Author Topic: IRIAF F-14 (Read 14007 times)

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #50 on:** March 11, 2010, 08:42:30 PM »

the AIM-23C sejil is a medium-long range missile the Fatter is a WVR (within visual range) missile and you can't replace one with the other...missiles like the Sejil can't be used at very close ranges thats where something like the Fatter comes in...That and most on the net think only a few F-14s have even been modified to carry the AIM-23 so it isn't widespread just yet..

To be honest, my theory is Iran is working to reverse-engineer the TF30 Turbofan engines of the F-14s and could achieve this in a few years and when that happens Iran could begin a fairly extensive upgrade program for its F-14s and could even modify some to be more Multirole...Because while there have been rumors for years that Iran wanted to re-engine the Tomcats doing such would be very expensive and complicated when it would be much easier to just stick with the engine it was built with..

Ayyash · « **Reply #51 on:** March 11, 2010, 09:12:20 PM »

The TF-30's downed more tomcat's then the Iraqi's could ever hope to shoot down. At least that's how the saying goes.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #52 on:** March 11, 2010, 09:29:09 PM »

It is indeed a terrible engine for a fighter..and in truth the F-14 was originally intended to use a different engine but the TF30 was available but it was replace the first chance Navy had a chance..the F-14B/D models used F110 Turbofan engines which were superior interms of thrust, weight, and reliability..but you have to remember the TF30 was never designed to be carried by a fighter..it was designed to be carried by strike planes the F-111 which in theory wouldn't need to manuevere in combat..not to mention it was one of the 1st Turbofan engines to be used in military aircraft.

But like I said..the Cost, time, and effort in finding a proper replacement, modifying the airframe would cost alot and in the end its unlikely Iran could even acquired a proper replacement anyway...Also studying the TF30 would give Iran insight into developing their own Turbofan engines. Which in turn could used to develop a small turbofan engine for a Tomahawk-like cruise missile, or a large one for Fighter aircraft..

Shirazi · « **Reply #53 on:** March 11, 2010, 09:34:20 PM »

They already have the R95-300 turbofan engine which powers the KH-55.

Ayyash · « **Reply #54 on:** March 11, 2010, 09:53:39 PM »

That's unconfirmed

Shirazi · « **Reply #55 on:** March 11, 2010, 10:00:22 PM »

Ukranian politicians have confirmed it.

aryana · « **Reply #56 on:** March 11, 2010, 10:09:27 PM »

so why dont we reverse engneer it
do you think they tried and missiles like exploded so they dont have it any more

AminCo · « **Reply #57 on:** March 11, 2010, 11:12:32 PM »

Quote from: aryana on March 11, 2010, 10:09:27 PM

so why dont we reverse engneer it

why you think we did not?

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #58 on:** March 12, 2010, 01:46:15 AM »

I'd bet they're still working on that (if they indeed did get the Kh-55) because Iran has no experience building a Turbofan engine so it would likely take them some time to being able to R&D the engine...and since they've only had the engine 6 years or so and they've had the TF30 for 30 years now so it would make more sense for them to study the TF30 and with that expertise they could speed up the development of a smaller Turbofan engine...just my thoughts of course.

Catsoo · « **Reply #59 on:** March 12, 2010, 02:24:47 AM »

Eagle,

I'd bet they're still working on that (if they indeed did get the Kh-55) because Iran has no experience building a Turbofan engine so it would likely take them some time to being able to R&D the engine.

Iran has some experience with Turbojet engines. Tolou-4 is already in production and Tolou-5 was already complete 60% four years ago. So, for long range cruise missiles, Iran already has the engine technology.

Catsoo

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #60 on:** March 12, 2010, 02:31:52 AM »

Catsoo,

Yes Iran has experience with Turbojets but no Turbofans and there is a big difference! Turbofans work in a different manner and have more moving parts not to mention much better fuel efficiency compared to a Turbojet engine...this is why no modern LACM like the Kh-55, Tomahawk, Babur and DH-10 uses turbojet engines and instead use Turbofans (though Russia does make a version of the Kh-55 with a turbojet engine but it has a much shorter range than the original)...The confusion between Turbojets and Turbofans may seem subtle but they are very different things..

Shirazi · « **Reply #61 on:** March 31, 2010, 10:12:23 PM »

How different is the TF30-P-414A from the Pratt & Whitney F100? They were built by the same company so i am right in saying the latter is a progression of the former? I am asking this because Venezuela's F-16s have the F100 and they're a better engine than the TF30s, so if they're not that different from each other and the resources spent on reverse engineering the TF30s would not be wasted, maybe Iran is working on the F100.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #62 on:** April 01, 2010, 12:04:30 AM »

I have some links that help to best describe the relation between the TF30 and the F100 and its a little confusing but here's my take on it..

The F100 descended from the winner of a competition in late '60s, the JTF16 and JTF22, to see which would be the future engine design for American Fighter jets (which is not what the TF30 was designed for)..the F100 eventually evolved from the JTF22 while the JTF16 apparently was abandoned. However the interesting thing is the JTF16 was apparently based at least partially on the basic TF30 model (which the TF30 model used in Iran's F-14s is the final model)..So for all intensive purposes the TF30 and F100 have very little in common other than they were designed by the same company. But since we know PW did design a more modern Turbofan from the TF30 it is feasible that Iran could use the knowledge to possibly design their own engine and also help them with other Turbofan projects.

Hope this helps!

Where I got my Info:
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1970/1970%20-%200037.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1967/1967%20-%200925.html

Shirazi · « **Reply #63 on:** April 01, 2010, 12:10:44 AM »

Thanks. So would you rule out the possibility that Iran is or might be working on reverse engineering a Venezuelan F100?

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #64 on:** April 01, 2010, 12:29:23 AM »

I dont rule it out but theres no proof Venezuela sold Iran any of its F-16s..Just talk from Chavez but thats it. To be honest, I wouldnt be surprised if the US was keeping a close eye on Venezuela's F-16s to make sure they dont try to sell them to Iran. And it isnt easy to smuggle a plane..the Preferred method is by plane but any large cargo flight from Ven. to Iran would likely be tracked and possibly even searched but it is still very possible they found some way to get a few to Iran but there just isn't any proof so I prefer not to speculate..

Shirazi · « **Reply #65 on:** April 01, 2010, 12:35:03 AM »

I derived to this thought through the idea that it was safe to believe that Iran is working on reverse engineering an engine and the most advanced one it has is the TF30, which isn't very advanced, but if it wanted to, it wouldn't be hard to get the F100 from Venezuela. They don't need to transport an entire plane just to let Iran access its' engine, also it might be possible that they've asked Iran to help them maintain their F16s.

What's your thoughts on this topic? Which engine do you think they're working on, if any at all and which engine do you think they should be working on? could they have decided to go with the RD-33?

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #66 on:** April 01, 2010, 12:50:36 AM »

Indeed but I think smuggling an entire F-16 would be far more worth it..not only for the engine but for its radar, and its FBW tech which Iran has little experience with. But I see your point.

Considering the Shafagh was supposed to the use the RD-33 I would actually be a little shocked if they werent working to reverse-engineer it. The RD-33 is a more advanced design than the TF30 (though not quite as powerful) but consider that there is only about 2000lbs thrust difference between the two engines but the RD-33 is smaller and lighter so I find it a better design to work on. While not a perfect engine (too smokey and fuel efficiency isnt the best) the TF30 is just a bad engine for fighters plain and simple..but considering it was never designed to be such I try not to bash the engine too much.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #67 on:** July 08, 2010, 03:58:12 AM »

A beautiful pic of a F-14 flying almost "clean" with just 2 AIM-9P/Fatter missiles, Enjoy!

Lur · « **Reply #68 on:** July 08, 2010, 08:11:11 PM »

Eagle nice pic, on a side note do you know if Tom cooper knows where Iran is getting their sidewinders/sparrows/mavericks still? because I doubt they are leftovers from the war and if so would they still be operational? thanks

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #69 on:** July 08, 2010, 09:58:14 PM »

Actually the Air-Launched Weapons thread would be the perfect place to discuss that..I will post a response there shortly.

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #70 on:** July 16, 2010, 09:28:42 PM »

4 Overhauled/Rebuilt F-14s at Mehrabad in September 2009..

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #71 on:** July 16, 2010, 09:54:37 PM »

Something rather interesting to note..Just a week or so after those F-14s were seen at Mehrabad in September 2009, ELEVEN more were seen at Esfahan Air Base! All have the newer blue paint job and look in decent shape (at least from orbit lol). So many seen about the same time is rather impressive and gives us a better feel for how many F-14s are really operational. I will post images of the 11 at Esfahan shortly..Enjoy!

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #72 on:** July 16, 2010, 10:01:55 PM »

All Eleven..

Eagle2009 · « **Reply #73 on:** July 16, 2010, 10:04:23 PM »

Missed one...

Lur · « **Reply #74 on:** August 13, 2010, 07:42:44 PM »

Iran TF-30 Engine on F-14 looks clean
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran---Air/Grumman-F-14A-Tomcat/1759420/&sid=76316cfc98470dbae09096a372ba9f61