Correct me if I am wrong, but these “5” appear to have no serials at all.

They’ve got serials on the fins and on the right hand size of the noses – the numbers start with 3-XXXX (3 denotes fighter in IRIIAF).

6 Saeqeh serials have been seen -3-7366 through 3-7371.

And the Iranian air force is very well documented. Even air forces in suppossedly democratic Asian countries seldom allow the level of photographic information flow the Iranians do.

Why trust serials so much…

Because serials are generally only proof of an aircraft’s existence.

Even when they’re randomised, they still usually don’t change. After all they require repainting and that’s usually done during an overhaul.

Perhaps we could use Google Earth to see if we can spot aircraft. I recall once seeing an F-14 on the side of a runway, and an F-4 taking off, shortly after reading by one American “expert” that Iranian F-14s are not in flyable condition.

Americans have known for decades that Iranians have been able to keep F-14s airworthy. They even managed to get 1 to defect to Iraq in 1986 along with an F-4E in 1984. These were used to determine how they were keeping them in the air and came to conclusion there was a degree of local content.

A lot of “experts” are in denial due to patriotism or other misguided ideas. And this is regardless of nationality.

How is it we can swallow Chinese HUD and avionics without any evidence at all other than a link to an Iranian forum? We need a uniform standard to avoid bias…

I don’t.

The Iranians often talk big but do nothing. I wouldn’t be surprised if F-4 upgrade was just a SLEP to eek a few more years out of the airframes.

The truth is that Iran does not invest at all in it’s Air Force. I’m sure they could get Chinese JF-17s or even MiG-29s if they wanted to. Instead they’re relying on old aircraft. Their newest aircraft were delivered in early 1990s and then most of them were Iraqi jets sent there in 1991 (though I think a handful c. 6 Su-25s were delivered to IRGC in early 2000s)!

They’ve also not invested in any significant recapitalisation of air transport, helicopters or trainers. Again I’m sure they could obtain these things from non-Western sources if they wanted to.

Respectfully, they call that naïve……..Plus, that fact that most of the experts from the Major Western Powers would disagree or at least call that a very risky assumption.

Then why are most of the major European countries doing massive military cutbacks? The truth is they see the threat and future threat levels as low and know Uncle Sam will bail them out anyway.

Any threat that may include the PAK-FA, J-20, or J-31. (and the list could grow)

So war against China or war against Russia, both of which are unlikely.

Number of potential customers for those birds is small:

India (nuclear powerful and decent relationships with West).
Vietnam (why would we go to war with Vietnam? I doubt the USA would ever even consider such a thing)
Algeria (reasonable relations with West, more focused on local Islamist issues)
Indonesia (very small air force, Western aligned)
Malaysia (very small air force, Western aligned)
Kazakhstan (Russian sphere of influence)

Other than Libya, the last few wars were “predictable.” Even invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were too a point predictable. Both were bubbling away since 1990s.

Also in case you haven’t noticed, air warfare between combat aircraft is just about extinct. I don’t see Syrians scrambling MiG-29s to intercept Israeli F-15/-16s. Even over Persian Gulf, Iran tends to stay away other than cheap shots at UAVs.

Also Western capability is heavily in decline and has increased in intensity since Libya e.g. short term things such as sequestration but also long terms things like disbanding fighter squadrons, infantry batallions, cutting procurement etc etc.

The new wars the West will generally prefer to fight will be to allow locals to fight with Western money and resources and limited usage of special forces and drones to limit footprint and thus lower cost and political risk.

Indeed this is happening in Yemen, Pakistan and Philippines and was initially pioneered in drug war in Colombia and elsewhere in Latin Amercia. It’s the plan for Afghanistan post 2014.

And there’s less and less countries that have air defence systems or fighter planes. And these are the countries that the West is likely to get involved in due to them often being unstable.

So I still am willing to stake my life on a RCAF never tangling with J-31, J-20 or Pak Fa

Just Germany and France and that may change with time.

This again? Last time France purchased American fighters was F-8 Crusaders and F-100 Super Sabres over half a century ago.

Spain does plan on purchasing a number of F-35B’s for the Navy. Yet, has also shown interest in the F-35A for the Air Force. Yet, that is some time off because of the current economic condition of the country.

Spain’s a definite wait and see. Their economy has basically collapsed (27% unemployment). You don’t get out of that easily.

It also has the issue of Catalonia (where Barcelona is) voting for independence in 2014. If Catalonia separates (and the popular opinion there seems to be very anti-Spanish – I had first hand experience of this when I was there), it could result in other regions trying to break away (e.g. Basque).

Regardless, most NATO Members plan on going with the F-35.

No, unless you regard NATO as it was in 1991. Eastern Europe will not see any F-35s (save maybe Poland).

As stated Spain is a watch and see, whilst Portugal is doing the Eastern European thing of dismantling it’s military. They’ll be down to 23 F-16s after the transfer of 12 to Romania in 2017.

Belgium is still undecided – it will probably still get F-35 but in really small numbers. Denmark isn’t expected to buy more than 30 F-35s and it could be as low as 22.

With such small numbers, the fighter fleet becomes an air policing force only and you might as well buy new F-16A Blk 15s.

So only bright spots for F-35 are UK, Italy and Turkey (who generally doesn’t participate in NATO action).

F/A-18E/F is used by US Navy.

And Canada picked F/A-18A/B when most NATO states opted for F-16.

If you want “seamless” operation with other coalition partners, then buy Eurofighter Typhoon – it is by far the most numerous “modern” aircraft in Europe and will be in the future even when a pitifully few F-35 replace existing F-16s and Tornados.

Plus F-35 isn’t used by major NATO partners Germany, France or Spain and its European numbers probably won’t match Eurofighter (e.g. Germany’s 143 Eurofighters = combined F-35 purchase by Netherlands, Italy and maybe even Denmark if Dutch numbers don’t go according to plan).