Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Otto von Pickelhaube

Iran unveils 'stealth' fighter

105 posts in this topic

This is the opinion of the experts, as reported in Wiki the Pedia:

"A prototype version of the Qaher-313 has been portrayed to have test-flown at some point before the presentation.[9] According to the head of the design team two sub-sized models have been created and tested. One of the models uses a propeller engine while the other uses a small micro jet engine.[10] The models were shown in a video clip (along with descriptions by the head of the design team) the same day.[11] According to Haaretz, the "blurry video published by the Iranians purporting to show the Qaher 313 in flight seems to show not a manned fighter jet but a small radio-operated drone."[6]"

Flight Global noted that the Qaher-313 resembles the Boeing Bird of Prey prototype, but with a more faceted design similar to the 1970s-era Lockheed Have Blue that was developed into the now retired F-117 Nighthawk. Flight Global also said, "given the apparent small size of the aircraft and its single engine design, the Qaher 313 could be powered by reverse engineered variants of the General Electric J85 turbojet that Iran is known to have in its possession." Iran has General Electric J85s as a result of old Northrop F-5s in its inventory.[8]

Israeli experts doubt the Iranian claims, saying the fighter presented was nothing more than a "very sleek plastic model." They note that the canopy appears to be constructed of "basic plastic," and its engine air intakes are unusually small. They say it gives the impression of plastic parts pasted to an old flying platform. The cockpit and ejection seat seem real, but the Qaher-313 displayed seemed too small to be a capable fighter. Video footage showing the plane airborne could have been a radio-controlled model aircraft."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaher_313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt look stealthy to me. I concur with the comment that it is a mimic of the F22.

People seem to think that stealth makes a plane invisible to radar. It doesnt. It merely makes it much harder to detect and maintain the signal. Another issue is that stealth aircraft are not fast simply because of the drag imposed by the design. Stealth is a trade off between speed and agility vs detectability at long range. Personally I would take a lot of fast agile fighters vs a (very) few stealthy ones (due to very high costs)

At some point, high tech becomes a losing proposition when you are fighting an actual war. The more complex a machine the less its servicability and a non servicable plane is just so much expensive metal. Look at the old warhorse B52... designed in the 50's and still going strong. Reliable, robust and a proven combat performer. Is the F35 going to be a diamond or a lump of coal?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt look stealthy to me. I concur with the comment that it is a mimic of the F22.

People seem to think that stealth makes a plane invisible to radar. It doesnt. It merely makes it much harder to detect and maintain the signal. Another issue is that stealth aircraft are not fast simply because of the drag imposed by the design. Stealth is a trade off between speed and agility vs detectability at long range. Personally I would take a lot of fast agile fighters vs a (very) few stealthy ones (due to very high costs)

At some point, high tech becomes a losing proposition when you are fighting an actual war. The more complex a machine the less its servicability and a non servicable plane is just so much expensive metal. Look at the old warhorse B52... designed in the 50's and still going strong. Reliable, robust and a proven combat performer. Is the F35 going to be a diamond or a lump of coal?

I recently read that the F-22 has to be recoated with a material every so many hours of flight time for it to remain stealthy. I don't recall the details but it sounded like some high tech form of paint that helped with "dampening" return. In a real combat situation this could cause issues with effectiveness and availability that could be unacceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once read that they didn't keep the B-2 out in the rain for much the same reason, although I don't know how true that might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently they're building UFOs over there, and this is what they come up with for their own military?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, "flying saucers".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once read that they didn't keep the B-2 out in the rain for much the same reason, although I don't know how true that might be.

I vaguely recall that we lost a 117 Stealth fighter in the Bosnia intervention and it was traced to rain/bad weather reducing the stealth effect. AFAIK it's the only one ever shot down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt look stealthy to me. I concur with the comment that it is a mimic of the F22.

:huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently read that the F-22 has to be recoated with a material every so many hours of flight time for it to remain stealthy. I don't recall the details but it sounded like some high tech form of paint that helped with "dampening" return. In a real combat situation this could cause issues with effectiveness and availability that could be unacceptable.

No, an F-22 is already stealthy by aggregate of design. Decreasing its radar cross section even more is a matter of policy not necessity for the technology to work. There is no one secret that produces "stealth", it's a multitude of design considerations that work together synergistically yet simultaneously unconducive to performance, analogous to armor plating on a tank. And contrary to a previous claim, it is invisible to radar such that a radar is going to hit on so many signals it results in vectoring pilots to intercept birds and insects. When you're lost in the noise of the environment, you're invisible.

This Iranian jet is obviously just a prototype. The most noteworthy thing I see about its design is the severe anhedral on the main wings, making this design extremely unstable. They were obviously trying to go for maximum maneuverability...it appears extremely likely to me that this is just a platform to test new technologies they'll incorporate into a future design intent to produce for service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, an F-22 is already stealthy by aggregate of design. Decreasing its radar cross section even more is a matter of policy not necessity for the technology to work. There is no one secret that produces "stealth", it's a multitude of design considerations that work together synergistically yet simultaneously unconducive to performance, analogous to armor plating on a tank. And contrary to a previous claim, it is invisible to radar such that a radar is going to hit on so many signals it results in vectoring pilots to intercept birds and insects. When you're lost in the noise of the environment, you're invisible.

This Iranian jet is obviously just a prototype. The most noteworthy thing I see about its design is the severe anhedral on the main wings, making this design extremely unstable. They were obviously trying to go for maximum maneuverability...it appears extremely likely to me that this is just a platform to test new technologies they'll incorporate into a future design intent to produce for service.

I couldn't remember where I saw the article but here is a piece on how the coating for the F-35 is being used on the F-22 to reduce maintenance costs and time out of service.

http://www.paintsquare.com/news/?fuseaction=view&id=5424

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may as well just give up, Obama. last week it was a Submarine, now it's the Dominant 313.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-21307208

I wonder if it uses Keshe antigravity technology?

The Americans dont have a stealth fighter capable of carrier operations.

Something tells me Iran just won the race to build their N-bomb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americans dont have a stealth fighter capable of carrier operations.

Something tells me Iran just won the race to build their N-bomb

So if we can't safely bomb Iran from carrier jets, they'll finish their nuke? If the most offensive weapons in our military lose their edge, maybe our policies and Presidents who think they're Kings will too.

We seemed to lose our three major technological advantages during the Clinton administration....we gave our space cards away to the Russians, our nuclear cards away to China, our stealth cards away to Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americans dont have a stealth fighter capable of carrier operations.

Something tells me Iran just won the race to build their N-bomb

I really don't think that (even if they were to lose use of all the land bases within reach) would deter them too much, since they could use b-2s, if Stealth really was essential; although I don't think the Iranian air defenses'd be so formidable as to make that the only way they could penetrate Iranian airspace in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think that (even if they were to lose use of all the land bases within reach) would deter them too much, since they could use b-2s, if Stealth really was essential; although I don't think the Iranian air defenses'd be so formidable as to make that the only way they could penetrate Iranian airspace in any case.

Typically such an onslaught has begun by saturation of AAA site by cruise missiles. Between that and electronic/computer interference the enemy is usually blind from the outset.

I have no problem with Iran building all the toys they like, short of one that can be used to strangle the world's economy if they choose to.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can it still be termed as stealthy now that everyone has seen it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American air power is so much more then anything Iran has on the table. I remember the dismantling of a few infrastructures without losing much more then a plane here and there during our "war on terror". Look back at what happened to Serbia/Bagdhad due to American air power for a good example of being blinded by our systems. Its definitely one of our specialties.

Missing and hitting civilians not so good however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can it still be termed as stealthy now that everyone has seen it?

Western media is starting to say its not even real just like the Monkey launch. So who knows whats really going on. Things that make you go hmmmm.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American air power is so much more then anything Iran has on the table. I remember the dismantling of a few infrastructures without losing much more then a plane here and there during our "war on terror". Look back at what happened to Serbia/Bagdhad due to American air power for a good example of being blinded by our systems. Its definitely one of our specialties.

Missing and hitting civilians not so good however.

Not perfect surely. But compared to 30 years ago it's a totally different order of accuracy. The damage that used to require fleets of aircraft to accomplish on a target can now be done with a few sorties of tens of aircraft versus hundreds. In the last Gaza dustup they had tailored specific bomb sizes to take out targets that were within meters of civilians that killed only those targeted and not the civilians. So that aspect is getting better all the time. But if one goes to war, innocents will die.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks cheap lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no expert in military aircraft, however I have flown and built Radio Control aircraft and helicopters for the last ten years at club level. The pictures are not great but looking at it I would say it is a small aircraft, ie about 20 inches long but maybe up to 50 flying close to the ground and fairly slow rather than a large aircraft flying higher and faster. Note there is also no heat haze behind the engine and no sign of combustion.

I am 99% sure it is R/C using an EDF (electric ducted fan). I think the model has gone through various stages of development as it was filmed and tested before using a propeller. This is something easy to do for models due to the high power to weight ratio regardless of propulsion method but I cannot see the point in doing this on a full sized plane. Why would you do it? A propeller would ruin it's stealth capabilities so it would be useless for testing that and the flight characteristics would change majorly if you are using a prop and engine so it would be useless for testing flight performance.

This video will show you how an EDF performs.

http://www.dailymoti...ch#.URDciqWZalg

Looking at the full size aircraft I have also noticed another problem. To maintain Stealth weapons need to be kept in internal bays. The size of this thing would either suggest it wouldn't be stealthy once loaded or has a pathetic payload.

Edited by skookum
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Western media is starting to say its not even real just like the Monkey launch. So who knows whats really going on. Things that make you go hmmmm.

I think the chief purpose of all of this is to demonstrate that the sanctions aren't working.

Looking at all the evidence in this video clip, a hoax is possible. It flies like an RC in the video (or a small craft with severe anhedral, but maybe that's just part of the ruse to explain its sloppy flight). and there's curiously only a few edited fly-bys (that could have been cherry picked for looking the best). Then the full size dummy in the hangar is just painted aluminum and wood with a shaped glass canopy. If we could have seen the thing take off, land, see the avionics light up, hear the engine start, anything like that would have reasonably disproved a hoax. If there's no other evidence that confirms this thing is real, I'm going to believe its fake on the OP "evidence".

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this pretty much settles it:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/jad_that_not_gonna_fly_KDsQFz2eU4EdWOsiylHUwJ

“It looks like the Iranians dumped some rudimentary flight controls and an ejection seat into a shell molded in what they thought were stealthy angles,” reporter John Reed wrote in the journal Foreign Policy.

“It looks like it might make a noise and vibrate if you put 20 cents in,” joked Andrew Davies of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. “I can see (almost) how North Korea gets away with transparent nonsense due to isolation, but Iran has a population that’s much more switched on and connected, at least in the cities.

On the upside, they could probably mass produce a lot of them fairly quickly.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is so obviously phony I can't believe anyone thinks it is real. The cockpit is just thin plexiglas and there are no calfax fittings anywhere, nor are there any panels. It is a big fiberglass model. Utter nonsense.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is so obviously phony I can't believe anyone thinks it is real. The cockpit is just thin plexiglas and there are no calfax fittings anywhere, nor are there any panels. It is a big fiberglass model. Utter nonsense.

Thats the thing! Its not real! For one thing the jet is way too smal to be an affective fighter, I see no sign of any internal weapons bay, how much feul could this thing carry? Hardly anything, the nose is way too small there isnt any space for radar.

Although this could be just a show peice and not the real thing.......if the real thing exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can find a market for it though. The Radio Control model seems to handle well and is different. If the Iranians have 50 units available I am interested in buying.

Whats the betting they are made in China and sold over Ebay :td:

A few units of their Keshe built UFO would go well in my model shop as well

Edited by skookum
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.