So - if you were going to design a (real) combat aircraft for Iran...

[Avimimus]

...what would it be like?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

...what would it be like?

Limited to a 5,000 lbs J85 (with afterburner) knock off engine as they are I wouldn’t be doing anything different to trying to improve the F-5.

 

[Kryptid]

Are there any companies in Iran that make jet engines of any sort? Even for light, Learjet-type planes? Are there any countries outside of Iran currently willing to sell them small turbofans?

If they are limited to existing engines in their inventory, could they make a plane with 3 or 4 J85s to compete with larger fighters? Sounds bad for fuel consumption and maintenance, but you've gotta make use of what you can when resources are small.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Cruise missiles. Lots of them.

 

[Orionblamblam]

???

 

[chuck4]

Are there any companies in Iran that make jet engines of any sort? Even for light, Learjet-type planes? Are there any countries outside of Iran currently willing to sell them small turbofans?

If they are limited to existing engines in their inventory, could they make a plane with 3 or 4 J85s to compete with larger fighters? Sounds bad for fuel consumption and maintenance, but you've gotta make use of what you can when resources are small.

Bell developed a vtol fighter concept powered by 8 j85 engines, 6 providing thrust in level flight. If you really want a full sized fighter and j85 is all you have to work with, I suspect it is possible to do something like that, putting twin j85 in wing pods plus a pair of j85 in the fuselage. But I suspect Iranian design and testing capability is not advanced enough to support the development of a high performance fighter with unorthodoxed layout.

 

[RyanC]

Limited to a 5,000 lbs J85 (with afterburner) knock off engine as they are I wouldn’t be doing anything different to trying to improve the F-5.

1. Buy many WS-13 turbofans from CHINAAAAAA.
2. ???
3. PROFIT.
Yes, I know, currently the WS-13 is still fairly new; but give the Chinese a few years, and they'll be able to get it up to acceptable engine lifetime.

 

[Deino]

Sorry, but then would be much wiser to directly buy J-10, FC-1 or anything else from CHina .... if they are willing to sell !

 

[Abraham Gubler]

They must have at least 200 J79s sitting around in Iran both in and out of non flyable F-4s. So maybe they could build 200 F-5 copies powered by rebuilt J79s? Would make for a heavy, big arsed F-20. Better than most of their other, limited, options.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Cruise missiles. Lots of them.

Hmmm. I wonder if they've done any work in the area of propfans.

At the lower end of things, how good are their turboprops? If they can produce good ones in the 1,000 Horsepower range, they could do worse than get a license for the FMA IA 58 Pucará to form the basis of a CAS aircraft.

 

[hagaricus]

With all due respect to the knowledge of those posting in this topic, I think the idea of working with 20-30 year old tech & trying to "catch up" with more advanced nations is a futile excercise and certainly not what I'd be doing.

Rather than going through complicated issues of metalworking etc, I'd look at what are the best possible engine, avionics etc available off the shelf, and build something modern around those out of composites. Starting a 20th century production line in 2013 makes no sense. Computer power, software and composite building techniques are readily available, can be set up relatively cheaply, and if you're still stuck reinventing the wheel, at least it is this century's version of the wheel.

Just my .2c

 

[aam641]

What would be the purpose of the aircraft? Most missions would be better served by maintaining and upgrading F-5 and F-14. If they can't keep those aircraft in airworthy condition using new-built parts, there is no hope for any new design of similar performance. Stealth air superiority fighter is plain out of question.
[/size]
[/size]Stealth strike aircraft, something like 1/2 scale of F-117, might just be feasible. Plain aluminum air-frame, two small engines, a single guided bomb, GPS navigation, range around 400 nmi. A cruise missile would make more sense though, unless the supply of engines is limited.

 

[Steve Pace]

...what would it be like?

Why would you even consider the design of a 'real' combat aircraft for Iran, Avimimus? -SP

 

[chuck4]

If hot core is the main obstacle to Iranian manufacture of military engines, Iran may be to strip the hot cores out out of commercial turbofan engines, and either give it a new bypass fan, or just use the engine core as a straight turbojet. For this purpose they might be able to negotiate a deal for a substantial supply of commercial engines in the name of either supporting their existing civil fleet, or using a false front of a civil commercial jet project.

They would have to use totally different attached auxiliaries for the these engines. They may have the capacity to design and maunfacture engine auxiliaries. They may also use false fronts to get foreign firms to design and/or manufacture new attached engine auxiliaries for them, particularly if the foreign firm could have deniability. I am sure the Chinese would be more willing to make parts for engine auxiliaries for Iran than they would to actually sell engine cores, or complete engines, or fighters to Iran, which would have serious political reprecussions. If they just provide parts, especially if the parts come from several different firms, it may be hard to prove what their ultimate purpose really is.

 

[piko1]

if i was going design a (real) combat aircraft for Iran i would go with
tube like body just as MiG-21 with LERX low Trapezodial wing, 6 hard points and RD-93 Engine

the other i can think of is f-5 copycat

but they have JF-17 in production right now why they need new one ?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

JF-17 is China/Pakistan, not Iran. :

 

[Kryptid]

I might be shot for for saying this, but maybe something along the lines of the Qaher-313 could actually be made to work. I wouldn't pit it as a dogfighter by any means, but it could make a decent subsonic strike aircraft. Keep the main inlets on top for reducing returns from ground-based radar, but enlarge them enough to feed a decent engine. Go with a simple, non-afterburning turbofan if at all possible. I'd also put some auxiliary inlet doors on the lower fuselage to help supply air to the engines at moderate angles of attack. Keep it small to reduce costs (but make it large enough to fit a pilot comfortably). Build it out of relatively conventional materials to reduce cost further. Use planform alignment more extensively and some internal weapons bays. It would never be as stealthy as an F-22 or F-35, but it might be able to reach that of a clean F/A-18E/F.

 

[Justo Miranda]

If what it is required is the means to transport primitive nuclear weapons , Russians and Chinese still keep the B-29/ Tupolev Tu-4 plans... :-\

 

[chuck4]

I might be shot for for saying this, but maybe something along the lines of the Qaher-313 could actually be made to work. I wouldn't pit it as a dogfighter by any means, but it could make a decent subsonic strike aircraft. Keep the main inlets on top for reducing returns from ground-based radar, but enlarge them enough to feed a decent engine. Go with a simple, non-afterburning turbofan if at all possible. I'd also put some auxiliary inlet doors on the lower fuselage to help supply air to the engines at moderate angles of attack. Keep it small to reduce costs (but make it large enough to fit a pilot comfortably). Build it out of relatively conventional materials to reduce cost further. Use planform alignment more extensively and some internal weapons bays. It would never be as stealthy as an F-22 or F-35, but it might be able to reach that of a clean F/A-18E/F.

The thing did fly as an RC model, so it probably can be made to fly in full scale. Anything that can fly can be used in low intensity war.

But does Iran have the industrial ability to make it servicable in a medium or high intensity war?

 

[Madurai]

...what would it be like?

Why would you even consider the design of a 'real' combat aircraft for Iran, Avimimus? -SP

What else do we do here but consider designs?

 

[piko1]

JF-17 is China/Pakistan, not Iran. :

lol yes Paul you are absolutishe right i always think about Pakistan duno why
ah well i would stay with the F-7 relative described in my first post if i go for a strike aircraft i will go with redesign of the F-5

 

[Arjen]

...what would it be like?

Why would you even consider the design of a 'real' combat aircraft for Iran, Avimimus? -SP

What else do we do here but consider designs?

Ten exciting things you could do with your chainsaw but probably shouldn't come to mind.

 

[2IDSGT]

...what would it be like?

Use well-known VLO technology to build the lightest/simplest possible airframe that can carry a single anti-ship missile over a combat-radius of ~500nm. Just focus on those 3 requirements and you'll have a credible area-denial capability that won't cost much.

 

[Avimimus]

...what would it be like?

Why would you even consider the design of a 'real' combat aircraft for Iran, Avimimus? -SP

What else do we do here but consider designs?

Yes - simply the intellectual challenge. A war with Iran would be tragic (considering that the regime will change someday on its own) and investing in combat aircraft is largely a waste for said regime anyway.

 

[kcran567]

How about reverse engineering their f-4s and rewinging (pic reposted from another topic) it with an f-22 wing? some primitive flight control thrust vectoring. Or instead of the strange Q-313, why not go all the way and try to build a full on copy of the x-36. Paint it dark grey and call it a day.

 

[chuck4]

How about reverse engineering their f-4s and rewinging (pic reposted from another topic) it with an f-22 wing? some primitive flight control thrust vectoring. Or instead of the strange Q-313, why not go all the way and try to build a full on copy of the x-36. Paint it dark grey and call it a day.

I think the effort involved in integrating F-4 forward fuselage with an entirely new set of wings, empannage and rear fuselage would hardly be worth while. For little additoional effort one could get a whole new plane from ground up.

 

[kcran567]

It would take alot of work Chuck, but it seems like the Iranians like to do those kind of strange projects, like their endless tinkering with the f-5. How about an f-5 with an f-22 style tail and wing. At least it would look intimidating and advanced, and would be easier than the f-4. The Iranians could get some mileage out of that.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

If you're going to play with the F-5 then use Northrop's own ideas e.g. this enlarged wing/tail:

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Or the F-5S "Super Tiger"

 

[kcran567]

Thanks Overscan, those are great views. Saw the models of the Super Tiger on other thread, but that is a cool scan.

 

[quellish]

...what would it be like?

The thing is, Iran does not have much of a need for anything but recapitalizing their current force. Their current projects revolving around updated F-5 designs are probably doing a fine job of that. Their Air Force isn't used to project power far beyond their borders, and there is not significant evidence they are moving in that direction. Historically they have used...... other means to project power and influence outside their borders. At the end of the day, their needs do not justify anything more than recapitalized light fighters, which is where most of their effort is being spent.

But if I were designing a combat aircraft for Iran, it would probably be a lightweight prop using an automotive engine that can be produced locally. Something like a PC-9 or PC-6.

http://www.iranwatch.org/government/us-dod-reportmiliarypoweriran-0410.pdf

 

[Jemiba]

But if I were designing a combat aircraft for Iran, it would probably be a lightweight prop using an automotive engine that can be produced locally. Something like a PC-9 or PC-6.

To my opinion even smaller, lighter, simpler ! And produced in numbers, as big as possible. Remembering the way Iran fought against Iraq, I think, the main weapons
actually would be men (down to childrens age), equipped just with the absolute minimum of weapons. So, instead of building something fighter-like, why not
mass produce light aircraft, that could be hidden in barns, garages and other buildings, take-off from the street in front and attack, maybe just once?
Count von Rosen was relatively successful with that kind of air attacks in Biafra !

 

[Abraham Gubler]

To my opinion even smaller, lighter, simpler ! And produced in numbers, as big as possible. Remembering the way Iran fought against Iraq, I think, the main weapons
actually would be men (down to childrens age), equipped just with the absolute minimum of weapons. So, instead of building something fighter-like, why not
mass produce light aircraft, that could be hidden in barns, garages and other buildings, take-off from the street in front and attack, maybe just once?

It’s not a bad idea. The airborne IED.

Count von Rosen was relatively successful with that kind of air attacks in Biafra !

Things are a bit different fighting the USA than Nigera in the 1960s. But such a light aircraft could leverage vulnerabilities in the US ground force rather than be able to hit air bases.

Arm it with 68/70mm unguided rockets and a few salvos could do some serious damage to tanks and IFVs. Add some HMGs and you can strafe supply trucks and shoot down transport and naval helicopters. Napalm canisters and that’s death to infantry no matter how much body armour they have. Build/train 200 units per year and in five years you’ve got something that makes the IRGC Boghammers look like the bad joke they are.

Fortunately this kind of concept is anathema to dictatorships like the Iranian regime because it entrusts junior soldiers with combat power and decision making. Plus of course some discrete modifications to all those RCWS would make it them highly lethal air defence weapons against light aircraft. So ends the Iranian Minicon dream before it began…

 

[Grey Havoc]

Something like the Soko J-20 Kraguj, or something more on the lines of an ultralight?

 

[Jemiba]

Well, I was thinking of a kind of ULA, maybe build from welded steel tubing with fabric covering.
Wouldn't make any difference for the pilot, as a simple rifle bullet would go through a plastic fuselage
as well. Powered maybe VW car engine, that should be available quite easily and in numbers there,
too ?
Abrahams point about RCWS is viable, of course, but it would just depend on the numbers of "aircraft"
available for a single attack to reach saturation, I think. To what level training and equipping many
believers would contradict the principles of the Iranian leadership, I really don't know. How many people
in Iran would actually follow their leaders ? How hard would they be pressed ?
For this scenario, of course, a campaign "Donate your VW Gol for Allah !" could be started to get enough engines quickly ! :-\

 

[piko1]

Dear Jambia your idea sounds right a plane just with the size of Zlin-143 used by Tamil Tiger rebels that's one great idea by the way

 

[JeffTracy]

I'd suggest that the next time Mr. ArmadilloInADinnerJacket wants to impress his mates with a new stealth fighter he should first start a thread on Secret Projects.

He'd end up with something far more credible.

 

[mithril]

They must have at least 200 J79s sitting around in Iran both in and out of non flyable F-4s. So maybe they could build 200 F-5 copies powered by rebuilt J79s? Would make for a heavy, big arsed F-20. Better than most of their other, limited, options.

i would imagine that they are already using those engines though. either as spare parts for the still flyable F-4's, or as subjects of dissection and attempts at reverse engineering.

though the idea of a Tigershark clone is certainly something i could see them doing if they could get ahold of a source of engines.

 

[Grey Havoc]

From the old Light, fixed-wing anti-tank/ground attack aircraft projects thread, the Schapel SA-981 (h/t borovik):

Another source of inspiration from the same thread, the IA-55 training/ground attack aircraft project (h/t huey21ar and Retrofit):

The IA-51 COIN design might be too light for our purposes:

 

[riggerrob]

Thread number 4 suggest "cruise missiles, lots of them."
Let's face facts: the majority of progress has been in avionics. Even an F-5 - updated with a glass cockpit - is a viable dog-fighter. Too bad most opponents now have missiles that are reliable beyond visual range.
Cruise missile air frames are expendable, so can be built small and cheap.
Small and medium-sized turbo-fans can be "borrowed" from business jets and commuter airliners. The longer the range, the more difficult they are to predict and defeat.

The secret is in the software.
As I was discussing with a bus maintenance engineer last week ... we can print electrical connectors on our home 3D printers, but the expensive part is the software.
Tehran's theocracy would rather that software was only accessible to a handful of "faithful" software engineers. Forget about GPS guidance because the USAF will scramble those signals the second Iran launches the first cruise missile. Perhaps guidance needs to combine GPS, GLONAST, Eurosat, the Chinese equivalent, inertial navigation, terrain mapping radar, etc. all comparing signals to chose the most accurate. Magnetic navigation is rapidly becoming obsolete with recent shifts in the magnetic north pole.