Iran does have pretty advanced scientists and the US knows it.
Patriotism like national football teams are for home consumption.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 5 2013 12:04 utc | 101

z @ 100.
I presented the AMX as an exemple of a successful project for the missions Mr Pragma was proposing.

Mr Pragma said he doesn't know much about planes and was speculating on how the sort of plane he imagines the 313 to be might fit into a coherent self-defense plan. Given those constraints I thought he did a reasonable job.

You, on the other hand, couldn't think of anything intelligent to contribute and suggested a "better" plane than the 313 despite the fact that no-one outside Iran knows precisely what its planned capabilities are - just to be contrary.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 5 2013 13:33 utc | 102

z (100)

I see your point and, yes, that picture doesn't show or prove much.

The situation is, however, not as bad as you describe it. The Iranian have build the Saeqeh.

Furthermore my point wasn't that Iran has build something "groundbraking".
No, they have build something that is rather basic and can in my minds eye not at all compete with current us or Russian fighters.

But the major point is something quite different but also very important.

The Saeqeh is proof that Iran has mastered the *complete* cycle from design to (still low) volume manufacturing.

I don't care about the pictures of the 313. I see them just as an indicator that Iran is/has been working on another mil. airplane. From that point on I was asking (and trying to answer) *what* that new plane could be.

And my explanation is by no means just positive for Iran. I do, for instance, assume that the Iranians have recognized major issues with the Saeqeh, for example the fact that it was aiming to high, too expensive and still not anything to be put against currently used american jets.
And that they have learned from that and therefore developed a more down to ground, feasible (also financially) yet useable, if only for a tight range of jobs.

Yes, maybe I'm dead wrong. After all nobody here has ever seen or touched the 313. But - at least to me - my "guessing" seems to be way more realistic than interpreting some goofy internet pictures.

And just btw, I didn't say that I don't know about mil. planes. I said I don't know about avionics. And that I therefore am not in a position to judge those pictures (which I wouldn't trust anyway).

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 5 2013 13:43 utc | 103

@ 103 And just btw, I didn't say that I don't know about mil. planes. I said I don't know about avionics.

You did. And there is a difference.
I apologise for not checking before rushing into print.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 6 2013 1:56 utc | 104

this done by Iranian engineer, and would be updated rapidly. it made according Iran defense necessities. its weapons is inside located such as stealth fighter.

Posted by: reza | Feb 6 2013 8:53 utc | 105

Looks to me that if the Iranians *do* intend to develop this thing into a real warplane then what they are aiming for is a crude version of the F-117 i.e. something that doesn't emit, is as stealthy as their current tech allows, and is designed to sneak around in a VERY hostile environment.

Nothing fancy. Nothing flash.
Not intended to take on the hostile fighters, merely to sneak around/under them.

Think of it as the cockroach of the warplane ecosystem, and that's what you are looking at.

Mind you, I may be wrong; the Iranians may be planning on putting frikkin' laserbeams on its frikkin' head and using it to sweep the skies clear of the infidel F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, F-F**ing Whatevers all the way from Tehran to Tel Aviv.

But somehow.... I doubt it.

Posted by: Johnboy | Feb 6 2013 10:01 utc | 106

Cockroach, i would not make fun of them they have survived since the time of the dinosaur's. I think the Iranian's specialists will surprise us, Why do you think they have as yet not been attacked by the USA, it is not because of their retaliation strike, i think because of their unknown capabilities. Remember USA/Europe/Israel are constantly telling us how backwards Islamic countries are.

Posted by: hans | Feb 6 2013 11:12 utc | 107

Hoarsewhisperer (104)

Whatever. If anyone feels that I should apologize, I have no problems to do that.

Kindly keep in mind though, that I'm not a native english speaker.

I think, my comments and points can be quite well understood. Bot for the sake of correctness:

I don't know enough about avionics, flight properties, flying controls, and the like to judge that side of any airplane project.
What I do have a useful level of knowledge of is the engineering, strategic, and military side.

I apologize for any misleading impressions I may have created.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 6 2013 14:20 utc | 108

@Mr Pragma

Here is an identification of the avionics in the cockpit:

http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/Kahir313_Kokpit1_zps7a187389.jpg

Again, I don't think there is much to learn from this: if a real plane is being worked on this is not it, or at least this is not the cockpit.

I think what you are envisaging is plausible, but even a "simple" fighter would be extremely costly to develop, build and maintain. These costs are much greater for achieving low observability. The Americans report horrid maintenance costs for their RAM treated airplanes. Assuming that the Iranians master making and applying these materials, wouldn't they also have to face very high costs from having a large number of planes dispersed on rough locations? The military usefulness would be limited, and its advantages can be countered. Given enough air assets in the area tactics could be developed against the sneak and swarm tactics that you propose.

So, they would be looking at a very high investment with uncertain returns. When the announcement was made I was hoping it was a sort of a single-engine Fulcrum, a multi-role fighter to produce in good numbers. That would allow them to replace and standardize their current fleet (the f-5, f-4 and f-7) as it gets old and it could have some export potential. They must be having huge costs now to maintain all those different types of foreign-built planes.

I still don't see how something militarily useful could come out of this. To keep the United States away I would spend my money on quiet diesel submarines and the bomb.

Anyway, I will be happy to be proven wrong, I'm always happy to see a new kind of plane flying! :)

@Hoarsewhisperer: relax.

Posted by: z | Feb 6 2013 16:18 utc | 109

z (109)

Thanks for that at least entertaining link that might provide quite some information.

Not about the instrumentation. But about the intention behind that whole maneuver.
While I'll mainly focuss the Garmin system, the same holds true for other parts as well.

Here is what *I* (personally, subjectively) see:

A cockpit widely equipped with western electronics.

Before going into technical issues this tells me one thing: This is a fake. And it's target audience is nato, mainly the usa.

To assume that Iran would use american equipment for their military hardware seems ridiculous. If they needed anything from outside they would rather get it from Russia or, more probably, China who, what coincidence, is the leading producer of electronics anyway.

But then americans are arrogant and dumb; around 80% could not even roughly point to Irak on a globe. For them, what's not american isn't real, important or worthwhile. So, if one wanted to play games with the americans, one better used stuff with western, preferably american names on it.

As for reality Iran has a rather developed electronics industry and most of can be seen in that cockpit can be summed up as what you get in a modern Android Pad device. Chips with pretty everything needed for a cockpit (GPS/Glonass, xyz accelator sensors, etc.) are readily and cheaply available from chinese corporations and sure enough, Iran has no problem whatsoever to build the needed devices for a cockpit.

Concerning your other remarks, let me put it this way: I do *not* assume that they built anything new but rather that they reconsidered the Saeqeh and stripped it down. So, the technology and manufacturing are readily available.

Concerning the stealth technology some similar considerations are true. Yes, to reach the current us or Russian level were costly and technologically challenging. But do they need that?
They are almost certainly not looking to confront american jet fleets (with airplanes) nor are they interested in conquering countries far abroad.

Let me give you an example from another area. Newer intel chips have built-in features to speed up encryption. Now, if you were a major company that might be interesting. If, however, all you want is a firewall for your small company or even your home, that feature wouldn't be necessary; what you need could be done even by an Arm chip (as used in modern smartphones).

I think, if we want to understand the Iranian mil. reasoning we must leave the established and largely american influenced mind set (e.g. pissing contest, tech "leadership", etc.). This is even more true considering that the goals are extremely different in almost every major parameter. And so are the financial means, the industrial situation, etc.

The same 80:20 logic also holds true for the stealth features in my opinion. From what I know, you can quite some stealth effect by rather simple steps and materials (e.g. designing the air entry so as to hide the turbine blades and general forms of the plane).
You see, if an american ship has a distance of 25km from the iranian cost, a jet flying at 1500 km/h did that distance in 1 min. If 20 jets attacked that ship while 100 missiles were fired at it it's not that decisive whether during that 1 min you have 80% stealth or 100%. Don't forget: In the end stealth simply translates to cost and time (of detection and reactive measures).

And again: The Iranian will almost certainly follow a strategy that is very different from what we are used to.
An example: Rather that going for perfect stealth and whatnot I, as an Iranian strategist, might rather go for a rather simple way to control my missiles. That is: I'd have my (land based) missiles controlled by some standard (and probably not too sophisticated) means. BUT I would design the system so as to allow any of my jets to mark the target. That way I'd send (assume) 10 jets towards that enemy ship timed so as to arrive 10 or 20 seconds before my AS missiles. Any jet that was still alive would a) send the optimal target to the missiles (which would interpolate the slightly different coordinates) and b) fire off cheap saturation missiles to fool and keep busy the ships AD systems.

Sure, I will quite probably loose some cheap jets. But I would have an extremely high hit probabilty on an strategically important target at a cost that were, in terms of humans and material, insignificant compared to the enemies losses.

If you are going for american ships you don't need mm accuracy. It might sound provoking but when you think about it, it would be perfectly sufficient to have smartphone GPS capabilities. This is even more true when considering one major difference: americans (must) bet on high tech. Iranians would fight in *their* zone which they know and have brave men up to the point that kamikaze operation would be feasible.

All in all, I might sound crude but actually I think that the real 313 cockpit will be even simpler that what we see on those pictures. Because it suffices for the job at hand and has many advantages that are strategically more important (mass production, fast development, etc.)

Well, I might be dead wrong. After all, this is all speculation. But one point is certain in my minds eye: The Iranians are not stupid, quite the contrary, and they will not employ american thinking. They will have a surprise. And quite certainly more than one. (Hint: I do not at all believe that the Russians are that distanced from the Iranians as it sometimes seems ...)

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 6 2013 18:00 utc | 110

Mr Pragma @ 108.
My short-hand @ 104 seems to be producing more confusion than clarity. Just to be perfectly clear, my "You did" was a response to your final (quoted) statement. i.e. "I said I don't know about avionics."

I hope this helps.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 7 2013 1:27 utc | 111

Iran releases decryption footage from US' RQ-170 drone, with English subbies on the important parts! Watch it amazing details shown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd1Hl6mjqMM

Posted by: hans | Feb 7 2013 8:54 utc | 112

hans (112)

WOW! Very very nice!

So much for Iranians being but a bunch of pious retarded Muslims ....

Thanks, Hans

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 7 2013 14:14 utc | 113

112 :-)) if it is true what they are saying - and they do no seem to be joking this time - then the arrogant US fools had the whole life memory of the drone stored inside, must have been the same arrogant fools that made the present of stuxnet to Iran for improved use.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 7 2013 14:50 utc | 114

Iran mass produced Scan Eagle ( in two version )...

http://www.tabnak.ir/files/fa/news/1391/11/19/231267_681.jpg

http://www.tabnak.ir/files/fa/news/1391/11/19/231266_805.jpg

http://www.tabnak.ir/files/fa/news/1391/11/19/231268_923.jpg

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10248/Mohajer_Saieh_09.JPG

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10248/Mohajer_Saieh_05.JPG

and this pic is taken in 2010 !!!

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10248/Mohajer_Question_01.JPG

and this is intersting ... the first Combat UAV in history made by IRan during Iran Iraq war ... (mohajer 1 )

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10248/Mohajer_Jang_15.JPG

http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/10248/Mohajer_Jang_14.JPG

Posted by: End | Feb 7 2013 17:14 utc | 115

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/7/3964142/iran-stealth-forgery

If you read the comments people actually name the components in the cockpit and give the URLs where you can buy them.

You fools are too much. If b is the smartest one of your bunch, then I truly feel sad for the rest of you.

Posted by: Team America | Feb 11 2013 9:17 utc | 116

Team America... you're too much. Checked out the site and shouldn't you guys be studying for your geometry test or somethin'?

Posted by: DaveS | Feb 11 2013 12:48 utc | 117

تا کور شود هر آن که نتوان دید.

Posted by: hamid | Feb 12 2013 7:07 utc | 118

Team america

Didn't it occur to you that to kill americans there are no enemies or weapons needed? They themselves are their worst enemy and killers.

So, don't worry about b. He is at least smart enough not to pay for the guys who kill him.

Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Feb 12 2013 10:39 utc | 119