What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

.
@AmirPatriot @Stryker1982 @Blue In Green @aryobarzan @Hack-Hook

What did I tell you guys?!?!



Looks like some Iranian military engineers read my posts 8-)
Great thing about these kinds of investments is that they will last 100 years+, for basically anything that requires storage in a secure location. So you are really getting your moneys worth than an aircraft itself which would be fully outdated in about 35 years.

Seems like I missed it and no one is talking about it, but it looks like a air-launched CM was shown to be UAV capable? "Haidar"
 
Last edited:
.
Seems like I missed it and no one is talking about it, but it looks like a air-launched CM was shown to be UAV capable? "Haidar"

Two were actually shown off.

One was a stand off CM of 200 KM range (haidar) another was a loitering CM called Haidar-2.


I’m curious what the seeker is on both. I assume INS/GPS combo. But can Fotros have the ability to “change” the target? Ie update the targeting data to a new target and upload it to the CM.
 
.
This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...
 
.
This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...

They are put on before flight. Most of these were probably taken out of storage conditions (disassembled) for the “video”. You can see crates in a part of clip which I am assuming houses dissembled drone components.
 
.
F-35 can reach Iran with mid air refueling. Or do you need to check global security to use basic intelligence?

And yes I use F-35/F-22 as Iran’s primary threat because the most likely war would be fought against US/Israel. It seems you are preparing for a war with Azerbaijan since that’s all you quote.

So where would this Israeli imaginary party refuel? Their 707 would be seen and blasted in the air by Syrian or Iraqi Airforce/Air defense. There goes that route. Syrian Air defense is not a bit shy of firing AD missiles at the Israeli airforce which each time they enter Syrian airspace have to maneuver around and run back after delivery of their SOWs. What would happen to their 707 over Syria or Iraq ? that route is impossible. Not to mention our own early warning system might even see such activity happening if it happens within our radar reach. Turkey and Saudi Arabia would not risk making an enemy out of Iran for nothing by allowing Israelis to fly + refuel over them to reach Iran. So tell me which way it is going to be? around the globe? If Israel is ever going to strike on Iranian nuclear sites then it will probably use UCAV's+Ballastic missiles, it has shown that intention through previous attacks.

And US operates not just F-35, it also operates F-22, B1, B2, and what not, if they want to destroy Iranian sites they would not have to rely upon a manned attack fighter like the 1950s. Instead, they have 12 different solutions none of which Iran (or any country other than China) can counter easily.

Everything resembles an F-5. It’s an upgraded F-5, which in itself was a cheap light plane ment to be supplied to banana countries during the 60’s.

Owj engine is merely reverse engineered F-5 engine. Radar has been upgraded yes, but still outclassed against radars on medium and heavy fighters.

Combat suite has been upgraded from analog to digital and incorporation of LCD screens.

You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?

I am glad that you have quickly changed your stance from Kowsar being 1960s F-5 to "oh now I realize few things are different and radar has been Upgraded" I think I deserve credit here.

Now let me bisect your post. You said radar has been upgraded while from (1) official unveiling pictures and footage shown (2) official information given out on slides at the time of unveiling (3) Articles written by BT ... ZERO evidence exists that radar is an upgrade of the APQ-153 (later mildly upgraded) system that IIAF was delivered with. The weight, the shape of the antenna, size, range, T/R modules count, etc all point towards the ditto of Grifo M-346 or its Chinese NRIET copy KLJ-6F. so tell me is it NEW or is it an upgrade?

And why would we need to pit a light fighter's radar against those in Su-35S or F-15E? if we go by that logic then FCK-1, T-5, F-16 Blk 40, F-20, F-5TH, FC-1, LCA, F-2, etc should not exist because they all have lesser radar ranges than SU-35S. Great logic

Combat suite has been upgraded from analog to digital and incorporation of LCD screens.

You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?

So radar and avionics have been changed, the combat suite is changed, the airframe is brand new (zero life), and the engine is newly built. Comms are modern, EW-suite is there, semi FBW system is being deployed. Everything has been changed to an on par rival an FC-1 Nlk-II/FCK-1, but yeah it's all 1960s right? Iranians, Turkish, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indopaks, Thais everyone is probably mad to invest heavily in modern light combat aircrafts.

You keep saying BVR Missiles. Which one are you referring to for the Kowsar?

We do not know because the plane is not operationalized fully, its detailed specs are still coming out. 3 years back we did not even know Iranian companies were capable of atually producing a complete 4.0 generation avionics+combat suite. It came as a surprise. I have been chasing this project from days of IDF, IMF I remember how we all were disappointed to find out the Saegheh aerodynamic failures and the fact that initial batch (the famous 5) had no avionics package. From there to a 4.0 Gen combat suite which they literally unpacked and showed to the public was a great leap.

About the BVR we do not know what they will go for when the plane actually gets operationalized. They might opt for PL-12 considering that this project (key.aero, Air international articles) was a consortium with Chinese CATIC. Slim chances exist of procurement of R-77E for MIGs and they might be used for Kowsars. We don't know yet like we did not know the capability of IEI avionics manufacturing capability. Wait and see until the plane gets operationalized.

As I have said, Kowsar has its place as a light support aircraft and advanced trainer for Iran. It’s those like you who try to make it an air superiority fighter that I do not agree with it.

Where did I say that its an air superiority fighter? You write on basis of what you imagine. Whenever I talk of it I call it a very good replacement for the entire circus we have of F-5E/F, MirageF-1EQ, and F-7N. Combined these are some 150-160 airframes with zero worth in modern combat. Hell, I even say that there is at least another generation of this R&D project of Azarakhsh-Saegheh-Kowsar which would be on par with F-16 block 40-52/F-18A/FC-1-III, and that plane would probably be the actual production model which would eventually replace this 150+ money for nothing fleet we have.

Yes Israel and US. Who do you plan to go to war with? Afghanistan? UAE? Iraq?

Israeli jets can not reach Iran unless they get bases in UAE or Saudi Arabia, which even if they do would probably be dealt with BM/CM/UCAV attacks by IRGC.

And you can not stop the US from striking Iranian nuclear sites even if you grab some 250 Su-35S, they will launch some 2000 Tomahawks at nuclear sites, airbases, naval installations if they want to. War is a combination of politics, military tactics, and diplomacy. Iran has fought the US with all three aspects and that is how you deal with a real superpower. Not by purchasing 24x Su-35S and thinking they will counter F-35 so you can stop the menace.

In military terms threat levels are set on basis of adversary capability and from there you build up the counter. IRIAF faces threats from Azerbaijan+Turkey < KSA+UAE+Kuwait < US in region. This is why airforces make airbases and in all directions along borders, purchase both light and heavy fighter and station squadrons in accordance with what kind of threats they perceive from that border. Right now we are just not capable of dealing with regional foes let alone other larger forces. You start from somewhere and we are exactly doing that.

It seems all you can do is regurgitate either one single article of how Iranian Air Force positioned itself in a foreign conflict it had little chance of entering. Or going to global security and using that as your Bible of aircraft capabilities.

I do not work for HESA or IRIAF so yes I rely upon well-researched articles on the internet to know more like almost everyone else. I do not get the joke here?

We quite frankly do not Iran’s data link capabilities across the unified air defense network.

Quite frankly we know literally nothing except what we get from researched articles, unveilings, and words of officials. If the article says we use datalink on some fighters from G-WACS network grid then I would believe it. I do not know what would you need to convince yourself. Each to their own perhaps.

Nonetheless my point is factual. F-14 and Mig-29 are Iran’s best assets right now to defend airspace. And Iran will need an air superiority like fighter in SU-30 class range to defend its airspace. Kowsar cannot be that fighter.

Nobody in this forum at least, including me has ever said that Kowsar (or its next gen) is going to replace F-14AM, MIG 9.12A (61 operational fighters) that we have. I do not recall myself or anyone saying something like this, if you have seen it then please put that here for debate. Kowsars next gen will be an amazing leap in the Iranian aviation industry and it will kick out all the other tiny relics fighters we have. That has always been my point. Unless we get some 100 x Su-35S or J-10C I do not see even the F-4E/D fleet retiring.

This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...

I believe some are from the parade .. now guess the rest
 
Last edited:
.
Nobody in this forum at least, including me has ever said that Kowsar (or its next gen) is going to replace F-14AM, MIG 9.12A (61 operational fighters) that we have.
well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33
The N019 radar weighs around 385 kg in total. It is a pulse-doppler radar operating in X band around 3 cm wavelength. It uses three basic operating regimes. High PRF radar mode for optimal detection of closing targets, medium PRF mode for optimal detection of receding targets, and an interleaved high/medium PRF mode for all aspect detection. It uses a guard channel for sidelobe suppression. SARH Illumination and main channels use different frequencies within the X band, and are multiplexed in time. Individual aircraft can be preset on the ground to different frequencies to avoid mutual interference during group operations. Scanning cycle times are 2.5–5 seconds depending on mode. Beam width is 3.5º, which determines the minimum separation of two targets in azimuth. The radar beam is stabilised up to 120º in roll and +40º/-30º in pitch. N019 is a hybrid analogue/digital design, with an NII Argon Ts100 digital processing unit. The Ts100 processor can achieve 170,000 operations per second, has 8K RAM and 136k ROM, and is built using medium scale integration ICs. It is based on the proprietary POISK architecture developed at NII Argon, which allows adapting of the instruction set to control system functions by expanding the basic instruction set with microcodes inherent in specific tasks. Compared to machines using the same elements but a generic instruction set (e.g. the ES EVM architecture Argon-15A of the MiG-31) processing capability was enhanced by 1.5 to 2.5 times and the code 3 to 5 times more compact, making Ts100 much cheaper to produce. The Ts100 computer weighs 32 kg

Mode “V” (Vstryehchya): Encounter​


Encounter mode is the main search mode used in interception, as it gives the longest detection ranges and the least false returns. It uses a High PRF mode which can detect closing targets only in the velocity range of 230 – 2500 km/h at altitudes from 30m to 23,000m. The display is calibrated to a maximum range of 150 km. Target can be up to 10,000m above or 6,000m below the host aircraft’s own altitude. A typical 3 sq m RCS fighter target can be detected at 50–70 km and tracked at 40–60 km. If the target is flying below 3,000m reduces the detection range to 40–70 km and tracking range to 30–60 km. Two basic scan patterns are used. When the system is under direct GCI control via datalink, a 6 bar elevation raster scan is used. This scan covers a sector of 40 degrees in azimuth at ranges up to 30 km, 30 degrees at ranges of 30–55 km, and 20 degrees above 55 km within the scan limits given above. The distance to target and other useful information is supplied by GCI command, and the direction of the scan is automatically cued by CGI command towards the desired target. When the system is not under direct GCI control via datalink, a 4 bar raster scan mode is used to acquire a target manually. This mode scans a constant 50 degrees in azimuth, with the pilot controlling the direction of the scan. It is expected that the rough direction to the target will be given by ground control via voice commands. There is no scan pattern for full azimuth range scanning. The 130º scan area is divided into 3 sectors. Left sector is -65º to -15º, centre sector covers -25º to +25º, right sector from +15º to +65º, giving overlapping coverage of the full 130º scan limits. Individual targets can be resolved providing they are separated in azimuth and 5–6 km in range. Range measuring error of a single target can be as high as 8 km, which should be recalled when comparing measured target range with that supplied by GCI controller. Minimum measurable range in this mode is 5 km. Lockon and transition to tracking mode takes 2 to 7 seconds in Encounter mode. Note that in Encounter mode, a target that changes direction to a tail-on engagement may be lost even when in tracking mode, if it is no longer closing.
you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.
N-019 is the USSR standard model.

N-019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks “SP” mode.

N019EB is an export variant for general export. More downgraded. Less capable TS100.02.06 digital processor. Lacks “SP” mode.
our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar. by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz
 
.
well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33


you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.

our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar. by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz
well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33


you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.

our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar. by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz


You say: our MIG-29 has not been updated and are equipped with the original N019 radar

Prove it factually and if it was the opposite? Speculation or verifiable truth?
 
.
well food for taught, if the next generation Kowsar have better engine why not.
our mig-29 have not been upgraded and are equipped with original N019 Radar and original RD33


you see that's how usually the radar work but there is some problem even there.

our mig-29 has N01EB not Phazotron Zhuk-M that is put on SMT variants and everybody has and the capabilities on sites like Wikipedia are based on that Radar. by the way N019 radar already compromised to USA in 90s so even mig-29 9.13 get a newer radars called N019-Topaz

Well yes. Like I said before in the previous post. IRIAF MIGS are the earliest relics of the Fulcrum series. They are 9.12As carrying the weakest possible RPLK-29 FCS systems that will barely detect an F-16 sized fighter from 50-60 KM by which time The F-16 would have already shot some 4 x AIM-120 at it and left the area. Let alone anyone else if you pit them against let's say a fully operationalized Kowsar with 2 x Fatter and 2 x PL-12/R-77E. The 9.12A's 385 Kg heavy N01 Junk radar won't detect a 1-2 m2 RCS bearing Kowsar before 40-45 KM by which time Kowsar would have emptied its every pylon at the MIG to dazzle it and even if MIG gets extremely close Kowsar with HMD and All aspect Sidewinders wont be easy task for the MIG.

Actually, when they unveiled IEI products and Bayyenat-II with kowsar, I was thinking that maybe. if Russia through its Belorussian front companies (Usually how it has operated before) refused to help Iran upgrade its 2 x squadrons of MIGs in the future, why not just ditch this whole fatigued failed system of N019+R27E inside MIG and replace it with lets say the current/next variant in Bayyenat series ... We know Bayenatt-I is on F-4E (looks ditto of JL-10A of JH-7, 83 km) confirmed by pics of F-4E of on Bushehr. We know its a very capable system that enabled the Phantoms to fire long-range AShCM. We know Kowsar has Bayyenat-II with 93 KM range look-up range and merely weighs ~85 kgs. Its a Grif-346/KLJ-6F ditto, one can probably predict Bayyenat-III will be something like Grifo-E/KLJ-A AESA. Installing such a system on the MIG will suddenly get rid of excess 300 kgs and also boost the MIG capabilities which it currently lacks.

You say: our MIG-29 has not been updated and are equipped with the original N019 radar

Prove it factually and if it was the opposite? Speculation or verifiable truth?

Visual evidence of 23x Airframes in total out of 19 are combat-capable with 17 capable of firing SARH R-27E BVR. Unlike clear evidence of F-14 AM upgradation, F-4E/D with Dowran upgrades, and F-5E/F => domestic production variants, the MIG's avionics suite has never been touched by anyone.

Some estimates say there are 44 airframes in total.
 
Last edited:
.
They are put on before flight. Most of these were probably taken out of storage conditions (disassembled) for the “video”. You can see crates in a part of clip which I am assuming houses dissembled drone components.
This secret UAV base is great but I noticed that none of the UAVs have EO cameras equipped and so I'm slightly puzzled...
I should also add, that, I am not sure if this is a storage base for UAVs and munitions or their will be direct take-offs from the base.

Either way, the UAVs already deployed on airbases/airfields would be installed, but UAVs in storage would not need EO cameras installed as they are not actively being used. It helps increase the life-span and condition of the unit if securely in airtight crates.
 
.
Unless we get some 100 x Su-35S or J-10C I do not see even the F-4E/D fleet retiring.
Go for the J-10C. SU-35 is overrated and expensive. If you want to go for a flanker J-16 is far better, but it is not for export.
 
.
Go for the J-10C. SU-35 is overrated and expensive. If you want to go for a flanker J-16 is far better, but it is not for export.

We need some 100 x 4.5 Gen Air Superiority interceptors like that can shoot multiple LR-BVR and provide long CAPS since we are a large country. We do not need light fighters as our Kowsar program is morphing into a 4+ Gen light BVR fighter. Similarly, we do not need strike fighters since our missile forces and UCAVs are enough to destroy the enemy far beyond.

If it was up to me I would go for some 100 x MIG-35 that would fit rather easily within our MIG infrastructure. A force of some 60 x F-14AM + 125 x Mig-29/35/Su-35S + 200 x 4+ Kowsar-II, datalinked with networks of G-WACS and LORADS/SHORADS will be hell for regional foes to fight in the sky. This might actually happen as well.
 
.
I should also add, that, I am not sure if this is a storage base for UAVs and munitions or their will be direct take-offs from the base.

Either way, the UAVs already deployed on airbases/airfields would be installed, but UAVs in storage would not need EO cameras installed as they are not actively being used. It helps increase the life-span and condition of the unit if securely in airtight crates.

The drone base location has already been spotted and it’s at an airbase. So it will leave the tunnel get on the runway and fly off.

Personally I think they should fly out of the tunnel itself or shortly there after, but baby steps.
 
.
Total Airframes of IRIAF/IRGCF (just the plain numbers in hangers + warehouses). Aircrafts being testbeds/techdemo are * while in production ones are tagged **

72 x F-14A
26 x MIG-29 9.12A/9.15UB) ... or 42 x Russian claim
64 x F-4 E/D/R
23 x Mirage F1EQ/BQ
81 x F-5 E/F/R/B/Azarakhsh
43 x F7-N (and FT-7N)
40 x SU-22M3/M4
35 x SU-24MK
14 x HESA Kowsar**
12 x HESA Saeqeh I/II*
2 x Yasin**
 
.
Total Airframes of IRIAF/IRGCF (just the plain numbers in hangers + warehouses). Aircrafts being testbeds/techdemo are * while in production ones are tagged **

72 x F-14A
26 x MIG-29 9.12A/9.15UB) ... or 42 x Russian claim
64 x F-4 E/D/R
23 x Mirage F1EQ/BQ
81 x F-5 E/F/R/B/Azarakhsh
43 x F7-N (and FT-7N)
40 x SU-22M3/M4
35 x SU-24MK
14 x HESA Kowsar**
12 x HESA Saeqeh I/II*
2 x Yasin**
Good info and I do not question your sources..of interest to me is 2 Yasin...did Yasin finish flight tests ..is it certified yet...it has two ** on it..
 
.
Back
Top Bottom