Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 02, 2013

Ghaher-313

The Islamic Republic of Iran had announced that it would reveal a new fighter plane. Everyone thought that such would be an updated copy of the Northrop F-5 which Iran bought before its revolution.

But instead Iran came up with this:


bigger, more pictures here

Wow! I am impressed. (As are others.) That is a very, very unique design with polyhedral wings and with some elements of the MDD X-36 and of Boeing's Bird of Prey.

This Ghaher (or Qaher) is not just a mockup. President Ahmedinejad said the bird has flown several thousand hours* and Iranian TV showed short flight clips.

While this may not be a world class fighter yet, it seems to lack a sophisticated radar, it definitely shows that Iran has a very capable aeronautics industry.

Congrats Iran. And again, I am impressed.

Update: *This was a mistranslation in a forum.

Posted by b on February 2, 2013 at 05:24 AM | Permalink

Comments
next page »

Like F-5 it seems to be very small. Perhaps a short-ranged one with low power engine, but still looks impressive. I hope it's not just a fiberglass mockup over a piece of junk. Would love to see some data sheet!

Posted by: Michal | Feb 2, 2013 5:56:50 AM | 1

The reaction's been along these lines: Oh,if it's made by Iran, then it's fake..Apparently only the US can design and build fighter jets with no questions asked about it's capabilities, we're made to believe.

Did I mention the F22 is still having breathing problems???

Posted by: Zico | Feb 2, 2013 6:19:46 AM | 2

Here in a youtube clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkuu3zPQUVU

Posted by: hans | Feb 2, 2013 6:53:34 AM | 3

It looks small, cheap and highly manoevreable to me.
Just the thing for home defense after demolishing every US base and warship within 1500 miles, every "Israeli" city and power plant, and every well-head, port and loading facility in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain, with long-range missiles, after a pre-emptive suicide attack by USraelis.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 2, 2013 7:28:38 AM | 4

I don't know what to make of this. there are no rails for missiles, no gun, no bomb bay. what is this for? looks like it is massively underpowered as well.

I supposed if they could build 50 thousand of these and have them swarm it might be impressive but any fighter in production in europe and the us could take on several of these at a time and not even break a sweat.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 7:31:17 AM | 5

...take on several of these at a time and not even break a sweat.
When was the last time an 'in production' US or EU fighter took on ANYTHING that could shoot back ... with or without sweat?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 2, 2013 8:13:57 AM | 6

Hoarse,

yeah, fighter pilots are not particularily brave and are not allowed to be foolish with their multi-million dollar machines. risk reduction to the max.

of course it is not good business strategy to start a fight you could very well lose.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 8:44:43 AM | 7

here a short article about Ghaher 313.
Ghaher-313: a lie, a plan, or one hell of a surprise?
http://theiranproject.com/blog/2013/02/02/ghaher-313-a-lie-a-plan-or-one-hell-of-a-surprise/

Posted by: seyedali | Feb 2, 2013 9:54:46 AM | 8

@5 "I don't know what to make of this. there are no rails for missiles, no gun, no bomb bay. what is this for? looks like it is massively underpowered as well."

Its just a prototype, therefore its unreasonable to expect just announced fighter to be completed with all subsystems. Hell, decades old F-35 wont be completed until 2018, and still its being mass produced :) Also we have no idea about how much underpowered/overpowered it is until we get full details, which probably wont be anytime soon.

"I supposed if they could build 50 thousand of these and have them swarm it might be impressive but any fighter in production in europe and the us could take on several of these at a time and not even break a sweat."

While US/EU fighters are definitely more advanced, but we have no actual idea about their combat proves until Q-313 is completed and faces F-35 and the like. Kalashnikov may be old as hell, but in some cases its better than M-16.

In fighters world, F-35 and F-22 were "clubbed like the baby seals" compared to latest MIGs in close combat war test, and if anything - Q-313 will be VERY maneuverable (even fresh prototype seems fast and doing 360 spins like its nothing). If Q-313 will be equipped with a good radar and air-to-air missiles, and US/EU would better hope they can annihilate swarms of these from the far away, otherwise it could get ugly.

In any case, its a major breakthrough for Iran to go from 3 gen. fighters to 5 gen.(?) in any way you look at it, credit goes where its due. Major respect for fast advancement, and for surprise unveiling. NOBODY expected THIS, and I mean nobody.

Posted by: Harry | Feb 2, 2013 10:33:40 AM | 9

@dan of steele - The Germans thought the same of their Tigers and Panthers v the T-34. The Soviets reckoned it would take nine T-34s to kill a Tiger or Panther, they outproduced the Germans by about 20 T-34s for each Tiger or Panther.

Posted by: blowback | Feb 2, 2013 10:39:24 AM | 10

@dan

The one in the pictures seems to be a mockup or prototype with the real shape but with some (secret) details missing. Not unusual. The first F-22 shown in the U.S. was also a mockup.

According to the Iranian defense minister the plane has internal weapon bays for missiles and for bombs. Makes sense as the body is wide enough for that.

In the linked video they show some CATIA plans and pressure simulations of the plane. Those seem very real to me and mastering the design is no small feat.

As for engine power. Iran is said to have re-engineered the Mirage F1 engine (it got 24 F1 from Iraq). That's 49.03 kN of dry thrust, 70 kN on burners. Certainly enough for a rather small plane like this.

Posted by: b | Feb 2, 2013 10:43:11 AM | 11

BTW, its just me, or its the best looking non-US fighter? Which is somewhat departure from Iran's usual "it could look like WWII old, as long as its effective." In any case, effectiveness is what matters, and we'll see how good (or not) this fighter is. Still, beauty doesnt hurt the eyes, maybe thats why US prefers it that way ;-)

Posted by: Harry | Feb 2, 2013 10:45:13 AM | 12

To think the realm of aerodynamics and flight are European or western only is the height of idiocy.
We(western bigots) are going to be surprised by our future,a future filled with the results of our arrogance and stupidity.
Free da Press!(from its bigoted masters)

Posted by: dahoit | Feb 2, 2013 11:08:38 AM | 13

Would be nice to have someone in the area to challenge, if need be, the usual bullies of the world. It remains to be seen if this prototype is a move in that direction. All nations of the world deserve the autonomy to pursue legitimate self defense policies.

Posted by: ben | Feb 2, 2013 11:14:14 AM | 14

It would be surprising if China didn't share stealth data from the Serbian shoot-down f117 from the Balkan war, with Iran. It will be interesting to see what this plane can do.

Posted by: Crest | Feb 2, 2013 11:26:20 AM | 15

I really don't want to rain on anyone's parade but the thrust is not at all impressive.

this jet looks to be about the same size as the F-16 which has as much as 144.6 kN of push. that would be its likely adversary as all the countries around Iran have them.

the Iranians would do better to get their F-14s fixed up and re-engineered. that is still an impressive airplane.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 11:40:17 AM | 16

Forgive me for just jumping in, without getting up to date with the medium of the latest post and comments..

DARPA's 1.8 Gigapixel Drone Camera Could See You Waving At It From 15,000 Feet
ARGUS-IS

Hope Iran and Syria remain unmolested by USUCKRAEL..

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 2, 2013 11:58:29 AM | 17

I have not seen any clips of the actual plane flying. The only clips I have seen are the flights of scale down small models. I'll be really happy when I actually see clip of the actual sized plane flying.
I read in an Iranian military forum -and I don't know the source so it may or may not be true- that Iran will unveil the engine of F-313 in the upcoming days as the first "completely Iranian" Turbofan.
*IF* that turns out to be true, meaning that if Iran indeed makes a turbofan engine with no element or material of it having been bought/smuggled from outside, that will be a HUGE breakthrough all by itself.
By the way, does anyone know how far it is to go from building a fighter aircraft engine to building a commercial airliners turbofan?

Posted by: Pirouz_2 | Feb 2, 2013 12:35:41 PM | 18

@16 Iran has spent a lot of time and money figuring out how to keep their Shah era airframes running. For the f-14s, they make indigenous copies of their phoenix missiles and manufacture a lot of parts themselves.

Posted by: Crest | Feb 2, 2013 12:54:36 PM | 19

I don't know that much about the manufacture of turbines and turbofan engines other than the extreme precision required to cast the individual blades. those blades, other than needing a complicated shape, must endure great stress. to build an engine is one thing, to build a reliable, powerful, dependable engine is yet another.

while I certainly applaud any country that undertakes this, they have a long way to go and you certainly have to ask yourself if it is money well spent. certainly suitable engines can be found from suppliers other than the huge US/UK suppliers such as General Electric, Pratt & Whitney, and Rolls Royce. The Chinese must have something suitable....

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 12:54:55 PM | 20

Pirouz_2 @18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok2aMgfBdCs

Posted by: hans | Feb 2, 2013 1:04:32 PM | 21

@20;

*China itself imports engine for its aircraft from Russia: Chinese ‘Mighty Dragon’ doomed to breathe Russian fire

*Iran is under very severe sanctions for aircraft parts and components, so it has a great deal of difficulty in buying it.

*It is of paramount importance for Iranians to be self-sufficient in several strategic industries.

*The techonlogy to make aircraft engines is almost 'dual-use'. It also applies to making power plants for electricity production, and it even has applications -if I am not mistaken- in oil and gas industry.

Posted by: Pirouz_2 | Feb 2, 2013 1:07:58 PM | 22

@22
good point. I did not know the chinese were that far back.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 1:12:26 PM | 23

Hans;
I think the flight clip you showed me is parts of this clip (minutes 4:40 on).

In the clip I just gave you it is written (in persian) "test flight of the small scale model", also the interviewed engineer says (again in Persian)that the clip is the test flight of the scaled down small model.

Posted by: Pirouz_2 | Feb 2, 2013 1:28:39 PM | 24

Perhaps the American ire at, and desire to denigrate, this Iranian plane stems from their own recent total failures in getting a decent plane operational to replace their own Eocene era birds? The F-22 proved to be an expensive failure, barely able to hold its own against 4th gen Russian aircraft that would have a poor chance against Russian and Chinese aircraft nearing completion of their development. The F-35 is just a $1.5 trillion used car scam. The aircraft is well below current American types in capability and many times more expensive to produce and operate.

The Iranian plane is obviously a prototype and they have a lot of work still to do, and probably years ahead of them, in the development of it. The Iranian aircraft design shows it is not a copy of an existing aircraft and that a lot of originality went into designing it. Being hamstrung by Israeli-American sanctions, that's no minor feat, either.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 1:53:20 PM | 25

as far as performance, the F-16 is as far as the human body can go. Pilots risk blacking out in 9 G manuevers but the airplane is certainly capable of exceeding that.

the next generation is about stealth and that does not lend itself toward superb manueverability. You can't have it all.

at any rate, I did not intend to be dismissive. it is a great effort but it is only a start and nothing to get all that excited about. If the techology needed to make a turbine engine can be used to become self sufficient in all the other areas where turbines are used, well that can only be a good thing.

If Iran can avoid getting bombed back to the past as we did with Iraq, they have a chance of pulling through. I believe they have invested in new technologies, a friend of mine has built steel processing factories there. It continues to be extremely difficult for them as the US has been able to get so many sanctions and what not against them. In a fair and just world, those actions would be known as acts of war and a true justice system would punish those who perpertrated them.

alas, we still live in a world where might = right

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 2, 2013 2:23:37 PM | 26

what you think about Iran? a mockup??????? a model????
I'am Iranian.
I'am sure that it's an advanced and effective
fighter jet. we know it's not so advanced like f22 or f35 but
know that Iranians can produce every thing.today or tomorrow..
We can ..with sanctions or without sanctions.Iran was superpower
for 3000 years.We will come back.
زنده باد ایران--------

Posted by: ha | Feb 2, 2013 3:19:07 PM | 27

dan of steele - 26

"the next generation is about stealth and that does not lend itself toward superb manueverability. You can't have it all."

Yes you can:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xyws8JLC1ss

The PK FA is every bit as maneuverable as the Su-35, which itself can fly circles around any American or European aircraft in existence. It also is a stealth design, but one where stealth doesn't take precedence over everything else, so the plane is actually capable after it's been spotted. Stealth is much over rated and mostly a profit making scheme to sell less capable aircraft at much higher cost.

I agree with you about Iran, though.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 3:24:42 PM | 28

When you say, b, "Ghaher (or Qaher)", it is written Q (Arabic qaf) but pronounced Gh by Iranians. As far as I remember, it only occurs in words of Arabic origin.

I quite agree about Iranian enterprise. Iranians are capable of doing amazing things, considering the difficulties in face of sanctions. Expatriate/exiled Iranians tend to downplay what is being done in Iran today, because they don't like the regime.

As I've mentioned before on these threads, when I was in Turkmenistan last year (2012), I was very impressed by the numerous convoys of Iranian 40-tonners carrying exports. They were a majority of the 40-tonners on Turkmen roads, as far as I could see. That in spite of the fact that the regime is going against Iran.

Posted by: alexno | Feb 2, 2013 3:32:08 PM | 29

The photos are of a prototype/mockup. There is no afterburner, the cockpit and seat are too small for the pilot, canopy is plexiglass, nose is too small for a good radar, overall construction not the cleanest ...

Nonetheless a good first effort and in a few years, perhaps a viable real aircraft if Iran invests in it.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 3:44:11 PM | 30

Paul @30

I wondered how long till you worked your way here, still the doom and gloom about Iran as in all posts you make. Is Uskowi on Iran redneck site too boring.

Posted by: hans | Feb 2, 2013 3:52:02 PM | 31

@31 - oh if it is doom&gloom anything IRI, Paul, well know that he made his way over to Amir Taheri's blog (firmerly of uskowinoniran) screaming "FAKE monkey"!!!! LOL (btw I will recommend readers to visit taheris blog which is very good source of information coming out of Iran - therealamirtaheri.com

Posted by: Irshad | Feb 2, 2013 4:16:04 PM | 32

this is a power of Iran.

Posted by: Hossein | Feb 2, 2013 4:27:45 PM | 33

Paul - 30

"the cockpit and seat are too small for the pilot"

LOL

http://mod.ir/sites/default/files/images/f313.26.preview.JPG

http://mod.ir/sites/default/files/images/f313.27.preview.JPG

Maybe next time it might be prudent to check out the material first, before spouting the hasbara.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 4:40:36 PM | 34

re 30 - the point is that that the Iranians are catching up very quickly. They can't be expected to have everything straight away, but a lot of development is happening in short order.

Posted by: alexno | Feb 2, 2013 4:53:08 PM | 35

Iran president unveils Qaher-313 indigenous fighter jet

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/02/02/286841/iran-unveils-new-indigenous-fighter-jet/

Has a video in English, also.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 4:59:15 PM | 36

Bob tak, have you seen a fighter jet up front? The cockpit is too small and that is no hasbara talk. See analysis at http://theaviationist.com/

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 5:46:06 PM | 37

If Iran can build advanced aircraft, under sanctions, it can make the pharmaceuticals it needs to keep its sick children alive. Which is terrible news for the US and its satraps.
At first sanctions weaken countries which depend upon international trade; Cuba suffered terribly when Yeltsin suddenly pulled the carpet out from the sugar exports it relied on. But before long it had benefited from ending its reliance on the monoculture.
Self sufficiency is an important weapon in the arsenal of anti-imperialism. What better day to unveil this fighter than on the 70th anniversary of the victory at Stalingrad, for the Red Army was the creation of an economy boycotted, sanctioned and almost destroyed in successive wars.

Posted by: bevin | Feb 2, 2013 6:08:02 PM | 38

hans, Irshad, you guys are funny and remind me of GW Bush: never let the facts get in the way of your “truth"!

But then I shouldn't have expected that from somebody who believes in the Mayan "ninth wave":
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/09/does-erdogan-declare-war-on-all-shia.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef0177449841b2970d

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/12/more-obama-propaganda-for-war-on-syria.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef017ee636c4b0970d

As for the monkey Irshad, Iranian media goofed, plain and simple. They showed photos of the poor monkey from a previous failed launch (who had a a mole), and then the real monkey from this launch in the press conference (with no mole). Even up to this point they haven't come and said sorry, we made a mistake. Instead they made the world media think Iran had lied and made Iran a laughingstock. They are the idiots you should be criticizing.

As for this plane, it's a mockup and prototype. Even the Iranian TV program said the flight video was of a model. Let them show us a real pilot getting into the plane, taking off, landing it, and getting off, and I will eat my words.

Until then facts are facts, and you can continue acting like Bush and Netanyahu and selectively filter them in your head.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 6:14:34 PM | 39

Paul - 30

"have you seen a fighter jet up front? The cockpit is too small and that is no hasbara talk."

Have you ever been outside your mother's apt little boy? Here is a photo of an F-22 cockpit - smaller than that of the Iranian.

http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1213/1345183556_6f27e9c109.jpg

Why don't you find a real job.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 6:49:46 PM | 40

That was a response to post 37, not 30.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 6:51:01 PM | 41

Paul - 30

"nose is too small for a good radar"

The nose of this aircraft is even smaller:

http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1213/1345183556_6f27e9c109.jpg

Are you saying there is no room for a good radar in a F-22, Mr. Expert (at video games)?

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 7:14:13 PM | 42

Bob Tak, why don't you just put the F-22 photo next to the Iranian jet photo, and compare dimensions taking into account assumed heights of people and other markers. You know, stuff like length and width and depth and volume of different parts. If you don't know what these terms mean, please refer to Wikipedia. As for my real job, I can't tell you what it is, but I can tell you one thing: it requires a lot of math, and a brain, and a lot of critical thinking. The latter two are apparently missing in you.

With friends and defenders like you, hans, and Irshad, Iran does not need any enemies!

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 7:15:42 PM | 43

Lol hahaha - Paul get a grip of yaself, no one takes you seriously so why do you take yourself so seriously? Hahaha!
Still feeling proud of yaself of forcing Amir Taheri to leave uskowi blog site due to your constant demonisation and venom towards his country, people and govt? Thankfully he is doing very well without the likes of you!

Critical thinking my a$$!!!!

Posted by: Irshad | Feb 2, 2013 7:24:50 PM | 44

My dear idiot Irshad, you must be mistaking me with another Paul. I love Amir Taheri and his blog.

Get that critical thinking going by taking some online classes. It will be good for you even if you have a peanut sized brain and make mistakes and stupid deductions like this.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 7:29:18 PM | 45

looks to me the iranian stealth plane is as big as this chinese one

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/j21.jpeg

Posted by: nikon | Feb 2, 2013 7:43:06 PM | 46

According to the state-owned BBC's Iranian journalist Cyrus Amini, "[the] Qaher F313 looks like a cheap copy of the American F22..."

LOL!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21307208

Posted by: Murad | Feb 2, 2013 8:13:14 PM | 47

Lol - there must be something in the name for all you pauls to be soo uptight constipated douches! Anyway I am/was under the impression you are that idiot Paul iddon who considers himself to be a serious Iran analyst and blogs at uskowi site. Froum the way you and HE writes, its very similar! So if you really are not paul iddon, then I apologise for assuming you was ;)

Posted by: Irshad | Feb 2, 2013 8:15:17 PM | 48

@47
I guess they think journalists are qualified to analyze fighter jets.

Posted by: nikon | Feb 2, 2013 8:22:26 PM | 49

Let's face it guys. It's another spectacular fail of Iranian propaganda.

What a shame. Such a great country, so great people and they humiliate themselves again. Time to fire all the photoshopists and mockup builders.

Posted by: Michal | Feb 2, 2013 8:38:42 PM | 50

Michal - 50

Considering the effort you Israelis are mounting against this news, I'd say you Israelis have all but confirmed the story.

But I can understand what you people must be going through. Israel has not been able to develop a decent fighter of their own yet, and must bribe other countries to sell them fighters. With all the inflated Israeli ego of being the best of the best of the world, seeing the Iranians (who are Muslim, too, OMG) out do Israel must be really grating on that old self image meter.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 8:52:39 PM | 51

Irshad, thanks for the complement (uptight constipated douche). My recommendation for you: please use whatever is left of your brain, and try to safeguard it. You don't want to lose that remaining 10%.

As for Paul Iddon, yes I remember him on Uskowi. I stopped reading that site precisely because of his and Uskowi's postings and because they would censor my critical comments.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 2, 2013 9:00:05 PM | 52

@51 "Considering the effort you Israelis are mounting against this news, I'd say you Israelis have all but confirmed the story."

You have a point, in my country Zionists are going literally insane about this fighter, spamming and derailing topic to the extent I havent seen in years! It seems they are more worried about F-313 than non-existant (shhh!) nuclear bomb, at least judging by their reaction in forums. As you said - they cant make any decent fighter by themselves (outside of drones), therefore such unexpected breakthrough in Iran makes them bleed in tears.

Posted by: Harry | Feb 2, 2013 9:01:51 PM | 53

Nobody here actually touched or flew that new airplane.

But:

We can come to an educated guess. Before that, however, we should clear ourselves from the widely standard assumption that "good fighter plane" is defined by "like F 22 or modern Sukhoi".

Iran is a very peaceful country (proven fact over 100's of years) and they need and want to *defend*. That is one *major* factor that inevitably co-defines weapon designs.
If Iran wanted to attack another country then that would be israel. To do that, Iran had several options; going there with fighter jets is almost certainly not an option they'd consider.
Furthermore, mil. airplanes are not designed to nominally surpass another countries airplanes sepcification (except the us, probably).

So, any new fighter jet must meet (or strive towards) certain criteria.

Other than the us and accordingly some nato countries no country develops weapons and military know-how and routine to engage in the "far abroad" that is, far away from home. This is even more true since very long range and even intercontinental missiles are available.

Any normal, i.e. non psychopathically aggressive country, cares only about 3 zones (in order of declining importance): home, very near abroad and near abroad ("very near abroad" meaning a zone of ca. +-100 miles beyond own ones borders).

And for a simple reason: Typically, conflicts are with neighbouring countries or, at most, within the near abroad (theoretical example: turkey and Egypt).
Therefore btw. most countries do not have certain mil. capabilities such as transporting major amounts of troops across long distances.

So, what does Iran need in terms of mil. airplanes, in particular fighter jets?
The answer is very much co-defined by a) (own) geography and b) most probable scenarios. there I see:
- defending their country against us/israel/nato aggression
- pro-active defense in the very near and the near abroad (e.g. saudi-arabia)
- israel - which is of no concern here in terms of fighter jets.

Another very important factor is "HOW will potential enemies attack?". The most likely attack would be by the us or israel. Both would work similarly (but with the us capable of more massive attacks). In both cases there would be a first wave by (cruise) missiles, followed by one ore mor more waves of air attacks. For the missiles one needed a good AD system which the Iran almost certainly has.
The air raid waves would be another story. However, it can be assumed that at any point in time there would be 10 to 100 enemy planes involved, and at most 200 (ca. 3 us carriers).

It is important to note that almost certainly the Iranian jets are *not* meant to engage us jets in massive scenarios. That would be taken care of by AD. The jets are quite probably meant to support counterstrikes and, in particular, to support ground forces in defending the *ground*, i.e. when an enemy tries to bring ground forces into the country.
Similarly the Iranian jets would be used if Iran in a defensive move would go for us bases in the near abroad. Considering the fact that western AD is comparatively weak the most realistic scenario is a saturation attack, i.e. sending masses of cheap (and short range, relatively unprecise) missiles to saturate the us AD systems followd up by air raides to do the precision work.

For all that Iran needs a rather simple jet. A reach of 15 - 2000 km is more than enough, speeds in the range of 1500 km/h are sufficient. Important would be to be as stealthy as possible which is why the Iranians actually put emphasis on that. The logic is simple: Iran has excellent strategic facilities provided by nature, the mountainous regions. As long as they stay at home or don't go farther away than 50 to 100 km (which is sufficient for everything in the gulf and the opposite enemy coast with us garrisons and harbours) those simple but half-stealthy jets will do fine.

Looking at the few available pictures one can notice another hint: The impression that those jets are primitive is also based on the absence of gadetry and unneccessary design. Partly they *seem* rude because the Iranians didn't waste money for looks, nice covers and perfection. Which has, next to simpler design jobs, another advantage price. And price translates in military to "massive" - which is a very valid strategy against a technologically superior enemy.

Also don't forget the 80:20 rule in engineering. 20% of the efforts and costs go into the last 20% of finesse and high-tech, which as we can currently experience again with us jets, brings also lots of traps and problems.
While the sukhoi jets nowadays are easily on par with american high-tech they have a "secret of success"; they stem from quite primitive but very reliable designs. Roughly, one could say that americans develop in leaps, often doing (too) large steps. The advantage is high-tech superiority, the disadvantage is lack of reliabilty. The east prefers continous development which is slower but leads to an increasing reliable base where components are steadily enhanced.

Can Iran win a war against the us? Can those new jets fight 1 on 1 against modern us jets? No. Surely not.
But they can inflict mortal damage to basically everyone around Iran and they can drive the costs of war up for the usa, financially, psychologically and in body count.

After all, beyond PR and hollywood, war and burglary have something in common: There is not absolute protection, no matter what you pay for your alert system. And, contrary to marketing brochures, that is not the job of alert systems, fences and security. In real life, experts know that, their job is to increase costs and risks for intruders. In the end, wars are just intrusions on a large scale. The same laws hold true.
And whatever those jets are really capable of ... one thing is sure. They drive up the costs and risks very considerably.

This is btw. a very well proven theory. It is basically the sowjet approach. They didn't have the money to keep up with the usa carrier by carrier, jet by jet. So they concentrated on very few areas, foremost air defense (because that is how the us attack) and missiles, because they are way cheaper, faster, simpler to design and risk-free (you don't risk an expensive pilots life and you have a certain deniability).
The idea is strikingly simple: Destroy an american jet costing 50 mio. dollars with some missiles costing 100 times less. Unless the us found a well of eternal money the *must* loose that game.

Looking at it from this very pragmatic angle (yes, I confess, this is not good enough for hollywood) the Iranian jet - whatever it's capabilities - is a clear sign of luxury and confidence. Because it means that Iran feels that it has enough missiles that are good enough and enough AD systems that are good enough. Designing an building a jet is an extension of basic neccessities, a step to the next level where you do not merely need to somehow defend your country but where you add options and choices - and the option to co-define the events rather than to merely react and defend.

The major asset in Irans cache, however, was, is and will be american hybris and the fact that the us are cheap cowards with a loud mouth.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 2, 2013 9:26:48 PM | 54

Mr. Pragma - 54

Well said. Israel-America fears pain. Even breaking a nail causes them to shriek and carry on unmercifully. As long as Iran's defense can inflict pain, or Israel-America thinks they can, Israel-America will hesitate to attack.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 2, 2013 10:05:33 PM | 55

correction:

"Also don't forget the 80:20 rule in engineering. 20% of the efforts and costs go into the last 20% of finesse and high-tech, which as we can currently experience again with us jets, brings also lots of traps and problems."

Apologies.

Of course, correct is: 80% of the efforts and costs go into the last 20% of finesse and high-tech.

Also: Please be generous with me as I do not have english spelling checker available. Thanks for your patience and understanding.


Some concrete technical considerations (after all, that's a major point when looking at a countries capabilities to build jets and the like):

Iran has in quite few years built up key industries to 85 - 95% of best western standards. For instance the are capable to design complete cars and to, more importantly, manufacture them in large quantities.

They have also mastered all main blocks of aircraft design, construction and manufacture.

Concerning "those cheap Chinese" who use Russian engines (more precise: turbines) in their jets it should be noted, that basically everyone started on the shoulders of others.

It might surprise but actually turbine engines are amongst the few most demanding technologies (as there are, e.g. fluids and gases in different conditions and temperatures involved). Also the manufacturing is a major undertaking as one needs very high-tech 5-axis machining centers.

From what I know and can conclude, Iran has a certain albeit limited capability in that respect. I would guess that currently they can produce simple design (e.g. from the 90ies) in serious but not major quantities and up-to-date designs in small quantities.

What they could do, however, and almost certainly have done is to first copy old engines they had and then to modernize them which is actually the most reasonable thing to do for everyone. You don't just design an engine from scratch but rather enhance existing well understood (!) designs.

As any system must be mastered through the whole cycle, i.e. from design and understanding the physics behind it (like hydrodynamics), through construction and up to full scale manufacturing it is very demanding and complex to arrive at the point where one really masters a technology like fighter jets.

Also, from what we know, Iran has used that approach in other fields. They did, for instance, not "invent" completely new AD systems but rather worked hard to fully understand the existing old systems and then - often very considerably - enhanced those and in the end produced them. In the case of AD they actually have 2nd and 3rd generation systems.

A propos "generations". Someone here assumed the new jet to be "5th. Generation". This is, sorry, extremely unlikely. What would seem realistic to me is 3+ generation.

But again, beware! The point in mil. technology is not to win pissing contests! The point is to have what you really need for your situation, geography and scenario.

Also, it is much more desirable for Iran to have an gen. 3+ jet for which they master the full process than to have a gen 4 or even 4+ jet in an early stadium and having many dependencies and problematic processes.

One should not forget the real demands (rather than hollywood dreams). Dependency, for instance, is boring but extremely important. If for instance the us did not give any more jets and spare parts to israel, they would go belly up in short time. Actually a mil. jet is only 1/3rd of what you need. 2/3rd is spare parts and maintenance.

And again, a gen 3+ jet that Iran fully masters, produces their own spare parts, have qualified technicians to service and maintain it is way more powerful and useful than a cool 4+ jet without the needed blocks (like maintenance) around.
Also it should not be forgotten that there are just 3 countries apable of fully (or almost fully) mastering gen 4 and higher jets: usa, Russia and China. Even "high-tech" nations like France or uk have hardly more or better than Iran.

All in all the us well advised to avoid war with Iran.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 2, 2013 10:08:19 PM | 56

despicable US warns Pakistan of sanctions over Iran gas pipeline deal
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-20587-US-warns-Pakistan-of-sanctions-over-Iran-gas-pipeline-deal

US is free to bomb pakistan: and not be sanctioned or hauled to ICC or any court....pakistan tho if it works on pipeline with Iran will feel the terror regimes wrath

time US was sanctioned

Posted by: brian | Feb 2, 2013 10:43:16 PM | 57

I think it is a great start for Iran against sanctions . Iran need times to make it better

Posted by: Reza&javad | Feb 3, 2013 1:11:57 AM | 58

@56 "What would seem realistic to me is 3+ generation."

Iran was already making 3+ gen fighters for years, as well as refurbishing 4 gen. fighters (F-14 and MIG-29). To assume F-313 is 3+ gen. would mean they barely improved from F-5 and havent learned from 4th gen, not to speak what Iran found out about newer gen fighters.

Until we get more info, I would assume F-313 is a combination of 3/4/5 gen, and previous fighters like Saeqeh were assumed to be new tech test beds till Iran sorts out newer platform like F-313.

Posted by: Harry | Feb 3, 2013 1:27:22 AM | 59

I am impressed too!!!

Posted by: j.k | Feb 3, 2013 1:52:10 AM | 60

Speaking about generations, F-313 has a lot of 4 gen. features and few of 5th gen. For example, Iran extensively worked with Mikoyan on Shafaq (fourth+ generation fighter), until it was canceled due to lack of engines or some undeclared issues. F-313 is derivative of that project, as well as a culmination of everything Iran learned from other 3/4/5 gen. fighters.

Posted by: Harry | Feb 3, 2013 1:52:51 AM | 61

Interesting article:
http://farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13911115000006

The "low flying" capability of this plane is being extensively talked about by Iranian media. Wing size and shape do seem to be optimized for sea-skimming flight. The small nose may not even house a radar. After all all foreign radars should be treated as compromised, and a domestic one will be detected and will take away form the stealth nature. The small size of the plane furthermore adds to its stealth.

So what will this plane be used for? Not for air to air combat. This is a cheap, easy to make ship killer. It will fly from makeshift runways on Iran's south coast, dash over to a carrier battle group at very low altitude while avoiding detection by radar, fire a few missiles, and get back (or not).

A defensive Iranian solution, for a threat perceived by them. Another tool alongside their cruise missiles and ballistic anti-ship missiles.

Smart. F-313 is a stealth SU-25, Iran's Volksjäger.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 3, 2013 2:03:39 AM | 62

ya perfect

Posted by: shinay | Feb 3, 2013 2:37:31 AM | 63

Harry (59 & 61)

Saeqeh is widely considered gen. 3 and the 313 is declared an enhancement (actually rather a - probably also modernized - variant) of the Saeqeh.

That sounds like 3+.

Furthermore the 313 lacks - by definition - major features of gen 4 (such as linear speed vs. turnrate balance and capabilities).

Anyway this is not an attractive point to discuss because actually the 313 seems to be outside the usual grid anyway. My impression is that rather than building a better and enhanced Seaqeh the Iran military understood that, and strived for a rather primitive (as seen from western standpoints and as compared to F-16 (not to even talk about F-35) or modern Sukhoi planes) jet that is minimalistic, almost stripped down with only decisive capabilities enhanced.

It seems reasonable to assume an engine power around 60 - 75 kN which, yes, is smal compared to modern jets but which was good enough for rather successful (if somewhat old) planes going mach 2.5. This is even more interesting when considering the supposedly very lite weight of the 313. Secondly I would strongly assume a rather good capability.

That formula is cheap, doable for Iran and feasable in quantities and allows for the jobs assigned to it (as explained earlier).

Feasability seems, I feel confirmed by reality, to be a major issue considering that Iran basically has nothing one might call airforce and that the Saeqehs, while being viable aircraft, come in too few per time unit and are probably quite expensive.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 3, 2013 3:32:40 AM | 64

The first F-22 prototypes flew in the 1990s. The first squadrons didn’t go active for another decade. The F-35 prototypes flew 6 years ago and production versions won’t officially go into service until 2017. Russia and China have both flown prototypes of their own 5th Gen fighters and aren’t even close to beginning production.

Iran has neither the experience or industrial capacity to match any of these countries, so assuming this is an actual aircraft, don’t expect the first production examples to reach operational status until sometime around 2020.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 3, 2013 5:10:02 AM | 65

iran is a best countiry of the word

Posted by: iran | Feb 3, 2013 6:57:55 AM | 66

ralphieboy (65)

No.

The problem in Russia is mostly on the side of sowjet-infested industry and power games between them. The technology is is usually quite solid and well tested due to the fact that they usually don't construct completely new things but rather enhance proven technology in small steps.

The problem in the usa is monetary, politically, with corruption and (too) large steps: Furthermore the american military has a tendency to first do marketing and sales and doing the real development and construction only afterwards and quite pressed by too big promises sold.

From what can be seen so far one can reasonably assume that the manufacturing of the 313 should be relatively simple and cheap. Actually it has to be reasoned that this was a major factor in the decision and the design ("Let's build something that somehow flies, can't be detected too easily and can carry a certain- possibly small amount of weapons *NOW*. Better stuff that consumes much more money and time will be done later.")

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 3, 2013 7:44:35 AM | 67

Furthermore the american military has a tendency to first do marketing and sales and doing the real development and construction only afterwards and quite pressed by too big promises sold.

Sounds like my company lol, on a side note our Norwegian branch will soon be doing a joint project with a Iranian university for designing of next generation sea bed sensors. I guess they did a lot of research in this field to be able to detect NATO, Israel, American submarines. Lets see if that SLC starts complaining I think they will.

Posted by: hans | Feb 3, 2013 7:50:32 AM | 68

Thank you Mr Pragma for your interesting contributions.

Posted by: DaveS | Feb 3, 2013 8:52:57 AM | 69

I can not put in words how much I am disappointed by this gimmick. Iran could come up with a indigenous fighter if it had the political capability to choose a realistic goal and pursue it for decades. But they are run by publicity-whores who will let this happen.

I don't understand how some here think that something will come out of this. How can you be so deluded? The photo opp is gone, it will never fly, this is a dead end.

It's a shame, Iran is a great nation that could contribute something to aviation.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=122220

Posted by: z | Feb 3, 2013 9:07:14 AM | 70

Yahoo news is showing this photo of the F-313 (I think) Looks much more real here.

Keep in mind that it makes perfect sense for Iran to release some information along with some disinformation and to conceal the aircraft's true capabilities. So it's entirely possible the showroom aircraft is just a model of the real thing, which does exist, or is being developed.

Posted by: Lysander | Feb 3, 2013 10:13:42 AM | 71

Lysander - 71

That's a different aircraft design. Probably an older stock photo Aljazeera had in their files. It's doubtful the Iranians would publish detailed photos or video of an actual prototype at this stage, that would be almost like handing Israel-America the blueprints for it.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 3, 2013 10:34:09 AM | 72

Lysander 71 - вот так 72

That is a Saeqeh, a double-fin reverse-engineered Northrop F-5. Iran has built about a squadron of these.

Posted by: z | Feb 3, 2013 2:11:02 PM | 73

Thanks to Mr Pragma for the good contribution on why Iran does not need, and will not, build superpower like fighter jets.

I also concur with Paul at 62.

So what will this plane be used for? Not for air to air combat. This is a cheap, easy to make ship killer. It will fly from makeshift runways on Iran's south coast, dash over to a carrier battle group at very low altitude while avoiding detection by radar, fire a few missiles, and get back (or not).

A defensive Iranian solution, for a threat perceived by them. Another tool alongside their cruise missiles and ballistic anti-ship missiles.
---
Question: Could the F-313 have at least some ground effect capabilities like Soviet Ekranoplans? (Bets guess - no)
---
Otherwise yes. That fits Iran's defense strategy and makes a lot of sense for them. Still I would not discount the capability of that bird, should it ever get finished, to go into visual range fights with other fighters. The general aeronautic configuration with those huge canards and anhedral wings may allow for some surprising maneuverability.

Again Paul
Smart. F-313 is a stealth SU-25, Iran's Volksjäger.

The SU-25 is an armored air-ground fighter like the A-10 and unlike the F-313.

But you are quite right with the Volksjäger. The Blohm & Voss P.210 "Volksjäger" was the first project to use polyhedral wings. It was copied/stolen, like many German technologies, by the U.S. and used in Boeing's Bird of Pray and, as I wrote above, the F-313 seems to have some Bird of Prey blood in it.

Posted by: b | Feb 3, 2013 2:23:36 PM | 74

with down israeel

Posted by: ghaher313 | Feb 3, 2013 3:27:57 PM | 75

b, when I said the F-313 is a stealth Su-25 what I meant was that it's main role will be bombing of high value ground targets and attacks on carrier battle groups, in a stealth body ... I agree, not the best analogy.

The analysis below taken from an online forum:

A design is based on its requirements as strange an uncommon as it may look like.

My observations.

-The design is meant to be subsonic

-Kinematic performance is low given the choice of a single small turbojet/turbofan.

-Reason for the choice of the J85 like engine is availability and ability to produce it locally.

-As kinematic performance is low its not designed to enter dogfights with highly agile fighters with high kinematic performance.

- Because its not mean for dogfights its air intakes are not designed for high AoA where airflow could be interrupted and the design is free to place the intakes into a area where its well protected against emitters below it. Furthermore such a intake protects the engine from foreign objects during start.

- Its stealth features are based on common stealth designs. Stealth performance might be so important in the design that only rather static flight regimes are expected in combat. With hit and run tactics being its main missions.

-GCI and support by external sensors as well as better stealth performance and cost is the reason why no radar is used.

- low level fight masked by mountainous terrain and sudden pop ups after targets locations are recieved by data-link from external sensors is a main design feature.

- Internal fuel should be high, also thanks to the thick subsonic wing design.

- The space under the fuselage can be used for two large weapon bays, as the is no space necessary for large intakes.

From these points it becomes clear that this design is based on uncommon requirement.

The use of a sub-sonic airframe, a single J85 class engine and no radar decreases the costs of this design significantly.

Its emphasis on stealth-performance and ease of operation enable it to deliver a useful payload to its target and ambush other fighters if supported by friendly emitters.

As this design aims to counter systems such as the F-35, F-22 and B-2, it has to do so without directly competing with them.

Therefore: If the Iranian IADS encounters a target which it cant attack by its ground based assets its very useful to have a high numbers of F-313 like assets doing CAP in those blindspots. These could then be vectored into ambush position, maybe even doing a BVR attack. The main advantage on which the F-313 relies is its stealth features and high numbers. Naturally given its low operation cost, its also a ideal bombtruck.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 3, 2013 5:01:41 PM | 76

:-)) It reminds me of this here.

The two guys presenting the plane in the video had difficulties to keep their face straight, even the female presenter seemed to share a joke.

This here is the take of the aviationist.

But sure, Iran has been working on stealth fighters for quite a while.

When they finally get their cheap mass produced fighter jet, a large section of the US,UK,French military complex will be out of a job.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 3, 2013 5:08:59 PM | 77

While we're speculating...
The drooping tips of the rear wings seem to be designed to carry/afix something fairly heavy. Whether the devices in question are wing tanks, torpedoes, rockets or rotary canon (Gattling guns), remains to be seen.
Also, the 1-piece canopy (no separate fixed windshield) is more reminiscent of glider design than jet fighter design.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 3, 2013 5:45:08 PM | 78

Hoarsewhisperer - 78

"Also, the 1-piece canopy (no separate fixed windshield) is more reminiscent of glider design than jet fighter design."

It's actually fairly common in fighter designs now.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 3, 2013 5:56:59 PM | 79

As far as which gen (3, 4, or 5) the 313 belongs to, I'm quite certain that the 313 would glide like a brick if it lost power - which puts it right "up there" with all the best modern fighter planes.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 3, 2013 6:03:42 PM | 80

An unusual feature of the design is the small wings, not usually compatible with the claim of short take off and landing capabilities. Have they used circulation control wings to get more lift from smaller wings? No plane with this technology has yet been built, but Iranian engineers have been publishing papers on the it. This may be of critical importance to civil aviation in future, as it would allow airliners to be designed for fuel-efficient flight at lower altitudes where the water vapour from their exhausts has less greenhouse gas effect.

Posted by: pmr9 | Feb 3, 2013 6:30:37 PM | 81

Also a comment from theaviationist web site:

So many of these comments are ignorant in so many ways. They can make a nuclear reactor, they likely can produce stealth aircraft equivalent to late 70s US equipment. That said, the F-117 is equally small, and there is a whole list of aircraft which are as well. Radar equipped fighters with smaller noses include the F-84, F-86, F-9, Mig-17,19, and 21, Electric lightning, and a whole list of other aircraft. Not only that, but the F-117 does not have a radar either. No EM signature. This is actually not an issue either, since even a Cessna 172 has a data link which can show it local traffic detected by air traffic control. It’s very possible that this aircraft could use a data link, which not only is currently used by the US, but has been used by civilians and the Soviet Union for 6 decades now.

If you take a long look at this thing, it’s quite clear that it is based on the F-5, not built around it. It’s clearly based on experience and the same category of machinery used in the F-5. They are familiar with the scale and ergonomics of the F-5, so they will continue to work around it.

That said, the F-117 was also loosely based on the F-5, most accessories were from existing aircraft, like the life support from a C-130. New frames are easy, it’s the accessories which are hard, and so using existing systems is only natural, especially if they have a history of excellent performance. The components of the F-5 all exceed those requirements.

The Iranians have already shown that they can produce evolutions of the F-5, mainly one which exceeds the capability of the YF-17, which later became the F-18. Anybody can make a new airframe, even you can make one in your garage. It is plain ignorant to think Persians cannot.

When it comes to the avionics, a PC may not look as nice as a mac, but it works. A Cessna with a G1000 is more capable than an F-15 or F-14, so I wouldn’t say the Iranians are not capable of making 1970s era US technology.

When it comes to the intake and exhaust, many aircraft don’t have nozzles, and most materials can take the heat. Aluminum can withstand heat from flight at Mach 2.5, it’s not copper.

The Iranians are not morons, they already make their own aircraft. They would not overlook something like that. As for air intakes, it doesn’t even require a 1:16 thrust ratio to get a business Jet to Mach 0.9, so large intakes are not required for a high speed aircraft. The reason most fighters have large intakes is because they want additional thrust for better climb. It has nothing to do with operational speed. Most aircraft reach top speed using a fraction of the throttle. In the SR-71 POH, it states that "when climbing at Mach 2.6", remember to reduce throttle before leveling out, in order to avoid over speed and destruction of the aircraft. The SR-71 does not even have a 1:2 thrust ratio, and it can surpass Mach 3 and accidentally destroy itself, while climbing.

That said, there is nothing about this Iranian aircraft that has not been produced widely in any other aircraft. It is completely possible that it can match any F-18 in air strike penetration, and it is technically possible for it to match the air-to-air capability of the F-18A/B. That nose does not include a gun, and so the internal volume is actually similar to the F-18 instrument bay.

So, overall, this is actually a completely reasonable claim. This is actually a much more reasonable claim than what Russians claim the Su-27 can perform.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 3, 2013 7:18:47 PM | 82

Also a comment from theaviationist web site, part 1.

So many of these comments are ignorant in so many ways. They can make a nuclear reactor, they likely can produce stealth aircraft equivalent to late 70s US equipment. That said, the F-117 is equally small, and there is a whole list of aircraft which are as well. Radar equipped fighters with smaller noses include the F-84, F-86, F-9, Mig-17,19, and 21, Electric lightning, and a whole list of other aircraft. Not only that, but the F-117 does not have a radar either. No EM signature. This is actually not an issue either, since even a Cessna 172 has a data link which can show it local traffic detected by air traffic control. It’s very possible that this aircraft could use a data link, which not only is currently used by the US, but has been used by civilians and the Soviet Union for 6 decades now.

If you take a long look at this thing, it’s quite clear that it is based on the F-5, not built around it. It’s clearly based on experience and the same category of machinery used in the F-5. They are familiar with the scale and ergonomics of the F-5, so they will continue to work around it.

That said, the F-117 was also loosely based on the F-5, most accessories were from existing aircraft, like the life support from a C-130. New frames are easy, it’s the accessories which are hard, and so using existing systems is only natural, especially if they have a history of excellent performance. The components of the F-5 all exceed those requirements.

The Iranians have already shown that they can produce evolutions of the F-5, mainly one which exceeds the capability of the YF-17, which later became the F-18. Anybody can make a new airframe, even you can make one in your garage. It is plain ignorant to think Persians cannot.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 3, 2013 7:21:46 PM | 83

comment from theaviationist web site part 2:

When it comes to the avionics, a PC may not look as nice as a mac, but it works. A Cessna with a G1000 is more capable than an F-15 or F-14, so I wouldn’t say the Iranians are not capable of making 1970s era US technology.

When it comes to the intake and exhaust, many aircraft don’t have nozzles, and most materials can take the heat. Aluminum can withstand heat from flight at Mach 2.5, it’s not copper.

The Iranians are not morons, they already make their own aircraft. They would not overlook something like that. As for air intakes, it doesn’t even require a 1:16 thrust ratio to get a business Jet to Mach 0.9, so large intakes are not required for a high speed aircraft. The reason most fighters have large intakes is because they want additional thrust for better climb. It has nothing to do with operational speed. Most aircraft reach top speed using a fraction of the throttle. In the SR-71 POH, it states that "when climbing at Mach 2.6", remember to reduce throttle before leveling out, in order to avoid over speed and destruction of the aircraft. The SR-71 does not even have a 1:2 thrust ratio, and it can surpass Mach 3 and accidentally destroy itself, while climbing.
That said, there is nothing about this Iranian aircraft that has not been produced widely in any other aircraft. It is completely possible that it can match any F-18 in air strike penetration, and it is technically possible for it to match the air-to-air capability of the F-18A/B. That nose does not include a gun, and so the internal volume is actually similar to the F-18 instrument bay.

So, overall, this is actually a completely reasonable claim. This is actually a much more reasonable claim than what Russians claim the Su-27 can perform.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 3, 2013 7:23:23 PM | 84

@ somebody [#77],

Nomen est omen: France, the United Kingdom and the United States = FUKUS. Et ipsa scientia potestas est.

Posted by: Daniel Rich | Feb 3, 2013 7:46:22 PM | 85

This conflict may already be finished, but re: is it a mockup or not, the first time the f-22 was shown to the public, it was a mock up. It's a way of showing a plane without giving away certain aspects that the operator doesn't want to share with the world. That's all, it doesn't mean this jet doesn't exist, it obviously does.

Posted by: Crest | Feb 3, 2013 8:49:11 PM | 86

WOOOW!

very goood design .

Posted by: CyberMan | Feb 4, 2013 12:52:36 AM | 87

Take with a grain of salt what I say here as I'm not in any way an airplane expert. I can make well educated guesses on industrial feasibility and the whole lifeline from idea to "mass" product and from what I've experienced my views on strategic aspects and matters are usually not too far off. But concerning aironautics I'll better keep quiet. There seem to be others here who know about that way more.

I'm almost certain that Iran this time didn't even think about making an equivalent of a F-35 or other similar current designs (nor even a F-16 alike). It would be prohibitively expensive, both the planes and the development and it wouldn't add a lot of mil. capabilities they really need. And, no doubt, they learned a lot from Saeqeh.

Their context is: The us and/or israel along with some of their sheik dogs are the only concrete scenario now.

And another one that should not be overlooked is that Iran had to learn the maintenance and spare parts lesson the really bloody way.
So for many years to come and even if they can make a peace deal and get rid of all embargos, they will not bet their complete air force (or any other vital structure) on other countries.

If 10 years ago the americans have given a complete fleet of aircraft to, say saudi arabia then saudi arabia today is completely dependent as to every whim and blink of the us. Without us support they could as well scrap their airforce.

Simple reason: You don't go to your friendly hardware shop around the corner to get some jet fighter spare parts made. They would often enough not even have the materials to start with.

Simply speaking you just don't really learn making parts for modern jets unless you have designed and built a couple of complete jets yourself. There are multiple fields of science involved, extremely complex design issues and thousands of smal but "deadly" traps (like: if you mill a certain material with more (or less) than x rpm you mess it up)

So my assumption is that the Iran has planned it along those lines:

a) later, after the sanctions, get a couple of high tech Russian jets *plus* an official deal and plans to make most spare parts themselves.

b) build a bread and butter jet now themselves. Nothing too complex but something smart. And then do that in masses.

Looking from a military perspective there are quite few realistic scenarios. By far the most probable one is to be attacked from their doorsteps, i.e. the narrow gulf. Second place goes to mid to long range missiles and fleets of modern jets.

The adversary missiles and jets problem is better adressed by air defense systems, anyway. So let's look at the other one.

The first scenario comes in 2 flavours, small scale and large scale (the us attacking). And here we come to a first concrete factor for the 313. americans always do it the same way: as cowardly as possible.
First they rain cruise missiles on you trying inter alia to destroy your air defense. Next they send in their jets. Either one will try to hit your mil. airports because americans fear an adversary with even the slightest chance to hit back.

The 313 is supposed to have STOL capabilities, i.e. it can start off from short runways. And here I add a guess: Probably the 313 will be either capable of starting from makeshift runways (like wetted and compacted desert) or, more probably, plain roads. Yes roads. Don't forget, it's a rather small plane. And you can bet that it has been designed with a us-attack scenario in mind.

Maybe you feel that I'm getting a little carried away, here. But don't forget that a major block of Russias mil. doctrine came from a similar base. They couldn't keep up with us mil. spending, so they had to put brains and ideas against money (and arrived at deadly missile systems).

Sure enough, the smart Iranians will put their geography to best use. Now, thinking mathematically, if I manage to make a jet 1m smaller on any axis I will save 100m³ in storage space. this is particularly important when your storage space is "caves" in mountains (nicely bombing proof) or any larger innocent looking sheds that are *not* on official military areas (but, e.g. along a road).

The logic is strinkingly simple:

Their most probable adversary is known to first kill off any air force capabilities. Whether you have bombed and broken high-tech F-35 or low-tech cheap jets is not important; broken is broken.
So the Iranians make small and relatively cheap (= mass production) and simple (=mass production) jets without bells and gadgets that they can hide away and bring them on as bomb trucks against regional (or naval) us bases and for other purposes in the very near abroad.

Even if you loose 10 or 20 cheap 313 destroying an american carrier you have destroyed billions in worth and, very importantly, you got rid of ca. 70 enemy jets. And the Iran can play out another strength, namely, that they have loads of brave, noble men who are easily willing to die for their country and their God where the americans prefer to remote control war out of florida or the like and complaining about their milk-shake being too warm.

Preparing against the us means either be on par or even superior militarily like the Russian and sometimes soon the Chinese - or - to let them have their first wave but minimize losses and be prepared to strike back later.

And I'd like to add: The Iranians won't need high-tech jets. Not this time. The Russians will take care of that part.

So let us not look respectlessly on the 313. It will prove a very smart design for the situation given. And I bow before the Iranians for the simple fact alone, that they can build any jet in those difficult conditions and without help.

But then, they a have a culture that reaches back thousands of years where the americans have lost what little culture they brought with them (and killed the real civilastions there).

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 4, 2013 3:47:09 AM | 88

@ Mr. Pragma:

Whatever plans the Iranians have to develop their aviation industry this farce is not a part of them. This is an unworkable and useless design, a prop for internal propaganda only.

It is unfit for what you are proposing; a real effort would look like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX_International_AMX

I am not saying that Iran doesn't have capable people, only that they were not the ones building this amateurish contraption.

Posted by: z | Feb 4, 2013 5:00:11 AM | 89

z (88)

As I said, I'm not an avionics experts and feel not fit to judge those aspects.

I'm, however, absolutely certain, that the Iranians did not waste money, resources, and time to build something unuseable (which the thing on the photos might be; I don't know)

So it has to be assumed that either
- we are wrong with our avionic judgement of the shown thing
- they showed (for tactical, political or whatever reasons) not the real plane they have designed and probably prototyped and tested.
- the whole 313 is just a fake, possibly for internal purposes or to create confusion (along the line "*possibly* having such a thing brings us 90% of what we get if we really had it", i.e. driving the to be assumed costs of potential adversaries up)

Against the last option speaks that it would have been cheaper and more credible to show an enhanced or even a stripped down (=cheaper = mass production) version of the saeqeh.

From what I know, the saeqeh is too expensive, too slowly produced to reach any not militarily insignificant number of planes, and still far beyond even 15 year old planes of Russia or the us or europe.

Therefore it is perfectly logical and credible that the Iranians did develop a new jet that considerably better matches their real needs. From what one can assume based on the little information available the 313 nicely fits the specs (albeit, if I get you and others right, not the thing shown).

I'm looking forward to read more comments of avionics experts.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 4, 2013 5:47:23 AM | 90

Is Iran the first country in the world to adopt Keshe Magrav technology and build it into it’s space program. It has already shown NATO/US/Israel that they can’t fly even their most advanced stealth drones without having them pinched, landed in perfect condition and then displayed for all the world to see. A country that can do this is capable of producing a fighter as described.

Posted by: hans | Feb 4, 2013 5:56:28 AM | 91

Claims I have, over the years, heard about Iran
- Iran can not enrich Uranium
- Iran is falling apart
- Iran can not make nuclear fuel pellets
- Iran can not count election votes during just one night
- Iran can not detect stealth planes
- Iran can not survive under sanctions
- Iran can have taken down that stealth plane
- Iran can not make enough gasoline for its cars
- Iran can not build such a plane

Posted by: b | Feb 4, 2013 8:38:01 AM | 92

z @ 89 conveniently forgets that hardware manufacturing by Western defense industries - all of them - are little more than corporate welfare and pork-barrelling with profit as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd priorities. Most if not all (systemically unscrutinised) 'defense' contracts run the full gamut of corruption. It is quite normal to factor in every conceivable form of pay-off, commission, and general palm-greasing contingency.

What taints z's best-buy recommendation is that the wiki entry spells out that the plane is the product of a no-bid contract - just like the planned-obsolescent eye-candy churned out by "defense contractors" in almost every state in the US of A.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 4, 2013 9:59:15 AM | 93

b @92

I always find it a bit weird that anything that Iran does that seems a bit sophisticated, it's called fake.Yet, it's the same country that is sophisticated enough to build da bomb that invites crippling sanctions?I dunno about how others think; but they seem to be steadily increasing the bar for their 'fakes'

missiles
rockets
drone capture
spying networks
centrifuges
space launches
aeroplanes
fighte jets
reverse engineering

They really must be spending a lot of their hard earned money, doing phDs in faking. And I'm beginning to enjoy these 'fakes' and the posters who doth protest too much! :-)

Posted by: shanks | Feb 4, 2013 11:43:03 AM | 94

The glorious innovative arms race:

small, light, effective, cheap, deadly on a personal level, precisely targeted, towards some X person or small group of people.

The implications touted, for the larger public, as I understand it, are:

No bombing of cities (Dresden, Japan...), no random targets (landmines), smart war, get the Terrorists and the like. No prisons, concentration camps, no rape, blanket bombing, just hyper surgical precision. The ultimate outpouring of the bad apple, individualistic, argument.

Eliminate the poison within. Keep society stable!

Note how technotopia - “new” but not so fantastic etc.- arms follow advertising, you just need to target the right people at the right time. As if using x deodorant or praying 5 times a day or whatever personal characteristic makes one a ‘good’ person or a ‘terrorist’, ‘insurgent’, etc.

So that is the Spin.

Targeted, blameless, aka completely sanitized individual killing, has been a dream of all the powerful since forever.

Looks like now it has come to pass.

Posted by: Noirette | Feb 4, 2013 11:55:07 AM | 95

Talking about Corporate Welfare, here's a link to a story about what the well-bribed facilitators of pseudo-military nest-feathering "invest" taxpayer dollars in/on.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=64844

The subject is a midget surveillance drone/helicopter, 4 of which would fit comfortably on the palm of one's hand. The UK has ordered 160 of them to use as forward scouts in NATO's AfPak SNAFU.

The price? $4 million, or $25,000 each...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 4, 2013 10:15:11 PM | 96

It's worth reading down until you get to the part which describes these worth-their-weight-in-diamonds products of Technotopia as "expendable".
Cute, isn't it?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 4, 2013 10:24:11 PM | 97

I wonder how easy it would be to override their RC gear? A hacker with a bit of creativity and a sense of humour that is politically correct, yet really isn't politically correct, could probably put those little things to good use.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 5, 2013 2:29:42 AM | 98

It is a very good start for Iran to stand against imperialism.I know there is a long way to new technological devices but i hope to the future.(remember monkey astronaut and nuclear reactor)
پاینده باد وطن

Posted by: Reza_Patriot | Feb 5, 2013 2:44:05 AM | 99

@Mr Pragma - 88

Hey, I'm sorry to be the messenger of bad news... I have tried to look at this as maskirova, but it doesn't really make sense as this mock-up won't fool any foreign agencies. This presentation must be intended to a domestic audience only.

I don't think we can deduce anything about a real fighter program from the 313. Look at the road the Chinese have taken to get where they are now: they have spent decades building hundreds of licensed and unlicensed versions of Russian / French / Israeli airplanes and helicopters. Now they have a real industry, not just the lead companies, but a whole ecosystem of suppliers. The Iranians are nowhere on that road. They make prototypes and small series, but their industrial base is small. What airplane have they built in 100 units? 50?

Is there any example of a country coming up with a groundbreaking fighter out of nowhere?

The truth is that they haven't put much effort into their fighters since the end of the Iran-iraq war. They are probably right to do so, because there is no way they can make or buy a fighter force that challenges air superiority in their current environment. Maybe in some decades when the USA are gone. Other weapons are more appropriate for them now.

Cheap fighters don't make any sense and no one is building them. Training pilots is hideously expensive, the long-run costs kill all the savings.

@Hoarsewhisperer - 93 : I presented the AMX as an exemple of a successful project for the missions Mr Pragma was proposing. It is not manufactured any more and I was not suggesting that Iran should buy it. And of course Western aviation is not a good reference for Iran, except maybe for Sweden.

Posted by: z | Feb 5, 2013 6:05:14 AM | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.

 

Site Meter