Iran successfully produces a new generation of the Tomcat F-14

[Gold Eagle]

hi bro,welcome to PDF.

Thanks

 

[Hack-Hook]

Experts will disagree with you on this.

According to experts, both China and USA are conventionally much stronger then Russia.

Those S300 and S400 can also be taken care of with long range cruise missiles. No big deal.

And you believe tor and pantsir are just for show ?

 

[Greenn]

such a funny they are! yeah, I think you can incoming to Russia with no problem and all of these equipments are fake and one American marine can blow out whole the Russia, as you can Find them in the Hollywood!
and at the End they rise the us flag in the Kremlin!
The hero who defeated Russia army ---->

 

[LeGenD]

And you believe tor and pantsir are just for show ?

Things are not so simple, my friend. Fancy toys do not make much difference on their own. Entire military setup matters.

Here is a big hint:

Moscow's points of neuralgia are the development of US global strike capabilities, the conventional forces imbalance in favor of NATO and the weakness of Russia’s conventional capabilities, particularly its lack of high-tech precision-strike systems and advanced C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance).

Full read: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/Collaboration/international/McDermott/Russia-NuclearPolicy.pdf

Their is strong basis behind over-reliance of Russia on its nuclear arsenal for its security needs. This will not change unless Russia will be able to address its conventional military weakness.

such a funny they are! yeah, I think you can incoming to Russia with no problem and all of these equipments are fake and one American marine can blow out whole the Russia, as you can Find them in the Hollywood!
and at the End they rise the us flag in the Kremlin!
The hero who defeated Russia army ---->

No need to bring Hollywood in to these discussions; but the fact is that Russia is not in the league of US and possibly China in conventional military capability.

Recent military demonstrations cannot hide the fact that Russia’s conventional military stand on the precipice of irrelevance. Almost two decades of under funding has resulted in obsolete equipment, inadequate maintenance, poor training and low morale. In this same period there has been a revolution in military capabilities centered on the exploitation of information technologies. The result has been an order-of-magnitude improvement in the lethality and operational effectiveness of conventional military forces. This is a revolution n which the Russian military has yet to participate. Whatever may be the Kremlin’s ambitions for the Russian military of 2020 and beyond, the decline of the Russian defense industrial base means there is little chance of Russia being able to reach those objectives.

The likelihood that Russia can achieve its goal of a thoroughly modern conventional capability, one able to take on the West in a regional conflict by 2020 is fanciful, at best. The Kremlin is left, therefore with two strategic options. One is to seek to constrain Western and particularly U.S. military advances through pursuit of an aggressive arms control agenda. The other is to try and return to the past, focusing the U.S.-Russian relationship on nuclear issues. In order to do this, Russia must take the necessary steps to maintain and modernize its nuclear arsenals, both strategic and tactical. Unfortunately, on this path lies confrontation.

Source: http://www.ndu.edu/inss/symposia/2010 Russia Security Workshop/OSD_Russia_Goure.pdf

Current trend shows that Russian military planners are cutting down the size of the nuclear arsenal and focusing on improving conventional military might; therefore minimizing the dependency on nuclear arsenal for security needs. This is good approach. However, China is expected to beat Russia in modernization phase.

Also, keep in mind that it is not just the weapons that make the difference. Morale and training of troops are two additional determinants. Russian troops lack in morale and training aspects due to obsolete military structures in place, rampant corruption and social degradation back at home.

Ever wondered that why some Islamic nations are so hard to defeat even with inadequate military capabilities? This is due to high morale, faith and better society.

Consider the example of Iran: this nation has minimal internal differences to exploit or they are not known much - thanks to check over media sources; morale of troops is generally high due to strong faith and family support; and majority of the nation seems to be united for national cause. It is these factors that greatly enhance Iranian strength as a nation. Not that Iran is invincible but its internal strength and unity leaves a psychological impact on potential enemies.

In a combat scenario; I would place my bet on an Iranian soldier over Russian soldier any day.

 

[The SC]

My friend, you need some serious education in warfare.

Fact is that Iraq lost against USA; Iraq failed to prevent invasion; Saddam Hussein and his sons were taken out; Baath Party lost power; Iraqi resistance lost momentum after 4 years of struggle; and US prevented breakup of Iraq by implementing democracy.

In the end, US left Iraq due to Obama's mandate. People should remember that no country is personal property of any other country. But US have re-written Iraqi history; Saddam and his sons are gone. Their is no one who would get free ticket to step in the shoes of Saddam now and treat Iraq like his personal property. This is BIG thing. Yes! This conflict was hard-fought. US suffered noticeable losses but these losses pale in comparison to what US have suffered during COLD WAR as an example.

And yet I am being delusional? Sorry.


Oh! So China will be willing to put at stake all its accomplishments for the sake of another 3rd world country?

That can be the general's personal opinion. Does China have official policy of protecting Iran?


"Iran CAN easily defeat the US"

Right! Whatever makes you happy. Earth is FLAT as well.

And if Afghanistan is your benchmark for victory; good luck. Please advice Ahmadinejad to hire Taliban to protect Iran because it has proven itself in combat through killing lot of civilians with suicide attacks thus far.

I am saying That Iran can defeat the US in the Persian gulf anytime, and most certainly now that all the regional actors supporting the US have awakened to the reality that any war in the gulf will be fought with their lives with a few American lost souls, but the worst part of it all is that all the regional American allies and America itself are facing huge internal problems. So logically speaking, America without any safe base in the area has to wage the war from home to Iran or use some islands in the Indian ocean to attack Iran, those are very long distances to wage a potent war.
In the Persian gulf itself , even two, three or four task forces with hundreds of thousands of marines won't stand a chance against a task force of over 10 million fighters , well armed, well trained and deadly motivated for defending their homeland.
Add to this a regular army combined with the IRGC who are extremely well trained and armed; that is the Iranian task force, if you want my opinion.

For Iraq, you might say that the US and a few dozen allies have defeated Saddam an his ill trained army, they still had trouble for months and years with members of the republican guard. But the main thing is when the Iraqi people opened their eyes and saw the hatred the Jews instilled in American hearts about the Arabs in general, and decided to take up arms, the remaining youth defeated the Americans back to their barracks in less than one year of total war and constant combat and forced them to negotiate a pull-out.

The same happened in Afghanistan, the proof is that America is being helped to save face by the same people it came to eliminate, namely the Taliban with whom it is in constant negotiations. The only American action we hear about today in Afghanistan and some places in Pakistan is made by combat drones with the obvious complicity of the people who fights other rebellious tribes who don't belong to the majority, so they are fighting them with the American proxy now a days, and with American soldiers lives if they turn against them, the real masters of Afghanistan.

 

[Penguin]

Any pics or videos?! That's impossible guys. Impossible. They can copy F-5 with a second tail but not one of the most capable, sophisticated and advanced aircraft in the world. It was retired mostly because of it's very expensive maintenance, and spare parts.

What is meant is recycling, modernizing, upgrading existing jets ´in house´, not building new airframes from scratch.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Wondeful job of overhauling the bird looks BRAND new , from the landing gears to the body work
also the other pictures demonstrate the internal engine work

Awesome
Just look at the overhaul , all parts are BRAND new

 

[BordoEnes]

Anyone knows wether Iran posses any Passive radars or have there own?

 

[atatwolf]

Let me put it this way: US is so powefull that it can take down Russia in just three months in a conventional war. They would never know where the missiles came from. And yet you speak Iran's possible victory against US. Forgive me if I don't buy it.

Iran will never be able to stand more than a week if US decides to attack.

One week? Wow

Let me put it this way: US is so powefull that it can take down Russia in just three months in a conventional war. They would never know where the missiles came from. And yet you speak Iran's possible victory against US. Forgive me if I don't buy it.

Iran will never be able to stand more than a week if US decides to attack.

One week? Wow

 

[Hashshāshīn]

Let me put it this way: US is so powefull that it can take down Russia in just three months in a conventional war. They would never know where the missiles came from. And yet you speak Iran's possible victory against US. Forgive me if I don't buy it.

Iran will never be able to stand more than a week if US decides to attack.

Bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? Russia in 3 months?! US is strong, but not THAT strong. Against Russia in a conventional war, it could last 9 months to a year. (US victory obviously)

man,everyday your post becomes more bullshit.its can be more stupid...

Russia has been a country for a 1000 years. It is also in the most populous super-continent with many bordering countries. US has only been a country for 200 years, and only borders Canada (their puppet) and Mexico. There's a huge ocean on both sides of it.

What's your point?

 

[Cheetah786]

There goes that 'passive radar' nonsense again. Radar detection is a two parts process: Transmission and Reception. Without either, there is no 'radar detection'. This is real physics, not 'Iranian physics'.


That is a double edged sword. The more you move the less time you have to perform any real work. The less you transmit, the more the gaps -- time and area -- for the enemy to slip through your defenses.

''passive radar” that can locate even difficult-to-detect flying objects such as stealth aircraft, and that itself is practically undetectable.

In contrast to conventional radar, passive radar doesn’t emit any radiation, but instead analyses radiation reflections from other emitters, such as radio and television stations, to detect objects.

 

[SOHEIL]

Anyone knows wether Iran posses any Passive radars or have there own?

oh man ... WTF ?

we have best one ( home made )

 

[gambit]

''passive radar” that can locate even difficult-to-detect flying objects such as stealth aircraft, and that itself is practically undetectable.

I have already explained this many times before: That there is no such beast as a 'passive radar'.

In contrast to conventional radar, passive radar doesn’t emit any radiation, but instead analyses radiation reflections from other emitters, such as radio and television stations, to detect objects.

And I have explained this many times before as well.

In theory...

When a radar signal impact a body, unless the body is literally a flat plate facing the radar, the vast majority of the scattered signals will be away from the seeking radar. Only the tiny portion of those scattered signals will return to the seeking radar. Those signals that scattered away from the seeking radar is called 'forward scatter' mode. The tiny portion that returned to the seeking radar is called 'back scatter' mode. The vast majority of the world's operating radars, from weather to air traffic control to military, are 'back scatter' radar systems.

The idea behind the falsely labeled 'passive radar' system is called 'bi-static' configuration.

This is where there is a Transmitter and more than one physically distinct Receivers who will pick up those 'forward scatter' signals. In the above illustration, Receiver B will pick up more signals than Receiver A. That is the law of nature base upon geometry. This is real physics, not 'Iranian physics' and not 'Chinese physics'.

What you are talking about using TV, radio and cell signals is based upon the same bi-static radar configuration...

When there are many physically distinct receivers, the entire network can be labeled 'multi-static' but essentially each transmitter-target-receiver combination is still bi-static. So while in theory that such a set up can be used to locate a 'stealth' threat, the system does have limitations and weaknesses.

Chief of those weaknesses is data processing. In radar detection in a typical mono-static configuration, the user (you) is in complete control of the entire process. You are in control of the transmitter and receiver operations. You control the operating frequency, amplitude, and signal characteristics.

From the above example, you should receive these vital target resolutions:

- Altitude
- Speed
- Heading
- Aspect angle

The more control you have over the entire process, the greater those target resolutions. But when you remove the 'Transmitter' side of the process, meaning you depend on TV, radio and cell phone signals, the quality of those target resolutions begins to degrade. You no longer have control of the operating frequency, amplitude, and very importantly -- pulse characteristics. To improve those resolutions, you must have many and many receivers and all of them must communicate with each other as to what each see, where, and when. Because the TV signals have different frequency, amplitude, and signal characteristics than radio and cell phone signals, data processing to sort out which type of signals will best produce which target resolutions. For all we know, TV signals will produce better altitude resolution than speed resolution. Or that cell phone signals will produce better aspect angle information than radio signals can.

Another weakness is mobility. The more your receiver stations move around, the greater the loss of data quality. Any EE can tell you that electricity loses power over distance. Or has Iran found something unique about electricity produce in Iran that does not have this characteristic?

How to defeat? How about removing electrical power from these TV, radio, and cell phone towers? Are you going to tell everyone that the US have no experience in locating and destroying infrastructures vital to enemy operations?

I do not expect you to change your mind. Just like the bulk of people here, you already made up your mind about Iran's ability to defeat US despite reasonable arguments to the contrary.

 

[A1Kaid]

I do not expect you to change your mind. Just like the bulk of people here, you already made up your mind about Iran's ability to defeat US despite reasonable arguments to the contrary.

I don't think anybody here believes Iran can defeat US.

 

[Jasongt]

Let me put it this way: US is so powefull that it can take down Russia in just three months in a conventional war. They would never know where the missiles came from. And yet you speak Iran's possible victory against US. Forgive me if I don't buy it.

Iran will never be able to stand more than a week if US decides to attack.

guys where is the honor of importing things from us?
Russia has more nuclear missiles
Russia is more advanced in AA technologies
Russia has flankers(super flanker and ....)
Russia is biggest country in the world and because of that there is no airbase that you can use against this country for covering all of its target places and only thing you can do is using long range planes
Russia has one of toughest armies in the world

so Forgive me if I don't buy it.