Iran's indigenous UAVs

The problem is that for ten different war type scenarios there will be ten different weapons that would work best... the problem is that a weapon that works best in one situation might be worse than useless in 7 or 8 of the other war situations.

The problem is that without knowing what type of conflict we are talking about it is too hard to say this or that is a good idea for certain.

And then of course even if you get it right the situation might change... your enemy might adopt a different strategy and buy new weapons based on the systems you have.

Sometimes you might get luck... your enemy sees your formidable ATGM potential and decides against wasting money on MBTs and instead goes for lighter more mobile vehicles. Well ATGMs can still take out point targets at extended ranges so you could modify your missiles from HEAT warheads designed to penetrate 1m or more of armour then perhaps redesign it to punch a fist sized hole in thinner armour and then blow plasma or thermobaric material into the cavity to burn and suffocate the contents... would work on armour and would work on bunkers and buildings...

I think medium and high flying larger drones will be useful for monitoring the battlefield, while smaller drones carried by troops can work down to the squad level in finding targets.

If they can get 152mm artillery shells going 170kms then a vehicle or two around the place should give all weather day night support capability most soldiers crave... being a top attack munition it should be fine even for heavy armour.

I think drones have a role to play but much of the time they will be looking for targets and sharing a picture of the battlefield with various units... and of course marking targets for precision attacks.

Regarding enemy air power... well whether you are using manned air support or unmanned this is something you have to deal with either way.

Having specialist drones designed to take out dedicated air defence systems would be important for drones as it is for manned aircraft... just because unmanned drones are expendable does not mean you throw them away... when destroyed they stop performing their function... unless they are suicide drones of course.

The point about sea anti - ship drones. On land, large and slow drone against armour, with short range ATGM not useful. Both agree. On land drones do not have to be long range. Lines of contact are close. At sea, ships are far away to avoid becoming target. So need large drone wingspan fuel to reach. But means slow and easy target if too close to ship. Drone can carry own weight plus payload. But if separate payload, with own body and engine and avionic and sensor, then can be only small warhead. Not effective against ship either.

But separate missile must have own avionics. Most expensive part of missile. This gets destroyed every time anyway. And we save body of UCAV. BUT have to make two avionic. So cost more. Plus, when UCAV turn around, it exposes engine to heat sensor and become target.

Therefore false economy to separate UCAV from missile. Best have UCAV that changes to missile or torpedo near target. No more big wing or slow. Rocket ignited. Engine ejected. Wing ejected. Evaporative cooling of body to ambient temperature. Composite body. Bigger payload. Because not carrying two sets of control and actuator and body. Just one set. Loose weight. Not gain weight.

It comes down to survivability... if there is a good chance of the drone surviving then it makes sense to make it sophisticated and fast and powerful and loaded with weapons instead of the drone itself being a weapon.

Think of it in terms of getting bombs on target.

A drone is a useful alternative because modern bombers and modern precision guided bombs are expensive... a cheap simple drone makes sense, but if you already have those expensive bombers and with a modification are then able to use cheap dumb bombs with an accuracy and precision good enough so instead of dropping million dollar bombs you are dropping thousand dollar bombs then suddenly it becomes much harder to justify using a drone for that job because that bomber can carry self defence equipment and self defence weapons and would be much harder to deal with than a simple drone.

Obviously you could argue that having fighters protect the bomber means more cost but cost is justified if it means actually reaching and destroying the target.

For Iran a mini sub might be the best solution... with low speed very quiet propellers they could be towed out to sea by fishing vessels and then released to sail back towards any attacking western ships from behind... using lots of batteries you could make it so that it can be very quiet and sneak up on targets from behind, or position themselves in the path of enemy ships and dive down to sit just below their hull and when the ship comes over top a MAD sensor could make it go boom...

Being a submarine you could put ten tons of explosive inside it easily... along with ten tons of batteries.... connect a power cable to the fishing boat to charge the batteries to full charge while towing it out to position and then at the time it is released transmit the general positions they need to be at to be effective... they could release a small buoy with an antenna to receive targeting instructions... they could carry dozens of them including fake ones that are released with a delay so they pop up hours after the mini sub has gone by... the sub itself could operate along the sea floor to make it hard to detect but with sonar to detect vessels and aircraft and ships looking for it...

But separate missile must have own avionics. Most expensive part of missile.

There are lots of cheap guidance systems available... you don't need ARH or IIR sensors... simple command guidance or laser beam riding is relatively cheap and simple...

Therefore false economy to separate UCAV from missile. Best have UCAV that changes to missile or torpedo near target. No more big wing or slow. Rocket ignited. Engine ejected. Wing ejected. Evaporative cooling of body to ambient temperature. Composite body. Bigger payload. Because not carrying two sets of control and actuator and body. Just one set. Loose weight. Not gain weight.

The problem there is that each target requires its own individual bomber platform to deal with it... which might sound cheaper but would likely end up being much more expensive.

Of course cost is not the only factor... a weapon that costs $50 is no good if it does not destroy the target... if they can develop 152mm ammo that can reach targets 170km away then what could they achieve with a 203mm calibre round. Shore based gun artillery is interesting... and so would shore based rocket artillery... especially if it can be used against ground targets too...

Agree. It is more a case of what you have. But if you don't have and are making. Then everything else being equal. Then you need a variety of systems. That exploit and rely on different methods of attack and guidance. From manual to automated to using different sensors. So that if enemy overcomes one system. Say knows how to jam Radar, then you have X and Y  and  Z. But not good idea to have duplicates. Two systems to attack same target that rely on same method.

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/158506/IRGC-fighters-equipped-with-new-air-to-surface-missile

Now this is more like it. For war situation. Stand off range should be big. Bigger than many SAM, I think. Then manouver out of the way. Keep UCAV on land, for recon or use against Rats.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1108709/%D9%81%DB%8C%D9%84%D9%85-%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%B8%D9%87-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%84%DB%8C%D9%86-%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B1-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%88-%D9%81%D9%86-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C

Looks like Iran making Turbofan for UCAV. Can fly at  60000 feet. Long endurance. So Iranians are heading to developing combat air to air UCAV , stealth fighter against F35 or F22 at high altitude. No place to escape for them.

I have always thought that, if we assume radio and optical communication to be secure enough to allow use of AA missiles in piloted jets. Then control of UCAV  in  air combats from ground, should be just as effective. With added advantages of cost and superior numbers. And no pilot lost in combat. So for cost of one F35, we build 100 combat UCAV........ Die F35 Die........... LOL.

Of course more advanced models, using internal inertial or starlight navigation and automated target detection and engagement without ground control will make ECM and others useless against them, in loiter mode.............

Iran already using UCAV, to intercept and shoo away American planes from drill zones. Looks like drones already adapted for air to air  combat missions. Must be carrying AA missiles. Latest 99 wargames....

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2020/09/12/2346841/iran-intercepts-us-aircraft-in-war-game

When possible, UCAV 'S design and functions should be amalgamated. So that there are not too many different types. Leading to expensive and truncated system. The same drone can perform the function of surveillance and launching ATGW against armour, for example.

But having different types, may be necessary at times. A missile needed to destroy a Tank, may only need a warhead of 5 kg. And land army can launch at close ranges, of only a few kilometres. But a missile warhead to sink a ship, may need to be 100 or more kg. And ranges from shore, can be in the hundreds or more km.

In both these cases, different drones are needed. Against Tanks, a small disposable drone with electrical drive and low RCS. Is useful. With much longer range than present anti - Tank missiles.

For anti - Ship drones,  large and longer range drone is useful. Like Simorgh. But improvements can be made.  And of course body is composite. This drone carries the longest range cruise missile. The cruise is fired at maximum range. To give large UCAV, chance to avoid enemy fighters at sea. And this flies fast and programmed evasive terminal moves.

Using UCAV against ship may be more effective than submarines. Because enemy ship can move fast and change position. Difficult for submarine to catch. But UCAV, travels at 100 km / hr. Five Times as fast as Sub. Can catch ships at sea. But even UCAV at long range needs course correction. A ship can change position by 200 km. To New position. By the time UCAV  or cruise missile reaches it .

Two ways of doing it.  If avionic and micro-chip in short supply and  engine for props and pumps and gears cheap. Then let cruise guide the UCAV. Then discard it, and fly to target. UCAV body disposable. And at rear. Cruise mounted forward section.

The second way, if avionic and micro-chip not expensive or in short supply, but engine and body expensive. Then build UCAV, to return to base, after firing cruise anti- ship. Recover body. But build more avionic. Cruise mounted mid- section, under wings. Inside body.

https://www.mashreghnews.ir/photo/1121703/%D8%B9%DA%A9%D8%B3-%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%86%D9%85%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D8%B2-%DB%B3-%D9%BE%D9%87%D9%BE%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%AC%D8%AF%DB%8C%D8%AF-%D8%B3%D9%BE%D8%A7%D9%87-%D9%BE%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86


Looks like the UCAV, designers are on the right track. Pay attention to the one covered up. Let me guess : Range of boat from shore 500 km. Range of UCAV 1000 km. Range of cruise missile 1000 km. 2500 km........

USS Nimitz in the viewfinder of an Iran UAV in the Persian Gulf


Escort Ships


New IRAN UAV´s
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/6213631.html
New Iranian attack UAVs and kamikaze drones entering service with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Photos taken in late September and early October 2020.
At the moment, Iran is confidently among the top 10 countries of developers and manufacturers of multifunctional UAVs, and also has an extensive practice of their use, primarily in Yemen.
Therefore, every few months Iran presents both modernized versions of existing UAVs (reconnaissance, strike, corrective, kamikaze), as well as various new products, both serial and promising, which are still in the process of development.

Iran test their copy of Spike missile, which they got in Syria, when it was shot down.

They released one UAV with the name Gaza .

More on the Gaza. Looks a real threat!


syrseal
@syrseal44
Iranian UAV "GAZA"

Radio button The new reconnaissance and strike UAV Gaza is a further development of the Shahed-129 UAV with noticeably increased dimensions and characteristics.

It is stated that it can carry up to 13 guided bombs at a distance of more than 2000 km, as well as up to 500 kg of various reconnaissance and electronic equipment. The declared flight duration is up to 35 hours.

Obviously, such indicators were achieved due to the use of a more powerful engine, most likely a turboprop.

According to the commander of the Aerospace Forces of the IRGC, Brigadier General Amir-Ali Hajizade, the drone detects stealth aircraft with a radius of up to 500 kilometers.

The length of this drone is 10.5 meters, its height is 3.2 meters, and its wingspan is 21 meters.

Gaza UAV's flight ceiling is 35,000 feet, which is equivalent to 10,668 meters, and its travel speed is 350 kilometers per hour.

Really precise strikes.

Shahed 136

That drone launcher is quite clever... though solid rocket boosters would be expensive compared with perhaps a compressed air launcher, but I guess solid rocket fuel was simpler.

Many Russian drones use an elastic launcher, but found in very cold conditions it does not work very well...

This seems very clever because you can change the launch order as you please so you might have some long endurance drone first to go out and look around and when it finds a few targets then other drones with bombs could be launched to attack those targets, or suicide drones could be used that lack the excellent optics of the loiter drone and only have cheap simple cameras that could fly out to the loiter drone and then attack the targets and then the loitering drone can return home with its expensive powerful day and night cameras to be reused.

Having each drone ready to launch also means if one fails to launch or crashes a replacement is ready to be launched in its place.

Also for ground forces having one drone to deal with can focus your attention so a drone flying higher might not be noticed so while enemy ground forces are firing small arms at a low flying expendable drone a more expensive reusable model of the same drone with much better wide angle cameras and state of the art navigation and laser range finding could be watching for muzzle flashes and recording the positions of enemy troops... ready for an air strike or artillery strike...

I like it, though I would probably replace the solid rocket motor with a compressed air launcher arm built in to the truck and perhaps operating from a compressor attached to the trucks engine... it would work in any temperatures and be completely reusable... make it the full height of the trailer box with perhaps three sections so it extends three times the height of the trailer at full reach on launch...

For heavy payloads perhaps a smaller solid rocket booster to further assist the launch... but most of the time just compressed air.

Launch

George1 wrote:

https://twitter.com/JasonMBrodsky/status/1530494043465064448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1530494043465064448%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sigmalive.com%2Fnews%2Finternational%2F960860%2Firan-ypogeia-vasi-drone-apokalypse-o-stratos-deite-fotografies-kai-vinteo

Very good. So the Iranian army finally gets modern stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD5DgIneHjQ

The 2022 World Armies International Competition UAV course related to the in city of Kashan Iran , the parenthesis of UAS teams from Iran , Russia , Armenia and Belarus

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MoB4DuowVn0&pp=ygUXSXJhbiBmMzEzIHN0ZWFsdGggZHJvbmU%3D


I suggested using composites in construction to reduce weight , but also removing radar and ejection seat ! Now they have gone one better , and removed pilot and life support also , turned F313 into fighter drone . But they kept internal bay for munitions and funny wings ! I think there is no longer any need for funny wings , since drone light enough for normal and agile flight , instead of relying on low level flight to take advantage of extra lift . Also internal bay makes large cross -section and reduces speed . If possible new AA missiles and bombs with composite bodies can be made , and carried in external pylons . They say F313 fighter drone is about 1000 kg in weight clean , and carried 1000 kg in munitions . Either two 500 kg bombs or four AA missiles . Weight wise this would be two Fatter and two Fakour 90 missiles . They also say that drone will have electric Fan propulsion ! Basically no heat output from motor . A manned fighter version with electric fan drive is also being spoken about !

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2023/10/05/2966617/iran-s-karrar-drone-armed-with-air-to-air-missiles#comment-form



Looks like this jet powered UCAV , carries a ramjet( ? )  powered AA missile , as well as Radar and IR sensor . Using it will be fun , it will have to close in , to enemy plane and fire the missile , to hit at high speed M3 to M6 ? Saves on expensive electrics ! But what advantage does ramjet offer over Rocket ? Range ? Is it a ramjet ?

A ramjet is a simple jet engine that is more fuel efficient than a solid rocket motor.

You can throttle up and down when it suits, but most importantly a jet carries fuel in tanks but to burn that fuel it needs oxygen and by weight it needs about four times more oxygen than it needs fuel.... so if you have 200kgs of fuel then you will need 800kgs of material to generate oxygen for that 200kg fuel to burn.

With a jet engine you put 200kg of fuel in the missile and scoop the oxygen as you fly so the total fuel weight is 200kg.

With a rocket you can potentially go much faster, but you will have solid rocket fuel weighing 1,000kg to get the same effect and it burns at a fixed rate that cannot be changed or stopped.

A ramjet means no fan blades or discs or shafts or expensive components, it is rather simple really... which makes it cheaper to make.

Iran Observer
@IranObserver0

Dec 30

Iran has unveiled a modern version of the Shahed-136

The Shahed-238 is equipped with an Iranian-made microjet engine.

This makes this drone more lethal than the Shahed-136

● More stealthy
● 3 times faster
● Can engage moving targets