Iranian UAVs | News and Discussions
- Thread starter The SiLent crY
- Start date
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Russia can't produce enough AESA radar for himself , they had to replace AESA radar on Mig-35 prototypes to PESA in later variants .
That Ibris-E means you get a lock at 50km on enemy F-16v and they get a lock on you in 120km . it means they are resistant to your r-Warfare and you are blind to what is around you
It means the line between life and death .
I'm not aware about ASAT s-400 and for anti-missile we are already working on our version of it we even made some test about it and its not in dire need so i suggest we use the money to develop our system farther
3th and 15th khordad and probably tactical mersad are iran middle to long range system , Bavar is our long range system ,Mersad and Zoobin and Oghab and herz and Majid and ... are our short range . you and sepehr, Ghadir are our early warning radars . you see all components of air defense are there and remember s-500 have no export version i'm aware of and s-400 export version don't come with longest range missile and only have the 200km missiles and come with PESA , even S-500 come with one PESA and one AESA radar , Bavar come with two AESA radar
the su-35 were pitted against rafale and the result was lack lustering . its not they come from west even J-16 and J-10c that come from east are better than those
wrong , they shoot no F-15e and it was with no Iranian missile , it was with the help of some modified Russians air to air heat seeking missile .
we are not talking about Iranian drones and I challenge you with one thing , find a post that I say Iranian drones suck .
wonder what is the people taught on the china air force
24 airplane out of thousands and when it is bought , it was a political move not because the airplane was good
Last edited:
Why doesn't China use JF-17 if its any good ? Why did China bother to copy Russia's flankers if they're trash ? Why is Turkey considering SU-35 if its no good ? Why were so many nations purchasing the SU-35 before sanctions ? Why is India risking sanctions to purchase S-400 ? Why did Turkey give up F-35 for S-400 ?
Also you never answer this one question I have ? Should Iran continue to fly F-4s ? They're 50 years old now. Should Iran use them until they're 60 ? 70 ? 80 ? What do you suggest ?
Don't tell me that SU-30 with TOT and a few dozen SU-35 would not be better than continuing to fly outdated F-4s, Mirages and J-7s. Iran's airforce is very badly in need of new hardware. If Iran could build an effective, modern fighter jet that can carry a decent payload, then they would have done it already.
Iran also needs AWACS planes. Iran needs engines for its Iran-140. Iran needs alot of things which Russia can provide and Russia needs Iran for trade, the north south corridor to India and much more. It only makes sense for both nations to work together for mutual gain.
Also you never answer this one question I have ? Should Iran continue to fly F-4s ? They're 50 years old now. Should Iran use them until they're 60 ? 70 ? 80 ? What do you suggest ?
Don't tell me that SU-30 with TOT and a few dozen SU-35 would not be better than continuing to fly outdated F-4s, Mirages and J-7s. Iran's airforce is very badly in need of new hardware. If Iran could build an effective, modern fighter jet that can carry a decent payload, then they would have done it already.
Iran also needs AWACS planes. Iran needs engines for its Iran-140. Iran needs alot of things which Russia can provide and Russia needs Iran for trade, the north south corridor to India and much more. It only makes sense for both nations to work together for mutual gain.
Last edited:
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
you see the jf-17 block 3 is wanted by Nigeria , who want su-35 ,, Russia only rely on the USSR names , Russia itself , well let not go there . by the way JF-17block III can use Pl-15 and PL-12 and the radar is AESA . pretty good package for a light fighter
china was building its airplanes then , that is industrialized enough for me
let be honest , what is that massive support , how much of NATO warfare capability is this , you think Russia air force could stand even one duty if it went against NATO air force ? , what about its navy ?
the answer for those are clear . let go to seme other questions , let look at artillery , they gave Ukraine 12 himras and they are still having problem deal with them .what if they wanted to face all NATO artillery power . do you believe Russians tanks could stand against attack by NATO tanks ? look at the soldiers look at their equipment , let say on battle field a Russians soldier get hit in the chest with bullet and a NATO soldier get hit on the chest you think what will happen , in pressure of battle who can keep its discipline Russians mobilized soldiers or NATO professional ones ? as i said don't mistake Russia with USSR . the only think kept Russia relevant is its nukes.
they would have been vaporized in the first week of war if Russians air-force had actual division for sear , those air-defense were vintage 80s remnant nothing new a squadron of f-18 growler would have blinded and then destroyed them in first week
you think Iraq radars at 1991 was something trivial ? or Ukraine system now are better ? and show me what they upgrade the most upgraded air defence system they had was the one they received from check republic i think , Ukraine ones where the shit they were , they just brought them out of storage
who said , i believe that , i say Russians weapon are inferior to other western and eastern weapons . because they stopped after USSR , because their electronics is old and outdated .
they can't build modern weapons an dsthey can't build weapon in mass if it belong to 2000+, at least we build the weapon on cheap , they even can't do that
what you think exactly happened . look what happened to t-72 (read T90) in around the world in Syria , Iraq or anyplace else right now Russia even have problem produce it and resort to bring t-60 out of storage.in 6 month we see they are fighting with t-34
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
because china have J-10c and fly 600 of them .
the copy is 100time better than the original and have modern radar , e-warfare system and weapons and actually can produced in mass
and let see what turkey get . and what option they have , right now they fall out with usa .let see what they get at last.
good question why and did they had other options and are they satisfied withtheir performance ? why india stopped building su-3 and went rafale route , why they even cancelled the last order ?
as i said the best air-defense India have indigenously is a copy of KUB not even BUK and turkey what air-defense they had ? USA refused to sell them patriot , what other option they had ? are you saying our situation is like them ?
I guess I answered that question many times already . use 1/6th the 6billion you guys want spend in importing 2-3 su-35 on developing indigenous turbofan engine and use the rest on producing next generation kowsar as a multirole light-medium fighter the damn aircraft is in size of Grippen , with proper engine it can replace f-4 and the equipment in kowsar currently is more advance than any upgrade you can get for mig-29 . the final product can replace F-5 , F-4 , J-7 , Mirages and even Mig-29. you spend money on that platform and it can be our J-10, JF-17, F16, F18 and Grippen
would be better , but won't change anything as they are nothing to what our neighbors have , you knew what would be better , build our own damn Fighter and build 300-400 of it and retire those circus airplanes
want engine , go buy the engine and build your aircraft , build an AWACS version of Simorgh not the damn outdated aircraft .
Last edited:
Despite the risk of sanctions lots of countries had set orders for the SU-35. Then the Ukraine war broke out and due to heavy threats from the west, countries like Egypt, Algeria, Indonesia all cancelled their orders
Ukraine has hundreds of air defense batteries. Russia is one country. You think if the UK or France went into Ukraine, which the level of support Ukraine has, that their airforces would fare better ? I highly doubt it. Maybe the US after months of launching missiles at Ukrainian targets, then they would send their airforce in.
Russia bombed Ukraine for one night. They didn't want to kill fellow Orthodox Slavs. They wanted to avoid bloodshed and conduct an operation like in 2014 Crimea, but it didn't work. Remember when Syria shot down an Israeli F-16 a few years ago ? You think US weapons are invincible ? No they're not. If the US could only bomb Ukraine for one night and Ukraine had the same level of support, US would lose jets as well.
Anyways why are you even talking about western hardware. Iran does not have access to that. Iran's only option is more F-5s, or J-10 or SU-35. That's it. That's the reality.
You think NATO soldiers are better than Russian soldiers Chinese or Iranian ? No they're not. Look at what happened to the Iraqi army they spent billions training or the Afghan army. 3 trillion they spent in Afghanistan. They were defeated by rag tag militants.
Recently the British spent months training hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers. Yesterday they launched the 4th or 5th amphibious assault on Enerhodar city, to try and take the Zaporizhia nuclear plant back. They were annihilated and defeated again.
Don't believe the hype about invincible western armies and how tough their soldiers are. It's all nonsense. NATO soldiers are 100% reliant on airpower and expensive gadgets. Take those away from them and they're pathetic and incapable. That's the truth.
Just because an air defense system is from the 1980's does not mean that it still can't be effective, especially with upgrades. When a missile travels several times faster than the speed of sound, there's no way an F-16 is getting away. Impossible. Think about an F-14 for example. With upgrades it's still a potent weapon. The C-130 Hercules. It's been in service with the US army since the 1950's. An AK-47 from the 1960s, if you had one stored away brand new, it still gets the job done.
Anyways Ukraine was the tip of the spear for the Soviet Union. After the Warsaw countries, it was the first line of defense for the USSR. Because of that, much of the USSRs best air defense systems and nuclear armaments were stationed there. Ukraine kept 250 S-300 batteries and hundreds of other types. A squadron of F-16s would stand ZERO chance. They would get wiped out.
The T-72s in Iraq were export variants. When the US attacked Iraq in 1991, Russia already had reactive armor and their T-72s could hit a target from 5 KM away. The Abrams couldn't do that, although it arguably had better armor. Anyways it's not fair comparing export variants to weapons used by superpowers.
In any case look at what happened to the Abrams in Yemen. Old Soviet ATGMs from the 1980s wiped them out. Turkish Leopard 2s sent into Syria. ISIS destroyed dozens. They were torn into pieces, some with their turrets blown off. Western weapons are all hype and they're overpriced.
Also in this globalized world every product has components from all over the world. Most US weapons have parts from China. Does that mean China is superior to America because of that ? What kind of logic is that ?
Russia can mass produce drones. They have decent models and they have the expertise. The main issue for them was time constraints. Because it takes time to adapt to sanctions, find new sources, suppliers for components and parts. Iran has adapted over years and decades. Russia neglected its drone program and then as the war dragged on, they realized that they needed drones immediately. They couldn't wait 6 months to a year for production to ramp up, so they turned to Iran,
Anyways it's easy to look impressive against Afghanistan or Libya, but after 2014 NATO build the largest army in Europe by investing billions into Ukraine. There are even thousands of NATO mercenaries in Ukraine, but countless numbers of them have been eliminated.
Russia has just recently begun turning up the heat on Ukraine, targeting vital infrastructure and recently mobilizing. Ukraine on the other hand is on the 9th round of mobilization. When the US went into Iraq, their first targets were power stations and vital infrastructure. When NATO attacked Yugoslavia, their first targets were power stations.
This entire time Russia has been fighting outnumbered, which is an incredible feat. Armies on the offensive are supposed to outnumber their enemy. Despite this Russia has gone on the offensive on multiple occasions and their army has never been surrounded, encircled and destroyed. Just keep watching and you'll see how it ends.
Ukraine has hundreds of air defense batteries. Russia is one country. You think if the UK or France went into Ukraine, which the level of support Ukraine has, that their airforces would fare better ? I highly doubt it. Maybe the US after months of launching missiles at Ukrainian targets, then they would send their airforce in.
Russia bombed Ukraine for one night. They didn't want to kill fellow Orthodox Slavs. They wanted to avoid bloodshed and conduct an operation like in 2014 Crimea, but it didn't work. Remember when Syria shot down an Israeli F-16 a few years ago ? You think US weapons are invincible ? No they're not. If the US could only bomb Ukraine for one night and Ukraine had the same level of support, US would lose jets as well.
Anyways why are you even talking about western hardware. Iran does not have access to that. Iran's only option is more F-5s, or J-10 or SU-35. That's it. That's the reality.
You think NATO soldiers are better than Russian soldiers Chinese or Iranian ? No they're not. Look at what happened to the Iraqi army they spent billions training or the Afghan army. 3 trillion they spent in Afghanistan. They were defeated by rag tag militants.
Recently the British spent months training hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers. Yesterday they launched the 4th or 5th amphibious assault on Enerhodar city, to try and take the Zaporizhia nuclear plant back. They were annihilated and defeated again.
Don't believe the hype about invincible western armies and how tough their soldiers are. It's all nonsense. NATO soldiers are 100% reliant on airpower and expensive gadgets. Take those away from them and they're pathetic and incapable. That's the truth.
Just because an air defense system is from the 1980's does not mean that it still can't be effective, especially with upgrades. When a missile travels several times faster than the speed of sound, there's no way an F-16 is getting away. Impossible. Think about an F-14 for example. With upgrades it's still a potent weapon. The C-130 Hercules. It's been in service with the US army since the 1950's. An AK-47 from the 1960s, if you had one stored away brand new, it still gets the job done.
Anyways Ukraine was the tip of the spear for the Soviet Union. After the Warsaw countries, it was the first line of defense for the USSR. Because of that, much of the USSRs best air defense systems and nuclear armaments were stationed there. Ukraine kept 250 S-300 batteries and hundreds of other types. A squadron of F-16s would stand ZERO chance. They would get wiped out.
The T-72s in Iraq were export variants. When the US attacked Iraq in 1991, Russia already had reactive armor and their T-72s could hit a target from 5 KM away. The Abrams couldn't do that, although it arguably had better armor. Anyways it's not fair comparing export variants to weapons used by superpowers.
In any case look at what happened to the Abrams in Yemen. Old Soviet ATGMs from the 1980s wiped them out. Turkish Leopard 2s sent into Syria. ISIS destroyed dozens. They were torn into pieces, some with their turrets blown off. Western weapons are all hype and they're overpriced.
Also in this globalized world every product has components from all over the world. Most US weapons have parts from China. Does that mean China is superior to America because of that ? What kind of logic is that ?
Russia can mass produce drones. They have decent models and they have the expertise. The main issue for them was time constraints. Because it takes time to adapt to sanctions, find new sources, suppliers for components and parts. Iran has adapted over years and decades. Russia neglected its drone program and then as the war dragged on, they realized that they needed drones immediately. They couldn't wait 6 months to a year for production to ramp up, so they turned to Iran,
Anyways it's easy to look impressive against Afghanistan or Libya, but after 2014 NATO build the largest army in Europe by investing billions into Ukraine. There are even thousands of NATO mercenaries in Ukraine, but countless numbers of them have been eliminated.
Russia has just recently begun turning up the heat on Ukraine, targeting vital infrastructure and recently mobilizing. Ukraine on the other hand is on the 9th round of mobilization. When the US went into Iraq, their first targets were power stations and vital infrastructure. When NATO attacked Yugoslavia, their first targets were power stations.
This entire time Russia has been fighting outnumbered, which is an incredible feat. Armies on the offensive are supposed to outnumber their enemy. Despite this Russia has gone on the offensive on multiple occasions and their army has never been surrounded, encircled and destroyed. Just keep watching and you'll see how it ends.
USA didn't refuse to sell Turkey Patriot. Turkey wanted Patriot with TOT. USA refused. Turkey then purchased S-400 with the promise that Turkey could assemble some inside Turkey and eventually receive the software codes and blueprints. However because Turkey sold drones to Ukraine, now Russia is refusing to give Turkey software codes.
So basically Russia can turn off Turkey's S-400 anytime they want and all the vital maintenance has to be completed by Russian technicians. However for Turkey avoiding the F-35 was probably a good thing. The F-35 is honestly overpriced and it's junk. As time passes, it has more and more problems, not less. It's a very problematic product.
The only jet Iran can build is the F-5 knockoffs and as I've said the F-5 is outdated and too small to carry a serious payload. If Iran could build a modern fighter jet that can carry a good payload, it would have been done already. They obviously can't. So then they have to either purchase J-10 or SU-35. That's it.
India stopped buying flankers because they already have a significant number and they wanted to diversity. After losing a MIG-21 to a Pakistani F-16, they felt humiliated and some Indians blamed Russia for the loss, ignoring the fact that the MIG-21 was outdated and no longer used by the Russians themselves. Realistically it was the Indians own choice to continue to use that platform and it was their choice to deploy it on the frontlines.
Anyways you could argue that SU-30/SU-35 or J-10s are not on par with western counterparts but they're MUCH better than Iran's J-7s, Mirage or F-4s. The fact of the matter is that those jets are too outdated and must be replaced sooner or later. Iran needs new hardware. Iran needs AWACS planes. No nation can produce everything on its own. Iran needs to work with nations like Russia, China to expand its capabilities.
So basically Russia can turn off Turkey's S-400 anytime they want and all the vital maintenance has to be completed by Russian technicians. However for Turkey avoiding the F-35 was probably a good thing. The F-35 is honestly overpriced and it's junk. As time passes, it has more and more problems, not less. It's a very problematic product.
The only jet Iran can build is the F-5 knockoffs and as I've said the F-5 is outdated and too small to carry a serious payload. If Iran could build a modern fighter jet that can carry a good payload, it would have been done already. They obviously can't. So then they have to either purchase J-10 or SU-35. That's it.
India stopped buying flankers because they already have a significant number and they wanted to diversity. After losing a MIG-21 to a Pakistani F-16, they felt humiliated and some Indians blamed Russia for the loss, ignoring the fact that the MIG-21 was outdated and no longer used by the Russians themselves. Realistically it was the Indians own choice to continue to use that platform and it was their choice to deploy it on the frontlines.
Anyways you could argue that SU-30/SU-35 or J-10s are not on par with western counterparts but they're MUCH better than Iran's J-7s, Mirage or F-4s. The fact of the matter is that those jets are too outdated and must be replaced sooner or later. Iran needs new hardware. Iran needs AWACS planes. No nation can produce everything on its own. Iran needs to work with nations like Russia, China to expand its capabilities.
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
exactly which many countries ?
which air defense , all are from 80s
let not go into propaganda nonsense realm
and never claimed USA weapons are better as a rule , but any day I say right now USA air craft are better than Russians . let just bring an example , F-16V which Russian air craft can compete with this one ?
I talked about Europeans , western and Chinese also , don't like western replace the name with Mig and Chengdu those are just name for examples , and your problem is that you think kowsar is F-5
better equipped and and don't loose their discipline under fire unlike volunteer and conscripts .
show me a battle that NATO soldiers lost to Taliban in a direct battle .
Ukrainian soldiers are conscripts not professional ones
and they didn't received months of training , the training maybe for months but each group only received at most 1 - 2 week of training
but you had to fight to them with those , its not a wargame that at start you pull a serries of rules and say you can't use air power and these gadget and I didn't said expensive gadgets i was talking about body-armors and first aid kits and clothes
you rather have NATO helmet and body armor or Russian issued ones , be honest answering that
Syria fired 100s of air defense missile against Israeli's aircrafts in last decade , how many aircraft they manage to hit ? how many raids they managed to prevent ? and no Ukrainian air-defense received upgrade , show me one with upgrade .
in Ukraine how t-72 faired how t-90 faired and those export variant had better armor than the domestic ones as the Russians removed part of the armor to install equipment on the body of domestic ones
please don't defend T-72 or its latest version t-90 . if it was t-64 or its derivate t-80 I didn't criticize it that much they are more survivable in battlefield
exactly how many and look at the videos , those several that get destroyed were attacked from lateral and behind , that point to the weakness in strategy and commanding capabilities not tank , with t-72 and t-90 you can destroy them from every
hope you are aware that the tanks that were ripped apart actually are not the reason of ATGMs but after turkey for various reasons abandoned them , they were bombed by Russia and turkey not to fall in hand of ISIS (previously 2 tank fall in the hand of ISIS), wonder you expect how the tank look like if a 250kg bomb fall om it and in that war 8 tank get damaged by ATGMs and IEDs and non of them get ripped off
oh and before i forget the version of leopard turkey received had no APS and had weaker belly armor than the others
never recall i ever claim a system inferior for using component s from other countries , can you point me to the exact post i made such claims ?
they have mass produced orlan-10 . the drone is launched by ellastic bands ,and even ababil-2 is better than it, i said 2000+ technology
don't care about those , i say modern weapons from Russia right now that can benefit us, don't care about war tactics
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
means usa refused to sell turkey what they wanted.
overpriced yes , but the junk is better than anything Russia can offer , even the proposed Su-57 can't compete with it
F-5 is the size of Grippen-C , you think how many weapon that airplane can carry ? in fact its size is between Grippen-C and Grippen-E
Grippen-C payload is 5300 and Grippen-e Payload is 7200kg f-5 can carry up to 4000kg
so the size is not the problem , something else decide how much the aircraft can carry
now a question with advent of SDB and percision bombing why you need big bombs that need 10t capabilities of f-4 what operation can you do with those f-4 that you can't do with twi Next generation kowsar each carrying 16-20 precision guided mk-82 size sdb
fact is India didn't send su-30 anywhere near Pakistani jf-17 and f-16s , the fact is for 10 years they asked Russia for aesa radars and they failed to deliver it.
iran need hardware , but uf those hardware are su-35 and awacs from russia , 10 years down the road they join that circus airplane they are supposed to replace .
by the way you are talking about 24-36 airplane to replace 200 airplane . the 6 billion can't provide us with a meaningful airforce if bought from other countries , but it can build us an indigenous airforce that we can upgrade down the road whenever we built something better
by the way by how I see it we have 4 route from worse to best
1- England and Canada route which is abandoning our superior product and go get inferior product from USA because it seems cheaper initially
2-Germany and east Europe countries , why bother go and get it from USA route
3-France and Sweden and China route , build whatever part we can , buy what ever we cant produce and design our aircraft ourself and built it ourself and try to build what we already cant
this show how future wars may be. one thing that worry me is that our infrastructures are not hardened and protected . , wonder will it worth the expense to move our critical systems under the ground incase of future wars
the last video i think its IRIS-T it seems if it reach a certain distance from where it fired , if it didn't acquire a target it self destruct so it don't fall on ground and severe damage to area it fall , they argue like this the debris do a lot less damage if they had to fire it in urban areas
Last edited:
They did shoot down Saudi F-15S https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...udi_Arabian–led_intervention_in_Yemen#By_type
2 Tornado IDS
2 F-15S
2/3 F-16
1 Mirage 2000
1 EF-2000 which Saudi claim had technical problems just like all their lost jets
2-3 Apache
And if according to you this is done by "some modified russians air to air heat seeking missile", then it's even better news for Iran if a western jet would enter Iran.
I didn't said that you told that Iranian drones s*cked, i used them as an example of underestimating and overestimating enemies, all the west was boasting that ALL Iranian hardware was terrible
Before 2019: They were boasting that Iranian missiles have no value in a real war
After 2019: "Iranian missiles are an enormous threat for our interests in the region and the world
Before 2019: "Iranian drones are just mockups bought on Wish they will never inflict any consequent damage"
After 2019 and now: "Iranian drones are a huge concern for Ukraine, are cost effective, hard to detect, hard to deal with and even if shot down, you lost 10x the cost of the drone on western missiles"
Before 2019: "Iranian SAMs are just all copies of S-200 and crappy BUKs and KUBs, SA-3 and HQ-2"
After 2019: "Iranian air defense sector is one of the best in the world"
This is to explain to you how they underestimated Iran for years before tasting Iran weapons, this is to make a comparison, you seem to believe that western fighters are invincible because they are made in the west and that they have unhuman brains, that every Russian fighters are bad because of no AESA yet, that Chinese fighters are "better because they have AESA and Russians one not", i don't think it is that simple to use one factor to determine if a fighter is "good or not"
Iran can't stay with F-5s and F-4s until 2025 or 2030, Iran do not and will never have access to Rafale/Gripen or F-18 or F-15/F-16/F-35, Su-35 can fill up this loophole while Iran can make their own fighter and engine (and air defense systems and bavar variants and upgrades) in serenity and having something to protect its airspace instead of relying on F-5s and F-14s and still paying for FT-7s, Su-22s and no-radar Mirage F-1s , Iran hasn't been offered J-10C or J-16/J-31, Iran should do with any option they have on the table, not waiting until the critical moment or developing their indigenous engines or fighters while being the airspace is exposed
Daylamite Warrior
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2021
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- -79
- Country
- Location
You're wasting your time! I dont know how many times the exact things youve mentioned have been told to Hack Hook, but he somehow thinks that Iran will be able to create an indegenous design like a rabbit out of a hat.
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
the only thing shown was one f-15 that a missile exploded near it , it assumed that f-15 probably get damaged , but no evidence of shot down ever provided , unlike the other case , so nope no f-15 was destroyed
the problem is not that . as i said our air defense is stronger than many NATO countries .
but the problem is the air defense need to be strengthened by air force and that part is postponed by not provided adequate finance to the development sector
wrong i believe western and Chinese airplanes are better than Russians one right now , AESA radars are very important , data link is very important , electronic warfare is very important , being able to produce the weapon is very important Russians have serious problem in that regard, because they were asleep in last 30+ years ands the world didn't wait for them
Iran very well can stay with then for the next 4-5 years , and we must replace the f-5 and mirages and j-7 with kowsar in that time till the domestic turbofan engine become ready and then build the next generation Kowsar that can replace all the circus airplanes and use the current generation of kowsar for training our pilots
those su-35 in the numbers that you guys suggest (24-26 ) have no effect at all only add to the complexity of maintenance of our air force and can't compete with our neighbors airforce
Similar threads
