Iran unveils new fighter jet - Are you watching BIS?

[rksl-rock 1301]

Hi all

More information and critique here:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline//2013/02/irans-new-qaher-313-stealth-fi.html

Radar Cross section is being reported as being 0.025 m2 (0.269 sq ft) that is presumably without weapons or extra fuel tanks. It seems to be based on the Iranians home made and developed supersonic training aircraft. There is only a short video of the supposed aircraft in flight.

Interesting to compare the Qaher to the Saeqeh Fighter on which it is suposed to be based:

u-2CfS226h8[YOUTUBE]

I wonder how much the Iranians have learned from the US Drone they downed video here of it actualy being captured:

[YOUTUBE]Y08LHkl3ggs[YOUTUBE]

Clearly the Iranians had very good control of the hacked RQ-170 UAV suggesting they have already got descent UAV pilots and technology capable of controling UAVs to a serious level. Since they Hacked the UAVs controls it would suggest they are also able to put out flight control signals equal to and localy superior to what the USA was using then.

I wonder if the Qaher is a piloted mockup for a future drone aircraft. That would explain the small size. In such a case replacing the meat and its attendant support packages with fuel and weapons payload would make it a considerable threat.

Kind Regards walker

Ok the Saeqeh is derived from the F-5A owned by Iran in 1965. Its a very simple aircraft to make and maintain. It was afterall designed to be a very cheap and easy to manufacture export fighter for us in allied countries. It was originally designed in the 1950's. Structurally its not that advanced and the same goes for avionics. Aerodynamically its also very conventional by modern standards. So if the Q-313 is real (which i really doubt) and is derived from it (I would be surprised if it was) then they have come along way in understanding:

• Radar Absorbent Materials
  
• Composites Manufacture
  
• Aerodynamics of inherently unstable shapes
  
• Avionics
  
• Flight Controls
  
• Real time sensing for the controls and pilot feedback
  
• Thermodynamics
  
• Jet Engine development and design.
  

Probably another dozen or so other things too.

As for that UAV video... its not an RQ-170 in there. it look more like the Lockheed Polecat. A totally different beastie.

I would suggest either Iran is copying US designs with better success than China and Russia or they are Re-using Lockheed's own PR reels. :cool:

EDIT - Yup they are using Lockheed's own PR reels.

[YOUTUBE]Y2c9V71BRn8

Edited February 4, 2013 by RKSL-Rock

[Dwarden 1126]

ye but it's know they captured the drone by misleading it's navigation and GPS tracking,

so the drone operator landed it, but instead of landing it in correct base it landed in similar altitude field somewhere in Iran

typical mistake of UAV designs, no double or triple safety of location and actual behavior

[rksl-rock 1301]

ye but it's know they captured the drone by misleading it's navigation and GPS tracking,

so the drone operator landed it, but instead of landing it in correct base it landed in similar altitude field somewhere in Iran

It is claimed they "misleading it's navigation and GPS tracking" there is no proof. Leading defence commentators have suggested that its not really that likely given the sort of data links commonly used with UAVs but not impossible. It would seem more probable that the Drone was struck by an electrical or engine fault which caused it to "crash" or do a "no power recovery" auto landing (a common function used in testing in the event of a comms failure - I had an RC plane that did something similar locked the attitude and speed and just descended slowly until either it hit the ground with minimal damage regained signal.) and failed to self destruct.

A theory that logically seems to be supported by the way the "captured" drone was presented the public. They covered up the underside of the aircraft... so why do that if they hacked it and take complete control of the UAV? To hide the damage from a crash landing?

And don't confuse what Walker is showing as video of the RQ-170 being "captured"... its actually Lockheed Martin's test flight video of the Polecat research UAV in the US. Not the same thing at all. I'm sure if they also captured a Polecat (it was a research test bed not an active system) they would have been crowing about it earlier.

typical mistake of UAV designs, no double or triple safety of location and actual behavior

I'm not sure what makes you say that. I cannot imagine that Lockheed wouldn't provide some form of backups especially on a system like this. I know Thales and BAE Systems does.

It more likely that the failure or "hack" that led to the UAV going down prevented the backups kicking in. But the real time uplinks aren't perfect. PBS aired a documentary recently called Rise of the Drones, there is a sequence where a UAV operator managed to bank the aircraft (An MQ-9 Reaper) too sharply causing the satellite link to fail. It took a few seconds for the onboard systems to right the plane and re-establish the link. It corrected itself. I cannot imagine that a classified system with a "multispectral sensor" payload would not have a similar "return to base" capability.

My own opinion is that it suffered a catastrophic electrical failed and soft-crashed. The Iranians found it and decided to exploit it as a PR coup.

Now returning to the actual topic, look at the Q-313. Its being comprehensively debunked by aviation experts around the world as a Mockup and PR event for the domestic Iranian market despite Iran's media stating otherwise. Given this "evidence" that the Iranian government is willing to exaggerate its capability on this topic is it not logical even probable they might stretch the truth over the RQ-170?

I think it is.

EDIT:

[h=1]Israeli experts dismiss Iran's Qaher fighter claims[/h]Israeli experts say the "indigenous fighter jet" Iran presented on 2 February is nothing more than a "very sleek plastic model".

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/israeli-experts-dismiss-irans-qaher-fighter-claims-381841/

Edited February 4, 2013 by RKSL-Rock
Added extra link

[slatts 1978]

Speaking of UAV back ups and lose of connection, just don't do what we did...poor little orbiter tried to fly home from south Chad to Ireland

[metalcraze 290]

ye but it's know they captured the drone by misleading it's navigation and GPS tracking,

so the drone operator landed it, but instead of landing it in correct base it landed in similar altitude field somewhere in Iran

typical mistake of UAV designs, no double or triple safety of location and actual behavior

Clearly it was running that Battleye!

[Dwarden 1126]

BattlEye would detect it plus there would be BEGUIDposition tracking, second BE-GPS backup and BE-GLONASS backup not to mention BEterrain recognize and BEstar recognize

in short ... we're clever enough to add it into UAV's code ;)

[-Paladin- 10]

I think it's a light attack aircraft and probably doesn't require a powerful air to air radar.

Maybe its armed with snakbar longrange missels or suicde homing missels, who knows what they have planed in secret.

[max power 21]

Let's not go down the road of calling all muslims suicide bombers...

It just occurred to me that this thing looks like some american concept aircraft I remember seeing a while ago, like in the late 90s.

Maybe it's the x-36 I'm thinking about.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Max Power