What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

F-14 is disposable so why lose a brand new aircraft by testing new engine along new radar as an example.

You must have reading comprehension issues. You said F-14 is not useless it can be used as testbed, I then clarified by “useless” i ment for the future it is useless as design for next gen fighter jet.

Then you continue talking about using it as an engine test bed. Which im not even debating. Get back on topic.

China conducts tests of new radar and engines on older aircraft until they are used on newer production aircraft.

You are having an argument with yourself. No one is talking about testing engines on F-14, I’m not sure why you decided to come into this discussion to divert it to a separate discussion on F-14 as a test bed.

F-14 is ideal testbed for both because it is basically in terms of size for engines and radar comparable to Su-27 series and its variants like Su-30 and Su-35.

No one is talking about engine test beds. We are talking about design of the next gen Iranian fighter.

Also RCS of an aircraft can be reduced through use of for example composite materials replacing parts made out of aluminum.

Sure, there are variety of RCS reducing measures. However, to get an F-14 design under RCS of 1m2 would require a complete overhaul of the design of the plane including getting rid of swept wing design. Which at that point why would you not start off with fresh design?

Using F-14 to test engines is fine (Iran is already doing that with heavily overhauled F-14 engines using Iranian components per Air Force commander). Using it to test next gen radar is also fine.

However, Redesigning the entire airplane and adding composite and titanium to test integrity is a waste of money and time. That is what prototypes are for.
 
.
and you guys advocating the same mistake with Russia

I'm not, and this is the second or third time you're repeating the false analogy. My opinion was and is: continued and expanded domestic development and production (Kousar, future heavier jet and unmanned fighters), plus three to four squadrons of Flankers right away as a complement, stop-gap and source of technology to study.

Which is very different from praising the western-subservient shah regime and attempting to legitimize its policies.

by the way f-14 was the best available at the time , su-35 is nowhere near the best but a platform based on an obsolete philosophy.

Of no consequence to the point at hand, and a limited number of Su-35 will be useful to Iran.
 
Last edited:
.
However, Redesigning the entire airplane and adding composite and titanium to test integrity is a waste of money and time. That is what prototypes are for.
Except it is not in any way possible because you can entirely design new components for next generation fighter jet with only compatibility mounting system/socket for F-14.

Later on that can be changed for a better design if there is one for next generation fighter jet, in mean time development time could be reduced for NGF project.

Because components can be tested sooner rather than wait for complete prototype being made when some of it if not majority can be tested on F-14.

Composite materials can reduce RCS of F-14 considerably and can make aircraft lighter in the process that notable decisions can be made.

Such as having new wing that is fully swept back and mechanism for variable wing angles not needed thus removed.

That reduces weight, but that can be used to expand internal fuel storage to considerable amount.

Then new wing could be made to not carry fuel thus be thinner and further reduce RCS.

Whenever viable the composite part should replace original one and then RCS reducing coating could be applied that can then be used on NGF project during crisis.

In case conflict appears to be imminent thus further reduce RCS of whatever aircraft is from NGF project when completed and mass produced.

New technologies have to be tested and F-14 is ideal example since it is over Mach 2 capable fighter jet and its size for large components.
 
.
no I don't have tie with Rosobronexport and i have enough experience about such news


and you guys advocating the same mistake with Russia
by the way f-14 was the best available at the time , su-35 is nowhere near the best but a platform based on an obsolete philosophy.
Iran still needs heavy lifting helicopters

Heavy transport helicopters

Mixing its air defense layers with other systems

Everybody is talking about Su-35 in a scenario which it would be used strictly against an F-35 or is strictly useful to Iran as an air superiority fighter

But Su-35 can save Iran money and gain knowledge because it has a lot of pylons to carry air to ground precise attacks, Iran could test its GBU like smart bombs and air to ground missiles, even research and study for an aeroballistic missile, it would save money against nearby groups, instead of launching missiles against militias, Iran could switch to raids using Su-35 and precision bombs, earth penetrating ordnance, making a bigger impact compared to Fateh launches into their fortress that barely kills anyone of them since of the CEP and being aware of the launch before

It could open Iran to fields like incendiary bombs and phosphorus bombs, precision guided bombs, ALCM, and maybe have a platform for aeroballistic missile, they would be gamechanger in time of war for Iran against US fleets being in the Arabian Sea
 
.
Later on that can be changed for a better design if there is one for next generation fighter jet, in mean time development time could be reduced for NGF project.

Development time can already be reduced via 3rd printing of parts and running robust simulations and other digital engineering techniques. USA cut their development time for prototype of 6th Gen fighter to months from years by using 3D printing and digital engineering.

Your idea is archaic and obsolete.

Because components can be tested sooner rather than wait for complete prototype being made when some of it if not majority can be tested on F-14.

You don’t need to wait for a full prototype to be complete. Software simulation, scale prototypes (1/10), radar rooms, wind tunnel tests, 3D printing can all reduce development time without needing to convert your most potent fighter into a test dummy.

Composite materials can reduce RCS of F-14 considerably and can make aircraft lighter in the process that notable decisions can be made.

You can simulate this via software before proceeding. You can also simulate RCS with software then radar room tests using scale (RC size) models before proceeding further in R&D.

Such as having new wing that is fully swept back and mechanism for variable wing angles not needed thus removed. That reduces weight, but that can be used to expand internal fuel storage to considerable amount.
Then new wing could be made to not carry fuel thus be thinner and further reduce RCS.

This isn’t an F-14 anymore and will slowly start approaching the shape of an F-22/TFX/SU-57. Designers have already done all this but you want to reinvent the wheel? Why?

New technologies have to be tested and F-14 is ideal example since it is over Mach 2 capable fighter jet and its size for large components.

Advanced supercomputer simulations, 3D printing, scale models, etc etc can all do this without taking the less than ~30 flight worthy F-14’s Iran has left and sacrificing them as frankstein projects.

design a prototype in software, test parameters, run simulations, reach an applicable confidence interval that your data is statistically significant, build 1/10 prototype do necessary real world simulations (wind tunnel, Radar bombardment, etc) input updated data into software re-run simulation. Build full prototype etc etc.

Now if you want the F-14 or F-4 or Mig-29 or SU-22 to test the new engine to make sure it doesn’t fail in the air or to determine HTO (hours till overhaul) then by all means do that. But the rest of what your saying is unnecessary.

UK-Italy-Japan 6th Gen. Project

US 6th gen prototype already flew in 2020

“The program uses a non-traditional acquisition approach to avoid traditional monolithic program schedules and exorbitant life-cycle sustainment costs. This strategy, called the Digital Century Series approach, creates a realistic business case for industry to adopt commercial best practises for key design activities – before a part is even manufactured.”

Acquisition head Will Roper noted regarding the importance of digital technologies to the new fighter program: “Digital engineering is lowering overhead for production and assembly [so] you do not have to have huge facilities, huge workforces [and] expensive tooling.” Roper further stated in a video conference call with reporters after his presentation: “It is letting us take aircraft assembly back to where we were in the [19]70s and prior to it — back when we had 10 or more companies who could build airplanes for the United States Air Force, because you could do it in hangar-like facilities with small, but very good teams, of engineers and mechanics. We're going back to that. It's super exciting.”

 
.
Tomcats are worthless. Their RCS is probably anywhere between 25-50. From a different era where radar and AD technology was not nearly what it is today.
If F-14 is worthless, I don't know what Kowsar is.

Ideally Iran needs something in AL-31 class or even AL-21 class in terms of power, but RD-33 is sufficient enough to get the job done for a medium size fighter.
Another question is, what will Iran do with it?

Iran gets an RD-33 first thing that comes to mind is to put it in a Kowsar.

AL-31? Make an F-14 because we know, Iran produces at least some parts of F-14. There isn't much else to do. Most importantly, Iran needs experience.
 
Last edited:
.
Simulations can not replace real world for testing of components.
Neither can be relied on 3D printers for anything that crucial.
You place too much faith into wishful shortcuts.

For those to have any worth they need real world data as reference point.
What I suggest would provide such for simulations as data set.
 
.
If F-14 is worthless, I don't know what Kowsar is.

Worthless for the future yes. Don’t take the term out of context.

Another question is, what will Iran do with it?

Iran gets an RD-33 first thing that comes to mind is to put it in a Kowsar.

AL-31? Make an F-14 because we know, Iran produces at least some parts of F-14. There isn't much else to do. Most importantly, Iran needs experience.

RD-33 class engine could lead to revival of a modernized shafaq project that was discontinued due to Russian refusal to supply the engine.

Also I said RD-33 or AL-31 class engine. Not that Iran will directly copy these engines.

Simulations can not replace real world for testing of components.

Simulations can achieve high degrees of confidence of the viability of components. Prototype stage serves to eliminate outliers/bottlenecks/confirm hypothesis


Neither can be relied on 3D printers for anything that crucial.
You place too much faith into wishful shortcuts

More bogus information. Rocket engines are now almost entirely being 3D printed, is that not a crucial enough component for you? See Relativity Space as an example.

A redesign of the Apollo F-1 engines using 3D printing reduced the number of parts from 5,600 to just 40(opens in new tab). No company has yet to reduce this number down to one, but it's undeniable that 3D printing has brought about a new age of fast, responsive rocket engine development.


Turkeys TFX project uses the worlds largest electron beam metal 3D printer to build large sections of the airplane. Is that not crucial enough part for you?

The EBAM machine will be destined for TAI’s plant in Ankara, Turkey, where it will 3D print some of the largest titanium aerostructures in the industry. The machine will be able to print structures up to 6 meters long by 2 meters wide and 1.8 meters high, with deposition rates will exceed 20 kg of metal per hour.

You seem to think 3D printers are the ones you buy online that can make you a doll or a statue. The future is 3D printing. Adhesive engineering is the future of mankind.

3D printing, quantum computing, and AI is what will allow countries like Iran to quickly catch up and compete with Superpowers like China ($250B annual military budget -> adjusted for cheap labor and cost in a China equals a $2T annual military budget) and USA (1T annual military budget) and break their monopoly on high tech weaponry of the future. We already saw it with MALE/UCAV drone technology and cruise missiles that used to be reserved to only the major military powers. Now even Houthi’s have the ability to produce.
 
.
Rocket engines do not operate for hours.
Non-3D printed at most do 4 or 5 minutes.
Turbojet engines in fighter jet do hour or two.
Turbofan can do 24 hours in an UAV/UCAV.
Also 3D printed geometry is questionable.
 
.
Rocket engines do not operate for hours.
Non-3D printed at most do 4 or 5 minutes.
Turbojet engines in fighter jet do hour or two.
Turbofan can do 24 hours in an UAV/UCAV.
Also 3D printed geometry is questionable.

3D printing has already made its way into jet engines with commercial jet engine GE9X. Advancements are happening every year. It’s only a matter of time.

As well as 3D printing, they have also been working with computer-aided design, and new materials to render parts once impossible to make using conventional methods. They claim to have made huge advancements in aviation from building airplanes with rivets and aluminum to assembling them with carbon-fiber materials and 3D printers that give shape to Liquid Metal

The huge engine spans a record 11 feet in diameter and generates 100,000 pounds of thrust, but most impressively perhaps is its inclusion of nineteen 3D printed fuel nozzles


GE’s also designed a turboprop engine with 30% 3D printed parts
That’s because their engine, called the Advanced Turboprop (ATP), will be the first commercial aircraft engine in history with a large portion of components made by additive manufacturing methods, which include 3D printing. The designers reduced 855 separate parts down to just 12. As a result, more than a third of the engine is 3D-printed.

 
Last edited:
.
If F-14 is worthless, I don't know what Kowsar is.


Another question is, what will Iran do with it?

Iran gets an RD-33 first thing that comes to mind is to put it in a Kowsar.

AL-31? Make an F-14 because we know, Iran produces at least some parts of F-14. There isn't much else to do. Most importantly, Iran needs experience.
The f5 airframe would require some serious reengineering to fit an rd33 into it.
However one that wouldnt,because its already been previously done,would be the mirage f1,indeed anything that you can do to upgrade the f5 can also be done to the f1.
One honestly wonders why the iriaf even bothered reactivating the f1 fleet when its done nothing with it despite its potential.All that they`ve done is just to increase their logistics burden for no gain in capability.
Its this sort of lack of vision,not to mention the ad-hoc,or even lack of actual planning involved when it comes to actually achieving goals that is the iriafs most glaring failure.
 
.
The f5 airframe would require some serious reengineering to fit an rd33 into it.
However one that wouldnt,because its already been previously done,would be the mirage f1,indeed anything that you can do to upgrade the f5 can also be done to the f1.
One honestly wonders why the iriaf even bothered reactivating the f1 fleet when its done nothing with it despite its potential.All that they`ve done is just to increase their logistics burden for no gain in capability.
Its this sort of lack of vision,not to mention the ad-hoc,or even lack of actual planning involved when it comes to actually achieving goals that is the iriafs most glaring failure.

It’s mostly to keep the engineers on payroll same with the mechanics and engineers that work on tanks.

The issue is a lot of Iran’s engineers/mechanics that specialize in this niche field are getting older and retiring. After all how many aerospace mechanics in Iran are distinctly familiar with the inner workings of F-1 or an F-7?

I thought I remember reading for some overhaul projects they brought some guys out of retirement to help. The talented youth in Iran isn’t going to this field. They are going to nuclear engineering, missiles, space, cyberwarfare, etc. sectors that pay very well.
 
.
3D printing has already made its way into jet engines with commercial jet engine GE9X. Advancements are happening every year. It’s only a matter of time.






GE’s also designed a turboprop engine with 30% 3D printed parts


So not fan, spools, turbines, compressors...

The f5 airframe would require some serious reengineering to fit an rd33 into it.
Yes, alternatively new turbofan could be developed to fit inside engine bay.
J85-GE-21 is simple 1 spool 9 compressor 2 turbine compact turbojet engine.
Very much possible to develop turbofan of comparable or greater thrust.
 
.
Russia has not delivered the Su-35 for some time, and Biden, pleased with Putin's weak stance, has finally begun to consider supplying F-16s.
There are also reports of moves among Eastern European countries to supply their own F-16s.
Iran must learn the lesson of what can happen when diplomacy of accommodation is used.
 
.
The F-14 is a outdated and complex (e.g. variable-sweep wing) design that is not worth reverse-engineering. Simply "copying" it would be a waste of resources for an already obsolete aircraft. By re-designing it in order to make it competitive, you would end up with a completely different aircraft altogether. Just keep the existing F-14 platforms airworthy and maybe upgrade them. But once Iran has a capable-enough engine for a fighter jet in a comparable size and weight class, a entirely new and up-to-date design is the way to go, imo.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom