What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

My emphasis on the roots of Iranian military tech was to demonstrate that catching up to the rest of the world in military tech is not easy nor quick. Yes, Iran should work on its domestic arms industry. But that doesn't mean abstaining from purchasing foreign arms.

Amir jan, I am fan of your twitter and blog and as a fellow Iranian thankful for the time you put on those platforms in order to inform and educate.

Having said that, I categorically disagree with you when it comes to procurement of expensive military hardware such as fighter jets or the likes of tanks, submarines, AD systems and such. Even though the later ones mentioned are not up to discussion, I wanted to make it clear that I am not only against procurement of fighter jets, rather all expensive hardware.

So I disagree with you on three accords. By buying these systems:
1. we will lose incentive to develop our own hardware. Hence, simply saying that we should buy and at the same time develop our own is in reality a toothless approach, because the stress and incentive fades and the sense of emergency is instead replaced with a sense of false security. This is the foremost silent killer of all incentives and domestic projects.
2. we loose budget for our development of our own industry.
3. we strengthen the negative image of ourselves being a client state and of inferior capability. This point is maybe the most important in my opinion because it will affect the young generation and thus in affect for decades.

Also you need to separate (real) engineering with reverse-engineering (copy engineering). Your example with the missiles taking decades to develop is a case of reverse engineering done by a work force not being expert engineers to begin with. A nation that conducts real engineering is able to utilise mathematical, physics, chemical, electric, electronic etc knowledge to develop a product which satisfies a very specific set of requirements. As an example Space X fielded the falcon rocket within 5 years (!!!), difference being foremost because real engineering being utilised.
Although Iran started its journey as a clear copy engineering nation, I would argue that today Iran has in many cases shown true signs of real engineering. The Air defence systems and new generation of precision missiles are a testament of this theory.
We can see the exact same development in the private sector such as with MAPNAs new gas turbine which is completely unique in its design. What does this show? It is a clear indicator that Iranian engineers do not need a corresponding foreign system to copy anymore. They are confident in their own product development process.

So if we could trust in Tehrani Moghaddam to kickstart our missile program from absolutely zero knowledge base with minimal resources, how can we turn our back to our current capabilities when it comes to satisfying the military needs in regards to airspace patrol and power projection?
 
.
Salam Sina jan. I hope you are well. I'm happy that you enjoy my contributions. Inshallah I will have something important to share in the coming weeks or months.

1. we will lose incentive to develop our own hardware. Hence, simply saying that we should buy and at the same time develop our own is in reality a toothless approach, because the stress and incentive fades and the sense of emergency is instead replaced with a sense of false security. This is the foremost silent killer of all incentives and domestic projects.

2. we loose budget for our development of our own industry.

3. we strengthen the negative image of ourselves being a client state and of inferior capability. This point is maybe the most important in my opinion because it will affect the young generation and thus in affect for decades.

I disagree with these.

1. You are implying there is an incentive to begin with. I have not seen any strong movement by Iran towards developing an air superiority fighter ever. Make no mistake, that's what Iran needs to defend its airspace. What are we meant to do, wait for the establishment to make a move? I don't trust them. Given how long fighter development takes (especially for a country like Iran), IRIAF would be no more than a shell of even it's current self by the time that "urgency" appears. IRIAF should grab its chance now.

2. If IRIAF gets a major modernisation underway then it shows it has been given support. Enough support to fund strategic projects like domestic fighter designs.

3. I don't think that would happen. We have domestically produced SAMs, ships, drones, tanks, and ofc missiles. The extent of the last one is unique for a country of Iran's status.

Consider my proposal to be similar to how we bought S-300 even though we were developing Bavar-373. Foreign purchases to meet immediate needs while domestic systems finish development. I should add that as far as I have seen, Bavar is not yet operational, 3 years after S-300 delivery. I could be wrong though.

Also you need to separate (real) engineering with reverse-engineering (copy engineering). Your example with the missiles taking decades to develop is a case of reverse engineering done by a work force not being expert engineers to begin with. A nation that conducts real engineering is able to utilise mathematical, physics, chemical, electric, electronic etc knowledge to develop a product which satisfies a very specific set of requirements. As an example Space X fielded the falcon rocket within 5 years (!!!), difference being foremost because real engineering being utilised.
Although Iran started its journey as a clear copy engineering nation, I would argue that today Iran has in many cases shown true signs of real engineering. The Air defence systems and new generation of precision missiles are a testament of this theory.
We can see the exact same development in the private sector such as with MAPNAs new gas turbine which is completely unique in its design. What does this show? It is a clear indicator that Iranian engineers do not need a corresponding foreign system to copy anymore. They are confident in their own product development process.

We may be "real engineering" with our missiles but not our aviation sector. The most advanced product we have is Kowsar, which is a modernised F-5. Nowhere near a 4+ gen air superiority fighter. MAPNA's work is excellent but gas turbines =/= jet engines. They're similar but not the same.
 
.
If anyone still thinks Iranian planners are still trying to build IRIAF conventionally, then they are fools. Considering three major factors:

1) Politics/Sanctions
2) Money for IRIAF from def budget
3) Changing dynamics of aerial warfare, roles of drones, non kinetic warfare.

It is safe to say that IRIAF will evolve as a heavily UCAV laden force in 2030s with probably 6-7 squadrons of 4+ generation fighters which will be procured (may be assembled in Iran) in late 2020s, may be Su-35S if Russia agrees.

IRIAF needs to be merged with IRGC-AF IMO.

Exactly. It is so shockingly obvious. As shocking are the conversations as if this were not the case.
 
.
1. You are implying there is an incentive to begin with. I have not seen any strong movement by Iran towards developing an air superiority fighter ever. Make no mistake, that's what Iran needs to defend its airspace. What are we meant to do, wait for the establishment to make a move? I don't trust them. Given how long fighter development takes (especially for a country like Iran), IRIAF would be no more than a shell of even it's current self by the time that "urgency" appears. IRIAF should grab its chance now.

There are two things we need to clear:
  1. Just because we do not see something doesn't necessarily make it non existent. Iran may have a program which is hidden, just like many others which were only revealed after production was already under way.
  2. I am not even sure that air superiority fighter is the way to go anymore. UCAVs with full or semi autonomy could be one way. Another way could be wingman approach other countries have be experimenting on. Just because a specific product have fulfilled a certain mission statement does not automatically mean that it is an unchallenged platform for the mission statement for all eternity.

2. If IRIAF gets a major modernisation underway then it shows it has been given support. Enough support to fund strategic projects like domestic fighter designs.

Im not even sure that IRIAF is any longer an organisation we should rely on. Not because of mistrust or competence issues, but simply because it is an organisation which operates on a legacy which was defines 50+ years ago. We need an organisation that can think outside the box and utilise the disruptive technologies available to its advantage and not try to play catch up with the richest country in the world both in term of hardware and tactics. This is a race which we will always loose. The only winning scenario is the unconventional and disruptive one and I cannot see IRIAF being that player.

3. I don't think that would happen. We have domestically produced SAMs, ships, drones, tanks, and ofc missiles. The extent of the last one is unique for a country of Iran's status.

Yes this point has merit. I agree.

Consider my proposal to be similar to how we bought S-300 even though we were developing Bavar-373. Foreign purchases to meet immediate needs while domestic systems finish development. I should add that as far as I have seen, Bavar is not yet operational, 3 years after S-300 delivery. I could be wrong though.

Of course the operational status of Bavar is something which can only be speculated since it is under such media silence. However I think it is safe to assume that the Bavar projects has boosted the confidence in an entire nation and even more important the sub systems developed and the manpower working on it have surely found the way to other air defence related projects.

We may be "real engineering" with our missiles but not our aviation sector. The most advanced product we have is Kowsar, which is a modernised F-5. Nowhere near a 4+ gen air superiority fighter. MAPNA's work is excellent but gas turbines =/= jet engines. They're similar but not the same.

I completely agree. A gas turbine is not a jet engine. But the engineering teams working on domestic gas turbines is hell of a better start for developing a heavy turbofan engine compared to Tehrani Moghaddams team during the war. What we need is a charismatic visionary and fighter just like Tehrani Moghaddam.
 
. .
Guys !

We already have the engine...

And the fighter jet itself!

I hope they just unveil that big *** bird soon and put an end to all these useless discussions...
Can you tell us if it is 5th gen or something higher or lower? :D
 
.
Guys !

We already have the engine...

And the fighter jet itself!

I hope they just unveil that big *** bird soon and put an end to all these useless discussions...

Source: trust me bro

For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.

He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.
 
.
Why can't Iran redesign the Kowsars to carry one AIM-54 & two AIM-9. Get a radar into the Kowsar that can track and hit 4th gen fighter at 150-180 km. The front nose may have to be made bigger.

Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.

Make hundreds of these improved kowsars. Use them as range hunters for air superiority. With the ability to dogfight and have auto-cannon and short range missiles for dog fighting.

At 15 million dollars a piece.

You can even hook up these slower fighters with supersonic drones to get 6th gen air warfare. Skip stealth for kowsars, or have them have radar absorbing paint. The drones carry more missiles for the kowsars and take hits for the kowsars.
 
Last edited:
.
Source: trust me bro

For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.

He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.

Wait, you were on IMF? Not with this username surely?
 
.
We cannot trust you and your so called IRIAF friends at least not more than IRIAF Deputy commander:




Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke :omghaha: Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?
 
.
Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.
I don't see why IRIAF can't tap into the solid missile fuel advancements made by the DIO and produce an advanced Medium ranged Air to Air missile to replace the AIM-7 and R-27s in IRIAF service? The IRIAF's AIM-7Es can barely manage 30km when fired from high altitude at high speed.

Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke :omghaha: Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?
They did not call the Kowsar a "heavy fighter". Read the article more carefully. They wrote "An Iranian commander said the Air Force has started to develop a heavy fighter jet after its success in manufacturing the Kowsar warplane."
 
Last edited:
.
Source: trust me bro

For starters, from what I recall, Soheil was nothing more than a whiny kid back in IMF (IranMilitaryForum) days who would complain whenever iran unveiled something that it wasn’t as fancy and shiny as a western toy. I remember two users vividly one was Soheil and the other was Yavar.

He sure has grown up since then. But this man has zero inside knowledge. Probably just browses military.ir forums and gleans insight from those members if I had to guess.

After the upcoming satellite launch if everything goes well and they announce it i will tell you the reason!
Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke :omghaha: Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?

You are not able to read an article correctly and doing moderation here!?

Nice
 
.
Calling that tiny fighter a "domestic heavy fighter" is just a joke :omghaha: Problem is, is this based on Iran's official statements or again hyped up by that always unreliable bulgarianmilitary.com-site?
No one in official iranian circles or any one in this forum has referred to kowsar as a "heavy" fighter ..so yes a "Bulgarian" job indeed.
 
. .
Why can't Iran redesign the Kowsars to carry one AIM-54 & two AIM-9. Get a radar into the Kowsar that can track and hit 4th gen fighter at 150-180 km. The front nose may have to be made bigger.

Or if the AIM-54 is too big, enhance the range of the AIM-7 to 85km, and have 4 AIM-7s.

Make hundreds of these improved kowsars. Use them as range hunters for air superiority. With the ability to dogfight and have auto-cannon and short range missiles for dog fighting.

At 15 million dollars a piece.

You can even hook up these slower fighters with supersonic drones to get 6th gen air warfare. Skip stealth for kowsars, or have them have radar absorbing paint. The drones carry more missiles for the kowsars and take hits for the kowsars.
radar limitations of the kowsar are the reason for the limited a2a missilw engagement. It might be able to field one Fakour 90/Phoenix under the fuselage if it could carry something like the AWG9 radar or equivalent.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom