Military Review

Iranian Defense Ministry: we have made significant progress in the negotiations on the acquisition of Su-30

48
Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehgan will discuss in Moscow the conditions for the supply of anti-aircraft systems and multi-purpose fighters Su-30, reports RIA News Journal of The National Interest.




“Minister Dehgan will discuss the purchase of Su-30 aircraft, which, according to the Ministry of Defense, are needed by the Iranian Air Force. We are well advanced in the negotiations, and I believe that the contract will be signed during the upcoming visit, ”the magazine quotes a representative of the Iranian military department.

Earlier, Dehgan on local television stressed that the leadership of the country "focuses on the modernization of the Air Force." At the same time, he drew attention to the Su-30 aircraft, without specifying which version of the military was interested.

"Perhaps Iran will need one of the advanced versions, similar to the planes available to India, Malaysia, Algeria and Russia," the newspaper notes.

According to the author, "Tehran can also make a choice in favor of Su-30М2 - buying an aircraft in this modification will be cheaper, which is probably a more reasonable decision, taking into account the economic situation in the country."

"It is quite possible that Iran will not limit itself to the purchase of weapons - Tehran is interested in concluding contracts for the transfer of licenses for the production of aircraft," he adds.

"The appearance of any version of the Su-30 in the air navy Iran will significantly increase the potential of the air forces, now consisting mostly of outdated models of American, Chinese and Russian production, ”the publication says.

According to the magazine, “the most modern aircraft in service with the Iranian air force today are the American fighter Grumman F-14 Tomcat (Grumman F-14 Tomcat) and the Soviet MiG-29. The rest of the fleet is made up of obsolete F-4 Phantom II (McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II), reworked by Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter (Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter / Tiger II) and F-6 and F-F planes 7 - models of the MiG-19 and MiG-21 ".
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Alex_Rarog
    Alex_Rarog 16 February 2016 17: 17
    +4
    Our weapons are increasingly popular more popular)
    1. Coconut Tima
      Coconut Tima 16 February 2016 18: 11
      +3
      The Iranian military plans to purchase at least $ XNUMX billion worth of Russian military equipment and weapons, the Kommersant newspaper reported on Tuesday, citing its sources in the Russian system of military-technical cooperation (MTC).
    2. Tusv
      Tusv 16 February 2016 19: 21
      +1
      Quote: Alex_Rarog
      Our weapons are more and more popular.

      It makes sense?
      1. Valera999
        Valera999 16 February 2016 20: 33
        +2
        And how else to take the currency to strengthen the ruble for you, now if not only weapons were the highest quality goods from you, then the whole world would be yours !!
    3. Talgat
      Talgat 16 February 2016 19: 32
      +3
      Quote: Alex_Rarog
      Our weapons are increasingly popular more popular)


      Yes, Russian weapons are well-deserved

      But in the case of Iran. agree, Iran has no choice. Either China or Russia, Iran will not have important things like Iran’s fighters or air defense in Western markets - they don’t buy from enemies. So we all remember that it is a dependency on those services. spare parts, repair and in the future also modernization. Buy from allies.

      And Russia also has no choice, they will not sell because. which is profitable, but because Iran cannot be surrendered. And the Middle East will be entirely in the hands of the Saudis and Cathars - but most importantly, a "hole" will be formed - a hole for aggressors right in the Caspian Sea, in the heart of Eurasia and in Central Asia
  2. Masks
    Masks 16 February 2016 17: 17
    +4
    Iran is still our good ally in Syria! And in the future I also hope (they have money and fighting spirit too)
    1. silver_roman
      silver_roman 16 February 2016 17: 22
      +5
      it is rather a forced collaboration.
      We have never been particularly friends with Iran, purely business and small moments of cooperation.
      I wouldn’t trust such a rear. and we fought decently with them. besides the Persians do not praise us much. it is still a serious nation with its own identity, not a balmy endangered balts!
      1. Alex_Rarog
        Alex_Rarog 16 February 2016 17: 24
        +3
        I do not agree the last Iranian prince was Colonel of the imperial army!
        1. Masks
          Masks 16 February 2016 17: 43
          +3
          Quote: Alex_Rarog
          I do not agree the last Iranian prince was Colonel of the imperial army!

          This is true, we have been communicating with Iran ... Deliveries (and large) were going through Iran during the Second World War!
          1. silver_roman
            silver_roman 16 February 2016 18: 06
            0
            it is a business. Ukraine is now worse than the enemy than Russia and can not come up with fool , but does not refuse to transport gas, because from this many suck here "svidomye" !!!
            that and in the cold war in the very heat of passion such as the Caribbean crisis, do you think that torus ties between the USA and the USSR stopped ????
            "ally" or "FRIEND" is not = PARTNER.
            I don't often hear from Lavrov or Putin: "our Kazakh / Belarusian partners"!
            1. Tusv
              Tusv 16 February 2016 18: 13
              +2
              Quote: silver_roman
              I don't often hear from Lavrov or Putin: "our Kazakh / Belarusian partners"!

              The word "partner" has a double interpretation, therefore such a definition is not appropriate about the participants of the TS.
              Policy
              1. silver_roman
                silver_roman 16 February 2016 18: 31
                0
                as one of the versions, but sometimes it seems to me that the reason is completely different!
                we do not name the Chinese partners.
            2. Masks
              Masks 16 February 2016 18: 37
              +2
              Quote: silver_roman
              Ukraine is now worse than the enemy than Russia and can not come up with

              I do not agree ..! Ukraine, it will remain Ukraine! Of course, you need to shoot a little (not all Bandera were finished off, or rather regretted ..) But building a serious (military-industrial complex ..) in Ukraine is not worth the future .. This is for sure!
              1. silver_roman
                silver_roman 16 February 2016 19: 03
                +3
                I live in Kiev, and believe me, the problem is not with Bandera. everything is done under the guise of all this. the ball is ruled by completely different individuals, and this is so ... to divert sights. here the most notorious "tolerasts" even had in mind that Bandera and everything connected with him.
          2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2016 20: 17
            +4
            Quote: Muskite
            Deliveries went through Iran (and large) during the Second World War!

            Aghas ... After the British, together with the Red Army, forced the peace of the Iranian army (there was one!). In general, Iranian supplies certainly were - contrary to the will of the Iranians
          3. Fat
            Fat 16 February 2016 21: 39
            +2
            Quote: Muskite
            This is true, we have been communicating with Iran ... Deliveries (and large) were going through Iran during the Second World War!
            Shah Reza Pahlavi was against transit. Iran was a neutral country.
            In September 1941, after the occupation of Iran by British and Soviet troops and the abdication and exile of his father, Reza Pahlavi, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was proclaimed Shahinshah of Iran and, together with the government, expressed his desire to cooperate with Great Britain and the USSR, having signed an alliance treaty with them in 1942. September 9, 1943 by his decree, the Shah declared war on Nazi Germany. In 1946, Soviet troops were withdrawn from Iran. The British left the country only in 1971. That’s what a wonderful and, most importantly, voluntary cooperation at gunpoint ... The British got Iranian oil, and the Soviet Union got the "corridor".
            The USSR quite fruitfully collaborated with Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in ​​the 60-70s of the last century.
        2. silver_roman
          silver_roman 16 February 2016 18: 04
          +2
          and against whom we helped to fight Iraq a couple of decades ago ????
          1. Thunderbolt
            Thunderbolt 16 February 2016 18: 33
            +1
            Quote: Alex_Rarog
            I do not agree the last Iranian prince was Colonel of the imperial army!
            And Baron Mannerheim was a lieutenant general of the Russian army. How did this help the Red Army to storm the "Mannerheim Line"? "Friendliness" in big politics is a very conditional thing. After the end of World War II, relations between Iran and the USSR were friendly. But Pehelevi came and deployed his Iran for the Americans. But Stalin planned to jointly produce oil and much more. But everything was decided by one palace coup.
            1. Fat
              Fat 16 February 2016 22: 10
              +2
              Quote: Thunderbolt
              After the end of World War II, relations between Iran and the USSR were friendly. But Pekhelevi came and deployed his Iran to the Americans. But Stalin planned to jointly produce oil and much more. But everything was decided by one palace coup.

              Not your truth. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi has "ruled" Iran since 1942. In April 1951, the Shah appointed Mohammad Mossadegh, a pro-nationalization leader, as prime minister, and on May 1 signed a law nationalizing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company after it was unanimously passed by the Majlis. After nationalization, oil production practically stopped due to the departure of British specialists and the oil embargo imposed by Britain. On July 16, 1952, after Mossadegh demanded emergency powers and the subordination of the army to him, the Shah dismissed him. This sparked a general strike and uprising in Tehran. On July 22, 1952, the Shah was forced to reappoint Mossadegh as prime minister.
              In October 1952, the government of Mossadegh broke off relations with England. In February 1953, Mossadegh proposed that the Shah leave Iran, declaring that the monarch should reign, not rule. At the same time, the British managed to gain American support in the overthrow of Mossadegh by agreeing to share oil profits with them. The planned coup was called Operation Ajax. On August 16–18, the shah was in temporary exile in Baghdad (Iraq), and August 18–22 was in Rome (Italy). In August 1953, the military associated with the throne, led by General F. Zahedi, with Anglo-American support, carried out a coup and overthrew the government of the Mossadegh National Front. Since then, the entire power in the country has actually passed into the hands of the shah.
          2. maiman61
            maiman61 16 February 2016 19: 19
            +2
            We helped both Iraq and Iran! This is well known.
            1. silver_roman
              silver_roman 17 February 2016 09: 44
              0
              I don’t know anything about helping Iran in that war. Maybe it was, I won’t argue. Grandfather, an aviation major, was sent to Iraq where he stayed for more than a year.
              But I know one thing for sure, the Iranians never considered us friends. Despite everything, I have a close friend - an Iranian. We studied together in aviation in Kiev. As he met, he immediately said: "We fought 3 times!"
              Persians are the oldest nation with their strong genes and self-esteem.
              I would even set the level with the Japanese in this regard. It’s just that the yapes are in such a way that they are not much shaken, although they also got it in full.
          3. samoletil18
            samoletil18 16 February 2016 21: 02
            0
            Quote: silver_roman
            and against whom we helped to fight Iraq a couple of decades ago ????

            In 1996? (!)
            1. silver_roman
              silver_roman 16 February 2016 22: 03
              0
              ok, I’ll write this: a few dozen ago. I don’t remember. it seems that the 60s were .... oh damn .. really half a century has passed! we are already old crying
        3. Grbear
          Grbear 16 February 2016 18: 43
          0
          In addition, there was Tehran-43, and this says a lot.
          1. Fat
            Fat 16 February 2016 21: 58
            +1
            Quote: GrBear
            In addition, there was Tehran-43, and this says a lot.

            This does not mean anything. Iran was occupied by the USSR and Great Britain ...
        4. Fat
          Fat 16 February 2016 21: 25
          +2
          Quote: Alex_Rarog
          I do not agree the last Iranian prince was Colonel of the imperial army!

          Shahinshah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was born in 1919 and simply could not be a colonel in the Russian tsarist army. His father rose to the rank of General of the Persian Cossack Division. (The Persian Cossack brigade (Persian بریگاد قزاق) (reorganized into a division in 1916) is a cavalry unit created in Persia on the model of the Terek Cossack units and which existed from 1879 to 1920.)
      2. adept666
        adept666 16 February 2016 19: 22
        +2
        I wouldn’t trust such a rear.
        Iran is primarily a technological driver for us, it’s not in one place for us as an ally; we can dump anyone without any allies. Before Iran, there was Libya and there were many hopes for it, but Medved passed it (maybe there was no option to help, but nonetheless). Iran = a lot of oil - sanctions = a lot of money. Nobody will sell technology to them from the Obama gang in the near future, and we will. For their money, we will continue to develop our atom, microelectronics, military and civilian equipment, etc. while decreasing its own dependence on oil and gas. It sounds like a consumer, but to live with wolves in a forest is like a wolf howl, especially since someone wants to fuck something from our country all his life and it’s advisable to have some free time ... I think the time has come to change this. For too long, we have not declared our strategic interests. V.V. Putin.
        1. Fat
          Fat 16 February 2016 22: 22
          +1
          I agree with you. But you shouldn't measure everything with money alone. They are trying hard to make Russia a "rogue state," which Iran has long been. For now, and probably for a long time, we will be on our way with them.
      3. Fat
        Fat 16 February 2016 21: 11
        +1
        Quote: silver_roman
        it is rather a forced collaboration.
        We have never been particularly friends with Iran, purely business and small moments of cooperation.
        I wouldn’t trust such a rear. and we fought decently with them. besides the Persians do not praise us much.

        What to praise? The last time they fought in August-September 1941. The northern part of Iran was occupied ... The Allies, the British, - the southern.
        1. silver_roman
          silver_roman 17 February 2016 09: 45
          0
          all right. I'm about the same.
  3. Oleg Lavrov
    Oleg Lavrov 16 February 2016 17: 19
    +4
    The "hysteria and horror" of the Saudis and Turacans will fly to Iran !!
  4. ohtsistem
    ohtsistem 16 February 2016 17: 19
    +2
    Only technology needs to be selectively transferred
  5. OlegV
    OlegV 16 February 2016 17: 20
    +1
    “The appearance of any version of the Su-30 in the Iranian air fleet will significantly increase the potential of the air force ....


    no one doubts .... definitely increase.
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 16 February 2016 17: 20
    +2
    They want modern weapons - and ours. Good news. Re-equipment of our videoconferencing will cost cheaper. You are welcome.
    1. tol100v
      tol100v 16 February 2016 17: 45
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      . You are welcome.

      Cooperation with Iran in Russia is beneficial for many reasons. Not only because he is our ally in Syria. We can help Syria without Iran. We sell high-tech products to this country. From nuclear power plants to S-300. Now that sanctions have been lifted from Iran, the list of goods, including weapons, will be orders of magnitude larger, especially since the partner is completely solvent!
      1. quote
        quote 16 February 2016 20: 53
        0
        Quote: Tol100v
        that the partner is completely solvent!

        So why is it being discussed for 8 "lard" weapons on credit?
        1. sharp-lad
          sharp-lad 16 February 2016 23: 03
          0
          The Iranians still cannot get to the earned money before, the West knows how to pull the "rubber", and earning new lards - it takes a lot of time, and they may have to defend themselves in the very near future.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  7. Nord2015
    Nord2015 16 February 2016 17: 22
    +1
    Let them take it, and the more the better. And with this money you can invent something new. All the same, military equipment is a product with high added value, and not non-renewable hydrocarbons and raw materials. In addition, the supply of ammunition for these weapons will later go, which is also good.
  8. sevsor
    sevsor 16 February 2016 17: 23
    +3
    "East is a delicate matter" ... this was proved by our recent friends from Turkey ((
  9. awersa
    awersa 16 February 2016 17: 24
    +1
    Why not? again, our "good neighbors" in the CIS, who look at your hair near Iran, think about it ... or else they’re sitting on shattered pieces of army owls ... flirting with mattresses, ,,,
  10. awersa
    awersa 16 February 2016 17: 25
    0
    Yes, and to the Turks to the peak, even so not so far ...
  11. Primus pilus
    Primus pilus 16 February 2016 17: 25
    +1
    The Saudi falcons are moody.
  12. Vita vko
    Vita vko 16 February 2016 17: 30
    +5
    Iran urgently needs to arm. This is the only powerful ally capable of really stabilizing the situation in the Middle East. More recently, Iraq and Iran were irreconcilable enemies, and now they are already part of the Syrian coalition with Russia.
  13. DimYang
    DimYang 16 February 2016 17: 46
    -1
    Opinions about Iran are different. But here it is made for me that not too Iran should be armed, I can smell inside them some kind of catch. Especially transfer technology. Their overly religious state is dangerous, because there are essentially two chapters. All this in the future can create problems, first of all, for us.
  14. DimYang
    DimYang 16 February 2016 17: 47
    0
    That is nonsense. The Czech icon was noticed at home. Although I am in Belarus. It’s strange.
    1. samoletil18
      samoletil18 16 February 2016 21: 08
      0
      Since New Year, I’ll pop up under the EU, then under the mattress. Moderators! What's happening?
  15. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 16 February 2016 18: 08
    +1
    Well, what about the United States lifted sanctions, now Iran can think about life. What needs to be bought for her, from whom.
    I understand Iran is not grateful. The USA lifted sanctions, and Iran buys weapons from the Russian Federation. Against whom is it interesting?
    Air defense seems to be at first e, and the acquisition of anti-ship missiles also does not need to be postponed.
  16. mav1971
    mav1971 16 February 2016 18: 23
    +1
    And the catch is very unpleasant. Iran is not going to pay with money but obscure goods. Type of oil at the rate of 50 and above. And even more. Iran is going to force us on a loan for a period of 15-20 years. 20 years we will feed plants with carpets and pistachios?
    Or tomatoes?
    Well, that means that all virtual dollars will simply gobble up and put down the toilet.
    And in cash, you could buy at least a dozen machines
  17. cap
    cap 16 February 2016 18: 50
    +1
    Iranians express their opinion, and support the Syrians without looking back at the United States and its satellites. Here is a recent publication in the Iranian press:

    "The UN Permanent Representative in Syria called the suffering of the people of the world the result of the policy of the West, primarily the United States.
    As reported on Tuesday by the Syrian Al-Akhbariya TV channel, Bashar al-Jafari, at a UN Security Council meeting on support and respect for the functions of the UN Charter for maintaining peace and security in the world, said: “Representatives of the United States, Great Britain and France have brought suffering by supporting Israel from the outset and paving the way for its occupation in Arab countries, and vetoing the Zionist regime dozens of times. "
    Syrian Permanent Representative to the UN called the creation of an effective international coalition within the framework of international norms and with the participation of the countries involved under the leadership of Syria the only effective way to fight terrorism.
    Al-Jafari noted: "A number of UN member states in an attempt to justify their military intervention in Syria under the pretext of fighting the Daesh group without coordination with the Syrian government is actually violating the UN Charter and covering up the sponsors of terrorism."
    Well, what is the physiognomy after that of the master of the world.
    obama
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 16 February 2016 23: 06
      0
      Pancake! But really offended!
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 16 February 2016 20: 14
    0
    Quote: Alex_Rarog
    Our weapons are increasingly popular more popular)

    War is doing its job!
  20. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 16 February 2016 22: 42
    0
    Quote: Valera999
    And how else to take the currency to strengthen the ruble for you, now if not only weapons were the highest quality goods from you, then the whole world would be yours !!

    Do we need it all? Why step on the Amer rake or the same rake of the permanent revolution of Trotsky?
    And we need money, at least for the production and development of newer equipment, which the RF Armed Forces lack so much! soldier