Iranian F-313 Qaher 'Stealth Fighter', and it appears to be real this time!
 

After the comical images released previously of the F-313, this time it does at least appear to be real, since it actually moves under it's own power in the video clip...

https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/1...irst-analysis/

-RP

It appears decidedly petite!

Is this a case of "we can" rather than fulfilling a specific need?

I almost feel sorry for them at how embarrassing that dumpster fire of a design is.

Or is it just Iranian willy-waving, in the hope someone will take them seriously? ;)

Not with a willy that size, I think. :E

I might have expected to see the rudders move as the jet was turned under its own power....

It's got to be for internal consumption.

I couldn't spot any alpha or beta vanes. Maybe they're hidden?

Is it a HESA Saeqeh that has been covered in glue and pushed through Halford's 'body mods' aisle?

Must be designed to combat these;


http://www.warfaresims.com/WarSimsWP...oard_Plane.jpg

Mainplane looked awfully thick. CG looks to be unusually far forward (based on the mainwheel positions). Shape seems to have way too many internal corners for something looking to have a low RCS.

But my main question would be how those intakes are supposed to work at any significant angle of attack.

PDR

And I wonder about a vortex from that LERX type surface feeding into the intake.

Looks like the unholy offspring of an F117 mating with an F22

http://alwaght.com/upload/files/2017...5204249852.jpg
Look at the canopy arch, that would give quite a big radar return. The intakes would be blanked as soon as you pulled anything more than about 7 AOA. The chord of the wing is way too thick for a performance fighter. Too many panel gaps, rivets and navigation lights to be propper stealthy. Sensor ball out in the breeze at the front will suffer above 300kts. The wings look like the same as those on tge MiG17, which are a distinctive shape, and then 'cut and shut' into a futuristic look - like some of Gerry Anderson's finest creations!

https://theaviationist.com/wp-conten...ew-tests-2.jpg
Another view...i suspect that the plastic would melt around the jet pipes as there is no protection!

http://nationalinterest.org/files/main_images/f313.jpg
This is the original mock up and note how the 'taxyable' version has a different canopy?i suspect this is just a dressed up model of the Saeqeh jet (see below).

http://defence-blog.com/wp-content/u...ense-ira-4.jpg

This supposed 'stealth jet' is a DIY model and that is all. A Sixth Form student could do better as an A-level engineering project.

Would've been better off reverse engineering the Tomcats!

Better off building an Archon SF-1 microlight - at least it flies!!!
http://www.flyer.co.uk/wp-content/up...hon-SSDR-2.jpg

Even as a layman the F-313 looks wrong in every way. The wings look too think, the pilot looks like he is sitting on rather than in the cockpit, the engines don't appear to have exhausts, the engine intakes are too small and look like they are obstructed by the fuselage, the FLIR looks like a last minute add on which would detract from any alleged stealth characteristics that the plane is supposed to have, the fuselage looks too wide and out of proportion compared to the wings and canards. Does the front under carriage even have doors? As for the downward sloping wing tips, how can they be aerodynamic in any way? I'm sure that they would add drag as well as making the plane very slabby which would mean larger radar returns when seen from the sides? Was it even taxiing under its own jet power as there didn't appear to be much in the way of haze coming from the exhausts. Why have twin tyres on the front undercarriage if this is supposed to be a light weight aircraft. Lastly what benefit is stealth for what is being described as a lightweight CAS aeroplane?

How many wuld have thought the F117 'wrong' if shown an imageof it before it came out of the black?

This is no F-117, Davef68.

Perhaps they're contributing to Firefox 2?

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?

Nose gear looks like from a KFIR.

Remember prototypes rarely look like the completed 'real' thing. The Avro 707 wasn't a Vulcan..

But the Avro 707 wasn't a Vulcan prototype. It was a technology research aircraft addressing one factor of the planned Vulcan design - so different situation.

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

The Kfir has a single nosewheel, the latest images in the first link I posted show the F-313 with a twin nosewheel set-up...

-RP

I never had the Iranians down as a comedy act, but this one seems good.

My thanks to the experts here ;)

"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.

Titter ye not with all your advanced technical wizardry. This aircraft will NEVER be detected by an enemy AD radar. :ok:

Hardly relevant, the F-35 doesn't have a HUD either, or have you forgotten that minor detail? And no, I'm not comparing it to the F-35!
As has already been mentioned, it is almost definitely for internal consumption...

-RP

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.

Do you at least like the colour? :p

'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 !

Is it available in a few shades of grey?

PDR

I may have missed something up-Thread, but where do the stealthy weapons go?

You kinda are.

They're hanging from the wing pylons. But obviously as they're stealthy you can't see them...

PDR

Er, no, I'm not...

-RP

Is it pantomine season already?

PDR

Oh yes you are!