FedaykinI gotta agree about using the GR.5 airframe for the Sea Vixen. Seems like a perfect fit. With the success of the AV-8B+, they probably wish they had done something like that now.
Regarding the gun I don’t see how you can not get a gun to work. How long have guns been around? Why not use the same gun as used on the GR.3 and Sea Harrier? Does it have to be an all-new design? Just doesn’t make any sense….
I hope somebody wises up and puts a gun back on the GR.9. It just seems wrong for it to not have one…..
Regarding AIM-9 rails on USMC Harriers I didn’t understand that either. Would make the air-to-air loadout much better anyway. Imagine an AV-8B+ with four AIM-120, two AIM-9, and two tanks plus gun. Not bad………
The Sea Vixen fitted to the FA2 has a far better performance than the APG66 fitted to the AV8B+ so it certainly would of been a good fit for the GR5 with a good export potential.
The ADEN 25 had numerous problems the main one being it couldn’t meet the weight requirements placed on it. Retaining the 30mm ADEN fitted to the GR3 was considered but rejected. The Sea Harrier retained the capability to use the 30mm weapon. Funnily the ADEN 25 used the same ammunition as the GAU12.
FedaykinThey would have had no reason to axe it at all, if it’d had been a GR.5 airframe modded for Blue Vixen. The mod could then have been carried forward, & we’d now have GR.9s with Blue Vixen, instead of the navy having to make do with radarless GR.9s on its carriers. IIRC, the reasons were supposed to be a combination of the cost of maintaining the FA.2s, with their old spec, worn-out, airframes and out-of-date engines, & their inadequate performance compared to the RAFs newer ones.
NB. The RAFs Harriers have been going to sea since 1982, so when you say navalising the airframe wouldn’t have been out of the question, you’re a bit behind the curve. 😀
Actually, fitting the Blue Vixens from retired FA.2s to RAF Harriers was considered, but rejected on cost grounds after a feasibility study. Necessary airframe mods were quite extensive. Bah! Build some new ones, I say!
Yes all crazy really!
To fit the Sea Vixen into the FRS1 airframe required a fuselage stretch to cram all the avionics in. They still needed to build 18 new airframes the last of which was delivered during 1997!
Whilst they were trying to cram all this into an old small airframe the larger more powerful AV8B/GR5 was well into production. I do conceed fitting Sea Vixen to the GR5 would of been expensive but ultimately wiser.
FedaykinI just don’t get why Iran hasn’t purchased a large number of Flankers? 😮
I think Iran is mulling oer the fact that Flankers alone will not be enough of a defense against Israels air force.
I think they will want to look towards a comprehensive update of their entire air defence network including Radars, SAMS and possibly AEW & C. On top of this tankers and integration of the various air defence assets will be needed. A sizeable purchase of late model Mig-29s and Su-27s to top this all off along with modern training aircraft will then be realistic. On top of all this more conventinally armed IRBMs to act as a quick reaction deterrant to Israel and America.
This is all expensive so will take some time, but the recent purchase of TOR could be the first move in that direction.
FedaykinThanks for clarification on the RAF Harrier TIALD location. Seems like I’ve seen that before, but I just totally forgot that’s where they put it. I’m disappointed in the RAF for taking the gun away from the Harrier. Seems stupid to have an attack jet and one so well suited for close support, to not have a gun. What’s wrong with the head honchos over there?
I hope you’re right about the Litening pod being repositioned. It just makes more logical sense to put the thing on the centerline hardpoint…..that hardpoint seems to be rarely used anyway.
It wasn’t so much the RAF taking away the gun from the Harrier then the 25mm ADEN intended for the GR5 never worked properly. Personally I feel when they realised that the gun was a dud they should of obtained a licenced built GAU12 instead.
The thing that I find so frustrating is the decision during the 80’s to upgrade the Sea Harrier to FA2 standard when the more obvious solution would of been to fit the Sea Vixen to the GR5 airframe allowing a more upgradeable solution in the long term. Considering the GR5 was in development and then production arround the same time as the decision to upgrade the Sea Harrier it all seems a bit strange. Navalising the GR5 airframe wouldn’t of been out of the realms of proberbility considering the Americans (and later the Italians and Spanish) regularly take the equivalent AV8B to sea.
With a GR5 based Sea Harrier for the navy the MOD would of had less excuse to axe this vital component from the Royal Navy. All this bussiness about not requiring a fleet defence fighter is Bollards! its just an excuse to save a few pennies!
FedaykinI’ve never met the guy personally. It’d be kinda hard to do since we’re a few thousand miles apart 😀
Can’t you jump into your F-15 parked up on your drive and pop over? 😀
FedaykinJ10 is not publicly revealed, only could we see its debut in the coming zhuhai airshow 2006, then we were able to talk its export availability. Otherwise, J10 is just a water too far to quench the nearest thirst
I think with Pakistan stating that J10 is on the cards its not unrealistic to see it being made available to Iran.
But I think it is a mute point as Iran is becoming far closer to Russia when it comes to defense expenditure. Also it has been rumered that Iran was never satisfied with the J7’s in service with them.
Any J10 production initially will be targeted at the PLAAF first with the PAF maybe considering a purchase between 2010 and 2015. I will be interested to see if the J11 will be made available on the export market once China has the WS10 and indigenous avionics sorted out.
FedaykinGood points!
National pride always muddies the waters.
FedaykinThanks for taking the time out to write such a well detailed and researched answer. I’m convinced you’re right.
So, in effect iran cannot mint new tomcats.
Thanks PLA-MKII, it seemed worth while to put things into context and quote Mike Spick.
Replacing the AWG-9 would be quite problematic considering this Radar is very much a system. Alot of avionics to run this radar is spread accross the airframe. There would have to be a great degree of rewiring and inclusion of ballast to accomodate a new radar system, which is probably why Iran decided to not replace this Radar in the end.
I think its fair to say that the Tomcats days are numbered in Iranian service and a suitable replacement is being actively searched for. It will probably be between the Chinese J10 and the Russian Su-27 with the latter having the advantage due to the recent defence packages sourced from Russia.
The problem for Iran is developing a credible defence against America and more importantly Israel is probably out of their means which is why there has been such an investment in IRBM’s. Iran needs to have a credible retalitory deterrant.
FedaykinFedaykin I think thats a good point. However, do u think they could make a “make do” box that could fly in ground configured pre set settings?
Also I want everyone’s opinion on what russian / chinese radar they could put inside the tomcats, so as to be able to fire russian BVRAAMS
I had to dig out Mike Spick’s excellent book ‘Modern Warplanes’ before I composed this answer. Firstly here is a quote from the book:
…One of the obvious applications of titanium in a variable sweep wing aeroplane is the wing carry-through box, which holds the pivots. This is inevitably a large and heavy structure which needs great strength to carry the in-flight loads. The corresponding item in the F-111 had been made of steel, part welded and part bolted together. Bolting is an excellent way of connecting things, but it does introduce discontinuities, as the stresses and strains are taken by the bolt holes. Suffice it to say that the F-111 experianced a few problems with its wing box assembly, and to avoid this, Grumman elected not only to manufacture the structure from titanium, but to produce an all-welded assembly. So large a component had never before been made from titanium, but the rewards, in the form of a 900lb (408Kg) weight saving over the same product in steel, was great. The weight reduction also reduced the fuel load needed to meet mission requirements.
The wing box assembly was a large structure, 22ft (6.71m) long, made up of 35 sub assemblies, which had to be carefully aligned before being placed in a vacuum chamber for electron-beam (EB) welding. For the production of the F-14, Grumman invested heavily in EB welding machines, five in all, including two of the biggest in the Western world. The largest was 32ft x 10ft (9.76m x 3.05m) and was capable of welding titanium wing planks 26ft (7.93m) long, while the machine used to weld the wing carry-through boxes measured 25ft x 11ft x 9ft (7.62m x 3.35m x 2.74m). The vacuum chamber is necessary to maintain the high energy levels needed (60,000 volts), and to prevent atmospheric contamination of the weld. With the components in position, the chamber is evacuated, and the machine operator uses a telescope to track the thin seam line of the joint.
Seventy welds are needed on each wing box assembly, and the machine is capable of operating at speeds of up to 60in (152.4cm) per minute. The energy of the electron beam is focussed on a spot roughly 1/8in (3mm) wide, and can penetrate up to 2.5in (63.5mm) of titanium at a single pass. The resulting weld is very narrow, very strong, causes hardly any distortion, and needs little cleaning up on completion. The F-14 had its share of problems, but the wing box was not one of them. So strong is it, that following the crash of the first prototype, the component was recovered intact from the wreck and put to use as a test fixture….
Considering all this you should start to see the issue for Iran if it tried to put a reverse engineered version of the F-14 into production. Including the wing box 25% of an F-14s structure is titanium to save weight and add strength. Irans aero structures industry is unlikely to have the capability to build major titanium structures and for that matter equivalents in steel. If they did produce Steel equivalents they would be too heavy and understrength for use in the F-14 (which should anwser your suggestion PLA-MkII).
Iran more than likely canablise major structures from stored airframes to keep the rest in service and any new structure construction is probably limited to aluminium or simple steel.
If Iran wants a new fighter in this class there first port of call will more then likely be Russia especially as that country has now lifted its self imposed ban on the sale of advanced weapons to the former country. Iran has expressed a serious interest in the Su-27 in recent years and I can see this type (or possibly the Su-30) being the most likely replacement for the venerable F-14.
FedaykinI agree with that, SteveO.
But in France we don’t know how preserving our aviation, including historic planes. As you know, Great Britain and USA perfectly manage to preserve their warbirds, including flying old supersonic jets such as Sea Vixens or even F-100.In France, a law was passed recently about “homeland security” by Sarkozy (our hatred minister). This law considered old warbirds as weapons, and they were prohibited flying!
Collectioners (people who have warbirds… I don’t now the english word) have to fought against the ministry to earn the right to fly their machines…
That’s why you will never saw an old Mirage III or Crusader flying in a French meeting…and also that’s why so many Mirage III or Caravelle were found in scrapyard and just avoid scrapping.
Wow a ‘Hatred’ minister! That sounds cool… 😀
P.S.
Love that model! it almost looks real.
FedaykinNevertheless those images show a significant improvement in Chinese avionics.
The most critical requirement for the JH-7A program is the introduction of uprated engines.
FedaykinGoogle … all hail! Thanks HH.
I remember how a 2 USAF F-16 (moose was one of them) pilots posted pics they had taken and gave out a lot of information (about the capabilities of the F-16, Su-30 MKI, their pilots, opinions etc ) after participating in the Cope India 2006 air exercises on the f-16.net forum and a few hours later all his posts and exclusive pics were removed and the webmaster gave a reason that sounded something like high level intervention from governmental agencies was the reason for his posts to be deleted.
I would not be surprised if something like that is the case here as well … and that’s perhaps why the webmaster is reluctant to give out any reasons for the closure of the forums.
The threads on China and Russia had truckloads of leaked pictures posted … which give vast insights about their forces and their equipment. Ditto for the threads on some other countries as well.
My guess is that the forums were closed by external intervention as it endangered the security of a nation/nations.
Then why is the Aviation forum still open?
This is just the webmaster being stupid!
FedaykinPAKDEF.INFO : SAAB 2000/Erieye Update
Seven Saab 2000 aircrafts, all former airliners have been thoroughly refurbished by Saab and the installation of a strut-mounted EMS Erieye radar on one aircraft’s spine is almost completed. The hot-and-high performance of the Saab 2000 was a significant factor in the PAF choice. Unlike Erieye remotely operated radar systems, PAF required onboard operators and this demand was met by Saab and EMS. The Erieye system will link into PAF existing network along with civilian ATC system. This is an extensive contract which includes ground equipment to support the radars and aircrafts. The seventh aircraft will not have radar but will have the provision for the radar, however, this aircraft will used for other specialized roles including training.
Interesting development, I look forward to seeing the first pictures. This will be a significant improvement in Pakistans air defence capability, once they have the new F16 (possibly fitted with AMRAAM) and JF17 with a BVR capability the Pakistan Air Force will be far more credible. If J10 is on the cards as has been suggested by Mushaffaf then things will be significantly improved for Pakistan.
FedaykinWow, I knew people would feel strongly about this but I must admit that I am surprised at the strength of the reaction.
This is a very sad day indeed, one of the central points for military discussion has been left near impotent by this decision. It is a terrible shame that so much high quality discussion has been lost and is being prevented.
I plead to the webmaster to reintroduce the forums.
Amen!
FedaykinWhilst Iran can build many new components for their F14s I doubt they have the technology to make the Titanium wing pivot box.
Sign In
