The Iranian Next-Generation Tactical Fighter

Even as the IIAF builds up its fleet of F-4E Phantoms, it recognizes that the procurement program for the next generation fighter must begin as soon as possible. The F-4E remains the premier regional fighter, of course; it’s performance in the 1968 war against MiG-21s and Su-7s was excellent, and since then no new opposing aircraft models have been introduced. But it is still fundamentally early 1960s technology, with the associated pitfalls. Furthermore, the rumored Saudi purchase of F-14As is… uh… terrifying.

The Shah, of course, personally prefers the option of simply outbuying the Saudis in F-14s. However, the defense ministry and Air Force leadership have raised some concerns with this idea.

Iran’s requirements are fairly specific — due to budgetary concerns, the roles of long range strike and airspace defense must be amalgamated into a single aircraft. The IIAF has therefore put out a requirement for a Mach-2 capable, long-range, heavy strike fighter with look-down/shoot-down capability, multiple target track-while-scan, and long range air-to-air engagement abilities. There are not very many aircraft that fulfill this requirement, and even fewer which can be provided by the IIAF’s preferred American partners.

Well, really just two. The F-14 and the F-15. Both are promising designs — extremely maneuverable, excellent avionics and armament (compared to the competitors). The key differences are also fairly clear.

The F-14’s long range air-to-air capabilities are undoubtedly superior — there is no missile like the AIM-54, and no radar like the AWG-9. However, diving into the avionics details complicates the story somewhat. The AWG-9 is designed to be operated over open water, and it’s analog design prevents the use of MPRF waveform, further degrading look-down performance over rough terrain. Finally, it cannot be upgraded without comprehensive hardware changes. Which is an issue, because it is not equipped with air-to-ground modes.

On the other hand, the F-15’s APG-63 radar is much lower quality than the AWG-9. It lacks track-while-scan, substituting it with the unimpressive Rapid Assessment Mode (RAM), which performs some but not all of the same functions. And it has only about half the raw power of the AWG-9, compromising both range and EW performance. However, it is entirely digital, and as a result can be easily upgraded with more power, more processors, and new modes, especially once the long awaited Programmable Signal Processor (PSP) arrives. Furthermore, while the mantra goes “not a pound for air-to-ground,” the APG-63 has built-in ground scanning modes, it’s just not technically supposed to use them.

There are other advantages to the F-15. First of all, it’s cheaper, roughly 75% of the F-14 sticker price and perhaps 50% of the maintenance and armament costs (which eclipse flyaway costs within just a few years for advanced aircraft). Swing wings are known to be maintenance hogs from existing F-111s, after all, a bit of an issue for a country which chronically lacks skilled technicians. The INGTF program is expected to be the most expensive defense procurement program in Iranian history, and for a government determined to hold defense spending below 6% of GDP, it’s an important consideration. Secondly, it’s somewhat better in visual range combat, with better engine power, less weight, and somewhat less… primitive flight controls.

The F-15 has issues, certainly, but ultimately, those are fixable, and ideally we’d have a plane which can actually use modern computers and will work most of the time. As for fixing those issues, the IIAF has some ideas (and a lot of money).

F-15CI/F-15DI

[IRL F-15C features assumed to be included]

TLDR: Adding modular fuel tanks/sensor packs for a variety of tasks, and additional avionics intended mainly turn the F-15 into a capable interdictor aircraft by buffing up electronic warfare and ground attack capabilities. Also, giving the two-seater the ability to be used as either a long range PGM truck or a Wild Weasel. Ideally we could get some initial F-15Cs off the production lines in 1980 or so while we wait for the gold-plated F-15D model. Procurement package unit costs should amount to about $26 million for the C and $29 million for the D, somewhat more than the F-14 for much greater all-around capability. Development of the additional upgrades not already planned by the USAF should cost roughly $130 million, of which we plan to pay around $50-60 million depending on the circumstances.

AIM-97 Griffon

As for that long range capability we’re missing, well. The AIM-7F will be fine in the majority of instances. But for that one time you might need to shoot down a MiG-25 at 80,000 feet, or… actually, let’s not talk about that, you might need something that can reach out farther. And it so happens that the USAF is thinking the same thing.

Iran is just going to hijack the AIM-97 program and pay some extra to develop a new long-range air-to-air missile for the F-15 based on the SM-2 Block 1. By adapting the SM-2, we get a missile which is similar in most ways to the AGM-78 the Americans were previously working with, but with some key differences.

The first is guidance. The new (currently in development) SM-2 will have solid state electronics and a monopulse seeker, increasing reliability and decreasing weight. Like the SM-2, it will fly most of its route on a programmed path with course corrections from a datalink. For the AIM-97, the flight path will therefore start with the initial high-power rocket pulse, which will throw the missile high into the air along the predicted trajectory. The second, longer pulse will propel the missile as it performs minor course corrections transmitted to it by the parent aircraft. Finally, it will glide down in the terminal phase, powered only by gravity, and hopefully smash the opposing aircraft with a 150lb proximity fused warhead.

Terminal guidance will be either SARH or Infrared, just like the current AIM-97 program. This way, the pilot can choose to essentially remain undetected through the entire firing cycle, since the missile will be fired during TWS mode, preventing enemy warning systems from going off. Using infrared in the terminal phase will make the missile essentially fire and forget and bypass many ECM measures, at a potential cost to accuracy.

Weighing in at around 1,400 lbs (about the same weight as Phoenix missile adapter/rail), this is a pretty hefty missile, and the F-15 isn’t exactly designed to carry these things, so at most it’ll carry two at a time. In theory, two can be fired at the same time, one SARH and one infrared, but without two radars for illumination and only one guidance channel per datalink pod (and carrying two datalink pods seems like... a poor decision) one missile will have to fly a course with no corrections. But with a theoretical range of around 110km (the edge of TWS range, which decreases as more targets are tracked), and enormous kinetic power on account of being the largest air-to-air missile in history, with highly maneuverable navy-style rear fins, one missile at a time should probably do fine.

We hope to get some working missiles by 1980 or so, at a unit cost of about $500,000. Development (after excluding funds already allocated to the SM-2) should cost roughly $70 million, of which we plan to fund $20-30 million, depending on how many partners we can find.

AIM-95 Agile

Iran sees potential in an all-aspect, high boresight, long(ish) range SRAAM. A lot of potential, in fact. With development flagging somewhat, we’ll inject some cash to get the program going again, make some prototypes and fire them off, that kind of thing. We hope to get some working missiles by 1980 or so, and to contribute around $5 million initially.

Leopard 1A3IR

The computer age is here for tanks as well, and our Leopard 1s need to participate. We will collaborate with Germany in producing a midlife upgrade for the Leopard 1 incorporating the newest solid state electronics.

The most important change will be the replacement of the fire control system with the EMES-12A1 computerized FCS. EMES-12A1 will consist of a TEM 4A laser rangefinder, digitized sensors measuring air temperature and pressure, powder temperature, gun wear, cross wind, and trunnion cant and tilt, and a computerized FLER-H ballistic computer nearly instantly providing the correct elevation and azimuth, and even providing a lead indicator on moving targets by computing the angular velocity from the traverse speed of the turret if the target is tracked by the rangefinder for a few seconds. EMES-12A1 will come with the elimination of the stereoscopic optical rangefinder and the replacement of the TRP 1A commander sight with the PERI R12 stabilized panoramic periscope with integrated passive night vision capability, and the replacement of the TZF-1720A backup sight with the TFZ-1A gunner's scope. PERI R12 is also capable of overriding the gunner’s controls for basic hunter-killer capability.

The other significant change is the addition of the PZB200 image intensifier unit, consisting of a TV camera box to the side of the gun, providing night sighting capability for the gunner (the driver already possess image intensifier vision blocks for their periscope from the previous version).

Finally, the addition of SEM90 digital radios and whatever extremely cheap quality of life hotfixes/field modifications can be standardized will round out the upgrade package.