Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran acquires Russian fighters
Middle East Newsline ^ | 02/07/2006

Posted on 02/07/2006 10:30:42 PM PST by Wiz

MOSCOW [MENL] -- Iran has quietly acquired three fighter-jets from Russia.

Russian industry sources said Teheran has procured three Su-25UBT twin-seat attack aircraft from Moscow. The sources said the contract was concluded in 2005 and deliveries would take place in 2006.

The deal marked the first Iranian purchase of the Su-25. In 2001, Iran negotiated with Georgia for surplus MiG-25s, but the two countries failed to reach agreement.

The sources said the Su-25UBT marked the most advanced model of the attack aircraft. They said the fighters received new electronic warfare and jamming systems.

(Excerpt) Read more at menewsline.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: armsbuildup; aviation; axisofdictators; axisofevil; iran; iraq; russia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-143 next last
To: Egberto

Nice try there! The Yugoslavs rejoing the Dayton Accord and the Vienna Document in October 1999. You have heard of them I take it? They declared under treaty that they had lost 50 combat capable aircraft and 136 armoured fighting vehicles.

25 nations air forces? Please list all those nations that supplied combat aircraft to Allied Force?

The operations in Yugoslavia were politicaly lead and controlled. The military were not allowed to strike certain key targets. Add to the fact that the politicians had made it clear that no ground troop invasion would be mounted and there you have it. All the Serbs had to do was berm and hide up their armour and place out decoys.

In regards to their air force. They initially sent up their MiG-29 out of an inventory of 14 single seaters. They lost 11 of those to all causes in the conflict. 6 of those were shot down in air-to-air combat. The heavy losses sustained by the air forces were from airfield strikes. Today the remaining MiG-29s (four single seaters and one two-seat trainer) are in storage.


81 posted on 02/10/2006 6:19:29 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: smonk

No. The Iranians continued to operate their F-14s even after the Shah was deposed. Today they are still noted flying operations and are very well known to the Coalition forces stationed there. The got spares under Iran gate and have cannibalised and reverse engineered most of their spares. The Iranian F4, F-5 and P-3 fleet are still very much active too and well known to the Coalition forces stationed in the Gulf. The Iranians have developed quite a strong aerospace industry and certainly are adept at reverse engineering spare parts.


82 posted on 02/10/2006 6:26:17 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Tommyjo

Yeah, by reverse engineering they've ben able to domestically produce a new fighter paterned on the old F-5. Certainly not cutting edge, but a step up from most contries.


83 posted on 02/10/2006 6:30:24 AM PST by Mac94
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Egberto

That is exactly what it is propaganda. Venik is a US citizen of Russian extraction. He lives in a complete fantasy world. All those hundreds of NATO aircrew claimed dead and missing not one of their families are asking as to where they are? Count up all the B-2s and B-52s that he claims. Utter BS and some of the worst propaganda ever produced. The Serbian Ministry of Information started it all off to keep their populace believing that the 'evil NATO' was losing. It completely spiralled out of control and there you have the likes of the 'aeronautics natodown' website. Complete and utter BS.


84 posted on 02/10/2006 6:31:12 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

Can it carry nukes? I mean, you would'nt buy an entire air group of 48 planes if you are only thinking about delivering one or two very important packages...


85 posted on 02/10/2006 6:37:33 AM PST by L,TOWM (Liberals, The Other White Meat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

No. This is not the case. The Iranians still employ CAPs with F-14 armed AIM-54s, to this day. They are still well known to Coalition forces stationed in the region. The most recent exercises from 2005 showed their ability to maintain their fleet. The Iraninas even released footage of their F-14s in their new camouflage scheme. One of the video shots showed detailed close-ups of F-14s still hanging AIM-54s using center-line carriage.


86 posted on 02/10/2006 6:37:38 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom

My family has three people serving in the military currently, MM -- so feel free to have your morning mug of STFU anytime, you hateful, ignorant defeat pimp.


87 posted on 02/10/2006 6:41:16 AM PST by L,TOWM (Liberals, The Other White Meat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Tommyjo
Sure, they hang the missile. They want countries to think they could actually fire them. (they cant) or that if they did, that the missile would actually ignite (doubtful) and track (it wont). The Iranian fleet is about as ready for battle as Al Jazeera is ready for honest reporting. The US is well aware of what the AWG-9 signature looks like on EWR, they have not seen it in some time.
88 posted on 02/10/2006 6:48:05 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Egberto

You are certainly extremely mixed up.

The B-2s were going on strike missions from day one at altitude. They don't operate at any other height but at high altitude. Think airliner cruising height at night! They only deployed JDAMs during Allied Force. You do know what a JDAM is and what it is guided with?

The Yugoslavs had SAMs that could go up to 80,000ft. Their SA-2s, albeit in storage, were still technically in the inventory. The SA-3 could go up to 60,000ft. The base height for operations over Kosovo was set at 15,000ft. This was a political move enforced on the military. All of the Yugoslav heavy SAMs such as the SA-3 and SA-6s could take out aircraft at those heights.

Think about how many cruise missiles were lauched against Serbia. Most of the collateral damage was caused by cruise missiles either being deflected by AAA or malfunctioning rather than GPS bombs going astray. Your pathetic claims are laughable 'B-2s got panicked'. Please do some research before posting on the web.


89 posted on 02/10/2006 6:50:27 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Egberto

One thing about the exercises with the Indian Air Force. The results were somewhat of a suprise, but the rules did negate one of our main advantages, and that was beyond visual range engagements (BVR) and also the Indians had numerical superiority.

But, the rules did serve their purposes, for both sides. For the Indians, their realisitic foes in any real war would be China or Pakistan, and neither have the BVR warfighting capability that we do. So, air combat would be much at a much closer range, something the exercises emphasized. This gave the Indians a bit more of a feel for what they would have to face in real battle againsr their primary foes. For us, it gave us a chance to test ourselves in situations where we wouldn't have numbers as well as testing our "close in" combat skills.

Yes, the results were a bit suprising in how well the Indian pilots and aircraft faired against us, but for the most part, this test was weighted to give the Indians a better feel for what they would realistically face in war rather than us. The results of this shouldn't overly concern the U.S.A.F., although it is useful in lobbting for the F-22A and F-35. The ones that should really take notice of the Indian's skill are China and Pakistan.


90 posted on 02/10/2006 7:01:26 AM PST by Mac94
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

The Iranians have also put on show their own reverse engineered copy of the AIM-54. You are solely thinking of EWR/RWR. Think outside the box here. Air-to-air radars are particularly difficult to track and detect unless they are painting up potentialy hostile aircraft. The Iranians don't play that game with Coalition forces in the Gulf.


91 posted on 02/10/2006 7:02:13 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Tommyjo
Air-to-air radars are particularly difficult to track and detect unless they are painting up potentialy hostile aircraft.

I suggest you put down the Aviation Week mag, and talk to a few people on the scene.

92 posted on 02/10/2006 7:13:24 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Tommyjo

I think the effective range of the SA-6 is around 40,000 ft, not 60,000. In any case, by the late 1990's, both of these systems were quite dated and we knew how to effectively defeat them both.

The SA-6 was a great weapon in it's day and age and it shocked the world in 1973 in its performance against the Israeli Air Force. But, because of that experience (as well as our losses to SAMs in Vietnam), the west really put alot of effort into defeating this threat. By the early 1980's, the Israeli's had figured out how to jam, evade, and eliminate, the SA-6 and like Russian systems and this was seem in their performance over Lebanon in 1982.

We were learning as well, but this same air defense system that Israel defeated so easily still shot down two U.S. Navy warplanes when we staged a large strike on the system. One Navy pilot was killed, the other captured by Syrian forces. But, to be fair, the advances that would take place during the Reagan era military builup hadn't occured yet.

By the time of the Yugoslav war in the late 1990's, our forces had undergone massive changes technologically, and learning from Israel and our own experiences and using new technology to deal with such threats, the SA-6 had been neutralized (for all intensive purposes) as a threat to our aircraft. It was a system that was in its prime 25+ years prior to the Yugoslav conflict and we had a long time to learn.


93 posted on 02/10/2006 7:16:21 AM PST by Mac94
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

Saddam liked canned hams.


94 posted on 02/10/2006 7:22:01 AM PST by OrioleFan (Republicans believe every day is July 4th, DemocRATs believe every day is April 15th. - Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

I'm on the scene. You ain't thinking outside the box.


95 posted on 02/10/2006 10:18:53 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Tommyjo
I continue to be amazed when people here think I need to be informed about anything related to the F-14 Tomcat.
96 posted on 02/10/2006 10:47:26 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

According to Janes, they use them in an AWAC role because of their long range radar. There was an article about a scenairo of US going after IRAN.


97 posted on 02/10/2006 11:02:32 AM PST by Always Independent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
I have no doubt that you are an expert when it comes to the US utilisation of the F-14. Obviously you believe the claims that ALL of the Iranian F-14 FCS were made redundant after the fall of the Shah. Independant aviation researchers have interviewed Iranian aircrew focusing on the period of the long Iran-Iraq conflict 1980-88. Are they ALL lying about their use of AIM-54s against the Iraqis? Is this some big huge game that photographs exist from the conflict showing AIM-54s on IIRAF F-14s? Both Tom Cooper and Farzad Bishop have interviewed Iranian F-14 aircrew and compiled the accounts in their joint book 'Iran-Iraq War in the Air 1980-1988. The also detail accounts of F-14 kills with AIM-7s.

Copy and paste if the links don't appear:

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_445.shtml

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1841767875/104-1495423-4320719?v=glance&n=283155

98 posted on 02/11/2006 1:38:26 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

Comment #99 Removed by Moderator

To: Tommyjo
Are they ALL lying about their use of AIM-54s against the Iraqis?

Yes and no.

They can carry missiles and they can fire a few of them too. But they wont hit anything. I don't know why anyone would expect honesty coming out of that region. You aint gonna sell a lot of books talking about missiles that came off the rail and went bonkers. I am well aware of the claims coming out of Iran, but if I were to list every false claim about military capabilities in the middle east, I would be typing until Sunday.

100 posted on 02/11/2006 6:57:51 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-143 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson