IRIAF | News and Discussions

[Hack-Hook]

To be fair I agree about the datalink to UAVs in order to create a 360 degree field of situational awareness because it's been one of the selling points of this platform. However, I don't think that at any point, it will go into mass-production but rather be used to test technologies that will be integrated on future, more robust airframes.

Despite the fact that modern air force doctrines are more about AESA radars, EW and BVR engagements, they'll need powerful engines and speed nonetheless to deal with more tricky platforms in case of a large aerial offensive since many planes will get through nonetheless and it will result in a dogfight. Fox 1 and Fox 2 missiles will be needed to deal with the intruding bandits. That is where a light aircraft just cannot suffice.

that's where a light aircraft shine more . and even then its a helmet mounted HUD and missile that can cover 360 degree like AIM-9x or Python-6 will help a lot and maneuverability is less of concern , the pilot of a modern fighter jet now a days don't need to fire its missile toward the tail of enemy aircraft or have the enemy in front of its fighter to get a lock

 

[Hack-Hook]

Not even close. They want a powerful unmanned bomber model of the Shahed-191? They'll need a beast of a turbofan to pull something like that off.

Ditto if they want to consider a UAV used for aerial refuelling purposes.

two fj-44 can carry a more than 10 ton aircraft , unless they want to go supersonic in which case i don't recommend anything produced by Shahed industries for that . they need a new design ,
and the role of aerial refueling probably will fall to airplane like simorgh and Iran-140 not a drone. even then as i said shahed-191 if even be 3 ton(which is not , then two FJ-44 like engine can be used to carry 7t more cargo with it

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

two fj-44 can carry a more than 10 ton aircraft , unless they want to go supersonic in which case i don't recommend anything produced by Shahed industries for that . they need a new design ,
and the role of aerial refueling probably will fall to airplane like simorgh and Iran-140 not a drone. even then as i said shahed-191 if even be 3 ton(which is not , then two FJ-44 like engine can be used to carry 7t more cargo with it

The F-117 Nighthawk was powered by 2 x GE-F404-F1D2 turbofan engines with 40.2 kN thrust each. It was a dedicated stealth bomber weighing 13,381 kg (empty weight) and 23,814 kg with a full loadout.

FJ-44-3 gives a 16 kN dry thrust and that's nowhere near what is needed. Even the RQ-170 Sentinel which was captured from the CIA was outfitted with a Garrett TFE731 with 15.6–21.1 kN thrust or a TF34-GE-400A with 41 kN thrust. To mate anything less powerful with an airframe of that size would just be underperforming.

 

[Hack-Hook]

The F-117 Nighthawk was powered by 2 x GE-F404-F1D2 turbofan engines with 40.2 kN thrust each. It was a dedicated stealth bomber weighing 13,381 kg (empty weight) and 23,814 kg with a full loadout.

FJ-44-3 gives a 16 kN dry thrust and that's nowhere near what is needed. Even the RQ-170 Sentinel which was captured from the CIA was outfitted with a Garrett TFE731 with 15.6–21.1 kN thrust or a TF34-GE-400A with 41 kN thrust. To mate anything less powerful with an airframe of that size would just be underperforming.

F-117 aerodynamic needed that much power a flying wing need a lot less to stay in the air.
also it was a manned aircraft not unmanned.
and it was more than 13t empty it could carry 2x bomb up to 1t each the rest was for fuel
an f-5 can fly with 6t of fuel and ammunition have an engine equivalent to fj-44 in power and use an airframe that produce a lot less lift than for example a shahed-171 and have to carry those extra 4t of bombs on outside pilon which make a lot of drag

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

that's where a light aircraft shine more . and even then its a helmet mounted HUD and missile that can cover 360 degree like AIM-9x or Python-6 will help a lot and maneuverability is less of concern , the pilot of a modern fighter jet now a days don't need to fire its missile toward the tail of enemy aircraft or have the enemy in front of its fighter to get a lock

I mean why rely on a light aircraft to fill in the gaps based on a doctrine which allows the enemy to get in close in the first place? It would be far better to have a heavy interceptor which is a missile truck bearing a whole array of short, medium and long-range missiles and an added 20 mm autocannon if it comes to in-close fighting.

In other words, a swift interception and engagement with BVR and then they swoop in on the enemy and engage them with Fox-1s and Fox-2s one after the other, forcing them to exhaust themselves or break off and flee.

Unless of course you want a shootdown where the enemy aircraft falls into Iranian territory and so does the pilot which frankly would be quite nice.

 

[Hack-Hook]

I mean why rely on a light aircraft to fill in the gaps based on a doctrine which allows the enemy to get in close in the first place? It would be far better to have a heavy interceptor which is a missile truck bearing a whole array of short, medium and long-range missiles and an added 20 mm autocannon if it comes to in-close fighting.

In other words, a swift interception and engagement with BVR and then they swoop in on the enemy and engage them with Fox-1s and Fox-2s one after the other, forcing them to exhaust themselves or break off and flee.

Unless of course you want a shootdown where the enemy aircraft falls into Iranian territory and so does the pilot which frankly would be quite nice.

that interceptor probably need 40000$ per hour of flight and light aircraft need 5000-6000$ per hour of light .
you can build that light aircraft for as cheap as 1/3rd of the price of that interceptor. and that interceptor even don't carry much more ammunition .
and the radar is not even that much stronger.
now you decide you want to send one interceptor that can use after burner and reach enemy at 2500km/h but ran out of fuel . or send three light/medium multirole fighter that can data link with each other and have better battle situation awareness and combined carry 2-3 time more weapon .and their maintenance is a lot cheaper and easier

let see the case for example F-15 and JAS-39
speed :
F-15 : can't supercrise but can reach up to 3000km/h but then the engine will need hours of hours and thousands of Dollar maintenance otherwise 2650km/h
JAS-39: can supercruise at 1.22mach , max speed 2450km/h and too reach that the engine won't toast itself

engine :
F15: 2 × Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 afterburning turbofans, 14,590 lbf (64.9 kN) thrust each dry, 23,770 lbf (105.7 kN) with afterburner
Jas-39: 1 × General Electric RM16 (F414-GE-39E) afterburning turbofan engine, 61.83 kN (13,900 lbf) thrust dry, 98 kN (22,000 lbf) with afterburner

weapon load
F-15: 10t on 9 hardpoint plus 1 gun
JAS-39: 7.2t on 10 hardpoint and one gun

combat range
F-15:1900km
JAS-39: 1500km

sevice ceiling
F-15: 20km
JAS-39: 16km

g-limit
F-15: +9
JAS-39: +9 -3

weapon
F-15: 8x AIM-120
JAS-39: 7x Meteor + 2x IRIS-T or 2x AIM-9x

RADAR
F-15: AN/APG-63(V1-V3) depend on the model
JAS-39: Selex ES-05 Raven AESA radar


its up to you to decide which one is better 1x F-15 or 2-3 x Jas-39 for your scenario

 

[TheImmortal]

for that heavy uav bomber , two FJ-44 size engine is more than enough.
also as I said if they want to build anything smaller than F-14 then TF-30 with its more than 6m long size is too big. and that engine is old tech and have left bad taste in the mouth of our air-force , nobody there like it much.
and Iran is building light/medium fighter . we want those airplanes to defend ourselves our plan is not to build an aircraft for bombing enemy

Not for a high altitude supersonic bomber. High altitude makes most air defenses obsolete in terms of interception.

I have pointed to the 1960’s D-21 drone

Cruise speed Mach 3.3
Altitude 90,000
Operational range: 5600 KM

If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.

It is my wide belief that such a drone if able to cost effectively produced would make the Iranian war machine nearly unstoppable when combined with the lower cost Missile philosophy.

But missiles alone cannot be relied on to do all damage as we saw in Ukraine war. In a future major war Iran could fire/lose up to thousands of ballistic missiles per month. Ballistic Missile supply is not infinite, there needs to be a compliment.

I also believe we will see 6th Gen fighter bombers adopt this philosophy high altitude - high supersonic cruise speed - VLO design.

 

[Stryker1982]

If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.

Yeah I am hoping for some sort of next generation Karrar that can perform missions but operate as a low RCS supersonic bomber.

 

[TheImmortal]

Yeah I am hoping for some sort of next generation Karrar that can perform missions but operate as a low RCS supersonic bomber.

Think about it, a bomber that flies at 90,000 altitude could theoretically only be shot down by a THAAD from the ground.

Patriot taps out at 70,000.

There is very few THAADs in the world vs defense sites that need protecting. Add in the fact that you are traveling at Mach 3.3 and you are pretty much untouchable unless an F-22 can get in the air fast enough and reach its max altitude and fire a A2A missile at you. Even then F-22 Max altitude is 60,000. So I’m not sure what A2A missiles can even reach that high, many need to be fired at much lower altitude to be effective.

The only issue for the bomber would be to devise bombs that can still be pretty accurate (5-10M cep) when dropped from that altitude.

But in the Middle East, Iran would be untouchable. Could bomb any HVT in the Middle East pretty much at will. During a war with Israel, Israeli skies would be unprotected against these bombers add in the fact Iran’s also firing missiles and you have developed on of the most lethal 1-2 combos in modern military history.

With the mountain airbases to protect these bombers, you can afford to spend a little higher on cost per bomber since they are likely to survive a great length of time.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Not for a high altitude supersonic bomber. High altitude makes most air defenses obsolete in terms of interception.

that flying wing design provide a lot of lift , the drone can go high , but certainly can't go super sonic . on the other hand , show me a supersonic flying wing, the design is not for supersonic speed

I have pointed to the 1960’s D-21 drone

Cruise speed Mach 3.3
Altitude 90,000
Operational range: 5600 KM

If you modify this ramjet drone into a unmanned bomber variant and guard them inside the mountain air bases Iran has unveiled, you have a game changing weapon that can drop the ordinances of multiple Sejill missiles and have a low ability to intercept via air defenses.

that design is the must useless design ever , that only good as a several million Dollar suicide shit that can't carry any sensor , any ordnance . and that ramjet eat fuel like crazy, have no internal capacity , a single camera , that later would be released and then the drone self destruct
in short a one way winged engine with zero carrying capacity
some photo to show what that drone actually is and how it reach that speed

Think about it, a bomber that flies at 90,000 altitude could theoretically only be shot down by a THAAD from the ground.

Patriot taps out at 70,000.

There is very few THAADs in the world vs defense sites that need protecting. Add in the fact that you are traveling at Mach 3.3 and you are pretty much untouchable unless an F-22 can get in the air fast enough and reach its max altitude and fire a A2A missile at you. Even then F-22 Max altitude is 60,000. So I’m not sure what A2A missiles can even reach that high, many need to be fired at much lower altitude to be effective.

The only issue for the bomber would be to devise bombs that can still be pretty accurate (5-10M cep) when dropped from that altitude.

But in the Middle East, Iran would be untouchable. Could bomb any HVT in the Middle East pretty much at will. During a war with Israel, Israeli skies would be unprotected against these bombers add in the fact Iran’s also firing missiles and you have developed on of the most lethal 1-2 combos in modern military history.

With the mountain airbases to protect these bombers, you can afford to spend a little higher on cost per bomber since they are likely to survive a great length of time.

your bomber is a one way bomber that can only carry a single camera, on other hand it can fly high.
if you strap that ramjet engine to Karrar it can also fly that high and fast , it would be cheaper and it can carry mor bomb

now that i think about that , the warhead of Kheybarshekan can be modified to be a damn good bomber

 

[mohsen]

Blurred pictures

https://president.ir/fa/138408

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Blurred pictures

https://president.ir/fa/138408

What exactly is that component?

 

[mohsen]

What exactly is that component?

Something which they unveiled (for themselves) !

 

[BlessedKingOfLonging]

Something which they unveiled (for themselves) !

Any guesses what it could be?!

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1554556522600009729