IRIAF | News and Discussions

[Stryker1982]

I personally don't understand the Syrians. Recently Israelis struck another research facility. This is confusing to me because during the civil war, the rebels dug massive tunnel networks in underground caves. Some of these being very extensive and deep underground. With Iran's experience in this field, Iran could easily extend these networks and setup vital locations, like research facilities there. Or they could be used to keep mobile launchers for air defense units. Another option is to keep Iranian drones or missiles on Russian protected sites, like Hmeimim airport.

These tunnels are long destroyed and eradicated. Nothing about building a tunnel network is easy. I don't know where you got this idea from. Especially if the enemy will attack it during construction and if you do not have the right equipment available considering the logistics of transporting it from Iran.

Iran could also transfer small scale air defense systems to Lebanon, since Israeli jet usually fly over Lebanon to launch missiles to Syria. They often fly low, then fly over the Golan Heights, unleash their missiles and then fly back to Israel. MANPAD ambush teams could easily spot the jets while they're flying low and try to shoot them down. For some reason though this never gets done.

A Majid type system with Passive engagement and thermal optics for viewing at night would be ideal. Not as sexy as a star-streak but still good.

What do you mean for some reason?

Hezbollah is not going to shoot down any Israeli Jet and risk a war they are clearly not interested in, especially under the current economic stances.

Another thing i wonder about Libya is why they don't liberate the rest of Idlib. Their army seems capable but I guess the Turks don't want Al Qaeda militants flooding into Turkey as they flee. I suppose that with the current economic situation in Turkey, that Assad is waiting for a pristine opportunity ?

Because they need Russian greenlight and need Russian support and they are alittle busy right now. Turkey will try to prevent and without Russia, Syria cannot do it.

But then there's Al Tanf and the oil fields in Deir Ezzor controlled by SDF. I don't understand why Assad doesn't unleash missiles and drones at these sites. I mean yes he's hoping that one day he can regain control and doesn't want to destroy the oil facilities but come on he should give them an ultimatum, "either give us our oil facilities back or we'll destroy them"

Is this a serious question? You have very childish view points. I presume the presence of Americans in Al-Tanf and the Dier Ezzor oil fields might have something to do with not "unleashing drones and missiles" at these sites. Can you explain in what position Assad is in to demand ultimatums to the US and SDF?

If you want Syria to attack American Bradley BUSK configured IFVs then good luck with that.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Also the Chinese claim that their engines are as good if not better than Russian engines but I've heard stories about the JF-17 emitting black smoke and having various issues. When the Pakistanis complained the Chinese say "it is what it is" LOL

Dude
JF 17 uses Russian RD 93 engine that was first smoky but thanks to our engineers, we have resolved smoke issue.

Watch this video:no black smoke.

 

[OldTwilight]

I think that from a purely technological perspective iran could certainly produce a single engine light fighter like the F-CK-1 Ching-kuo or JF-17,tho the real question is whether the huge economic costs involved in doing so could be justified,especially when one considers the fact that those resources could arguably be far better utilized on the production of far more capable weapons.
The simple fact is that the airforce,regardless of however it is equipped,is still only ever going to play a back up role in irans military doctrine.
The airforce also has the problem in that it has consistently failed to further develop its own capabilities indigenously or to take advantage of new weapons technologies such as drones or aeroballistic weapons systems.

even Ukraine with considerable aerospace infrastructure couldn't field a worthy air force against 20% percent of Russian air force power ...
we should have air force too keep our not friendly expansionist neighbors in check but in fact against our primary foe which is USA , even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...

 

[SalarHaqq]

In your opinion, why would they refuse??

Indications from reliable source indicate that JCPOA is to be revived very soon

https://twitter.com/x/status/1519050488989245442

Hopefully more cash flow = New fighter jets

Of course stating that Elijah Magnier "was good before but is a hit and miss now" explains nothing.

An actually realistic explanation would be that Magnier joined the staff of Responsible Statecraft, the online magazine of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a Washington-based, George Soros- and Charles Koch-funded think tank which advocates realist foreign policy for the US regime.

It is led by Trita Parsi, former head of the NIAC (National Iranian-American Council). Consequently, Responsible Statecraft is plays a high-profile role in support of the JCPOA, much like the NIAC back in the day (some of the latters' figureheads are close to reformist members of the former Iranian negotiations team, in particular the "New York group" around Mohammad Javad Zarif).

Therefore it comes as no surprise that Responsible Statecraft authors will endeavor to keep alive the notion that negotiations are as good as completed - something we've kept hearing for almost a year now. These "optimistic" forecasts systematically failed to come true, which suggests that the parties emitting them (including European regime mouthpieces such as the British Reuters news agency, which published at least one piece of fake news about the negotiations so far), are doing so deliberately and for specific reasons.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

even Ukraine with considerable aerospace infrastructure couldn't field a worthy air force against 20% percent of Russian air force power ...
we should have air force too keep our not friendly expansionist neighbors in check but in fact against our primary foe which is USA , even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...

Iran should rather look at light multi-role fighter aircraft such as L-159 Alca to draw influence from. It would be far easier and cheaper to achieve fighter jet of that caliber than purchase hundreds of Su-30's or designing a affordable within Iranian capability a supersonic fighter jet whose only advantage would have been being supersonic.

 

[925boy]

even 200 su-30 won't last for 1 month ...

But Iran wont need 200 Su-30s IF its air defenses can shoot down xx-xxx # of US airforce planes ,simple. But if Iranian air defenses dont perform well and are effectively suppressed alot, then what you're saying will play out.

 

[TheImmortal]

This is not true that they won’t last.

I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.

It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.

It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.

So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.

Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.

 

[Stryker1982]

This is not true that they won’t last.

I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.

It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.

It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.

So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.

Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.

Never going to happen with the IRIAF, only possibility is if the IRGC takes on an interceptor project or has already worked on one and just needs to finish the propulsion. They have both the financial resources and human resources to do it.

The scale of the project would have to be enormous though. Might be better to just expand existing bases into both missile and air bases.

 

[TheImmortal]

Never going to happen with the IRIAF, only possibility is if the IRGC takes on an interceptor project or has already worked on one and just needs to finish the propulsion. They have both the financial resources and human resources to do it.

The scale of the project would have to be enormous though. Might be better to just expand existing bases into both missile and air bases.

It creates jobs. The burrowing of mountains is already going on (see multiple missile facilities getting extended renovations) as well as a couple nuclear faculties including the new centrifuge and enrichment workshop being built in the mountain.

The ramifications are huge. Chinese mountain airbases could reportedly withstand nuclear weapons.

And from a safety standpoint keeping missiles, jet fuel, missile fuel, and armaments in one underground area is not very wise.

Spread them out and make the enemy work harder to reduce your deterrence.

5-6 bases might cost several billion in construction costs, but the economic benefits and military benefits in the long run will outweigh the initial costs.

 

[Cancerous Tumor]

I was looking at older news for heavy fighter jets

Close to 5 years ago it was in study phase

2 years ago it went into production phase ( prototype ?) ?

after last report there is a radio silence , any news or updates ?

 

[Abid123]

They're $35-$60 million each depending on the configuration and Iran's economy is going to be in surplus this year.

PAF bought them at 50 million USD per plane to be exact.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iran should rather look at light multi-role fighter aircraft such as L-159 Alca to draw influence from. It would be far easier and cheaper to achieve fighter jet of that caliber than purchase hundreds of Su-30's or designing a affordable within Iranian capability a supersonic fighter jet whose only advantage would have been being supersonic.

engine aside in every metric that airplane is inferior to Kowsar

But Iran wont need 200 Su-30s IF its air defenses can shoot down xx-xxx # of US airforce planes ,simple. But if Iranian air defenses dont perform well and are effectively suppressed alot, then what you're saying will play out.

for what role we exactly need Su-30 ? you must first answer that .

This is not true that they won’t last.

I have laid out a proposal for a modified version of Iran’s Missile mountain bases to instead be built using internal runways for Iran’s interceptor fleet drawing inspiration from the Chinese underground air bases of the 70’s as well as other examples in military history.

It is quite possible with Iran building as little as 5-6 of these under mountain bedrock airbases for Iran to keep 72-100 interceptors flying and protected for a decent length of time. Interceptors are Iran’s most important air asset needed to survive. You can’t save every type of fighter, so these underground airbases would only hold Iranian interceptors.

It requires ingenuity and engineering skill which Iran has demonstrated.

So this notion that airforce should be neglected because they will all be destroyed in “a month” is just a cop out.

Iran’s air defenses + interceptors will make it much more likely Iran’s air shield survives rather than just air defenses doing all the workload. Eventually they will weaken and fail. And complex air defense systems aren’t something that can be built overnight once they are gone.

well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them

 

[sha ah]

Is this a joke ? Kowsar is not comparable to J-10. It was a lightweight fighter sold to banana republics during the Vietnam era. Maybe a highly optimized variant could be considered decent by todays standards but nothing Iran has been been able to build so far is comparable to the J-10.

The Flanker is an excellent platform! What role ? I don't know multi purpose, especially the SU-35 is a highly manueverable and lethal air superiority fighter. This is why Iran has shown interest in both the SU-30 and SU-35

Please for the love of God get this Sweden idea out of your head. The west will NEVER, EVER sell Iran western fighter jets. For Iran it's either J-10 or SU-30/35. That is all, nothing else.

engine aside in every metric that airplane is inferior to Kowsar

for what role we exactly need Su-30 ? you must first answer that .

well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them

 

[Hack-Hook]

The Flanker is an excellent platform? What role ? I don't know multi purpose, especially the SU-35 q very lethal fighter indeed which is why Iran has shown interest in both the SU+30 and SU-35

people tends to confuse the capabilities of Su-35 and Su-30 with each other
su-30 is a waste o money for Iran . by the way I'm not a fan a flanker and I'm biased there, several years ago I would have supported the Idea of big airplanes , but now I believe the technology and dynamic of the war have changed now I'm fan of medium sized multirole fighter like Mig-35, J10-c or Grippen and F-16 and if they have some datalink capabilities that's a lot better

Is this a joke ? Kowsar is not comparable to J-10. It was a lightweight fighter sold to banana republics during the Vietnam era. Maybe a highly optimized variant but nothing Iran has been been able to build so far is comparable to the K-10.

we were not talking about JF-17 we were talking about L-159 Alca what it have over Kowsar except that more efficient engine

Please for the love of God get this Sweden idea out of your head. The west will NEVER sell Iran western fighter jets. For Iran it's either J-10 or SU-30/35. That is all, nothing else.

who said buy Swedish airplane !? I said the strategy of a lot of airfield with small amount of equipment in each (AKA BAS-90, that's not an airplane name) instead 5-6 underground fortified fields that enemy can put out of commission in first strike for at least weeks , do we also have to buy the airfields from west ??
you very well can implement that strategy with airplanes such as J-10C, Mig-35 or even our own Kowsar.

by the way you also put the taught of Russia or china transfer some meaningful aviation technology to Iran before we ourself manage to build something of equal capabilities out of your head

 

[TheImmortal]

well I suggest more affordable and survivable Sweden BAS-90 strategy , with the money you want spend to build those 5 airbase instead build 200 small airbase around the country each of them adjacent to one or two road nearby (strengthen to be able to be used as emergency runway) as backup. a lot more survivable and you can put 5-6 airplane in each and put them separately . so one missile don't destroy all of them

You think 200 small base is cheaper than 5 mountain bases?

You do realize those 200 small bases would need security, air defense systems, and supporting facilities, not to mention personnel. The Roads and nightmare of logistics of resupplying 200 bases with jet fuel and armaments.

Building long enough runways to allow large jets to land to resupply the base with fuel and armaments.


Def not a good a idea. The mountain airbase is damn near impenetrable without high KT nuclear weapons. Makes much more logistics sense.