PeeD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Peed jon technologically in terms of engines we are more than capable of producing chassis & engines more capable than the ones designed and developed by the Russians over 40-50 years ago. Problem is that the funding and efforts aren't properly being directed towards that goal
so I believe this to be more a matter of miss management, lack of proper planning and a completely wrong mentality rather than anything else!
Problem is that their entire mentality is wrong! If their mentality was more towards "If I export I can use the income to increase my own stock va dar ayneh hal doostan va mottahed ha mo ziyad tar o ghavi tar mekonam" rather than "Esraf badeh so I'll dig my head in the sand and put all my efforts towards refurbishing what I already have" then we wouldn't be having this conversation!
Just listen to them:
Your overall industrial level must reach a maturity level, that allows production of critical systems like the engine.
If you force it, it won't be economical nor sustainable.
Iran needs parts manufacturers which can produce a ordered item for a Iranian tank engine. Specialized companies that provide the part at a economical cost, producing other parts for many other systems.
Iran is getting there and then, it makes sense to produce a complete tank.
Meanwhile technology needs to be mastered in low profile "prototype" projects, such as the Kowsar to have the necessary workforce and experience.
A tank is a great asset, foremost because it (used to be) is low cost.
If it is low cost and protected against air attacks, it can break trough enemy lines, out flank and use the cheapest possible weapon: direct shot HE round, to destroy enemy war fighting capability.
The modern cost-effect tier is like this:
BM strike
CM strike
Fighter-bomber delivered PGM
prop drone delivered PGM
dumb bomb/rocket attack by prop, jet or helicopter
artillery
direct fire tank gun
If your support and supply chain are up to it, highly mobile armored divisions attacking in blitzkrieg fashion, while protected against airpower, is a highly cost effective way to do war.
This can't be done with a $5m M1A1 but a $1m Karrar can do it for Iran.
So the tank weapon is still good.
Its not the priority for Iran, since massive mechanized warfare was not possible in the past due to enemy airpower and is unlikely in the future, since a cold war scenario is created.
Lets wait until Iranian industry naturally mature to that level, there is no hurry like in the case with BMs, air defense and drones.
PS: Karrar would do great on today battlefields but the next decades require a platform that is able to support a >140mm gun and Karrar/T-72 is too compact for that.