IRIAF | News and Discussions

[Ich]

Easier said than done. Sure they can fly alongside but in combat situation it's still a long shot away.

Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!

US:

(vid is over 3 years old)

Russia:

 

[Blue In Green]

UCAV can be jammed and AI is nowhere near man level. It takes quantum computer to achieve man like AI considering brain works on the quantum level.


Su-35 is big but expensive to service. It lacks sophisticated AESA and targeting pod. As you know Russians are not very good at electronics post USSR. JF-17 Block 3 onwards has state of the art AESA and targeting pod which has high resolution FLIR. On top of that, JF-17 Block 3 powered by RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio compared to Su-35 powered by AL-41. On top of that, JF-17 has better combat radius than Su-35 1350 km compared to 1100 km due to newer fuselage design and new DSI type intake which reduces weight and improves aerodynamics. On top of that, Su-35 has way bigger RCS than JF-17, which has RCS reduction measures for example DSI type intake which effectively hide engine blades. On top of that, Russians have nothing comparable to PL-15 which is in the same class as AIM-260. It makes absolutely no point to pick Su-35 over JF-17 Block 3 other than for politics.

The JF-17 is not a specialized air-superiority fighter nor does it sport the same flight characteristics as the SU-35 which is classified as a 4.5+ generation air-craft specifically tailored to achieve air supremacy in contested zones (which Iran would be experiencing during wartime).

Su-35 specs as per Wikipedia quoting JANES:

General characteristics

• Crew: 1
• Length: 21.9 m (71 ft 10 in)
• Wingspan: 15.3 m (50 ft 2 in)
• Height: 5.9 m (19 ft 4 in)
• Wing area: 62 m2 (670 sq ft)
• Airfoil: 5%
• Empty weight: 19,000 kg (41,888 lb) [198]
• Gross weight: 25,300 kg (55,777 lb) with 50% internal fuel
• Max takeoff weight: 34,500 kg (76,059 lb)
• Fuel capacity: 11,500 kg (25,400 lb) internal
• Powerplant: 2 × Saturn AL-41F1S afterburning turbofan engines, 86.3 kN (19,400 lbf) thrust each dry, 142 kN (32,000 lbf) with afterburner

Performance

• Maximum speed: 2,400 km/h (1,500 mph, 1,300 kn) / M2.25 at altitude

1,400 km/h (870 mph; 760 kn) / M1.13 at sea level

• Cruise speed: 1,250 km/h (780 mph, 670 kn) / M1.1+ supercruise at medium altitude[199]
• Range: 3,600 km (2,200 mi, 1,900 nmi) at altitude

1,580 km (982 mi) at sea level

• Combat range: 1,600 km (990 mi, 860 nmi) approx[200]
• Ferry range: 4,500 km (2,800 mi, 2,400 nmi) with 2 external fuel tanks
• Service ceiling: 18,000 m (59,000 ft)
• g limits: +9
• Rate of climb: 280 m/s (55,000 ft/min) +
• Wing loading: 408 kg/m2 (84 lb/sq ft) With 50% fuel

500.8 kg/m2 (102.6 lb/sq ft) with full internal fuel

• Thrust/weight: 1.13 with 50% fuel

0.92 with full internal fuel
Armament

• Guns: 1 × internal 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-1 autocannon with 150 rounds
• Hardpoints: 12 hardpoints, consisting of 2 wingtip rails, and 10 wing and fuselage stations with a capacity of 8,000 kg (17,630 lb) of ordnance,with provisions to carry combinations of:
  • Rockets: S-25
    • Air-to-air missiles:
      • 8 × R-27ER/ET
      • R-40
      • R-60
      • 6 × R-73E
      • 12 × R-77M/P/T
      • 6 × R-74
    • Air-to-surface missiles:
      • Kh-25ML
      • 6 × Kh-29L/TE
      • 3 × 3M-14AE
    • Anti-ship missiles:
      • 3 × 3M-54AE1
      • 6 × Kh-31A/AD
      • Kh-35U
      • 5 × Kh-59MK
      • 1 × Yakhont
    • Anti-radiation missiles:
      • Kh-25MP
      • 6 × Kh-31P/PD
      • 5 × Kh-58UShE
  • Bombs: *** 8 × KAB-500KRTV-guided bombs
    • 8 × KAB-500L laser-guided bombs
    • 8 × KAB-500OD guided bombs
    • 8 × KAB-500S-E satellite-guided bombs
    • 3 × KAB-1500KR TV-guided bombs
    • 3 × KAB-1500L laser-guided bombs
    • GBU-500 laser-guided bomb
    • GBU-500T TV-guided bomb
    • GBU-1000 laser-guided bomb
    • GBU-1000T TV-guided bomb

Avionics

• Irbis-E passive electronically scanned array radar
• OLS-35 infra-red search and track system
• L175M Khibiny-M electronic countermeasures system[42]

The Ibris-E is one of the most capable radars available to any combat air-craft today: Irbis-E can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets at one time at ranges near 350~400 kilometers, and attack up to 8. In air-to-surface mode the Irbis-E provides mapping allowing to attack four surface targets with precision-guided weapons while scanning the horizon searching for airborne threats that can be engaged using active radar homing missiles.

It can detect a target with radar cross-section (RCS) 3m2 at up to 400 km, (towards each other, in an area of 100 square degrees) while a target with RCS 0.01m2 at up to 90 km.

It is one of the most powerful PESA radar used in an operational aircraft.

In terms of raw capabilities, the Su-35 serves Iran in all sorts of area, multi-purpose, air-superiority, interception roles etc.,. Although for economical reasons, Iran would be off opting for the SU-30SM (better variants) given its lower cost.

Sukhoi Su-35 vs JF-17 Thunder | Comparison jet Multirole specifications

Here you can compare specifications, production year, cost and pictures multirole aircraft.

armedforces.eu

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

The JF-17 is not a specialized air-superiority fighter nor does it sport the same flight characteristics as the SU-35 which is classified as a 4.5+ generation air-craft specifically tailored to achieve air supremacy in contested zones (which Iran would be experiencing during wartime).

JF-17 Block 3 is more technologically advanced than Su-35 on all levels. Not only in fuselage design but also in terms of electronics. Su-35 to date lacks wide angle HUD which JF-17 Block 3 has. On top of that, Su-35 lacks HMD which JF-17 Block 3 has. And I'm not going to talk about the radar considering the answer is obvious. While Su-35 has TVC, it uses more fuel and reduces combat radius further. R-77 is also no match for PL-15, considering the range is only 100 km compared to 200 km. RD-93MA has better thrust to weight ratio compared to AL-41, not to mention more advanced FADEC which means better fuel economy.

 

[foxhoundbis]

Also AL-41’s trump any Chinese engine by a mile. China is still a decade plus behind Russia in ... technology and still uses Russian engines in its 5th fighters because its own engines aren’t yet ready.

U are wrong my friend. It was true 5 years ago, nowadays it is no longer the case. And in the incoming years, U will see how China had progressed. The reason is simple, as Russia is threatened in an existential way by the US, and the West, the leaders of Russia had helped the Chinese Aerospatiale industry to emerge. The WS-15 in terms of performance is at least equal to FW-119.

Else, let's to be clear, no one among us is capable today, to assert something about the performances AESA, or the PESA radar of the Russians, nor Chineses.
We can at the best, just suppose, and we suppose with information coming from most of the times dubious medias, if not malicious medias.
If you are sure that Irbis E can detect let's say an F-22 at 90 km.... Good luck! If you are happy with that ...
Just to remind you, the US stopped the production lines of the F-22, and are ending the F-35 program. UK said they will cut their F-35 orders at 60 %. I remember at the end of 90's I used to read that the US wanted at least 1.000 F-22 and thousands of F-35. After it was a matter of 700 F-22 and thousands of F-35. They are continuing with F-15, with the F-15EX, and instead of F-35, US Air Force wants a 'more simple' 4++ gen. But not a new F-16, let's say a new F-18.
Are U still convinced by the fact that Irbis-E has shortcomings?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. Su-35 is F-14 size. JF-17 is F-5 size. Both F-14 and F-5 need to be phased out. Iran can go for Su-35 to phase out F-14, but JF-17 for phasing out F-5 is a must considering it's more bang for the buck than any alternative.

However, considering the capabilities and combat radius of JF-17 Block 3, it can also phase out F-14 without going for Su-35. It is much less costly to purchase and service and can be built in numbers much faster.

 

[foxhoundbis]

Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. .... JF-17 is F-5 size. ....

With the amazing Chinese progress, and prowess in terms of technology, the JF-17 with the new WS-13, or even WS-10G, the JF-17 could be compared to Grippen. If powered by WS-10X the JF-17 would be more powerful not only than an F-16, but even more powerful than a Rafale, or maybe an EAF Typhoon.
As China masters totally the technology of jet engines, everything is possible.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

With the amazing Chinese the JF-17 with the new WS-13, or even WS-10G. If powered by WS-10X the JF-17 would be more powerful not only than an F-16, but even more powerful than a Rafale, or maybe an EAF Typhoon.
As China masters totally the technology of jet engines, everything is possible.

Yer. WS-10 is too big to fit in JF-17. WS-13 is a possibility. However China and Russia have a deal all export JF-17 are powered by RD-93. Only Chinese version is powered by WS-13.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

No no no Iran will not abandon the Kowsar and other improvements to the F-5, quite the contrary. This platform has a lot of future and technological surprise with artificial intelligence and super technological weapons. The platform will also be improved

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

No no no Iran will not abandon the Kowsar and other improvements to the F-5, quite the contrary. This platform has a lot of future and technological surprise with artificial intelligence and super technological weapons. The platform will also be improved

With a suitable engine Iran may be able to develop an improved version of F-5 ala F-20 Tigershark. Powered by a single RD-93MA engine or WS-13 engine. However, JF-17 has far more potential to due a modern fuselage design including DSI intake. It may be more worthwhile for Iran to invest in JF-17 Block 4 rather than develop another F-5 variant.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

With a suitable engine Iran may be able to develop an improved version of F-5 ala F-20 Tigershark. Powered by a single RD-93MA engine or WS-13 engine. However, JF-17 has far more potential to due a modern fuselage design including DSI intake. It may be more worthwhile for Iran to invest in JF-17 Block 4 rather than develop another F-5 variant.

It's already done and constantly improving with the F4 SM.

 

[vizier]

Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!

US:

(vid is over 3 years old)

Russia:

Drones seem to be a cheaper option that should not be neglected. They are also lightweight. They can even use ordinary not-hardened highways in my opinion but it should be tested. They would be less airbase dependant and can be carried arround easily if need be. Valkyrie below for example is about 2 tonnes and with an upper intake it wont have a fod problem. It seems it can takeoff-land anywhere.

There are some disadvantages as well. But these can be improved. Jamming would be much more difficult and range extends tremendously if the drone uses satcom. In Karabagh war Russian jamming systems couldnt jam out the TB-2 most of the time eventhough TB-2 didnt have satcom and it continued its operations throughout the war. Satellites are vulnurable to asat that is true but there are other means like atmospheric-pseudo satellites like high-alt balloons. They need to enter your airspace to shoot them down within that high altitudes.


Loyal wingman is high subsonic maybe low supersonic range. Although slow it can pack a punch with wvr and bvr missiles which are fast enough. It is not dogfight era. I think the weak side of these planes currently are the engines. To increase thrust to weight ratio they either need a more powerful engine such as RD-93 used in Jf-17 or 2 smaller engines like J85 of F-5 to fit in a smaller airframe like this. It would decrease interception time and also increase max-altitudes of these systems to intercept higher flying aircraft.

Further edit: Actually I see 2- J-85 f5 engines are used in these drones. They are testbed for target drones but even targeting them would be difficult in a2a mode. It says it can easily go supersonic. Also the tail seems to be makeshift not angled backwards like loyal wingman which has better stealth characteristics. They made it more targetable on purpose it seems.

Sierra Technical unveils ‘faster’ and ‘more manoeuvrable’ stealth UAV

Sierra Technical Services recently completed several ground tests, including an engine test run, on its Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) aircraft.

www.flightglobal.com

I think next step would be removing the tail altoghether. That would reduce drag further make these easily go supersonic and much less detectable by any type of radar.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

It is unlikely Russia will sell Su-35 to Iran. Maybe downgraded Su-30.

Come on. Take a look at the vids. Its already there!

US:

(vid is over 3 years old)

Russia:

UCAV can be used to complement manned jets. Manned jets remain the core of air force. Not even quantum computer can replace brain.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Keep in mind Su-35 and JF-17 are not same size class. Su-35 is F-14 size. JF-17 is F-5 size. Both F-14 and F-5 need to be phased out. Iran can go for Su-35 to phase out F-14, but JF-17 for phasing out F-5 is a must considering it's more bang for the buck than any alternative.

However, considering the capabilities and combat radius of JF-17 Block 3, it can also phase out F-14 without going for Su-35. It is much less costly to purchase and service and can be built in numbers much faster.

Iran plan is to phase out f5 with domestic fighter that's why we play so much with the platform and use newer avionic. Our goals is to build something like tigershark or F18 out of it and that's why people tell you wait for our new engine which is being developed.
So I doubt jf17 will have a role in our doctrine on other hand when it come to a heavy interceptor we knew we can't build one in near future and sadly China only offers us j10b and that really didn't met our criteria for a heavy fighter.

 

[Ich]

Drones seem to be a cheaper option that should not be neglected. They are also lightweight. They can even use ordinary not-hardened highways in my opinion but it should be tested. They would be less airbase dependant and can be carried arround easily if need be. Valkyrie below for example is about 2 tonnes and with an upper intake it wont have a fod problem. It seems it can takeoff-land anywhere.

View attachment 726352

There are some disadvantages as well. But these can be improved. Jamming would be much more difficult and range extends tremendously if the drone uses satcom. In Karabagh war Russian jamming systems couldnt jam out the TB-2 most of the time eventhough TB-2 didnt have satcom and it continued its operations throughout the war. Satellites are vulnurable to asat that is true but there are other means like atmospheric-pseudo satellites like high-alt balloons. They need to enter your airspace to shoot them down within that high altitudes.


Loyal wingman is high subsonic maybe low supersonic range. Although slow it can pack a punch with wvr and bvr missiles which are fast enough. It is not dogfight era. I think the weak side of these planes currently are the engines. To increase thrust to weight ratio they either need a more powerful engine such as RD-93 used in Jf-17 or 2 smaller engines like J85 of F-5 to fit in a smaller airframe like this. It would decrease interception time and also increase max-altitudes of these systems to intercept higher flying aircraft.

View attachment 726346


Further edit: Actually I see 2- J-85 f5 engines are used in these drones. They are testbed for target drones but even targeting them would be difficult in a2a mode. It says it can easily go supersonic. Also the tail seems to be makeshift not angled backwards like loyal wingman which has better stealth characteristics. They made it more targetable on purpose it seems.

Sierra Technical unveils ‘faster’ and ‘more manoeuvrable’ stealth UAV

Sierra Technical Services recently completed several ground tests, including an engine test run, on its Fifth Generation Aerial Target (5GAT) aircraft.

www.flightglobal.com

View attachment 726395


I think next step would be removing the tail altoghether. That would reduce drag further make these easily go supersonic and much less detectable by any type of radar.

View attachment 726399

Yes, and that is only that what they show us. The research and developments in this field are on for more than a decade, if not two. What we see in the vids and news about this topic is, as always, old stuff.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Manned fighter jets are still useful in modern warfare. With the prevalence of UCAV which fly low, air defense is ineffective against them. Manned fighter jets are effective at eliminating UCAV by flying over them and using look down shoot down mode. That is why Iran will buy JF-17 Block 3 / 4 as its next generation fighter jet to replace aging F-14, F-4, F-5, MiG-29.

Iran plan is to phase out f5 with domestic fighter that's why we play so much with the platform and use newer avionic. Our goals is to build something like tigershark or F18 out of it and that's why people tell you wait for our new engine which is being developed.
So I doubt jf17 will have a role in our doctrine on other hand when it come to a heavy interceptor we knew we can't build one in near future and sadly China only offers us j10b and that really didn't met our criteria for a heavy fighter.

Iran is a pretty small country. Distance Khoy and Chabahar only 2,080 km. Less than half the distance Kashgar and Xiamen. Iran has no need for heavy fighter. JF-17 combat radius 1,350 km is sufficient for Iran needs.