Qaher F313 l News & Discussion

[Fledgingwings]

General Statistics or Basic Info about the jet plz!

 

[VEVAK]

I am not an expert in aerodynamics or "any" generation fighter jets. My problem isn't that IRI is trying, but the fact that IRI mouth piece, IRIBC, is outright lying about what this plane is. If you saw the video, the "expert" (I am sure a paid retard expert) claims everything about this plane is domestic. That's just a lie, thus leading me to conclude this is just another propaganda stunt by a "alternate reality" regime. This is meant to fool Iranians that their elite are responsible and steadfast, a far cry from reality. Sad really.

Yea morons like you used to say the same thing about Iran's version of the US RQ-170 when the 1st video came out!

They used to say it's nothing but a RC toy and Iran will NEVER be able to make a 1-1 copy of the RQ-170! And what happened? This happened:

If Iran was able to reverse engineer and produce an Iranian version of the RQ-170 airframe then building a fighter like the F-313 is child's play for them

Is the F-313 a 5th Generation Fighter? Clearly NOT! Is it a Supersonic fighter? Clearly NOT!

But it is still a fighter with a lower RCS than the F/A-18 with the same speed and probably greater range than the F/A-18 when armed for Air to Ground missions!

This is Iran's Close Air Support Aircraft NOT an Air Superiority fighter or an Interceptor and whether or NOT this Aircraft is successful or not in testing doesn't matter because sooner or later Iran will produce a low RCS Air Superiority Fighter

The U.S. Shredded all It's F-14's (Other than the museum peace's) because people like you thought Iran was somehow buying the spare parts while in reality Iran was producing them on it's own at home!

Then years later when U.S. annalist claimed Iran has no more than 5-6 Air Worthey F-14's left a few days later a formation of 25 F-14's took to they sky and purposely went on a mission to be spotted by US radars!

And Iran is so confident on the Air worthiness of it's F-14's that it has started the production of it's own version of the AiM-54 and has successfully tested them

 

[Blue In Green]

I have little interest in the debate going on, on this thread, but I felt compelled to correct your post as it is VERY MISLEADING and INCORRECT. I don't want casual readers to get misinformed.

• The formula you have listed is a semi-empirical approximation of the drag force.
• The coefficient of drag VARIES with Mach Number. Perhaps you have never seen curves like these:
  
  
  What did you think the "sound barrier" was?
• For an aircraft not designed with Whitcomb's rules for transonic and supersonic flight the bump in the above graph of CD is SO VERY LARGE that the aircraft never goes supersonic. Famous example is of YF-102 redesign with area rule to allow it to go supersonic:
  View attachment 391245
  Just look at how even the one on the right is sleek and has thin wings and yet it was limited to Mach 0.98 due to something you can barely see (pinching of fuselage near wing root).
• Among other things airfoils have to be chosen to lower the "bump" of the Cd curve. Thick airfoils (like the one on F313) will have the bump at MUCH SMALLER Mach numbers (probably around 0.6) as the flow goes locally supersonic.

Please do not mislead people with equations and formulas when you have little or no appreciation for the subtleties involved. It's not the end of the world if the F313 isn't designed to go supersonic. Irani aerospace engineers are NOT idiots, that they will not know all that I've said above, and try to push the F313 through the sound barrier. When you insist that it will go supersonic you make your own country's engineers look stupid. They know they were doing, you don't.


I am quite certain their engineers have designed a jet-powered ground effect vehicle to possible attack US Ships with but their media, government, and fanboys have started assigning characteristics to it for which it was never designed.

I personally view this iteration of the Qaher-313 to be a update/work in progress from the engineering team behind the air craft that is being use doubly as propogranda by the government to look strong or whatever.

I used to think that it was a fake but why go through the trouble of putting two jet engines into a fake jet. I'm guessing the development cycle of the qaher-313 is simply different from its western contemporaries.

Bet again Dehqan has said on multiple occasions that this jet won't be ready until some time. Who knows though I think Iran is onto something here.

 

[WordsMatter]

Yea morons like you used to say the same thing about Iran's version of the US RQ-170 when the 1st video came out!

They used to say it's nothing but a RC toy and Iran will NEVER be able to make a 1-1 copy of the RQ-170! And what happened? This happened:

If Iran was able to reverse engineer and produce an Iranian version of the RQ-170 airframe then building a fighter like the F-313 is child's play for them

Is the F-313 a 5th Generation Fighter? Clearly NOT! Is it a Supersonic fighter? Clearly NOT!

But it is still a fighter with a lower RCS than the F/A-18 with the same speed and probably greater range than the F/A-18 when armed for Air to Ground missions!

This is Iran's Close Air Support Aircraft NOT an Air Superiority fighter or an Interceptor and whether or NOT this Aircraft is successful or not in testing doesn't matter because sooner or later Iran will produce a low RCS Air Superiority Fighter

The U.S. Shredded all It's F-14's (Other than the museum peace's) because people like you thought Iran was somehow buying the spare parts while in reality Iran was producing them on it's own at home!

Then years later when U.S. annalist claimed Iran has no more than 5-6 Air Worthey F-14's left a few days later a formation of 25 F-14's took to they sky and purposely went on a mission to be spotted by US radars!

And Iran is so confident on the Air worthiness of it's F-14's that it has started the production of it's own version of the AiM-54 and has successfully tested them

What the hell is wrong with you? Why can't you respond in a "grown-up" manner?! This isn't personal, so don't make it so. Grow up.

Let's see this copy of RQ is not yet operational, but you would like to take credit for it being so.

 

[PeeD]

What was shown is not flying hardware. Often taxing prototypes can become flying prototypes after some modifications, but not for this 08.

So what sense does 08 make? It is apparently powered by its jet engines and I haven't checked the videos but if that's the case its control surfaces must actuate to change direction and taxing. I haven't seen that to accept it as proof.
For a fake project electro-motors and a crude steering system could be integrated into the landing gear as well a heater at the nozzle location to create visual heat signature of a jet engine.

But for a real project its possible that a taxing prototype has been created to test the integration of the subsystems, the landing gear and a possible fly by wire system and its fine tuning at different taxing speeds. However I haven't seen the movement of the control surfaces nor high speed runs to test the ram air pressure on FBW actuated control surfaces and its behavior (with the RQ-170 FBW is no issue anymore).
If we see videos of such testing we can have hope of a fly quality air frame construction for the 09 and a real flight.

 

[VEVAK]

What the hell is wrong with you? Why can't you respond in a "grown-up" manner?! This isn't personal, so don't make it so. Grow up.

Let's see this copy of RQ is not yet operational, but you would like to take credit for it being so.

Only in your delusions it is not yet operational! That UAV was operational before Iran aired it on TV! And not only is it operational but Iran had already started developing a far more advanced armed version!

Countries don't go around showing away all their secrets! For example Testing of Iran's Sejil Missiles started almost 3 years before anyone even knew Iran was developing Solid fueled MRBM!

The F-313 is clearly a Subsonic close Air Support Aircraft mainly for Air to Ground mission which uses 2 Iranian built OWJ engines and nothing about it is out of Iran's capabilities! In fact the opposite, this aircraft is well below Iran's maximum capabilities. The main reason they chose it is because it has a low cost Airframe and uses a low cost Iranian built Turbojet engine which Iran can mass produce if it's test are successful!

What was shown is not flying hardware. Often taxing prototypes can become flying prototypes after some modifications, but not for this 08.

So what sense does 08 make? It is apparently powered by its jet engines and I haven't checked the videos but if that's the case its control surfaces must actuate to change direction and taxing. I haven't seen that to accept it as proof.
For a fake project electro-motors and a crude steering system could be integrated into the landing gear as well a heater at the nozzle location to create visual heat signature of a jet engine.

But for a real project its possible that a taxing prototype has been created to test the integration of the subsystems, the landing gear and a possible fly by wire system and its fine tuning at different taxing speeds. However I haven't seen the movement of the control surfaces nor high speed runs to test the ram air pressure on FBW actuated control surfaces and its behavior (with the RQ-170 FBW is no issue anymore).
If we see videos of such testing we can have hope of a fly quality air frame construction for the 09 and a real flight.

After initial taxi test and adjustments the Aircraft or the modified version of it would have to be transferred to Mehrabad Airport for high speed ground testing! The Airfield there is not large enough! Also, don't expect it's control surfaces to work like a Supersonic Aircraft for it is not one

 

[giger]

It can be supersonic at high height .

 

[Iranm]

It can be supersonic at high height .

I believe so.
Because it uses 2 x modified J85 same as Saegheh and I think it weights not much more.

 

[The SC]

Can anyone shed some light on the dorsal inlets (small air intakes) and their role? since many people here are complaining that the intakes are too small which I do not agree with in comparison to the F-5 or the Saeqa intakes..

 

[Arminkh]

I have little interest in the debate going on, on this thread, but I felt compelled to correct your post as it is VERY MISLEADING and INCORRECT. I don't want casual readers to get misinformed.

• The formula you have listed is a semi-empirical approximation of the drag force.
• The coefficient of drag VARIES with Mach Number. Perhaps you have never seen curves like these:
  
  
  What did you think the "sound barrier" was?
• For an aircraft not designed with Whitcomb's rules for transonic and supersonic flight the bump in the above graph of CD is SO VERY LARGE that the aircraft never goes supersonic. Famous example is of YF-102 redesign with area rule to allow it to go supersonic:
  View attachment 391245
  Just look at how even the one on the right is sleek and has thin wings and yet it was limited to Mach 0.98 due to something you can barely see (pinching of fuselage near wing root).
• Among other things airfoils have to be chosen to lower the "bump" of the Cd curve. Thick airfoils (like the one on F313) will have the bump at MUCH SMALLER Mach numbers (probably around 0.6) as the flow goes locally supersonic.

Please do not mislead people with equations and formulas when you have little or no appreciation for the subtleties involved. It's not the end of the world if the F313 isn't designed to go supersonic. Irani aerospace engineers are NOT idiots, that they will not know all that I've said above, and try to push the F313 through the sound barrier. When you insist that it will go supersonic you make your own country's engineers look stupid. They know they were doing, you don't.


I am quite certain their engineers have designed a jet-powered ground effect vehicle to possible attack US Ships with but their media, government, and fanboys have started assigning characteristics to it for which it was never designed.

Before starting to write and accuse someone of misleading others, spend a bit of time to read the post and it's background.

@500 claimed that Q-313 can at most fly around 500 km/hr. I showed that with the current two engines, Q-313 can easily fly at speed above 1000 km/hr. My calculations were for subsonic speed and the drag coefficient that I used is for subsonic speed.

And it is not like the drag coefficient increases 10 folds at supersonic speed. F-4 subsonic drag coefficient is 0.021 and it's supersonic is 0.044. Something that can easily be overcome by adding after burner to current engines.

Finally, if you paid more attention to what I had written, you could see that I said that speed is more than enough for a ground attack jet. Q-313 doesn't need to be supersonic for its intended use but it's not also be slower than WWII aircrafts as some like to claim here.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Any chance we can purchase few for JF17 thunder , always wanted to see how Pheonix missile would perform with JF17 Thunder

 

[Arminkh]

What was shown is not flying hardware. Often taxing prototypes can become flying prototypes after some modifications, but not for this 08.

So what sense does 08 make? It is apparently powered by its jet engines and I haven't checked the videos but if that's the case its control surfaces must actuate to change direction and taxing. I haven't seen that to accept it as proof.
For a fake project electro-motors and a crude steering system could be integrated into the landing gear as well a heater at the nozzle location to create visual heat signature of a jet engine.

But for a real project its possible that a taxing prototype has been created to test the integration of the subsystems, the landing gear and a possible fly by wire system and its fine tuning at different taxing speeds. However I haven't seen the movement of the control surfaces nor high speed runs to test the ram air pressure on FBW actuated control surfaces and its behavior (with the RQ-170 FBW is no issue anymore).
If we see videos of such testing we can have hope of a fly quality air frame construction for the 09 and a real flight.

To what end? Iran had much more credible projects that could have been used for propaganda.

People had forgotten about Q-313 until the defense minister brought it up again.

Even if we assume it was and is a lie, each one of them is just increasing people's expectations. Now everyone expects to see it fly. And according to the same defense minister, it is supposed to happen this year.

Why would someone, like the MOD, put himself in such an awkward situation?

 

[gambit]

Is the F-313 a 5th Generation Fighter? Clearly NOT! Is it a Supersonic fighter? Clearly NOT!

But it is still a fighter with a lower RCS than the F/A-18 with the same speed and probably greater range than the F/A-18 when armed for Air to Ground missions!

And you can tell just from looking ?

If you insists that what you said is correct in the absence of hard data, then do not complain if others say the F-313 cannot fly or even is a fake just from them looking.

The topic of radar cross section (RCS) control is an emotionally volatile one. No longer technical. On the one hand, we, meaning Americans, see how much effort Internet denizens put into trying to make 'stealth' as obsolete via Russian/Chinese countermeasures that have yet to prove themselves, but on the other hand, we see everyone tries to make their own versions of 'stealth' platforms and nationalistic passions trumps technical issues in insisting theirs are just as good as ours.

 

[JamD]

Before starting to write and accuse someone of misleading others, spend a bit of time to read the post and it's background.

I did read it. What you wrote was still as incorrect.

@500 claimed that Q-313 can at most fly around 500 km/hr. I showed that with the current two engines, Q-313 can easily fly at speed above 1000 km/hr. My calculations were for subsonic speed and the drag coefficient that I used is for subsonic speed.

At what altitude? And as for your calculations if you're using the zero-lift drag coefficient you better be talking about speeds less than Mach 0.3. I hope you know Cd doesn't just jump up at some magic Mach number but gets larger and larger over a region. And especially for a body that doesn't have a SearsHack distribution and has thick airfoils (F313) the Cd starts to rise MUCH sooner (read Mach 0.5).

And it is not like the drag coefficient increases 10 folds at supersonic speed.

Actually for a poorly designed body it actually CAN increase ten fold. That is why they used to think that the sound barrier could not be crossed. Do remember F-4 is a jet designed to go supersonic and obeys the area rule.

F-4 subsonic drag coefficient is 0.021 and it's supersonic is 0.044.

That is not it's subsonic drag coefficient or supersonic drag coefficient because THERE IS NO SUCH THING. Cd is a CURVE (read my original post). You will get 0.021 at below Mach 0.3, I hope that is not your definition of "subsonic". Also if you see the plot the peak is in the middle (transonic), and the lowest supersonic and subsonic Cd is always lower than the transonic peak. So the numbers you give are BEST CASE for a jet DESIGNED TO GO SUPERSONIC. Also, the peak in the transonic regime gets FATTER for bodies NOT DESIGNED to cross the barrier.

Something that can easily be overcome by adding after burner to current engines.

No. Even if you have a hypothetical engine with infinite thrust, the only thing it will do is break apart the airframe from shock interactions. It won't overcome anything.

Finally, if you paid more attention to what I had written, you could see that I said that speed is more than enough for a ground attack jet.

What can I say I have ADD, forgive me.

Q-313 doesn't need to be supersonic for its intended use but it's not also be slower than WWII aircrafts as some like to claim here.

Did I claim that? No.

 

[Arminkh]

I did read it. What you wrote was still as incorrect.


At what altitude? And as for your calculations if you're using the zero-lift drag coefficient you better be talking about speeds less than Mach 0.3. I hope you know Cd doesn't just jump up at some magic Mach number but gets larger and larger over a region. And especially for a body that doesn't have a SearsHack distribution and has thick airfoils (F313) the Cd starts to rise MUCH sooner (read Mach 0.5).


Actually for a poorly designed body it actually CAN increase ten fold. That is why they used to think that the sound barrier could not be crossed. Do remember F-4 is a jet designed to go supersonic and obeys the area rule.


That is not it's subsonic drag coefficient or supersonic drag coefficient because THERE IS NO SUCH THING. Cd is a CURVE (read my original post). You will get 0.021 at below Mach 0.3, I hope that is not your definition of "subsonic". Also if you see the plot the peak is in the middle (transonic), and the lowest supersonic and subsonic Cd is always lower than the transonic peak. So the numbers you give are BEST CASE for a jet DESIGNED TO GO SUPERSONIC. Also, the peak in the transonic regime gets FATTER for bodies NOT DESIGNED to cross the barrier.


No. Even if you have a hypothetical engine with infinite thrust, the only thing it will do is break apart the airframe from shock interactions. It won't overcome anything.


What can I say I have ADD, forgive me.


Did I claim that? No.

No drag is not a fixed number. It changes with speed. However when a single drag coefficient is announced, it is announced for its max speed. For example when they say the drag coefficient of a Boeing 747 is 0.031 it is calculated for its max speed of 920 km/hr at its service altitude.

Same is true for what I mentioned about F-4.

You can find a bunch of them here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_coefficient

Now in my calculations I suggested to use the Boeing 747 drag coefficient for two reasons. First because it is conservative enough and since it's max speed is close to what I calculated for Q-313. So it should be a good enough estimation.

What I did above is a simple conservative calculation to counter the claim of max 500 km/hr. You may disagree and think that Q-313 has a larger drag coefficient than Boeing 747 but then your guess is as good as mine because none of us has witnessed the wind tunnel test.

And finality, no you didn't claim anything. You jumped in between a debate without knowing what we were talking about.

Based on my estimate that I calculated above, the max speed of Q-313 should be around 1000 km/hr. Now if you have anything against that counter me based on a calculation similar to what I did. If not my ear is full of people's comments who can measure top speed of an aircraft just by looking at it.