Iranian F-313 Qaher 'Stealth Fighter', and it appears to be real this time!
Any chance it could be an existing Iranian type that actually has had some form of "body kit" fitted to give the impression of something more advanced? Does the undercarriage provide any clues as to the base aircraft?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A graphic apparently showing the internal layout of the F-313, with the usual proviso of how accurate it may or may not be, the engine configuration looks odd! Only one engine with the thrust split between two nozzles? And what appears to be a large frame or bulkhead passing through the engine/nozzles, this can't be accurate, I'm sure...
https://s25.postimg.org/jv5omk5fh/Co...aher_F-313.jpg
-RP
https://s25.postimg.org/jv5omk5fh/Co...aher_F-313.jpg
-RP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
I never had the Iranians down as a comedy act, but this one seems good.
My thanks to the experts here
My thanks to the experts here
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Appears to be real?" Yeah, real fake. That thing has the craziest mishmash of features, most making no sense at all. For example, the main gear are located forward of the main wing and engines. The only way for it not to be a tail dragger and be able to put weight on the nose gear is if they put massive ballast in the nose. That's nonsense. The intakes are above the LEX which would make flight above a few units AOA essentially impossible (more nonsense) and the intakes are coplanar with both wings. That means all the wing spars/carry-thru structure would have to have huge holes through them to feed the air to the engines. On a modern fighter that's nonsense. The engines have no nozzles, not even fixed ones. That's nonsense. There's no HUD. The list goes on and on.
And the internal layout drawing? Its even worse. The wing trailing edge structure is fixed. No flaps, no ailerons, no flaperons, nothing. The canard has no spars which sorta makes sense only because there's no structure for the canards to attach to. And the canard's actuator linkage is all wrong. No spindle, and instead of causing the canard to rotate about an axis that linkage would cause the canard tip to translate forward and aft, but with no hinge to allow translation. The main wing spars attach to.....nothing. No carry-through structure at all. Even the drawing itself is nonsense like an M.C. Escher drawing with impossible perspectives. They didn't even get real engineers to draw fake drawings. This is the work of high school kids with a good imagination, but zero engineering skills.
And the internal layout drawing? Its even worse. The wing trailing edge structure is fixed. No flaps, no ailerons, no flaperons, nothing. The canard has no spars which sorta makes sense only because there's no structure for the canards to attach to. And the canard's actuator linkage is all wrong. No spindle, and instead of causing the canard to rotate about an axis that linkage would cause the canard tip to translate forward and aft, but with no hinge to allow translation. The main wing spars attach to.....nothing. No carry-through structure at all. Even the drawing itself is nonsense like an M.C. Escher drawing with impossible perspectives. They didn't even get real engineers to draw fake drawings. This is the work of high school kids with a good imagination, but zero engineering skills.
Last edited by KenV; 19th Apr 2017 at 18:40.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That cutaway has to be the worst one I've ever seen!
How lazy was it to only show the left hand engine. The detail stops at the centre line then the right hand side of the fuselage is out of proportion.
How lazy was it to only show the left hand engine. The detail stops at the centre line then the right hand side of the fuselage is out of proportion.
Evertonian
"Appears to be real?" Yeah, real fake. That thing has the craziest mishmash of features, most making no sense at all. For example, the main gear are located forward of the main wing and engines. The only way for it not to be a tail dragger and be able to put weight on the nose gear is if they put massive ballast in the nose. That's nonsense. The intakes are above the LEX which would make flight above a few units AOA essentially impossible (more nonsense) and the intakes are coplanar with both wings. That means all the wing spars/carry-thru structure would have to have huge holes through them to feed the air to the engines. On a modern fighter that's nonsense. The engines have no nozzles, not even fixed ones. That's nonsense. There's no HUD. The list goes on and on.
And the internal layout drawing? Its even worse. The wing trailing edge structure is fixed. No flaps, no ailerons, no flaperons, nothing. The canard has no spars which sorta makes sense only because there's no structure for the canards to attach to. And the canard's actuator linkage is all wrong. No spindle, and instead of causing the canard to rotate about an axis that linkage would cause the canard tip to translate forward and aft, but with no hinge to allow translation. The main wing spars attach to.....nothing. No carry-through structure at all. Even the drawing itself is nonsense like an M.C. Escher drawing with impossible perspectives. They didn't even get real engineers to draw fake drawings. This is the work of high school kids with a good imagination, but zero engineering skills.
And the internal layout drawing? Its even worse. The wing trailing edge structure is fixed. No flaps, no ailerons, no flaperons, nothing. The canard has no spars which sorta makes sense only because there's no structure for the canards to attach to. And the canard's actuator linkage is all wrong. No spindle, and instead of causing the canard to rotate about an axis that linkage would cause the canard tip to translate forward and aft, but with no hinge to allow translation. The main wing spars attach to.....nothing. No carry-through structure at all. Even the drawing itself is nonsense like an M.C. Escher drawing with impossible perspectives. They didn't even get real engineers to draw fake drawings. This is the work of high school kids with a good imagination, but zero engineering skills.
'Interpretation provisional'. The drawing is a figment of someone's imagination.
That said,I doubt that the F-313 will prove to be much of an adversary in the future !
That said,I doubt that the F-313 will prove to be much of an adversary in the future !
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
I may have missed something up-Thread, but where do the stealthy weapons go?