Military Review

US-made fighters equipped with Soviet missiles

63

The Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran is armed with American F-14 Tomcat aircraft. They equipped these US-made fighters with Soviet R-27 air-to-air missiles.


Telegram channel writes about this today "Military Observer"specializing in the military, historical and geopolitical topics.

Photos of American military aircraft with missiles, developed in the Soviet Union, suspended under their wings have appeared online.




Iranian specialists managed to combine the military developments of the main opponents in the Cold War.

The Islamic Republic Air Force is currently in service with 43 units of F-14 Tomcat fighters. They have been produced by the American company Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation since the 70s. After the US-Iranian relations deteriorated, Tehran began to independently produce components for these aircraft and continued to use them. It is a fourth-generation two-seat jet fighter-bomber with variable sweep wings.

Aviation the R-27 rocket was developed in the USSR, but its serial production began already in the Russian Federation. Similar weapon produced in Ukraine. The missile is used to destroy mainly enemy aircraft and UAVs.
Photos used:
https://en.wikipedia.org/, U.S. Navy, https://t.me/new_militarycolumnist
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. faiver
    faiver 25 November 2020 16: 43
    +13
    Well done Iranians, what else can you say ...
    1. Shurik70
      Shurik70 25 November 2020 23: 38
      +1
      An interesting hybrid turned out ...
      And the United States, splashing saliva on Turkey for the purchase of the S-400, argues that Russian systems are not compatible with NATO ...
      1. Starover_Z
        Starover_Z 26 November 2020 00: 56
        +2
        Quote: Shurik70
        An interesting hybrid turned out ...
        And the United States, splashing saliva on Turkey for the purchase of the S-400, argues that Russian systems are not compatible with NATO ...

        And if you launch these missiles at NATO aircraft, the results will show for sure whether they are compatible or not!
      2. hydrox
        hydrox 26 November 2020 08: 48
        0
        Very well compatible!
        It is in the place where the explosive charge is triggered near the skin of the Yankes aircraft and the Iranians here act as innovators, but not even camel drivers! yes
  2. Thrifty
    Thrifty 25 November 2020 16: 46
    +4
    Well, even being under sanctions, the Persians managed to “cross a hedgehog and a snake!” Now, we need to sell them more weapons, and most importantly, not to fit into this sanctions provocation! And, we still need to urgently lift sanctions from North Korea, stop following the US!
    1. K-612-O
      K-612-O 25 November 2020 17: 29
      +4
      Duc for a long time already, they bought them before the embargo, and in the Iranian-Iraqi war they used Soviet missiles from Tomkets and Phantoms.
    2. Hwostatij
      Hwostatij 25 November 2020 17: 41
      -4
      And, we still need to urgently lift the sanctions against North Korea, enough go on about the US!

      They are beggars, like church rats - if you sell them something, then only for our own loan, which will never be returned
      1. garik77
        garik77 25 November 2020 18: 04
        +4
        Barter can be traded. The Persians have interesting food products that we ourselves do not have or do not have.
        1. Hwostatij
          Hwostatij 25 November 2020 18: 13
          +4
          Are you sure you read my comment? North Koreans and Iran are slightly different guys.
  3. Abdula
    Abdula 25 November 2020 16: 50
    -1
    Quote: faiver
    Well done Iranians, what else can you say ...
    yes, I agree, there are some who have already fought with ancient weapons that now leaving they burn their own houses
    1. midivan
      midivan 25 November 2020 17: 16
      +9
      Quote: Abdula
      yes, I agree, there are some who have already fought with ancient weapons that now leaving they burn their own houses

      The only difference is that some, having bought an ancient weapon, quietly sat on it, while others "poked" in it, studied and created a design school, there is a beginning, there will be results, they at least strive for something, and do not dance to the barbecue and hope to be helped.
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 18: 16
      +6
      Only Iran still has quite enough attack UAVs and cruise missiles en masse ..
  4. Alien From
    Alien From 25 November 2020 16: 59
    +1
    Necessity for invention is cunning ... Joke)
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 26 November 2020 08: 53
      0
      Do you condemn the Persians?
      Don't do this: these are our likely allies in a possible conflict between the United States and Russia
      1. Alien From
        Alien From 26 November 2020 09: 54
        0
        No, I don't, of course.
  5. APASUS
    APASUS 25 November 2020 17: 02
    +6
    This is what I understand the engineering school. We set up the production of spare parts for aviation equipment, we were able to cross an aircraft and missiles, two different systems and generations
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 26 November 2020 09: 02
      +2
      Not otherwise, as the Persians studied in Russian in-takh!
      What then are the squeals of our goat-libre "from education": "Ah, the Unified State Exam, uh," the Eblonskaya (sorry, Bologna) system "is already a diagnosis suitable for psychiatry: a training system suitable only for flaunting in the garbage dump of civilization is taken as basic for Russia.
  6. Pete mitchell
    Pete mitchell 25 November 2020 17: 06
    +19
    I would like to see the surprised faces of the creators of the F-14 ... the Iranians applause
    1. K-612-O
      K-612-O 25 November 2020 17: 30
      +2
      By the way, one of the best aircraft, shortsightedly written off, as a fighter, much better than a hornet
      1. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 25 November 2020 17: 38
        +7
        I also really like Tomcat, but it is a product of its time. Hornets, even the first generation, are a much more advanced machine, more versatile, pre-tuned for a lot of things ... corresponding to the problems of a universal aircraft.
        There was an opportunity to look both closely: Tomcat is of course such a kid, Hornet looks quite intelligent to itself.
        In general, the Persians are great, but it's interesting: they only prescribed missiles there, or replaced the entire SUV
        1. garik77
          garik77 25 November 2020 18: 07
          +3
          There, the electronics need to be updated and then he will fight on equal terms with the hornets
          1. Pete mitchell
            Pete mitchell 25 November 2020 18: 18
            +5
            Quote: garik77
            will still fight on equal terms with hornets

            If Tomcat is modernized to take into account modern technologies, the machine will still work out ... But from the point of view of operating costs and prospects, the fleet needs to be updated
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 26 November 2020 09: 14
              +1
              Quote: Pete Mitchell
              the fleet needs to be updated

              Here I definitely agree with you!
              It is for the disposal of the morally and strategically outdated aircraft carrier fleet of the United States that all these Zircons, Vanguards, Daggers and other nice things that interfere with the sleep of overseas admirals serve.
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 25 November 2020 21: 04
        +2
        Remember forever, the F18 is a milestone, the first production aircraft in aviation, which was also made taking into account the minimization of aircraft maintenance costs. A whole program of such events was carried out on this aircraft, even at the design and testing stage ...
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 26 November 2020 09: 17
          0
          lol Listen, and you, for an hour, did not you take part in the design of this "miracle", so that with such a breath we can tell about this wickle?
          1. VO3A
            VO3A 26 November 2020 22: 20
            0
            And you did not unscrew the screws in the cold to remove a very inconvenient block? Narrator ....... !!!!
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 27 November 2020 09: 18
              -1
              I wish you to end your career as a "freezing screw looser" as soon as possible and move to the warmth and TEC for a start.
              narrator. laughing
              1. VO3A
                VO3A 27 November 2020 11: 05
                -1
                I finished it 35 years ago! The dilettante's logic is not explicable, and your logic is difficult ...
                1. hydrox
                  hydrox 27 November 2020 12: 14
                  -1
                  So you are a pro ... in frozen bolts (and even something dangles without a limiter like a schoolboy!) laughing
                  I won't even minus - it's dumb for me stop
    2. Stas Sv
      Stas Sv 26 November 2020 15: 25
      0
      Are they? Have you noticed why the Il-76 (Iranian) in the last six months has become a frequent visitor to the Mother See? 3-4 flights per week. So, infa for thought.
  7. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 17: 09
    +1
    I can assume that there is also a Russian or Soviet-made radar station.
  8. Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 25 November 2020 17: 15
    +4
    We crossed a bulldog and a rhino, if it still works, you can only slap the Persian flight of technical thought))
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 November 2020 17: 34
      +2
      Quote: Lord of the Sith
      We crossed a bulldog and a rhino, if it still works, you can only slap the Persian flight of technical thought))

      It can and will work. But only under ideal conditions - for a non-maneuvering target that does not interfere.
      R-27 is for the most part either IC GOS or PARLGSN. IR - too short-sighted for a heavy interceptor. And the helplessness of the RVV with semi-active radar missile launchers against the 4th generation vehicles was shown back in the 80s, when the Americans suddenly found out in the exercises that the effective launch range of their Sparrow, at which the enemy does not have time to disrupt the guidance, is approximately equal to the launch range of the sidewinder ". At long ranges, on-board electronic warfare systems break the grip, and missiles with PARLGSN go into milk.
      And if you put ARLGSN on the R-27, then why such perversions, if there is an R-77-1? smile
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 18: 44
        +1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        At long ranges, on-board electronic warfare systems break the grip,

        Do you remember at least one case that electronic warfare systems would have counteracted those launched at a long range, and at the same time it still got somewhere ...
        Quote: Alexey RA
        ARLGSN

        What's the problem?
        Quote: Alexey RA
        R-77-1?

        They just might not have them ...
        not interfering.

        The only advantage in my opinion of ARGSN over PRGSN, but serious, is that the target is not actually irradiated by the enemy radar, in illumination mode
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 November 2020 19: 32
          +1
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          What's the problem?

          There is only one problem - why? It's like upgrading the BTR-60. smile
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          They just might not have them ...

          Then there is no need to suffer. The Tomcat is more of an interceptor than a fighter, its task is to shoot from a distance and topple.
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          Do you remember at least one case that electronic warfare systems would have counteracted those launched at a long range, and at the same time it still got somewhere ...

          What is it about. R-27R forces "Tomcat" to climb at a launch distance closer than 10 km. And there it is not far from the BVB.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 19: 51
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            What are we talking about

            Not really, I did mean AiM-120 in relation to
            к
            Do you remember at least one case that electronic warfare systems would have counteracted those launched at a long range, and at the same time it still got somewhere ...


            Quote: Alexey RA
            There is only one problem - why? It's like upgrading the BTR-60.

            Yes? Well, remember how the AiM-7 and AiM-120 look like
          2. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 20: 21
            0
            And another interesting point - just long-range missiles, moreover, apparently with ARGSN of its own production, Iran does have - RVV Fakur-90 (Fakour-90)
      2. hydrox
        hydrox 26 November 2020 09: 30
        0
        The R-77 is a weapon in service with the Russian Armed Forces.
        Despite the fact that the R-27 has long been hopelessly outdated, this rubbish was given to the Persians so that they could try to create something acceptable on a decent glider, and moreover, train the designers in creating something new for them, incl. h and the creation of a school.
        Moreover, the Persians have been interested in UAVs for a very long time (remember a few pieces that they successfully caught either by the Autobase or the Zoo), but the garage is not suitable for creating the Terminators, a SCHOOL and a matbase are needed here.
  9. soul
    soul 25 November 2020 17: 34
    +20
    Article title can be misleading
    1. Kuzmitsky
      25 November 2020 19: 49
      +1
      Oh really!

      Or maybe not, if you read it. More precisely, the title of the article could be misleading if it did not correspond entirely to its content. Well, or in the event that you read only the title, but not the article, and then come up with the content yourself, then the delusion is inevitable. In general, something like that.

      The article deals with fighters manufactured in the USA and equipped with missiles created in the USSR. There is no other interpretation and cannot be. And this is one hundred percent consistent with its name.

      I hope it helped to navigate everyone who had difficulties with this.

      And the Iranians are great, skilled guys. Honor and praise to them!
      1. Stas Sv
        Stas Sv 26 November 2020 15: 35
        0
        Doubts gnaw at me, however ... Without the Russian Ivan, there was 100% of it.
  10. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 19: 39
    +2
    As far as I understand, the project is quite old. It was carried out in line with attempts to extend the life of the F-14.
    Reprogramming AWG-9 for P-27 control algorithms is doubtful. Rather, there is a radar station from the Su-27 with all the R-27 guidance and illumination command formation systems.
    The R-27R is clearly visible in the photo. Its effectiveness is not very high now, but it is in service and is still purchased by many countries. R-27T missiles with good efficiency at low altitudes, here it may well withstand modern missiles. A missile with a passive head is rather a scarecrow, it will not hit, but it will scare the enemy with rrich at a long range. In reality, there were no R-27 missiles with ARGS.
    If this is the case, then under certain conditions the P-14 may appear on the F-77.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 19: 53
      +1
      Quote: Pavel57
      In reality, there were no R-27 missiles with ARGS.


      Does the R-27AM index tell me sclerosis? Like they did the 27th with ARGSN. But I will definitely not argue on this topic.
    2. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 25 November 2020 21: 53
      0
      Without touching the AWG-9, they could have remade the R-27R head for the multipurpose Phoenix guidance procedure, but this is still a serious update.
  11. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 19: 57
    0
    Quote: Cyril G ...
    Quote: Pavel57
    In reality, there were no R-27 missiles with ARGS.


    Does the R-27AM index tell me sclerosis? Like they did the 27th with ARGSN. But I will definitely not argue on this topic.

    The project was, but work on the R-77 was a priority.
  12. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 20: 07
    +1
    Quote: Kuzmitsky
    And the Iranians are great, skilled guys. Honor and praise to them!

    Yes, hanging Hawk on the F-14 is serious.
    And their F-5 variants are also interesting projects. There was information that they were equipped with RD-33 and Mig29 radar.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 25 November 2020 20: 24
      0
      Quote: Pavel57
      Hawk at F-14 is serious.


      On the way, the Iranians made fun of the observers ...

      For not so long ago, they quite showed themselves the Iranian Phoenix - Fakur-90
    2. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 26 November 2020 15: 36
      0
      I don't see the hock, I see something similar to the AIM-54 Phoenix
  13. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 20: 11
    0
    Quote: Cyril G ...
    Like they did the 27th with ARGSN. But

    There was only a project.
  14. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 20: 30
    0
    Quote: Cyril G ...
    Quote: Pavel57
    Hawk at F-14 is serious.


    On the way, the Iranians made fun of the observers ...

    For not so long ago, they quite showed themselves the Iranian Phoenix - Fakur-90

    This kind of banter is quite expensive.
    And Fenx is an expensive and complex rocket.
  15. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 22: 10
    0
    Quote: Hexenmeister
    Without touching the AWG-9, they could have remade the R-27R head for the multipurpose Phoenix guidance procedure, but this is still a serious update.

    The principles of targeting Phoenix and R-27 are different. Nobody will alter the head for sure. This task is akin to creating a new rocket.
    1. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 25 November 2020 22: 25
      +1
      The point is not in the principles of guidance, but in the order of transmission of control information and illumination. And remaking the head is easier than changing the radar. And where the Iranians will get the "extra" H-001, they are not sold on the market, and the transition from AWG-9 and Phoenixes to H-001 and R-27ER is essentially a step back!
  16. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 November 2020 23: 06
    0
    Quote: Hexenmeister
    The point is not in the principles of guidance, but in the order of transmission of control information and illumination. And remaking the head is easier than changing the radar. And where the Iranians will get the "extra" H-001, they are not sold on the market, and the transition from AWG-9 and Phoenixes to H-001 and R-27ER is essentially a step back!

    I guess there was a period of cooperation with Iran. If the information about their version of the F-5 Sagem is correct, then they received both the RD-33 and weapons. Moreover, they got the RD-33 from the Iraqis. And they could receive stations from the Su-27 or install from the MiG-29. Although both options require solving a bunch of technical problems.
    When to support those. the readiness of the F-14 becomes difficult, then the question is which is easier from the available one can be established. BRLs and weapons are the simplest. Building a new rocket is very difficult. It seems to you that making a new head is easy. On the R-27, the head combines the functions of an inertial system, and this is all connected with the autopilot. The development of the rocket in the USSR required large resources of specialists for the creation and development. Despite the handiness of the Iranians, this is the most unlikely scenario.

    Modifying the Awg-9 is also problematic. The only option besides replacing the radar is to install an illumination station for the R-27 and flight detection units. But there was no separate illumination station for the R-27. This function was performed by the carrier radar. So the intrigue remained.
    1. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 25 November 2020 23: 29
      0
      Why bother with everything? The Su-27 has no illumination units and no honorary mission formation! And the work of the head is a complex, in fact, a comparison of inertial coordinates with the current parameters of the target's movement, which can change during the guidance process after launch. And all this is characteristic of the P-27 and Phoenix, only they are produced according to different diagrams. And the transition to the standard P-27R guidance diagram is a huge step back, since it will be associated with the loss of the possibility of a multi-purpose attack with a bunch of other accompanying negative factors. Do you think the Iranians do not understand this ??? And therefore, either this is all fake or you need to do something more complicated than H-001 and R-27R !!!
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 25 November 2020 23: 37
        0
        Can you find out what is the difference between the construction of the Phoenix and R-27 inertial systems?
  17. Pavel57
    Pavel57 26 November 2020 00: 10
    0
    Quote: Pavel57
    Can you find out what is the difference between the construction of the Phoenix and R-27 inertial systems?


    The Phoenix AIM-54A rocket did not have an inertial system, since the seeker operated in two modes - semi-active and active in the final section. The large diameter of the rocket and the seeker makes it quite easy to capture and track the target of the seeker immediately after launch (there are certain doubts, but they are not essential.).
    Now on R-27. The diameter of the seeker is smaller, the capture range is shorter, and you want to shoot at least further than the Sparrow analog. For this, on the basis of the inertial unit of the seeker, an ISU is made with the possibility of correcting the coordinates of the target along the radio path of the illumination.

    Suppose the Iranians have made a GOS for the R-27 at AWG-9 frequencies. They need to either repeat the entire ideology of the R-27 to ensure the range of the R-27, or abandon the Inertial section, which will lead to a decrease in the launch range to 50 km. No more. In addition, there can be no active channel in the diameter of the P-27 from the word in any way.
    1. Pavel57
      Pavel57 26 November 2020 00: 24
      0
      There is another option, which is hard to believe - to make an analogue of the R-27 out of the R-77. Then AWG -9 will require a foreseeable amount of improvements.
    2. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 26 November 2020 09: 19
      0
      The Phoenix AIM-54A rocket did not have an inertial system
      There were several variants of the AIM-54. including with ANN. It was the AWG-9 bundle with Phoenixes, which provides an attack on several targets with certain restrictions, and became, to some extent, a "rival" when creating the Zaslon-P33 bundle for the MiG-31, only ours managed to implement a multi-purpose attack without AWG-9 restrictions due to PAR, and the transition to the R-27R with its principles in the twenty-first century is, I repeat, a step back !!!
  18. Danila46
    Danila46 26 November 2020 08: 50
    -1
    "American fighter equipped with Soviet missile" ...
    "If you want to live, and you will not be so raspy-x / f" features of national fishing. "
  19. Pavel57
    Pavel57 26 November 2020 09: 56
    +1
    Quote: Hexenmeister
    There were several variants of the AIM-54. including with ANN. ,

    Phoenix AIM - 54C with INS was not transferred to Iran.
  20. Pavel57
    Pavel57 26 November 2020 10: 04
    0
    Another touch to the history - Tehran has established an independent production of components for these aircraft and continued to use them.

    The Americans, as is their custom, drove their entire fleet of F-14s to Arizona for storage. But after a while they were completely disposed of in order to exclude contraband in the West. parts to Iran.
  21. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 26 November 2020 11: 49
    0
    Hmm, that's how they did it, EMNIP, 15 years ago, when the last "Phoenix" and "Sparrow" went rotten.
  22. Pavel57
    Pavel57 26 November 2020 14: 18
    0
    Quote: Bersaglieri
    Hmm, that's how they did it, EMNIP, 15 years ago, when the last "Phoenix" and "Sparrow" went rotten.

    So we are wondering what they did?