Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:04 am

    They have fantastic engineers and designers, but when the head is broken and the wrong projects are stopped or never started and bad projects get the green light for all the wrong reasons then all you are going to get are problems.

    The C-17 is a case in point... nothing particularly special about it... they needed an aircraft that big to carry Abrams tanks because their C-141s couldn't carry such weights.

    The C-17 was a political project that was designed to be cancel proof... they built factories to make the plane in the constituents of the senators on the committees that decide Pentagon spending... it worked like a house on fire because none of the people in a position to cancel or or block its production would even consider doing so even if the reasons for doing so made sense. Having factories all over the US logistically it was a nightmare and of course the local people working in these factories never built a plane in their lives before this...

    For the price of one C-17 you could get 10 or 15 of the old model Il-76s, or 6 to 8 of the brand new Il-476s which would be much more useful...

    Most tanks get shipped to where they need to go anyway... it is too expensive to send them by plane except for small numbers... so shipping a few hundred tanks to different places around the globe in case you need some is a much better solution.

    US politics seems to be us and them... you can't discuss anything, no compromise... if you don't agree with me you are a tool of Putin... which is supposed to be an insult. Amusing... especially when they are all tools of Israel and Saudi Arabia and rich people anyway...

    Taking out American carriers at longest ranges, can not easily be done with planes. Unless a large force is used. And this proves unpractical. Submarines and smart torpedo, can do this job much better. But the Americans can attack in variety of ways. Including using Saudi airbase. Or using air launched cruise missiles from B52. With extended ranges. Since they have abandoned the arm's reaty.

    You guys can make mini submarines... would it really be that hard to replace the crew area with a 10 ton HE charge and automate it so that the rest of it is filled with batteries... create a mechanism so that it can be attached to the underhull of a large non military ship like a tanker... connect it to the tanker with a cable to fully charge the batteries so when it is launched it could run for days at low speed and with a simple sonar (aircraft carriers are not that quiet) and the location of the nearest carrier group put in to its autopilot and send it on its way... it can dive down to 400-500m or so depending on the water depths there and just slowly swim towards the enemy carrier in quiet mode... an MAD system will tell you when you are under 100K of metal... at which point you could make it rise to say 20m below the targets hull and boom. With its onboard Sonar it could detect an approaching carrier just based on its prop noise and manouver to be in front of the carrier and let it come to you.

    Russia needs land route to PG for sea trade, through Iran, more than China needs land route, through Iran, for trade. Because if the west and China United against Russia, apart from Iran, then Russia still has access to the rest of the world. But if Russia and Europe United against China, apart fron Iran. China can still trade with rest of world, by it's coastline. A friend in need, is a friend indeed.

    Such a thing would be useful for Russia but right now most of the money in the world is in the EU and Asia and so Russias North Sea Route is going to be a main traffic artery... a canal through Iran would be expensive and take maybe up to a decade depending on the geography.... I think it would pay for itself and I think land locked countries like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan would be keen to contribute to such a thing too... in fact I think... being a waterway that Iran essentially controls it would be most valuable to Iran... which is why I would think it would be a good idea all round...

    Iran doesn't need thousands of aircraft... what it needs is what the west call force multipliers... an S-300 SAM is a capable system but can only do so much on its own... it has weaknesses... big expensive long range missiles are not efficient against drones or small low flying munitions, but using the S-300 together with other SAMs in an integrated air defence network that the aircraft are connected to so everyone and everything can work together... it means you can do things that 1,000 separate and unconnected S-300s could do.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 971
    Points : 969
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Thu Jun 04, 2020 4:20 pm

    Russia is interested in negotiating delivery of arms to Iran...

    So Mig29, yak130 and su30 are again a serious possibility


    https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4343009


    Russian Foreign Ministry considers negotiations on arms supplies to Iran possible

    2020/05/13

    Moscow does not rule out the start of negotiations on the supply of Russian arms to Iran after the UN Security Council embargo was lifted from this country in the coming fall, Zamir Kabulov, director of the second department of the Russian Foreign Ministry , told RIA Novosti . Earlier, Iranian Ambassador to the Russian Federation Kazem Jalali said that Tehran has already received proposals for the supply of military equipment and defensive weapons from several countries.

    According to Zamir Kabulov, there are no negotiations on arms deliveries so far, “but they will become quite possible, because the international legal obstacle that exists until October will be removed.”

    The regime of restrictions on the supply of arms and military equipment to Iran expires on October 18. The United States has already expressed its intention to work in the UN Security Council on the issue of extending the arms embargo. As US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo emphasized, if these efforts do not bring results, then Washington will "study what are the alternatives to achieve the task." In Moscow, they see no reason to extend the embargo, noting that there was no de jure "arms embargo" against Iran. Arms deliveries were possible before, but only with the permission of the UN Security Council, which no one gave.

    “Exactly two years ago, on May 8, 
    2018, the United States proudly announced that they were leaving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action for the Iranian Nuclear Program (JCPOA) and closed the door. Now they are knocking on this door, saying “wait, we forgot to do one thing in the JCPOA. Let us do it and leave again.” This is ridiculous, ”Vasily Nebenzya, the Russian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, told reporters earlier.

    Earlier, the American newspaper The New York Times reported that Washington allegedly expects to use a special dispute settlement mechanism provided for by UN Security Council resolution 2231, which accompanied the adoption of the JCPOA (i.e., the Iranian nuclear deal) in 2015. The result of the use of the mechanism could be the restoration of all international sanctions previously applied to Iran.
    As Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia's Permanent Representative to international organizations in Vienna, stated in an interview with Kommersant , "an attempt to appeal to resolution 2231 looks cynical, since it is this resolution that the US is undermining, and it is absolutely unconvincing from a legal, political and moral point of view."
    RTN
    RTN

    Posts : 270
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield, CT

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  RTN on Sat Jun 06, 2020 6:06 pm

    GarryB wrote:My opinion is very biased as everyone here knows, I am a fan of Russian equipment and not so much of a fan of western equipment.
    That's okay because there are US fanboys who consider everything Western to be great and everything from Russia to be ordinary.

    But the problem with this stance is, since you are biased towards Russian weapons you are unable to carry out a clear headed, logical analysis of western military hardware. Because your bias clouds your judgement. Both Russian and US weapons have their flaws. On a number of occasion they have failed to perform the way they are advertised.

    F-16s have been shot down over Syria by S-200 but then Pantsir have been blown to bits by western PGMs. Therefore, analyzing Russian and Western weapons objectively without any bias makes far more sense than allowing bias, jingoism to cloud judgement.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:32 am

    F-16s have been shot down over Syria by S-200 but then Pantsir have been blown to bits by western PGMs. Therefore, analyzing Russian and Western weapons objectively without any bias makes far more sense than allowing bias, jingoism to cloud judgement.

    You make it sound so easy and so obvious... I would say there is an enormous difference between the use of Israeli owned and operated American kit being used over Syria against what is essentially only Syria... as long as they don't target Russian forces and notify the Russians about what they are doing the Russians don't seem to be responding, so essentially this is Syria vs Israel... which should normally mean Syria getting destroyed wholesale because of the disparity between the forces and of course the fact that the Syrians are busy trying to recover their territory lost to Israeli and US and Turkish supported terrorist groups...

    But the very occasional kill of individual Pantsir vehicles that appear to not have missiles loaded that seem to be caught unawares but standoff missile attacks launched from outside Syrian airspace by aircraft that are going to be the core of future HATO air power in the form of super expensive and apparently not so stealthy F-35s who don't come any closer than their standoff weapons and the mountains in neighbouring countries allow their F-16s to manage.

    I would say this is evidence that the F-35 is not worth the money and probably the greatest and most capable western air power per capita is really not getting its moneys worth from these super weapons and that if they actually had to pay for them themselves with their own money instead of getting them paid for by the American taxpayer there would be outrage in Israel that they are buying these things.

    All sorts of weapons fail, and the fighting in Syria is a rare opportunity for Russia to extensively test its new and existing weapons and some future weapons too in a real testing ground that doesn't really forgive failure...

    The difference is that the US drops some bombs on Afghanistan from F-35s and call them a success... separate not linked together... operating essentially alone... Soviet and Russian air defence systems of Syria before they got S-300s shot down 71 of 103 cruise missiles launched at them... BUK and Pantsir systems got between 80 and 95% kill rates, or actually 100% kill rates with multiple engagements (ie not every missile hit a target but all targets were destroyed) ...in comparison in Saudi Arabia not a single Patriot was even launched because they didn't see the drones or cruise missiles coming... Pantsir has shot down enormous numbers of drones in comparison which also proves it is detecting them too.
    RTN
    RTN

    Posts : 270
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield, CT

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  RTN on Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:38 pm

    GarryB wrote:You make it sound so easy and so obvious...
    The examples ( S-200, F-16) were used with the sole purpose of demonstrating the capabilities of these systems.

    The point that I made, which was lost on you, was the need to introspect the features of a system regardless of whether it is U.S or Russia, Dispassionately. It's only then that you can make meaningful deductions about these systems.
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 1000
    Points : 1006
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  nomadski on Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:44 pm


    I post article in English language version, so we can all read it well. I wish I could post Persian language version that I found on mashregh news site. Because it is much more comprehensive. But even I do not understand Persian language 100 %. Because I did not speak it much since age 14. So my main language is English. My family also make fun of me sometimes. For making spelling mistakes. But what I say here, is for ears of Iranian leaders and they have translators.........


    Here Iran, has strong airforce. Can repair Fleet of different helicopters.


    https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/06/07/2281019/ten-iranian-military-choppers-return-to-service-after-overhaul

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:36 am

    The point that I made, which was lost on you, was the need to introspect the features of a system regardless of whether it is U.S or Russia, Dispassionately. It's only then that you can make meaningful deductions about these systems.

    I don't agree with your point.

    A US strong fanboy might argue that the selling of F-35 to all its HATO allies is the actual success of the F-35 and that any WWIII conflict with Russia or China such things as fighter planes or fighter bombers will rapidly become irrelevant.

    The fact that most HATO countries could not afford to operate sizable and useful numbers of F-35 is also irrelevant because the planes are getting made anyway and LM has already made lots of money on the project as have the bribed politicians and people in America who make the planes. You can whine about it but that is what you get when you want to put made in the USA on the packaging... a terrible idea and concept that goes against all good business practices... you don't scatter production willy nilly all over a country in brand new state of the art factories that have to be built first.

    Passion doesn't come in to it at all... if an airforce that so dominates its neighbours as Israel does needs to hide in mountains of foreign countries to launch repeated sneak attacks with expensive long range standoff weapons that very occasionally catches individual vehicles off guard and gets hits then how does that fare for a country like Finland or Poland stirring up a bear by poking it with a stick using air defence systems that would reach into Israel and swat those planes down as they took off from their airfields... and not only that... they appear to be broken and outrageously expensive to buy and to operate, yet their mission profile against a third world country broken by a decade of war that had been supplied with a few up to date systems like Buk and Pantsir, is the same mission profile previous much much cheaper to buy and operate non stealthy aircraft carrying a much bigger load could manage.

    They are being sold a lemon and are paying extra for the privilege...

    A single engined unified fighter design was supposed to make it cheaper but instead has made it much more expensive and in some cases not affordable...

    I wish I could post Persian language version that I found on mashregh news site.

    Post the Persian language version... try Yandex translate to translate it...

    https://translate.yandex.com/
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 1000
    Points : 1006
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  nomadski on Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:01 am

    I think this helicopter has turboshaft engines. Two of them. And made in Iran. I don't know what type engine it has. Anyone with info on this. As this very telling on state of Iranian fighter jet development.  I like to see marine version.  This article in English language. Eight seats indicate the possibility of two seater combat version, with at least 600 kg lift capacity for external weapon or missile.



    https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/06/08/2281733/iran-to-mass-produce-homegrown-copter

    Undersea fuel pods can be dispersed by sub or ship, in advance of marine anti-ship chopper attack. The pods in GPS locations. Pop up and attach to body of chopper, without chopper landing on sea. Use winches. Extend range to many hundred or thousand kilometer.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3799
    Points : 3883
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  medo on Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:48 pm



    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/iranian-air-force-receives-3-new-fighter-jets-video/

    BEIRUT, LEBANON (6:20 P.M.) – On Thursday morning, the Iranian Air Force received three locally-made Kawthar combat aircraft, as they continue to boost their aerial combat capabilities.

    The Iranian Ministry of Defense released a video showing the three fighters flying during their handover ceremony, which was conducted in front of Defense Minister Amir Hatami and several other officials.

    IRIAF receive their first new build Kowsar fighter jets.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3799
    Points : 3883
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  medo on Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:47 pm

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 10797110

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Ebxfs610

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Ebxftl10
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 26, 2020 7:51 am

    Always like the F-5... nice, cheap, simple little fighter plane... yet manages to do that with two engines...

    The F-20 replacement design has one engine but was not popular...
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 971
    Points : 969
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Fri Jun 26, 2020 9:49 am

    GarryB wrote:Always like the F-5... nice, cheap, simple little fighter plane... yet manages to do that with two engines...

    The F-20 replacement design has one engine but was not popular...

    Is their trainer based on the same aircraft?

    Anyway this could possibly be also used as an advanced trainer before the pilots move into mig29/35 and/or su30
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:48 pm

    I seem to remember the T38 looks very similar and I think they are related.

    The whole programme was based around a very small very light weight engine of decent power... to make a cheap light aircraft....
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3799
    Points : 3883
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  medo on Fri Jun 26, 2020 8:50 pm

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Ebw0e210

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 61666310

    Kowsar, based on F-5, are combat fighter jets.


    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 10673510

    This one is a trainer jet
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 27, 2020 10:59 am

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_T-38_Talon

    The Northrop T38 talon light weight aircraft was accepted as a jet trainer in the US... the F-5 was developed from that aircraft and was sold to Iran who have now made their own version of both the fighter and the trainer.

    The T-38 entered US service in 1961 and the F-5 entered production about 1962...

    The F-20 looked really good to me but the larger more powerful single engine probably increased the costs making it not so cheap and simple... which were its main features.

    It was basically killed off as being similar to an old model F-16 but much cheaper and simpler to operate... it would hurt F-16 sales to poorer countries...
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 1000
    Points : 1006
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  nomadski on Wed Jul 01, 2020 11:35 am

    Always makes me happy to see these kowser jets. As I said before, this aircraft can turn into effective dog fighter against enemy planes. Iran using existing tech and modifications as follows. Can reduce weight of plane to about 4 tons. With 300 km range and 4 AA missiles. By :

    ( 1 )  Removing the two ejection seats. And Radar. And two canons and ammo. And pilot helmets. And fuel at 30 %.

    ( 2 )  save 20% weight or more by using composites. Carry only four sidewinder or air to air Rockets with laser proximity fused. Instead of cannons or radar. Internally.

    The pilot ejecting in sealed cabin, away from plane. The Rocket arrangement in the nose, allows for low RCS and using existing ammo. Unguided Rockets ( fired using small radar and ballistic computer with laser proximity fuse) could prove better. Since IR countermeasures, makes most heatseakers ineffective. The thrust to weight ratio of this fighter should approach 1 : 1. Can engage in WVR dogfight.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 02, 2020 2:08 am

    Even a power to weight ratio of 2 is not good enough for manouvering... the F-4 Phantom had excellent power levels and could power out of some situations but what you will find is that if the US or Saudi Arabia attacks Iran they will look at their enemy and decide how to take you on at least risk to themselves and teh first thing they will do when they see a lot of short range day fighters with no radar is to load up with AMRAAMs and launch missiles from 60km away... even if only 20% of them get kills they have the money to buy thousands and thousands of missiles... they don't care how much it costs...

    For a defender the important things will be the number of missiles you can carry and how fast and high you can fly...

    Keep the cannon... if your missiles are not working then you need a weapon to shoot down cruise missiles... and keep the radar because if you are operating blind they will simply pick you off after they jam your communications.

    I would look at a medium range missile like R-77-1 with a 110km range and a reasonable chance against enemy aircraft and any domestic missile too.

    For use against cruise missiles a fighter with Sidewinders is ideal... they are just stupid low flying targets that wont try to dodge your missiles or your cannon fire and the more your aircraft can shoot down the easier it will be for ground based platforms to deal with the rest.

    In terms of enemy aircraft I would try to use your fighters both light and medium together with your air defence forces... lure them into SAM traps...

    Thrust vectoring engines make power to weight ratio meaningless... when you are flying slow most planes can't pull high gs in turns simply because their control surfaces are not big enough and they are not moving fast enough... with TVC engines you can turn and manouver at any speed...

    The Germans and the Soviets experimented with air to air unguided rockets... the Soviets at the start of the war but they quickly realised against a small manouvering air target you carry vastly fewer rockets than you can carry cannon shells and you need to fire hundreds or thousands of each to assure a hit and a kill so they stopped using them against aircraft and started using them against things on the ground for which they were much better suited.

    The Germans used rockets against huge American and British bombers and they only used them in rocket planes that were moving so fast a volley of dozens of rockets at the target had a better chance of doing damage than a cannon... and that was only because of rate of fire issues.

    Their jets and prop engined aircraft used cannon...
    nomadski
    nomadski

    Posts : 1000
    Points : 1006
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  nomadski on Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:03 pm

    Of course Iranian fighters are now capable of night time operations. But firing AMRAAMS at a low RCS Kowser, without a Radar, accompanied by decoy drones,  head on, will be no more useful than firing shorter range AA missiles against a Kowser with own  Radar. It will probably be less useful. Since missiles can not lock on Kowser Radar. And ground Radar can always notify Kowser decoy escorts to deploy decoy Radar. And IR decoys. This can be done automatic. The pilot also told on Radio to take appropriate action. A Radio link to ground Radar, weights much less than Radar. A stealth plane should not have own Radar. Defeats the objective. Also ground Radar is much more powerful. With greater range.

    In a dogfight  situation, the most important factors are thrust to weight and wing loading. For maximum performance. As well as how many missiles are carried. That is why thrust to weight for a fighter Kowser is important. And hence reduction of weight. If all weight loss that I mentioned, is done for Kowser. Then it can climb as fast as F16. With new wing design, it can turn just as tight. It can be a contender. I am not sure about performance of J85 at very high altitude. Comparison with other Turbofan . But if a little short on altitude. Then Kowser can rely on SAM, to force enemy jet down. Or carry longer range AA missiles.

    The reason I mentioned, removing cannons, in the stealth Kowser, is not so much that I think cannons are useless in dogfighter . Quite the reverse. But on balance, I think it much better to place the AA missiles, in the long nose of Kowser. Instead of external hard points. This will mean using existing ammo. And keeping plane very low RCS. If enemy knows that Kowser has no Radar, then there is very little left to jam. Radio communication with ground control is helpful. But not necessary. Since pilots operate at very short range, and ultimately spot enemy visually. They could as well operate in Radio silence!

    Yes TVC is great, if you have it. Otherwise you do without. Here then you rely on power and weight and good wings. And numerical superiority. Two or four Kowser against one F18. With thrust vectoring ! We use tactics. Surround them. So no acrobatics will release them from prison.

    You mention R77. I suspect this to be medium range AA missile. But Iran has SAM that can reach altitude fast, level off and chase enemy plane. Using better longer range Radar. But what Iran does not have is short range dogfighter. Rely on pilot. Unjammable. Also the Rockets, I mentioned are nothing like old WW2 types. They are shot using small Radar and computer. And they have clever fuses. And much more difficult to jam. Compared to IR. But still IR guided can be used. If effective. This tactics is short range. To close the gap. When Iranian Radars jammed. Sam sites destroyed. F35 over Tehran.....

    The SAM trap is important. Placing them so that if enemy plane climbs and dives or turns to avoid. Then it will be caught by second or third Sam fired from opposite direction. Also passive seeker will keep safe from HARM. As well as decoy flare on ground to fool missile Warner in enemy plane.

    I am talking about Iranian fighter. But of course Russian planes will be welcome too. Iranians prefer version without TVC. Perhaps simpler or cheaper.


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust-to-weight_ratio

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24896
    Points : 25440
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 04, 2020 10:47 am

    But firing AMRAAMS at a low RCS Kowser, without a Radar, accompanied by decoy drones, head on, will be no more useful than firing shorter range AA missiles against a Kowser with own Radar. It will probably be less useful.

    It is a physically small aircraft and in American Top Gun training the students in F-16 and F-15 and F-14 and F-18 fighters have said it is optically small and difficult to keep track of in a dogfight... but American or Saudi fighter pilots will have no problems sitting 60km away launching AMRAAM after AMRAAM... even if 80% of them miss that means 20 get destroyed for every 100 missiles they launched.

    A couple of years ago they launched 103 cruise missiles to try to hit two buildings and two airfields in Syria that probably each cost rather more than an AMRAAM missile.

    You will run out of small light planes before they run out of missiles... and if you try to make them super cheap you will just make them sitting ducks and even easier to shoot down.

    If you want a cannon fodder plane then pick a simple cheap UAV and mount some long range missiles on it... something like R-77-1 that has a reasonable chance of a kill... that way when they get 20% kills and you get 20% kills yours are super cheap unmanned aircraft while theirs are potential crew lost over enemy territory that you can hunt down... if they send helicopters or tilt rotor aircraft to recover crew then your 20% probably becomes 80% against such targets...

    Since missiles can not lock on Kowser Radar.

    The only air to air missiles that can lock on to enemy radar are Soviet/Russian. The R-27R and R-27ER are designed to attack active radar sources... intended to shoot down F-15 fighters while they were using Sparrow missiles. Sparrow missiles as you might remember, are SARH missiles meaning to launch them the F-15 has to be tracking a target and then to launch the Sparrow at that target it has to direct an illumination radar beam at the target aircraft to highlight it... it is a bit like a laser guided bomb but the laser needs to be shining on the target at launch right through to impact... the R-27R and R-27ER home in on the laser signal... actually the radar beam that the SARH Sparrow homes in on but it hits the target marker instead of the target.

    The R-27R is similar to the Sparrow in performance but faster, and the R-27ER is faster and longer ranged than the Sparrow.

    AFAIK no US or Saudi air to air missiles are guided towards the targets radar.

    And ground Radar can always notify Kowser decoy escorts to deploy decoy Radar. And IR decoys. This can be done automatic. The pilot also told on Radio to take appropriate action. A Radio link to ground Radar, weights much less than Radar. A stealth plane should not have own Radar. Defeats the objective. Also ground Radar is much more powerful. With greater range.

    And the first thing the Saudis or Americans do when they attack is jam all radio communications and start launching cruise missiles at Comms centres and HQs...

    In a dogfight situation, the most important factors are thrust to weight and wing loading. For maximum performance. As well as how many missiles are carried. That is why thrust to weight for a fighter Kowser is important. And hence reduction of weight. If all weight loss that I mentioned, is done for Kowser. Then it can climb as fast as F16. With new wing design, it can turn just as tight. It can be a contender. I am not sure about performance of J85 at very high altitude. Comparison with other Turbofan . But if a little short on altitude. Then Kowser can rely on SAM, to force enemy jet down. Or carry longer range AA missiles.

    Modern AAMs move much faster than jet fighters can or do... but they are still aircraft so the most efficient way to use them is from directly behind the target... they can pull up or down or turn left or right, speed up or slow down, but the missile is going to accelerate into the back of them faster than they can accelerate and it can turn up or down or left or fight faster than they can too... it is essentially like getting behind someone and shooting them in the back and it is most effective because you can see them and you can tell if they start turning left or right or climbing up or dropping down... your weapons all point forward so they are essentially pointing at them as are most of your best sensors... IRST, radar and eyeballs.

    From their perspective all your weapons point forward and your sensors too and he is behind you. Some countries have missiles that can be fired forward and attack a target behind them but it uses enormous amounts of energy to do so which seriously limits its speed and range.

    In the past power to weight ratio means acceleration and speed means height and height means speed.

    In other words if you are flying fast and high you can roar down and attack the target with guns and then use that extra speed and engine power to then climb back up to altitude again. If you have to fight an enemy aircraft above you it was a disadvantage.

    The point is that speed was life... run out of speed and you stall and when you stall your weapons and sensors point towards the ground and not at the target... you are a sitting duck to any aircraft that hasn't stalled.

    With TVC you can stall and keep your nose pointed at the target so you can launch missiles or fire your gun at him.

    A missile that will turn 180 degrees to hit a target is nice but turning your aircraft 180 degrees with TVC engines means no 180 degree turn on launch for the missile... instead of bleeding away most of its energy turning 180 degrees it accelerates directly at the target so it gets there much faster...

    A missile turning 180 degrees on launch is already pulling as many gs as it can pull... if you turn in to that turn to get you it will need to turn even harder and will most likely fail. That same missile pointed directly at you and launched directly at you is free to turn in any direction you turn and its closing speed will be much much much higher.

    The reason I mentioned, removing cannons, in the stealth Kowser, is not so much that I think cannons are useless in dogfighter . Quite the reverse. But on balance, I think it much better to place the AA missiles, in the long nose of Kowser. Instead of external hard points. This will mean using existing ammo. And keeping plane very low RCS. If enemy knows that Kowser has no Radar, then there is very little left to jam. Radio communication with ground control is helpful. But not necessary. Since pilots operate at very short range, and ultimately spot enemy visually. They could as well operate in Radio silence!

    Let me disagree.

    First of all... all respect to Iranian engineers, but the Korsar is not a stealth aircraft... not even close, so the penalty of having external ordinance increasing the RCS would be a price well worth paying because aircraft cannot cover airspace as quickly as missiles can.

    Radar is essential and communications are critical if you want your pilots to work together as a team.


    Yes TVC is great, if you have it. Otherwise you do without. Here then you rely on power and weight and good wings. And numerical superiority. Two or four Kowser against one F18. With thrust vectoring ! We use tactics. Surround them. So no acrobatics will release them from prison.

    If you don't have it... buy it. Klimov have it... buy it from them to put on all your planes.

    Numerical superiority means nothing if they don't act stupid.... and most of the time they don't act stupid.

    50 Kowsers against one F18... the F18 detects the 50 targets at long range and at about 80km launches 8 AMRAAMs against the closest 8 targets... they either hit or don't hit but he doesn't care... he has already turned around heading for home for more fuel and more missiles... he might already be an ace by the time he lands... the AWACS will determine if his missiles got hits, but he is waiting for more missiles to be loaded and fuel to be put on board and probably asking for 10 AMRAAMs for this flight... he gets to the same place he was before and there are 46 targets and he picks 10 and launches 10 AMRAAMs and turns and heads home.... he can do this all week and so can all the pilots he is operating with.

    You mention R77. I suspect this to be medium range AA missile. But Iran has SAM that can reach altitude fast, level off and chase enemy plane.

    Missiles don't chase planes.... they are like bullets.... they either hit or miss. They do have proximity fuses so a close miss will set off the warhead so you might just get damage. The point is that if the missile misses and is not close enough to set off the warhead the missile never turns around and has another go... that is Hollywood bullshit.

    A missile has tiny control surfaces... it effectively has stabilisers... which keep it pointing nose forward, and control surfaces that can make it turn towards a target to get closer than it would otherwise get. To turn 180 degrees it would shed all its speed and drop like a rock... a plane has a wing to hold it up... the stabilisers and control surfaces on a missile don't generate any lift they just keep it pointed forward and allow it to turn a bit to compensate for the tiny distance the target could have moved in the time it is taking the missile to get there.

    In some circumstances a plane can evade a missile, for instance the way the SA-6 was launched if you detected it early enough you could dive down so as it was climbing up to intercept you it would have to turn the other way and it just couldn't turn that hard to reach you so you survived the SA-6... the problem for the Israeli pilots was that that dive took you down into SA-7 and ZSU-23-4 territory and that was dangerous too.

    The thing is that if you have not tracked the missile properly your manouvering might just make things worse... if an AMRAAM is coming for you but you turned left and so it is going to start looking for you away off to your right... if you then turn the correct way it might not be able to turn hard enough and fast enough to get you... if you turn the wrong way you might end up moving directly into its central view and it is going to get you.

    Using better longer range Radar. But what Iran does not have is short range dogfighter. Rely on pilot. Unjammable. Also the Rockets, I mentioned are nothing like old WW2 types. They are shot using small Radar and computer. And they have clever fuses. And much more difficult to jam. Compared to IR. But still IR guided can be used. If effective. This tactics is short range. To close the gap. When Iranian Radars jammed. Sam sites destroyed. F35 over Tehran.....

    You are better off letting the missiles do the killing and carrying as many as you can carry and using them as much as you can.

    I am talking about Iranian fighter. But of course Russian planes will be welcome too. Iranians prefer version without TVC. Perhaps simpler or cheaper.

    Communication and command and control are critical.... if your planes don't communicate you will find a lot of wasted time is spent because they are not seeing targets... and why bother with rockets that are guided... isn't that just what AAMs are?

    There is no free ride... if you could get away with spending next to nothing but also beating a military super power I would think it would already have been done.

    Even if you do beat them they will exact a nasty price... they have called for the people of Iran to rise up like they cared about the people of Iran... but they also block your access to medical supplies and food... they really could care less... but don't take that personally... they couldn't even care about their own people...

    What you need to do is shoot down aircraft. They will still attack, but killing pilots and shooting down expensive planes or sinking ships or subs is what you need to do to make some think why are we doing this... what is our goal... and when they realise it is all about making a few rich americans even richer they might reevaluate the purpose of their foreign policy. A tiny chance but better than nothing.

    Sponsored content

    Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions - Page 9 Empty Re: Iran Air Force (IRIAF) | News and Discussions

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:42 am