“This is the next generation of fighter-bombers”, stated the Minister of Defense while referring to the new aircraft Saeqeh, which the Islamic Republic claims they have developed [Persian]. The name of the new plane, Saeqeh (Thunderbolt), inspired the editors in the newspaper of the government, Iran, to use the big title “Iranian Thunderbolt at Zionists”.
What is missing in this “big achievement”? The fact that when the website of the national television first carried the news, they showed a plane which had the emblem of the Pahlavi Dynasty on it. This has made many guessing that this plane is not really designed by the Islamic Republic, but that it is rather an old plan which has been worked on since the late Shah of Iran. Of course they have changed the page now and it shows another picture [Persian]. An Iranian blogger managed to capture the original page.
Screen shot from the state-run television’s website. The picture down here shows the magnified version of the emblem on the tail of the plane. Click to enlarge.
Left: Emblem on the side of the plane “built by the Islamic Republic”, Right: The Lion and Sword emblem of Pahlavi Dinasty
See more pictures of the plane here. A helicopter and four unmanned airplanes are stated to be the next steps in the Islamic Republic’s technological quest [Persian].
[...] خبر داغ امروز سوتی سایت صداوسیما Ùˆ نشون دادن تصویری از هواپیمای صاعقه بود Ú©Ù‡ نشون Ù…ÛŒ ده این پروژه اØتمالا از زمان شاه روش کار Ù…ÛŒ کرده. در کمانگیر انگلیسی موضوع کامل ØªÙˆØ¶ÛŒØ Ø¯Ø§Ø¯Ù‡ شده Ùˆ عکسها هم هس…. [...]
Pingback by کمانگیر » آرشیو » خوانده های امروز - اسکناس هرویینی، هواپیمای شاهنشاهی Ùˆ باقی قضایا — September 20, 2007 @ 12:54 pm
Kamangir
First, thank you for creating such an excellent blog.
Take a look at the discussion page of Wikipedia on this aircraft:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:IAMI_Saeqeh
As many suspected, it is evident that they have taken a F-5E and just replaced the vertical stabilizer and slightly modified the nose. Iran purchased these aircrafts from Northrop in 1965 and subsequent years.
Kamangir: Thanks for the link and you nice comment.
As one of the posters on the page noted, the question is what have they really achieved? Will putting ‘lipstick’ on a 45 year old technology make it that much better?
Regards
Comment by Zixibit — September 20, 2007 @ 3:01 pm
Kaman: It looks like even their nuclear power plants are made up of outdated and obselete nuclear technology. And even for that they have to beg Russians and overpay their retired scientists.
Comment by serendip — September 20, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
Kaman: remember this lie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ8pkIRwws8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fardeshird%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOymPGXc_m4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fardeshird%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F
Comment by serendip — September 20, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Looks photoshopped, no one in the blogestaan trusts Kamangir
Kamangir: As I have mentioned in the about page, I will pay you $1,000 if you find a lie here.
Comment by Al-Kindi — September 20, 2007 @ 5:37 pm
Al kindi: Everyone trusts Kamangir in the blogsphere. He has earned it with hard work.
I think you’re projecting. Noone buys your trolling here. That’s what pisses you off.
Kamangir: Thanks my friend. :)
Comment by serendip — September 20, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
Ah, so it seems others have already picked up on your lies. $1,000? I’ll just sit back and watch the show, thank you.
Kamangir: Sir, with all due respect, you are either capable of proving that I have lied or owe me an apology.
Comment by Al-Kindi — September 20, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
I agree: Either Al-Kindi owes you an apology or Al-Kindi needs to present evidence to support the claim.
Al-Kindi, of course, should support any claims made.
Kamangir: Thanks Roxie. :)
Comment by RoxieAmerica — September 20, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
I second that. Al-Kindi, produce your arguments rather than going directly to a verdict. Unfounded accusations only make you look like a fool.
Kamangir: Thanks Roman.
Comment by Roman Kalik — September 21, 2007 @ 3:39 am
Wow, I didn’t realize that when I comment on Mr. Arash’s blog, I am free domain for demands to be made upon by Romans, Americans, and other esteemed commenter’s. Anyways, I was just making the observation that if one had to go to the lengths to make such a statement it shows both the insecurities of the writer and also increases the probability that he has been caught lying in a blog previously. Just observations, I’ll stick to my day job for money.
Kamangir: Lets settle this down. You are most welcome to come here and it is good to have people with different points of view in this blog. Having said that, I guess we all learned a lesson, if you are accusing people you have to provide proof. The good thing is, here, everything is in writing, so the evidence cannot disappear and can be always referred to.
Comment by Al-Kindi — September 21, 2007 @ 3:56 am
Al-Kindi, when you insult and attack people, expect to be called on it.
Comment by Roman Kalik — September 21, 2007 @ 7:57 am
*called out, rather.
Comment by Roman Kalik — September 21, 2007 @ 8:01 am
Whether or not the blue and yellow aircraft pictured is an F-5 variant or not, it’s not flyable as shown. The engines aren’t running, as evidenced by the fact the intake cover is installed, and a maintenance panel is missing halfway down the engine bay. Markings that would normally be present for ground maintenance crews aren’t there, such as fuel door markings, turbine rotation plane, or ejection system warnings.
The weaponry appears to be limited to two wingtip mounted air-to-air missles, as there are no underwing pylons for air-to-ground weapons. That’s not a very big threat.
So, the fact there are no chocks, and a pilot in the cockpit, tells us it’s a staged photo, most likely using a non-airworthy mockup. It’s all noise, with no truth to it.
Comment by Rob Thompson — September 22, 2007 @ 9:58 am
I think this news of an Iranian-designed fighter jet is nothing but propaganda. Does anyone doubt that American Air Force, if they had do, will make quick work of this fancy light-attack jet and their fancy new Russian air defense systems? This aircraft looks like a L-39 delfin that the former soviet-allied states used for pilot training. Anyways, my question to you is — how does this kind of propaganda resonate with Iranian public?? Do they really think they can challenge a war-mongering USA, a country that spends more on national defense than all nations in the world combined? Stop your nuke program, and maybe we’ll help you build some benzene refineries instead!! Merci :)
Comment by igor — September 22, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
One other point… It’s probably not supersonic, as it is missing the characteristic coke-bottle “pinch” in the fuselage, wgich is necessary to reduce airframe vibration in the transonic region.
Comment by Rob Thompson — September 22, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Its so cute. It looks like a kids toy. I can just imagine how well it would stand up to the IAF or the USAF…
Comment by moif — September 25, 2007 @ 6:24 am
May I make a suggestion? Find a credible photo or several photos of F-5’s, and post them up. I am not an expert on aircraft; however, it is immediately obvious that this aircraft is NOT a new aircraft…any person who reads the news and has a half decent memory will remember seeing pictures of F-5’s when Dan Rather ran that story before the election. One other thing i noticed in one of the pictures is that the exhaust nozzles(don’t know if that’s the correct term) in the picture with the newspaper in the foreground don’t look like they are “flexible”, like most jet fighters I have ever seen-just look like cans sticking out the back of a model that someone built
Comment by Dave Y. — September 26, 2007 @ 12:21 am
That is definetly a well known Iranian modification of the Northrop F-5E, called the Sa’Eqeh (sp?).
The basic F-5E is in service all over the world.
The twin tail, and some aerodynamic improvements were likely knocked off of Northrop’s own YF-17 prototype, based on the F-5, but never produced.
The US uses F-5Es mostly for “aggressor” aircraft – i.e. they play the bad guys in combat training. Very obsolete.
Comment by Chilly Willy — September 26, 2007 @ 8:57 am