Author Topic: Iran planning to build a new jet fighter (Read 16701 times)

M-ATF · « **Reply #75 on:** February 15, 2012, 05:36:55 PM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 15, 2012, 04:30:27 PM

M-ATF-jan, why do you believe Iran should build manned fighters? Can you elaborate in terms of application and effectiveness, know-how, cost, timeline, adversaries, UAV-as-alternative, etc? It seems along all of these parameters buliding a jet fighter is folly and UAVs/UCAVs are the way to go. However, I'd be interested to understand what your line of thinking is.
Mamdali

My English is very bad, So excuse me if I can't explain all of my reasons well. But i indicate to some of my reasons in brief
the8march indicated to some good reasons too .

First I should say I'm not against using UCAV's. Iran should work on development of UCAV's. And If it is possible to build a UCAV that can all tasks of a manned fighter, certainly I support it too. I also believe that Iran should develop manned fighter based on this assumption that Iran has

But when I see advanced countries like USA, Russia, China and even S. Korea and Japan that now is working on development of new manned fighters, I think surely they have studied option of development of only UCAV's instead of manned fighters too. Even when Defence minister of Iran says they planning to build new manned fighters despite this fact that Iran hasn't infrastructures and technologies and experiences of above mentioned group of advanced countries that have and Iran should invest and work more, Surely they have studied option of development of UCAV instead of manned fighters too. So when these countries and Iran decides to develop manned fighters, surely they have reached this conclusions that fighters have advantages over UCAV's or UCAV's cant accomplish all tasks of manned fighters at least till next two decades.

I think UCAV's and manned fighters shares many common technologies, UCAV's most likely are lighter and cheaper than manned fighters, but I think this difference for manned fighter and UCAV's with almost the same capabilities isn't very much compared to total cost and weight of aircraft. In UCAV there is no need to pilot and systems that is needed for pilot like Seat Ejector , but you need other systems like auto pilot systems and sensors or other systems that isn't needed for manned fighters. But in both cases the same radar, missiles and armaments ,almost the same engines and almost the same air frame and body and metalurgy technologies and infrastructures and industries are needed. So if Iran works on manned fighter it can use its technologies for UCAV's too.

So I believe Iran should work on both manned fighters and UCAV's simultaneously.

mamdali · « **Reply #76 on:** February 15, 2012, 08:47:29 PM »

M-ATF-jan, thank you for your response. BTW, your English is excellent!

You make a few good points but I believe a few items need to be elaborated on:

- Future of of manned combat craft: From where I sit, everything is pointing to the demise of these. Even current aircraft (J22/35) have been significantly curtailed. Can you share links to real future manned combat craft? Aren't there similar links for future UCAVs also?

- Even if everything you said is true, given where Iran is technologically, and given the West's continuing advancements in this area, how long do you think it will take for Iran to produce a competent aircraft? Is this timeline reasonable compared to leapfroging to UAVs/UCAVs? This is a very salient item and needs to be really analyzed. If, as you imply, the avionics on UAVs and nth-gen craft are comparatively similar, isn't it better to go with UAVs given their lesser cost and higher maneuverability?

- And finally, I think one has to see what is the best fit in the context of ostensible Iranian defense doctrine. Do you believe an nth-gen figjhter is a good fit within this doctrine? Or is a combination of AD and UAVs better? This is also a very important item that needs to be discussed and elaborated on.

That said, I am over the edge of my technical knowledge of these items and, again, you do make very good points, but a clear case for development of an nth-gen fighter has not been made yet in my opinion.

Mamdali

Numbers · « **Reply #77 on:** February 16, 2012, 03:02:07 AM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 15, 2012, 08:47:29 PM

- And finally, I think one has to see what is the best fit in the context of ostensible Iranian defense doctrine. Do you believe an nth-gen figjhter is a good fit within this doctrine? Or is a combination of AD and UAVs better? This is also a very important item that needs to be discussed and elaborated on.

Well, assuming that in the case of conflict with US, US will achieve dominance in the air (with 600 F-18s).
Knowing that it is clear that Iran needs UAVs in large numbers. And not piloted Aircrafts.

There is no need to risk lifes of Aircraft pilots in Air War with US. Multiple UAVs can be operated without loss of pilots.

Also important is that UAVs do not need Air Bases. UAV can be launched from Jeep (by pneumatic launcher) or from the rural road.

Of course UAVs should be built using 5th generation Stealth technology. Stealth UAV is the goal. Perhaps even Stealth UAV with vertical take off and landing.

Even after US will achieve Air Superiority, Iran's UAVs will be harassing US forces. Without determined UAV Air Bases, US will not be able to find location of all UAV Jeep Launchers.

Iranian UAVs will be able to operate under condition of US Air Superiority. That is why piloted Aircrafts are not necessary.

Izirbat · « **Reply #78 on:** February 16, 2012, 03:35:15 AM »

Quote from: Numbers on February 16, 2012, 03:02:07 AM

Well, assuming that in the case of conflict with US, US will achieve dominance in the air (with 600 F-18s).
Knowing that it is clear that Iran needs UAVs in large numbers. And not piloted Aircrafts.

There is no need to risk lifes of Aircraft pilots in Air War with US. Multiple UAVs can be operated without loss of pilots.

Also important is that UAVs do not need Air Bases. UAV can be launched from Jeep (by pneumatic launcher) or from the rural road.

Of course UAVs should be built using 5th generation Stealth technology. Stealth UAV is the goal. Perhaps even Stealth UAV with vertical take off and landing.

Even after US will achieve Air Superiority, Iran's UAVs will be harassing US forces. Without determined UAV Air Bases, US will not be able to find location of all UAV Jeep Launchers.

Iranian UAVs will be able to operate under condition of US Air Superiority. That is why piloted Aircrafts are not necessary.

It is true that the US does have air superiority but what makes you think that the US bases will be safe for those 600 F-18s?
If a war with Iran gets to that level US will lose all their bases in ME, The only bases the US will have left are their bases in Europe for their long range bombers but their Fighters will have nowhere to land and refuel.

There is no doubt in my mind that the US carriers will be sunk and the bases in Arab counties will be gone too therefore they will lose their air superiority. This will be very costly for Iran but Iran has proven over and over again in its history that it will pay the price before it will kneel to anyone.

Additionally the US doesn’t have the stomach to lose too much in any way hence there will not be a war with Iran which makes this debate a moot point.

Emirzaad · « **Reply #79 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:19:39 AM »

Guys , I am posting my talk from another topic on same forum ......

...

Only possible choice of an airframe that can accommodate Klimov turbofans and Zhuk ME radars (e.g.) seems to be based upon F-4 phantom ...

whatever aircraft IRIAF needs to acquire / create today should be multirole and for that it should be large enough for carrying both A2A and A2G weaponry , with long range since iran has a large area to cover ( we have a very big country ) . Phantom based airframe seems best to me for the job , give it klimovs 33 or even 93 , Zhuk ME , and Mig-29M2 style weapon suite and we will have a strong fighter in the sky ... easy route would be to Use locally made J-79s , and just ask Russia to deliver the modern Zhuk radars ( ME or AE if possible), Mig-35 caliber Avionics suite and alot of A2A weaponry ( R77 , R73 , R27 ) .... while not to mention that Physical Performance of Phantom , Speed , Climb rate , Range , Payload are excellent and better than most of the air-crafts flying around ... believe me , such a fighter in numbers around 100-120 will seriously mean something .....

Use composite based Phantom design ( with modifications off-course ) , add modern FLCC , 4 channel FBW , negative RSS ... Use RD-33 turbofans . I wont mind a local turbojet J79 either provided performance is enhanced . Seek Zhuk M radars from Russia along with additional R-77s .....Go the assembling route Like India did with its LCA .

another simple approach .... buy 2nd hand Mig-29s from wherever available in world , I heard Hungry and Malaysia are up for sale or even from Russia through Syria ... Its an easy solution . Additional Mig-29s ( if we manage to get some
50 more ) will instantly boost the deference capability but with R-77 . Its a more practical , instant and easy approach .

I dont know what is going through the minds of IRIAF planners but if they want instant solution then go for Used Mig-29s from wherever they can ... Hungry , Malaysia, Ukraine , Syria or even Russia ... it doesnt matter , 50 more mig-29s armed with R-77 / 73 / 27 and upgraded upto M2 standard can put up a serious challenge against any intruder . IRIAF right now operates alot of Fulcrums ( controversial figures ranging from 45 to 75 to 98 ) with 2 squadrons upgraded upto M standard . If we can add let say 50 Mig-29 M then they can easily adapt to already there infrastructure , IRIAF will require no training , no additional $ etc ... this would give Iran some margin of at-least next 10 years to research / seek / study / steal .. the tech. for a 4.5 -> 5 generation platform . Syria did same in 2009 deal where they upgraded thier 42 aircrafts upto M2 standards and bought unknown numbers from russia ( some claim upto 80 aircrafts in total ) , Same deal also provided Iran with Super cavitation torpedoes and Pantsyr S1 air defence systems where Syria became the 3rd party to by pass sanctions . Iran already has Shafagh and Sofreh mahi projects so preliminary research is there ... some careful planning like what was adapted for Neyroiyeh Dariyeh Iran 5 years back would take Iran back to its spot in air too ...

I was saying that something new in same configuration . Off-course if it would be a 4 + generation then it will be bonded honeycomb base composite based unlike the conventional Alloy of 3rd generation aircraft like Phantom so the weight will be less . Acceleration issues as u mentioned can be addressed once u have the basic weight of the aircraft set , mere function of TW ratio ... The RD-33 or any variant of it like RD93 can produce upto 40 K lbs ( x 2 ) at AF ( provided Russia agrees to deliver them like some 50-75 RD33 came some year back ) Rd 33 , J79 turbojet are roughly same dia , another Engine of same dia in Iran's reach is Al-21 of Su-24 and Mig-23 ( variant ) . Maneuverability can be addressed by incorporating a Negative RSS through 4 channel FBW and a basic FLCC . it will make a good Aircraft ... IMO Phantom design had alot of potential but corporate politics resisted any furhter evolution . The Israelis made Kornas 2000 based upon Phantom E and it was an equivalent of F/A-18 C/D ... Another advantage is that Iran knows everything abt this design , its + and - ... it will take alot of less time in research then studying something new .... had Iranian Aviation brains took more interest in Phantom rather than obsessing with F-5E based designs ( Azaraksh and Saeqeh ) then today we would have been alot better .

M-ATF · « **Reply #80 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:50:51 AM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 15, 2012, 08:47:29 PM

- Future of of manned combat craft: From where I sit, everything is pointing to the demise of these. Even current aircraft (J22/35) have been significantly curtailed. Can you share links to real future manned combat craft? Aren't there similar links for future UCAVs also?

I think responses to questions and points that you indicated aren't independent than each other and what I said before in my previous post.
Russia and China are following their T-50 and J-20 projects that is said will be operational till 2016-2018 and 2020. I guess the have planned to use these fighters for 15-20 years.
As I know Japan and S. Korea follow ATD-X and KF-X stealth fighters projects respectively too. I guess these two fighters will not be operational till 2020.
First role of most of UCAV's I have seen till now is strike and bombing missions not interception of enemy's aircrafts.

Quote

Even if everything you said is true, given where Iran is technologically, and given the West's continuing advancements in this area, how long do you think it will take for Iran to produce a competent aircraft? Is this timeline reasonable compared to leapfroging to UAVs/UCAVs? This is a very salient item and needs to be really analyzed. If, as you imply, the avionics on UAVs and nth-gen craft are comparatively similar, isn't it better to go with UAVs given their lesser cost and higher maneuverability?

As I said I believe Iran should work on development of UCAV's too, As I said before I think many of most important technologies needed for UCAV's is needed for fighters too, for example you need good radar, good engine,good missiles and armaments, infrastructures ans industries for production of high tech materials needed for some parts of engine or body of fighter. So if Iran is behind of western countries in this fields for development of a manned fighter, They have the same distance in technologies for development of UCAV's and so they have to fill this gap in these fields for development of UCAV's too. So I think despite distance of Iran's technology and West in these fields Iran has to go this path and development of a fighter isn't waste of money because most of acquired technologies in this project directly is used on UCAV's too. So for development of a lesser cost and higher maneuverability you have to go this path too. Then if it is possible to develop a UAV that can do all tasks of an Interceptor manned fighter, surely it is better to produce UAV's.

Quote

- And finally, I think one has to see what is the best fit in the context of ostensible Iranian defense doctrine. Do you believe an nth-gen figjhter is a good fit within this doctrine? Or is a combination of AD and UAVs better? This is also a very important item that needs to be discussed and elaborated on.

Surely Ideal case is using combination of AD, UAV's and manned fighters, but costs and needed time for development necessary technologies and also dedicated defined tasks determinate priorities. This is the same thing Iran has done till now, you can see till nowt development of AD systems for for defending sky and UAV's for reconnaissance and recently as strike aircrafts alongside maintaining operational and upgrading current fighters has been priority of Iran. Most of investment has gone to AD systems development and least investment on Air Force. But after development, mass production of Bavar 373, its turn of development of new manned fighters to be high priority that its technologies is needed for next gen. of Iran UAV's and even upgrading current fighters too.

I dont know why Vityaz 2000 project has been cancelled, but I have read in some articles that Vityaz 2000 has had good aerodynamic performance. There are reports and rumors about project of development of light turbofan engine based J-85. So personally I believe if really Iran can produce a light turbofan engine with around 25-30 (there are rumors for these numbers) dry thrust (that can be used massively on next gen uav's too), So in short time development and production a light multirole fighter based M-ATF airframe with two of such light engines (that can produce more thrust than one RD-33, and consider standard weight of J-85 is less than 20% of weight of RD-33) but with good radar and missiles, could be good and lesser cost option for Iran. alongside it Iran can use those acquired technologies for development of an interceptor UCAV too, howbeit It seems Iran hasn't any plan to continue projects like M-ATF program and using that design, due to reasons that we don't know, there are some rumors that say this project has been cancelled due to refusing to providing engines by Russians in recent years.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
------
Most likely we should think about unmanned combat spacecrafts for future since now too.

the8march · « **Reply #81 on:** February 16, 2012, 05:28:19 PM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 15, 2012, 05:12:57 PM

You haven't presented a cost-benefit analysis that compares these UAV production problems with the problems of building an nth gen jet fighter that can compete in the near, medium, and long term with opponents systems (UAVs and jet fighters). You must prove jet fighters are easier to build, cost effective, strategically competitve, and indeed provide the defense you're searching for IN COMPARISON to UAVs.

Just saying UAVs are tough to build doesn't make sense if one could easily show jet fighters are even tougher to build.

Mamdali

Mamdali,
Cost benefit analysis: well you do this if you have the possibility to do both projects. The main problem with these projects is not money or time, but a technical one. I mentioned one aspect concerning the communication and the need to satellites. Thats why i think we have to see which of these projects we can actually do. If we cannt do the UCAV there is not sense to make the comparison.

Currently Iran has no infrastructure for these UCAVs.. no communication satellites ... no GPS satellites ... UCAVs are for me out of question.

I think the most important parameter that should be set is to have a vertical take-off fighter (VTOL)... i think this is most important that even stealth technology... We do not exaggerate if we say that all the airfields will be bombed in the first round... VTOL can change the game since you can eventually start and store your planes anywhere .. and your air force will remain operational even if everything is bombed... something like guerrilla air force.

mamdali · « **Reply #82 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:02:33 PM »

Quote from: the8march on February 16, 2012, 05:28:19 PM

Mamdali,
Cost benefit analysis: well you do this if you have the possibility to do both projects. The main problem with these projects is not money or time, but a technical one. I mentioned one aspect concerning the communication and the need to satellites. Thats why i think we have to see which of these projects we can actually do. If we cannt do the UCAV there is not sense to make the comparison.

Currently Iran has no infrastructure for these UCAVs.. no communication satellites ... no GPS satellites ... UCAVs are for me out of question.

I think the most important parameter that should be set is to have a vertical take-off fighter (VTOL)... i think this is most important that even stealth technology... We do not exaggerate if we say that all the airfields will be bombed in the first round... VTOL can change the game since you can eventually start and store your planes anywhere .. and your air force will remain operational even if everything is bombed... something like guerrilla air force.

the8march-jan, for my edification AND education, let's explore this a bit more. I understand your concerns about satellites. However, this does bring up a few questions:

- How long will it take to build an nth-gen competitve combat craft?
- Given that timeframe (which I don't believe is less than 10-20 years) where will Iran's satellite launch capability be at that time? I won't so easily write this off. Plus there are Russion and Chinese GPS systems which Iran may be able to leverage as a stop-gap.
- How effective are nth-gen fighters without satellites?

Mamdali

mamdali · « **Reply #83 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:12:26 PM »

Quote from: M-ATF on February 16, 2012, 06:50:51 AM

I think responses to questions and points that you indicated aren't independent than each other and what I said before in my previous post.
Russia and China are following their T-50 and J-20 projects that is said will be operational till 2016-2018 and 2020. I guess the have planned to use these fighters for 15-20 years.
As I know Japan and S. Korea follow ATD-X and KF-X stealth fighters projects respectively too. I guess these two fighters will not be operational till 2020.
First role of most of UCAV's I have seen till now is strike and bombing missions not interception of enemy's aircrafts.
As I said I believe Iran should work on development of UCAV's too, As I said before I think many of most important technologies needed for UCAV's is needed for fighters too, for example you need good radar, good engine,good missiles and armaments, infrastructures ans industries for production of high tech materials needed for some parts of engine or body of fighter. So if Iran is behind of western countries in this fields for development of a manned fighter, They have the same distance in technologies for development of UCAV's and so they have to fill this gap in these fields for development of UCAV's too. So I think despite distance of Iran's technology and West in these fields Iran has to go this path and development of a fighter isn't waste of money because most of acquired technologies in this project directly is used on UCAV's too. So for development of a lesser cost and higher maneuverability you have to go this path too. Then if it is possible to develop a UAV that can do all tasks of an Interceptor manned fighter, surely it is better to produce UAV's.
Surely Ideal case is using combination of AD, UAV's and manned fighters, but costs and needed time for development necessary technologies and also dedicated defined tasks determinate priorities. This is the same thing Iran has done till now, you can see till nowt development of AD systems for for defending sky and UAV's for reconnaissance and recently as strike aircrafts alongside maintaining operational and upgrading current fighters has been priority of Iran. Most of investment has gone to AD systems development and least investment on Air Force. But after development, mass production of Bavar 373, its turn of development of new manned fighters to be high priority that its technologies is needed for next gen. of Iran UAV's and even upgrading current fighters too.

I dont know why Vityaz 2000 project has been cancelled, but I have read in some articles that Vityaz 2000 has had good aerodynamic performance. There are reports and rumors about project of development of light turbofan engine based J-85. So personally I believe if really Iran can produce a light turbofan engine with around 25-30 (there are rumors for these numbers) dry thrust (that can be used massively on next gen uav's too), So in short time development and production a light multirole fighter based M-ATF airframe with two of such light engines (that can produce more thrust than one RD-33, and consider standard weight of J-85 is less than 20% of weight of RD-33) but with good radar and missiles, could be good and lesser cost option for Iran. alongside it Iran can use those acquired technologies for development of an interceptor UCAV too, howbeit It seems Iran hasn't any plan to continue projects like M-ATF program and using that design, due to reasons that we don't know, there are some rumors that say this project has been cancelled due to refusing to providing engines by Russians in recent years.

(Attachment Link)
(Attachment Link)
(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)
------
Most likely we should think about unmanned combat spacecrafts for future since now too.

M-ATF-jan, thanks. One item I still don't understand from your response is if both UCAVs and jet fighters run parallel development paths and the final products will be EVENTUALLY available almost simultaneously, again, why develop a jet fighter? This isn't clear to me at all and I've read your post several times. It seems, the entire conversation may be boiling down to understanding this item.

The satellite requirements (as pointed out by the8march) is also a strong argument but it still doesn't clearly analyze how lack of satellites (which I don't necessarily agree with) will impact UCAVs so much more than combat craft and how this particular disdvantage is measured against the cost effectiveness and higher maneuverablity of UCAVs vis-a-vis nth gen fighters.

Mamdali

the8march · « **Reply #84 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:42:16 PM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 16, 2012, 06:02:33 PM

the8march-jan, for my edification AND education, let's explore this a bit more. I understand your concerns about satellites. However, this does bring up a few questions:

- How long will it take to build an nth-gen competitve combat craft?
- Given that timeframe (which I don't believe is less than 10-20 years) where will Iran's satellite launch capability be at that time? I won't so easily write this off. Plus there are Russion and Chinese GPS systems which Iran may be able to leverage as a stop-gap.
- How effective are nth-gen fighters without satellites?

Mamdali

Brother,
I hope iran will have its new fighters in the next 10 years... Iam not sure how far they are now... There are several points i have to add:
1- by UCAV i mean a multi role plane.. Bomber, interceptor... Even the ones being developed in the west does not have this role
2- those UCAV are definitly more complex than fighters... Evidence: they are still being developed while fighters exist
3- the UCAVs are not more capable than fighters... All those being developed are subsonic ... In any air to air fight they cannt win... The technology is simply not that far... Imagine on the earth, there are no cars driving alone... Those are still new technologies... They are developed as i said for specific bombing tasks
4- Iran should do research ... There are many steps before developing an interceptor UVAC... A UAV that can launch missiles... A one that sends data real time ... Silent UAVs ...
5- most important, you are having a plane that enemies can jam... Why would you do so? A plane that should always send and receive data ... While in a fighter u can do a mission without all those.. A fighter can even turn off radar and stop emitting RF
6- lets assume that iran can put the satellites needed... What will happen if the US destroys the satellite?

Its too risky ... Including satellites and development it would be more costly than a fighter ... And i believe the performance is very poor .. If the US is doing it, this does not mean its right

jalal · « **Reply #85 on:** February 16, 2012, 10:54:14 PM »

I agree, so far drons has been good against Taleban and recon, it is totally different game if they have to against another country who has air defenses and air force .

M-ATF · « **Reply #86 on:** February 17, 2012, 06:04:35 AM »

Quote from: mamdali on February 16, 2012, 06:12:26 PM

M-ATF-jan, thanks. One item I still don't understand from your response is if both UCAVs and jet fighters run parallel development paths and the final products will be EVENTUALLY available almost simultaneously, again, why develop a jet fighter? This isn't clear to me at all and I've read your post several times. It seems, the entire conversation may be boiling down to understanding this item.

As I said in my first post when I see countries like Russia China Japan and S. Korea planned to build new fighters and use it at least till two-three next decades. I conclude that maybe they have reached this conclusion that at least till that time, UCAV's cant accomplish all tasks of manned fighters (specially interception missions) .I believe in the case of serious investment Iran can develop and produce a light multirole fighter within 10 years. we know they have already started some projects related to development of fighters, like development of seat ejector, landing gears, air launched missiles, even engines or designs like Sofreh-Mahi (at least mock-ups of sofreh mahi shows it is a manned aircraft) and they also have designs like M-ATF too.

the8march · « **Reply #87 on:** February 17, 2012, 11:36:09 AM »

Even the F35 used design elements from the YAK141. A fighter with some stealth properties and VTOL would be great. I think Iran already had cooperation with the Russian company that produces the YAK?

Emirzaad · « **Reply #88 on:** February 17, 2012, 12:19:40 PM »

Friends .... I must remind you all that Hesa is already working on next generation of Azaraksh and Saeqeh , so whatever will; come out in next 2 years would be based upon experiences gained from Azaraksh and Saeqeh . I see a large Twin tailed F-5E based airframe . As much as I am into futuristic designs , I still believe that for next 30 years atleast , We need a strong force of at-least 200 interceptors armed with 4th and 5th Gen BVR missiles and AESA radars .

on subject of VTOL .... yes its a possibility for UCAV adaptation . airstrips are targeted at earliest so in mountainous regions a VTOL UCAV will serve excellently . Iran already uses ZLL for Karrar , so if a bigger UCAV with alot more attack capability in VTOL configuration can be made then it will make our aviation future safe .

M-ATF · « **Reply #89 on:** February 17, 2012, 01:18:37 PM »

Quote from: Emirzaad on February 17, 2012, 12:19:40 PM

Friends .... I must remind you all that Hesa is already working on next generation of Azaraksh and Saeqeh , so whatever will; come out in next 2 years would be based upon experiences gained from Azaraksh and Saeqeh . I see a large Twin tailed F-5E based airframe .

Do you talk based on certain source or it is just your prediction?

the8march · « **Reply #90 on:** February 17, 2012, 01:21:01 PM »

They dont need a second generation of Azaraksh or especially Saeqeh... or anything similar to F5 ... they need a modern multi role fighter... with VTOL or STOL ... made of composite material and has a low RCS

Numbers · « **Reply #91 on:** February 18, 2012, 03:01:07 AM »

Quote from: the8march on February 17, 2012, 01:21:01 PM

They dont need a second generation of Azaraksh or especially Saeqeh... or anything similar to F5 ... they need a modern multi role fighter... with VTOL or STOL ... made of composite material and has a low RCS

Quote from: Emirzaad on February 17, 2012, 12:19:40 PM

We need a strong force of at-least 200 interceptors armed with 4th and 5th Gen BVR missiles and AESA radars.

Iran needs only 20 of 5th generation Stealth VTOL Interceptors since US will achieve Air Superiority with its massive attack by F-35s (in case of war).

UAVs on other hand are cheap and do not sacrifice life of pilot if shot down. Without Air Strips UAVs can avoid US Air Force attacks and hit back using Jeeps (with pneumatic catapults) as launch platforms.

I am strongly against fighting US Air Force with Aircrafts. All you need is good Air Defence and "mobile UAV Jeeps". Never challenge US with Aircrafts. US will have more Aircrafts anyway (in all possible situations). Even Russia only relies on its multiple S-300 Air Defences in case of war with US Air Force.

Emirzaad · « **Reply #92 on:** February 18, 2012, 06:12:38 AM »

Quote from: the8march on February 17, 2012, 01:21:01 PM

They dont need a second generation of Azaraksh or especially Saeqeh... or anything similar to F5 ... they need a modern multi role fighter... with VTOL or STOL ... made of composite material and has a low RCS

I have already talked abt that , in case u ready my post ( 5th from top of this page ) . HESA with help from IEI , IACI / SAHA can create a potential 4 + Generation aircraft in just 5 years if they today decide to adapt the approach i have written . Off-course planners and brains behind Iranian Military are better than me so they must have figured out alot better option but to me that seems as an easiest option , It would require alot less R & D as turbofans and radars + avionics suite would come from abroad . Israel did same in 1990 and its kornas 2000 performance was a match with Super Hornet .

following equipment Iran must develop or seek ....

RD 33 turbofan or Al-21 .... i dont see any other engine in similar configuration , I wont even mind a locally developed modern version of J-79 turbojet .

Zhuk ME or even AESA AE radar or PESA Bars N011m radar ...or any radar which can track upto 10 and attack upto 4 atleast with detection range upto 150 km , with Look down shoot down upto 300 + km in maritime search mode while atleast 100 km in land based / small target mode . ME seems to be the perfect choice and given that Iranian Fencer and fulcrums have recently been upgraded by russia itself , there exists a choice that Russia would agree in supplying such thing .

IRST ... Infra red search & track system ... If AN/AAS-42 IRST of Tomcat can be reversed by IEI then fine , its an excellent system otherwise seek OLS-30 from russia , that is used on Su-30 and newer Mig-29s. A reliable IRST system eneables the pilot to use its IR homer and FnF or illuminator Missiles without even turning on the radar . Its a very important device for any modern combat fighter .

FLIR and laser designator pods .... Filat or Blue sky Navigation & Targeting / attack pods from china . Iran posses alot of 1980s pave pods that belong to F-4 II so if they can be modified locally then it would be good too . Cant say if Iran posses LANTIRN for its tomcats , system was not operational till mid 80s in US itself but we all know Shah and his lust for airpower so ...

another approach would be to save money and space and use more modern tech . laser-optical locator system OLS , with better range with incorporation of HMS target designation capability . The OLS system provides both IR + Laser designation , so it will be better , but it will be hard to get because its a very new system and i wonder if Russians r really this much sweet . OLS-27 of su-27 can be useful and is easy to import . OLS -30 is being used on Mig-35 and Su-30 MKI so they seem far from Iranian reach as of now but lets hope for the best .

ECM pod .... if china can supply electronic reconnaissance KZ900 & Self protection jamming pod BM/KG300G which are being used on Su-30/J-13 and J-10 . F-14s use AN/AAD-5 system while Phantoms use AN/AAD-14 FLIRR system along with AN/AAQ-8/9 , kind of obsolete now .

RWR ... I wonder if IEI can reverse eng. AN/ALR-67 V2 otherwise seek SPO-15 Beryoza that is used on Su-30 and Mig-29M of russia

Digital 4 x FBW ... if such system has been tested on Saegheh then HESA should exploit the experience . someppl believe that Saegheh with twin VS cant be flown with FBW . I dont know what kind of similar system is being used on Ir-140 .

ESM/DAS system to assess any threat nearby and act quickly to avoid it ...

a Modern Electronic flight instrument system EFIS ... I m pretty sure Iran is quite capable of employing such system locally , as can bee seen from local Helis etc , Incoporation of primary and multi and navigational visual output screens PFD , MFD/ ND ... Engine system (EICAS) / electronic aircraft monitoring (ECAM) ... in conjucntion with Shchel-3UM HMD ... which IRIAF currently uses on 24 of its aircraft stationed at Tabriz and Meherabad .

Missile approach Warning MAW ... Iranian F-4s use AN/AAR 44 ( some ) , dont know if contra affairs deal that brought 24 new airframes included any new MAW from Israel ... anyways Arbalet-D is fairly a modern system so ... if possible ...

Duplex communications data linking to stay in contact with AWACS nearby ....

short on time today so will rite more ............. my point is , a aircraft with such equipment i wrote above would take atleast 6 years in development ( considering we just use a composite based Phantom like airframe to save time on aerodynamics R&D ) , armed with BVR missiles like R-73 / 77 / 27 / Aim-23 Sajjil ... 120-150 such aircraft along with Alot and Aot of UCAVs and UAVs supported by excellent Air-defense and AWACS and AEW in air ... would make Persian skies secure ....

and btw i fully agree with VTOL UCAV idea , but developing a VTOL fighter would take atleast 15 years of Research for Iran , If iran can buy the scrapped Yak-141 project as it is along with technical assistance then it would mean something otherwise its just fantasy .

Ich · « **Reply #93 on:** February 19, 2012, 01:36:33 AM »

UAVs will become autonomous. No remote controll is needed. All tasks will be based on AI. There will be some connects for to get new orders or like that, but then they will fulfill their orders autonomously. Sure, there are a lot of programming and technical problems to resolve, but it is all on its way. 10-15 years we will see them, also in Iran.

I think, if Iran can build a cheap 3,75th gen fighter with the avionics and the weapons of a 4,5th gen fighter, it will fill the gap till the autonomous UAV gets air superiority. Stealth isnt necessary since we see the proceedings of passiv and activ radars in the last years.

Numbers · « **Reply #94 on:** February 19, 2012, 06:27:22 AM »

Quote from: Ich on February 19, 2012, 01:36:33 AM

UAVs will become autonomous. No remote controll is needed. All tasks will be based on AI. There will be some connects for to get new orders or like that, but then they will fulfill their orders autonomously. Sure, there are a lot of programming and technical problems to resolve, but it is all on its way. 10-15 years we will see them, also in Iran.

What, 300 kilometers of Radio Guidence is not enough for UAV that patrols local area and hits incoming US Aircrafts?

What is point for AI? Current UAVs already can have 300 kilometers distance of Radio Guidence.

lulldapull · « **Reply #95 on:** February 19, 2012, 10:33:45 AM »

Numbers, in case you missed out......

The Russian AF is absolutely huge! They are the cutting edge in confronting a US attack.

There are more than 500 Mig-29's, More than 450 Mig-31's and around 350+ Su-27/ 30's in front line service. These are backed up by more than a 100 Tu-95 strategic bombers which now carry the advanced standoff Kh-15 ALCM's. The Long Range DA operates 200+ Tu-22M's, as well as 25 Tu-160 Black Jacks (the most powerful and capable combat aircraft in the world).

The Russian Strike & ground attack forces operate 500 or so Su-24M2's and are inducting the Su-34's in large numbers now.

There are also more than 500+ Su-25T's close support types now in service.

The helio wings operate More than 2000 rotary craft including hundreds of heavily armed Mil-24's, Mil-28's and Mil17V's and hundreds of KA-27/ 29 marine choppers.

Putin just issued a decree to fund the PakFa and the long range PakDA strategic 5th generation bomber programs to the tune of $50 billion dollars.

There is a reason that the Russians and the Chinese are actively funding and developing 5th Gen. Combat Aircraft.

The S-300 and S400 units complement the Russian AF.

Your contention that jeep mounted UAV's can replace Combat aircraft is nonsense, considering the fact that Russia has as many nuclear warheads than the United States. In theory, no one can invade them....right?

Yet they are actively developing 5th and 6th Gen combat aircraft.

Quote from: Numbers on February 18, 2012, 03:01:07 AM

Iran needs only 20 of 5th generation Stealth VTOL Interceptors since US will achieve Air Superiority with its massive attack by F-35s (in case of war).

UAVs on other hand are cheap and do not sacrifice life of pilot if shot down. Without Air Strips UAVs can avoid US Air Force attacks and hit back using Jeeps (with pneumatic catapults) as launch platforms.

I am strongly against fighting US Air Force with Aircrafts. All you need is good Air Defence and "mobile UAV Jeeps". Never challenge US with Aircrafts. US will have more Aircrafts anyway (in all possible situations). Even Russia only relies on its multiple S-300 Air Defences in case of war with US Air Force.

Ich · « **Reply #96 on:** February 19, 2012, 11:46:38 AM »

Quote from: Numbers on February 19, 2012, 06:27:22 AM

What, 300 kilometers of Radio Guidence is not enough for UAV that patrols local area and hits incoming US Aircrafts?

Radio guidence can be jammed or taken out.

Quote from: Numbers on February 19, 2012, 06:27:22 AM

What is point for AI?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

Emirzaad · « **Reply #97 on:** February 19, 2012, 08:39:00 PM »

Manned fighters still have a healthy 30 years career left in them .... may be even beyond , sometimes innovation just fail e.g. cannon less Phantoms in Vietnam ... so who knows abt UCAV's in real combat against strong opposition . Yes UCAVs r important and continous investment in R & D is necessary but just totally relying upon them would be stupidity ....

and guys please have some faith in HESA ... its just a matter of 2 years ... Iran will surprise everyone like it has , so far in other fields too ...

Numbers · « **Reply #98 on:** February 20, 2012, 05:47:52 AM »

Quote from: lulldapull on February 19, 2012, 10:33:45 AM

The Russian AF is absolutely huge! They are the cutting edge in confronting a US attack.

There are more than 500 Mig-29's, More than 450 Mig-31's and around 350+ Su-27/ 30's in front line service. These are backed up by more than a 100 Tu-95 strategic bombers which now carry the advanced standoff Kh-15 ALCM's. The Long Range DA operates 200+ Tu-22M's, as well as 25 Tu-160 Black Jacks (the most powerful and capable combat aircraft in the world).

The Russian Strike & ground attack forces operate 500 or so Su-24M2's and are inducting the Su-34's in large numbers now.

There are also more than 500+ Su-25T's close support types now in service.

Your contention that jeep mounted UAV's can replace Combat aircraft is nonsense, considering the fact that Russia has as many nuclear warheads than the United States. In theory, no one can invade them....right?

Your figures for Russian Aircrafts might be over estimated because all those old Aircrafts might be just standing there without maintenance.

Also

The United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 F-35 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making it the most expensive defense program ever.

Radar on F-35 has 300 or 400 kilometers distance. Twice as long as most Russian Aircrafts Radars.

That and the fact that Russian Aircrafts can not see Stealth F-22 and F-35 implies that Russia currently relies on S-300 and S-400 to
defend against F-35 and F-22.

In reality all current Russian Aircrafts can not defeat F-35 and F-22. For example Sukhoi Su-30MKI has 20 square metres Radar Cross Section while F-22 has 0.0001 square metres Radar Cross Section.

Because of that Russian Government has developed 5th generation Aircraft Sukhoi T-50. But due to its high cost (57 million USD) Russian Government will rely in near future on S-300, S-400 which were reported to detect F-35, F-22.

And all old Russian Aircrafts will probably be scraped since there will be no maintenance for them.

lulldapull · « **Reply #99 on:** February 20, 2012, 01:23:58 PM »

Quote from: Numbers on February 20, 2012, 05:47:52 AM

Your figures for Russian Aircrafts might be over estimated because all those old Aircrafts might be just standing there without maintenance.

My figures are for operational Russian Combat aircraft taken from the new book Russian Air power from 2011 by Yefim Gordon/ Midland/ Ian Allen Publishing

Also

The United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 F-35 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making it the most expensive defense program ever.

They don't have money to buy these. The U.S. is broke and its financial system bankrupt! Russia on the other hand has committed to a far more reliable number of around 650 Pak-FA's.

Radar on F-35 has 300 or 400 kilometers distance. Twice as long as most Russian Aircrafts Radars.

Bhuwahahaaa.......The Russian Bars on the Su-30's has a range of more than 300+ Km's! Ks172 Novator anti Radar AAM's to shoot down an AWACS out to 200Km's.The old Zaslon on the Mig-31's also has a 250km range, and R-33's to take down low flying cruise missiles in heavy clutter and jamming environment out to 120Km's.

That and the fact that Russian Aircrafts can not see Stealth F-22 and F-35 implies that Russia currently relies on S-300 and S-400 to defend against F-35 and F-22.

F-35 is already inferior in power, kinematics and range and radar aperture power to an Su-30MK. All latest Block-52 F-16's and F-15C's have been thrashed by Indian Su-30MKI's during simulated combat at Cope India, Sindex in Singapore and also in Alaska, during numerous mock combat exercises. The Sukhoi is a powerful warplane, able to take the fight right to the F-35. the latest F-18E/F super bug is also classed as inferior to a late model MK series Flanker. See this:

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Flankers-Sept03.pdf#search=%22RAAF%20alternatives%22

In reality all current Russian Aircrafts can not defeat F-35 and F-22. For example Sukhoi Su-30MKI has 20 square metres Radar Cross Section while F-22 has 0.0001 square metres Radar Cross Section.

LO Su-50 is now coming out in numbers. By 2020, the RuAF will have more than 650 PAK-FA's operational. Already 5 prototypes are being tested. Besides the Su-30MK's can defeat anything else other than the F-22 flying right now, and even the sheer numbers of advanced MK series favour the Sukhoi because the F-22's are few and far in between in almost any theater of operation.

Because of that Russian Government has developed 5th generation Aircraft Sukhoi T-50. But due to its high cost (57 million USD) Russian Government will rely in near future on S-300, S-400 which were reported to detect F-35, F-22.

You can bet your ass, that if the Russians have highly capable AESA radar installed on the PAk-FA, then a retrofit on the existing hundreds of Su-30's is just a matter of time. Actually India and malaysia have already ordered the AESA kits to upgrade their Flankers.

And all old Russian Aircrafts will probably be scraped since there will be no maintenance for them.
Is that your wish, or reality? Russia is awash in oil and gas money, and now ten of billions are being redirected to resurrect a powerful RuAF. If there is one AF that can take on the USAF, and fight it on its own terms on this planet it is the RuAF!