• Iran unveils really weird looking fighter jet
    178 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sparkwire;39445491]weird looking? more like awesome[/QUOTE] It looks awesome in much the same way that Jeneane Garafolo looks fuckable.
[QUOTE=Brandy92;39458195]Drones are fucking shit compared to the F35 anyway.[/QUOTE] They have completely different missions and roles. They are literally non-comparable. [editline]3rd February 2013[/editline] Also, I do not think that this aircraft would have any sort of stealth capability. There are way too many rounded surfaces on the aircraft for it to be stealth capable.
I wonder if Iran got an bits of the stealth helicopter that crashed in Pakistan
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;39458132]look for yourself, dude. I was there too. 56 winners by the way, 0 disagrees or dumbs. RQ170-[URL]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1145235[/URL] ScanEagle-[URL]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1230388&highlight=Iran+drone[/URL][/QUOTE] There was several threads. It's in these threads where the "toy" / "low tech" posts started appearing. [URL]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1146300[/URL] [URL]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1147010[/URL]
Who Knows? [IMG]http://upload.tehran98.com/img1/brzvqle5bodk5wm58r7.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=laserguided;39445494]it has frog legs..[/QUOTE] Its Amphibious!
Looks awesome but I am 100% sure it can barely be called a 4th generation aircraft. The wings are too tiny and only suitable for flying on super sound speeds which is not that good, since most modern jet fighters have dynamic wing shape. With such tiny wings it's hard to control the jet on speed less then sound speed. But tbh better wait to get some real details when it's presented, I might be wrong. Maybe they found a way to fix the problem. But look at MIG-29's huge wings really.
Aaaah I get it now Supposed to look like a turtle
At least they tried. V:v:V
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;39458976]Looks awesome but I am 100% sure it can barely be called a 4th generation aircraft. The wings are too tiny and only suitable for flying on super sound speeds which is not that good, since most modern jet fighters have dynamic wing shape. With such tiny wings it's hard to control the jet on speed less then sound speed. But tbh better wait to get some real details when it's presented, I might be wrong. Maybe they found a way to fix the problem. But look at MIG-29's huge wings really.[/QUOTE] To be honest I really don't think it's meant to be comparable to high end aircraft. It's most likely in the same vein as a number of other smaller aircraft which are fairly good for small nations and if they can price it right it could actually be a pretty good hit for a number of asian and african countries who want their own airforce but cannot afford most newer aircraft. Like I've said probably in a role not dissimilar to the L-159 which is not exactly a bad aircraft, it's quite good for it's price.
[QUOTE=Brandy92;39458195]Drones are fucking shit compared to the F35 anyway.[/QUOTE] Which ones have had more successful missions?
[QUOTE=Brandy92;39458195]Drones are fucking shit compared to the F35 anyway.[/QUOTE] Why do people always base their opinions on shit off cosmetics.
i don't get this pointless expensive dick-waving. they've already got f14s and mig29s
[QUOTE=jeimizu;39446271]South Korea just uses American aircraft in their air force anyway. I'm not sure they're the best measure of aerospace success. edit: forgot about the T-50 This one appears to be based on the Shafaq [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkwLw9lqzXY[/media][/QUOTE] That doesn't look like a near exact clone of the F-18 or anything.
[QUOTE=CommieTurtle;39460996]That doesn't look like a near exact clone of the F-18 or anything.[/QUOTE] Who said it did? Unless you're implying it does, which it doesn't because its completely different.
It's just our drone with some extra panels and a cockpit on it.
I still think the F-18 Super Hornet wins in looks for best looking jet.
[QUOTE=O'Neil;39462367]I still think the F-18 Super Hornet wins in looks for best looking jet.[/QUOTE] It's definitely my favorite aesthetics-wise.
I'd put the Dassault Rafale in for best looks. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/bEAta2ll.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;39456929]Waging conventional warfare and working a counter insurgency are two entirely different things. The US, China, and Russia would each be able to absolutely crush the Iranian military through both superior numbers and technology. The Iranians might have decent engineers, but if you think anything manufactured by Iran can come close to competing with the 60 years of experience, testing, competition, and warfare which countries like the USA, Russia, Britain, German and other European nations you're sadly mistaken. Not to mention there's a hell of a lot more that goes into stealth than just how the plane looks. It might have some features which resemble that of western stealth fighters but I can guarantee it doesn't have anywhere near the same radar profile reduction. Additionally an RPG-7 is only a threat to infantry and light vehicles like the HUMVEE. They just glance off modern NATO MBTs and I'm sure as hell the Russians have developed countermeasures for them.[/QUOTE] The Iranians still have American-built Tomcats. That is to say, they have already a fighter that is fairly comparable to our F-15s and F-16s, and there's nothing stopping them from reverse-engineering and improving on the design. That is definitely a technological edge that the Chinese, for example, don't have. Again, they don't have to be able to kill F-22s in a one-on-one. They don't have to be able to take on the entire might of the US military. They just have to provide a credible threat, an outside possibility that a carrier could get hit with an ASGM, a FOB destroyed, or a strike jet shot down, because that would be enough to make the West think twice before invading. It may not be up to the same standards as NATO planes but this 'lol it will crash XD' bullshit, suggesting that it won't fly or must be fake solely because it's Iranian, is blind nationalism at its finest.
[QUOTE=Ridge;39464230]I'd put the Dassault Rafale in for best looks. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/bEAta2ll.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Flankers look the best overall. They're smooth all around.
GDI firehawk reporting [img]http://www.cultzone.com.br/artigos/img/cc3/85433-20-CC3TWpcRENDgdiFirehawkWM.jpg[/img]
So this jet hasn't been confirmed as fake or anything yet? When it is, just remember I called it
[QUOTE=Falubii;39445512]It wouldn't last very long.[/QUOTE] You've got a degree in Aeronautical engineering?
[QUOTE=catbarf;39464334]The Iranians still have American-built Tomcats. That is to say, they have already a fighter that is fairly comparable to our F-15s and F-16s, and there's nothing stopping them from reverse-engineering and improving on the design. That is definitely a technological edge that the Chinese, for example, don't have. Again, they don't have to be able to kill F-22s in a one-on-one. They don't have to be able to take on the entire might of the US military. They just have to provide a credible threat, an outside possibility that a carrier could get hit with an ASGM, a FOB destroyed, or a strike jet shot down, because that would be enough to make the West think twice before invading. It may not be up to the same standards as NATO planes but this 'lol it will crash XD' bullshit, suggesting that it won't fly or must be fake solely because it's Iranian, is blind nationalism at its finest.[/QUOTE] I'd hardly consider the F-14 comparable to the F-15 and F-16, I love the plane but there's a reason it has been completely phased out of service. Additionally the tomcat is 40 years old. There's really not much they're going to be able to gain from reverse engineering them, unless they were working on improved copies, but considering the air frame of their new fighter and its overall size, it isn't even using Tomcat engines. The key difference between the Chinese and the Iranians is that they have the money, the power, the experience, and the education to produce decent aircraft as they have access to much more modern technology and they have a lot more resources to spend on the military than Iran does. The Chinese may not have access to US Tomcats but they have plenty of experience with Russian planes. And you don't seem to understand, in its current state, this jet doesn't prove even the slightest threat to a Western or even Russian air force. We're more likely to lose aircraft in accidents or crew error than we are to this piece of junk. As far as modern air superiority works, its all about hitting the enemy before they can even see you. It would be stupid to expect the Iranian aircraft to come even close to targeting modern US and NATO aircraft before being taken out by AA missiles from aircraft the Iranians can't even see. The engagement range in modern air to air combat is such that NATO planes are going to be able to shoot them down before the Iranians can even see them. I'm not implying that it'll crash or that it's just fake, in all likelihood it's a mediocre airplane which isn't going to hold a candle to anything made since 1970. [editline]Edit[/editline] I also forgot, the Iranians have F-14A's manufactured in Iran, American design, but not American made.
Gotta love all the armchair aeronautical engineers in this thread [quote]I doubt this thing can fly[/quote] Seriously? I am completely baffled by posts such as these. [editline]4th February 2013[/editline] because obviously a facepuncher with a calculator at hand knows more about the plane than the people designing and building it
^ Hook line and stinker
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Du4m4VJ.jpg[/thumb] Courtesy of /k/. The body is fiberglass and the avionics are from a Cessna.
[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;39467744][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Du4m4VJ.jpg[/IMG] Courtesy of /k/. The body is fiberglass and the avionics are from a Cessna.[/QUOTE] When Iran announced it they already said this was a conceptual prototype design and that the video is a toy scaled down. These news articles are misleading.
[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;39466252]I'd hardly consider the F-14 comparable to the F-15 and F-16, I love the plane but there's a reason it has been completely phased out of service. [B]Additionally the tomcat is 40 years old.[/B] There's really not much they're going to be able to gain from reverse engineering them, unless they were working on improved copies, but considering the air frame of their new fighter and its overall size, it isn't even using Tomcat engines.[/QUOTE] Just as an aside I think it should be noted that the F-15 and F-16 are almost as old. Just because the equipment is old doesn't mean it's bad. I know a lot of people like to go "Haha the Russians are still using Cold War equipment!" but if you look at most of the U.S. arsenal it was originally designed and/or produced in the late 1960's and 1970's. That being said you're right, the Iranians don't really have much to gain from studying the F-14's they have anymore as they haven't had the luxury of continuously being upgraded to keep up with the times like our equipment.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.