Zulfiqar - IRAN MADE MBT

[mohsen]

@mohsen just ignore this Hasbara troll. Iran's weapons development programs are not to the behest of his ridiculous judgement.

I just wanted to humiliate this Zionist troll and I did it. sometimes ignoring them will make them more rude.

 

[Beny Karachun]

So now your claiming to know what type of engine the aircraft uses!! Funny, I didn't get that memo!!

1st off a single J85 engine has under 3000 lbf of dry thrust SO NOT possible!!! And whomever told you that the aircraft uses a single J85 engine is delusional much like yourself

And if you must know Iran planned on using a single J79 (+10,000 lbf thrust dry trust) without afterburners!!
FYI both the J79 & J85 are both Turbojet engines not Turbofan so they don't require massive air intakes!!!

And again your talking about the Air intakes of showroom mockup!!!

I am ASSUMING it, also the same in Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAIO_Qaher-313

" the Qaher 313 could be powered by reverse engineered variants of the General Electric J85 turbojet that Iran is known to have in its possession."

OF COURSE THEY REQUIRE A LOT OF AIR INTAKES:
The turbojet is an airbreathing jet engine, usually used in aircraft. It consists of a gas turbine with a propelling nozzle. The gas turbine has an air inlet, a compressor, a combustion chamber, and a turbine (that drives the compressor).

This engine ESPECIALLY needs more air intakes because it has a GAS TURBINE.

A mock up is the design of the plane that is not capable of flying
(Even though your government claimed that it was real)

I just wanted to humiliate this Zionist troll and I did it. sometimes ignoring them will make them more rude.

"Humiliate"? I showed you what stealth means in your own source, yet you didn't answer me, you are pathetic.

 

[mohsen]

"Humiliate"? I showed you what stealth means in your own source, yet you didn't answer me, you are pathetic.

So let's review your stupidity:
You are the guy who said flat surface means it's not stealth, and even when I said flat surfaces is the basis of stealth design you replied "that's literally the opposite". You didn't know the basic about stealth tech, and when I posted the link about stealth, you tried to cover your stupidity by saying stealth needs both absorbing and deflecting. And here is your another stupidity cause first of all I didn't said absorbing the radio waves isn't important and secondly basis in the design level is designing the shape (flat surfaces).

But afterall you are just a zionist troll, so you can bring more excuses for yourself.

 

[Beny Karachun]

So let's review your stupidity:
You are the guy who said flat surface means it's not stealth, and even when I said flat surfaces is the basis of stealth design you replied "that's literally the opposite". You didn't know the basic about stealth tech, and when I posted the link about stealth, you tried to cover your stupidity by saying stealth needs both absorbing and deflecting. And here is your another stupidity cause first of all I didn't said absorbing the radio waves isn't important and secondly basis in the design level is designing the shape (flat surfaces).

But afterall you are just a zionist troll, so you can bring more excuses for yourself.

NO. Your own source has that!
https://i0.wp.com/tinypic.com/ive6mw.jpg
LOOK WHAT IT SAYS: "Diagram showing that if radar is perpendicular to facet, the "stealth" aircraft becomes visible"
You send me links without reading them.
YOU don't know the basic about stealth science, NOT TECH
That is YOU that tries to cover your own stupidity now and before.
You know nothing like your nation.

 

[mohsen]

NO. Your own source has that!
https://i0.wp.com/tinypic.com/ive6mw.jpg
LOOK WHAT IT SAYS: "Diagram showing that if radar is perpendicular to facet, the "stealth" aircraft becomes visible"
You send me links without reading them.
YOU don't know the basic about stealth science, NOT TECH
That is YOU that tries to cover your own stupidity now and before.
You know nothing like your nation.

Your stupidity is endless!
Yes even flat surfaces reflect the radar waves, but that's only in one angle, VS the round shapes which reflect the radar in all angles. And a stealth designer makes sure to choose the angles in his design which lowers the reflection chance. This is a simple fact which a zionist troll can't or don't want to understand.

And this angle issue is the reason that the whole flight path is pre arrenged durring offensive operations to make sure the stealth fighter/bomber wont be in a wrong place to be cought by a radar wave accidentally.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Your stupidity is endless!
Yes even flat surfaces reflect the radar waves, but that's only in one angle, VS the round shapes which reflect the radar in all angles. And a stealth designer makes sure to choose the angles in his design which lowers the reflection chance. This is a simple fact which a zionist troll can't or don't want to understand.

And this angle issue is the reason that the whole flight path is pre arrenged durring offensive operations to make sure the stealth fighter/bomber wont be in a wrong place to be cought by a radar wave accidentally.

First of all, its not "Even", idiot

Look at the F22:
https://www.google.co.il/search?q=F...hXlJMAKHX_1DTMQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=KjGpoOSPwDmmJM:

Do you see that it have only flat surfaces? and the F22 on the radar is only 0.0001 squared meters For example, its nose, its much more different and EFFICIENT than the F117s nose
Its the same on the Su35, you know why its nose is curved that way? TO REDUCE ITS RADAR APPEARANCE.
the F313 has dozens of bumps, what does it mean? ITS NOT STEALTH.
The flat surfaces are bad for aerodynamics and stealth
Your F313 design is similar to the F117 (Although its MUCH worse)
and the F117 was shot down BY SIMPLE S-125 ABOVE YOGUSLAVIYA!

 

[mohsen]

First of all, its not "Even", idiot

Look at the F22:
https://www.google.co.il/search?q=F22&espv=2&biw=1680&bih=949&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkvuraqtnNAhXlJMAKHX_1DTMQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=KjGpoOSPwDmmJM:

Do you see that it have only flat surfaces? and the F22 on the radar is only 0.0001 squared meters For example, its nose, its much more different and EFFICIENT than the F117s nose
Its the same on the Su35, you know why its nose is curved that way? TO REDUCE ITS RADAR APPEARANCE.
the F313 has dozens of bumps, what does it mean? ITS NOT STEALTH.
The flat surfaces are bad for aerodynamics and stealth
Your F313 design is similar to the F117 (Although its MUCH worse)
and the F117 was shot down BY SIMPLE S-125 ABOVE YOGUSLAVIYA!

Back to denying the physic, good for you.

F117 was shut down because it's bomb bay were opened in the wrong place and compromised its stealth, same thing would have happened if it was an F22 too.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Back to denying the physic, good for you.

F117 was shut down because it's bomb bay were opened in the wrong place and compromised its stealth, same thing would have happened if it was an F22 too.

How am I denying physics!? Its you with lame answers with 2 words and such when I use YOUR OWN SOURCE to prove you wrong.

And this is UNKNOWN to NATO, not confirmed.
Anyways, your plane got a lot of bumps, its a subsonic jet fighter, simply useless against all modern and even old jet fighters.

 

[T-72B]

From the recent Eghtedar 40 arms exhibition ( notice the APS look a like)

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

From the recent Eghtedar 40 arms exhibition ( notice the APS look a like)
View attachment 536723 View attachment 536722
View attachment 536724
View attachment 536725

Its really nice to see some great pictures of the Zolfiqar!
Where do you notice an APS look a like?

 

[Mustang06]

Its really nice to see some great pictures of the Zolfiqar!
Where do you notice an APS look a like?

I think he's talking about the commander's cupola.

 

[Blue In Green]

I never really understood why Iran wanted to make this took look damn near identical to the M1 Abrams.

Like is there a practical reason for this?

 

[TheImmortal]

I never really understood why Iran wanted to make this took look damn near identical to the M1 Abrams.

Like is there a practical reason for this?

M1 Abrams is one of the most successful tanks in the world next to German Lepoard and Israeli Merkava.

M1 Abrams predecessor is M60, Zolifqar is inspired off of M60. Naturally they will look similar. Furthermore, Iran has gotten more experience with M1 Abrams during US occupation of Iraq.

Not to mention generally Iranian military gravitates to US based weapons vs Russian.

I think that is why there is a debate between Karrar vs Zolifqar in Iran’s armed forces.

Nonetheless, still not close to a mass production Zolifqar. Last we heard was in 2016 they added an APS system to it and our now working on DU armour and tank shells.

 

[Blue In Green]

M1 Abrams is one of the most successful tanks in the world next to German Lepoard and Israeli Merkava.

M1 Abrams predecessor is M60, Zolifqar is inspired off of M60. Naturally they will look similar. Furthermore, Iran has gotten more experience with M1 Abrams during US occupation of Iraq.

Not to mention generally Iranian military gravitates to US based weapons vs Russian.

I think that is why there is a debate between Karrar vs Zolifqar in Iran’s armed forces.

Nonetheless, still not close to a mass production Zolifqar. Last we heard was in 2016 they added an APS system to it and our now working on DU armour and tank shells.

It's one thing to produce a tank that looks aesthetically identical to the Abrams but it's a completely different ball-game to produce a tank that is technically identical to the M1 Abrams. I highly doubt the Iranians have the same on board weapons targeting systems and armor that the US M1 Abrams sports. The US tank is exceptional when it comes to battlefield efficiency. Desert Storm and Iraq showed us how well this tank preforms.

APS i'm familiar with but I didn't know Iran had access to Depleted Uranium technology? (not that well versed in the specifics on Tank armor and armaments).

 

[TheImmortal]

It's one thing to produce a tank that looks aesthetically identical to the Abrams but it's a completely different ball-game to produce a tank that is technically identical to the M1 Abrams. I highly doubt the Iranians have the same on board weapons targeting systems and armor that the US M1 Abrams sports. The US tank is exceptional when it comes to battlefield efficiency. Desert Storm and Iraq showed us how well this tank preforms.

APS i'm familiar with but I didn't know Iran had access to Depleted Uranium technology? (not that well versed in the specifics on Tank armor and armaments).

M1 Abrams is still just a tank. Houthis have torn them to shreds in battle as well as in Iraq during occupation. They aren’t magical.

The ones you see Arab countries using are export variant with no DU armour or DU shells. The DU armour and DU shells are what make the M1 Abrams so deadly as they can shred apart tanks and have extra protection.

I read an article a couple years back that seemed credible to say that Iran was working on the technology.

Wether it ever makes it to mass production is another story as DU armour and DU tank shells are harmful to environment and people.