Re: How did the Iranians get the Phoenix to work? [Archive]

View Full Version : Re: How did the Iranians get the Phoenix to work?

Ragnar

September 26th 03, 10:23 PM

Tarver Engineering

September 26th 03, 10:28 PM

"Ragnar" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Hobo" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Some people here have been claiming that the Iranians made effective and
> > widespread use of the Phoenix missle against Iraq. I have always read
> > that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians altered the F-14s they
> > were servicing so that they could never fire the Phoenix. If the
> > Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did they overcome the sabotage?
>
> They had the maintenance manuals, US-trained technicians, spare parts, and
> time.

They made a homebuilt Phoenix. I went to school with Iranian engineering
students at CSUF, they have the skill.

Nick Pedley

September 27th 03, 10:17 AM

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>
> > They made a homebuilt Phoenix. I went to school with Iranian
engineering
> > students at CSUF, they have the skill.
>
> I have read that the Grumman techs pulled the daughterboards necessary
> for firing the Phoenix. That isn't solved by building new phoenii.

No, it's solved by working out what those circuit boards did and making
replacements.

Nick

Tom Cooper

September 27th 03, 01:32 PM

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Some people here have been claiming that the Iranians made effective and
> widespread use of the Phoenix missle against Iraq. I have always read
> that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians altered the F-14s they
> were servicing so that they could never fire the Phoenix. If the
> Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did they overcome the sabotage?

Hobo,
don't get me wrong, but there is a book that describes it all nicely and to
the last details: http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php

Don't be lazy, but check it there and you'll see that all similar rumors
about the US technicians "sabotaging" Iranian F-14s so these couldn't fire
AIM-54s are actually a complete and utter nonsence.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Bill Silvey

September 27th 03, 03:30 PM

"Tom Cooper" > wrote in message

> "Hobo" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> Some people here have been claiming that the Iranians made effective
>> and widespread use of the Phoenix missle against Iraq. I have always
>> read that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians altered the
>> F-14s they were servicing so that they could never fire the Phoenix.
>> If the Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did they overcome the
>> sabotage?
>
> Hobo,
> don't get me wrong, but there is a book that describes it all nicely
> and to the last details: http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
>
> Don't be lazy, but check it there and you'll see that all similar
> rumors about the US technicians "sabotaging" Iranian F-14s so these
> couldn't fire AIM-54s are actually a complete and utter nonsence.

Considering that the Iranians are continuing to fly their F14's and indeed
*improving* them speaks volumes for their ingenuity.

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

Leadfoot

September 27th 03, 06:16 PM

> > Don't be lazy, but check it there and you'll see that all similar
> > rumors about the US technicians "sabotaging" Iranian F-14s so these
> > couldn't fire AIM-54s are actually a complete and utter nonsence.
>
> Considering that the Iranians are continuing to fly their F14's and indeed
> *improving* them speaks volumes for their ingenuity.
>

We had some Pre-Revolution Iranian Warrant Officers (is hofmadors the right
term?) visit our ground radio shop for familarization for two weeks in
circa 78-79. We threw some troubleshooting problems at them which they
solved fairly easily. The NCO's in charge of my shop were fairly impressed
with them and the Iranians got bored fairly quickly. Both were not thrilled
to return to Iran due to the revolution going on at the time.

Tom Cooper

September 27th 03, 09:34 PM

"Homafars" (the NCO Corps of the Imperial Iranian Armed Services ["IIAS" -
this included the IIAF, IIAA, and the IINA]) were - in relation - the best
paid and most priviledged personnel of the army, air force, and navy at the
time.

It's interesting that the only part of the military that joined the riots
against the Shah were - nevertheless - some of the Homafars stationed in the
Tehran area and quite a few young cadets from the IIAF Academy, which were
in the middle of their pilot-training courses, and planned later to fly
F-16s.

There were lots of claims about the lack of trained personnel in the IIAS at
the time, and some of these might also be truth as much as understandable -
especially given the fact that only the IIAF grew from 30.000 personnel in
1970 to 100.000 in 1978. However, the people chosen for the Project "Persian
King" (as the sale of F-14s to Iran was named), were the best they had;
all - including the technical personnel - were trained in the USA, and most
had at least one additional tour with the USAF, USN, IDF/AF, Luftwaffe, RAF
etc., etc. or at least the PAF. Nobody there had any kind of problems
qualifying on Tomcats.

The only problems were caused by the fact that the Pentagon was requesting
all the maintenance on sensitive pieces of the avionics to be done in the
USA - so the Iranians were not trained to do specific works. Given that for
this reason a considerable part of the supplied avionics packages was
permanently underway somewhere between Khatami AB and Calverton, the result
was that quite a part of the Iranian Tomcats were grounded already before
the revolution. The other part was grounded for purpose: they intentionaly
have purchased more than their units could need, so to have a solid
attrition reserve for the years to come (the IIAF standard was 16 planes per
squadron, plust two attrition reserves: they bought 80 F-14As for four
units). But, they needed not much time to learn about these jobs either.
Besides, the USN, just for example, would completely stop their
"consultation-activities" for the Iranian F-14-project only in 1983...

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Matt Wiser

September 28th 03, 01:33 AM

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>
>"Ragnar" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>>
>> "Hobo" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >
>> > Some people here have been claiming that
>the Iranians made effective and
>> > widespread use of the Phoenix missle against
>Iraq. I have always read
>> > that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians
>altered the F-14s they
>> > were servicing so that they could never
>fire the Phoenix. If the
>> > Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did
>they overcome the sabotage?
>>
>> They had the maintenance manuals, US-trained
>technicians, spare parts, and
>> time.
>
>They made a homebuilt Phoenix. I went to school
>with Iranian engineering
>students at CSUF, they have the skill.
>
>
Not to mention clandestine US assistance in the early 1980s, plus shipments
of -54A missiles when the USN went to the -54C. It appears that they have
reverse-engineered the -54A and build an unliscensed version of Phoenix.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Matt Wiser

September 28th 03, 01:36 AM

Hobo > wrote:
>In article >,
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>
>> They made a homebuilt Phoenix. I went to
>school with Iranian engineering
>> students at CSUF, they have the skill.
>
>I have read that the Grumman techs pulled the
>daughterboards necessary
>for firing the Phoenix. That isn't solved by
>building new phoenii.
Check the book Iran-Iraq War in the Air-it mentions some 70-90 firings
of Phoenix, and 50-70 kills. From MiG-25s to helos, plus Tu-16s and Tu-22s
were victims.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Tarver Engineering

September 28th 03, 01:44 AM

Tom Cooper

September 28th 03, 09:48 AM

"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message news:3f762c9c@bg2....
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
> >
> >"Ragnar" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >>
> >> "Hobo" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Some people here have been claiming that
> >the Iranians made effective and
> >> > widespread use of the Phoenix missle against
> >Iraq. I have always read
> >> > that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians
> >altered the F-14s they
> >> > were servicing so that they could never
> >fire the Phoenix. If the
> >> > Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did
> >they overcome the sabotage?
> >>
> >> They had the maintenance manuals, US-trained
> >technicians, spare parts, and
> >> time.
> >
> >They made a homebuilt Phoenix. I went to school
> >with Iranian engineering
> >students at CSUF, they have the skill.
> >
> >
> Not to mention clandestine US assistance in the early 1980s, plus
shipments
> of -54A missiles when the USN went to the -54C. It appears that they have
> reverse-engineered the -54A and build an unliscensed version of Phoenix.

Matt,
USN AIM-54As (and even less so their AIM-54Cs) are the same as Iranian
AIM-54As: so, they could not have been given to Iran even during the
"Irangate" affair.

The Iranians knew this so they also never asked for complete missiles. What
they were looking for instead (and what was usually smuggled) were
maintenance+upgrade packages and batteries for their AIM-54s.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Tom Cooper

September 28th 03, 09:50 AM

Ups, sorry: that first sentence should have been:

> USN AIM-54As (and even less so their AIM-54Cs) are _NOT_ the same as
Iranian
> AIM-54As: so, they could not have been given to Iran even during the
> "Irangate" affair.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Nick Pedley

September 28th 03, 10:10 AM

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Nick Pedley" > wrote:
>
> > No, it's solved by working out what those circuit boards did and making
> > replacements.
> >
> > Nick
>
> I hope Nick Pedley doesn't think he is the only one who might know this.

If you knew the answer, why did you ask the question?

Nick

phil hunt

September 28th 03, 10:31 PM

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:48:56 GMT, Tom Cooper > wrote:
>
>The Iranians knew this so they also never asked for complete missiles. What
>they were looking for instead (and what was usually smuggled) were
>maintenance+upgrade packages and batteries for their AIM-54s.

Why couldn't they make their own batteries? It's not exactly rocket
science is it? (Unless you're putting it in a rocket, but you know
what I mean).

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia

Nick Pedley

September 29th 03, 01:37 PM

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Nick Pedley" > wrote:
>
> > If you knew the answer, why did you ask the question?
>
> I didn't ask the question you attempted to answer. I asked Tarver how
> building replica Phoenixs would allow the Iranians to overcome sabotage
> to the F-14's electronics, a worthwhile question which seemed to outwit
> you.

As Tarver pointed out, they have the skills to build their own Phoenix
missiles. It therefore follows that if they can do that, they can probably
design and build their own circuit boards to allow firing of said missiles.
You seem to have missed the point he was trying to make.
Besides, as other more informed people have pointed out, the sabotage story
looks to be false.

Your question was:
".....I have always read that after the Shah fell US civilian technicians
altered the F-14s they were servicing so that they could never fire the
Phoenix. If the Iranians *did* use the Phoenix, how did they overcome the
sabotage?"

My answer was
"...it's solved by working out what those circuit boards did and making
replacements."

Admittedly not the most direct way of answering your question, but an answer
nonetheless.

Nick

Tarver Engineering

September 29th 03, 05:45 PM

"Nick Pedley" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Hobo" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Nick Pedley" > wrote:
> >
> > > If you knew the answer, why did you ask the question?
> >
> > I didn't ask the question you attempted to answer. I asked Tarver how
> > building replica Phoenixs would allow the Iranians to overcome sabotage
> > to the F-14's electronics, a worthwhile question which seemed to outwit
> > you.
>
> As Tarver pointed out, they have the skills to build their own Phoenix
> missiles. It therefore follows that if they can do that, they can probably
> design and build their own circuit boards to allow firing of said
missiles.
> You seem to have missed the point he was trying to make.
> Besides, as other more informed people have pointed out, the sabotage
story
> looks to be false.

Iran has a 100 pax airliner almost completed and a home grown rotary wing
industry. It would be a mistake to underestimate the intellegence of the
people of Iran. Better would be to help the people of Iran prosper, in a
free society.

Matt Wiser

September 29th 03, 06:32 PM

"Tom Cooper" > wrote:
>Ups, sorry: that first sentence should have
>been:
>
>> USN AIM-54As (and even less so their AIM-54Cs)
>are _NOT_ the same as
>Iranian
>> AIM-54As: so, they could not have been given
>to Iran even during the
>> "Irangate" affair.
>
>Tom Cooper
>Co-Author:
>Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
>http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
>and,
>Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
>http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585
>
>
Then why were new Phoenixes on Iran's shopping list during those secret
(and illegal) deals? Were those the rounds that were ordered but not delivered?

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Tom Cooper

September 29th 03, 07:21 PM

"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message
news:3f786cc9$1@bg2....

> Then why were new Phoenixes on Iran's shopping list during those secret
> (and illegal) deals? Were those the rounds that were ordered but not
delivered?

But, Matt,
they haven't ordered any, nor ever got any additional AIM-54s after autumn
1978 (in the sence of complete rounds).

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Tom Cooper

September 29th 03, 07:25 PM

"phil hunt" > wrote in message
. ..
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:48:56 GMT, Tom Cooper > wrote:
> >
> >The Iranians knew this so they also never asked for complete missiles.
What
> >they were looking for instead (and what was usually smuggled) were
> >maintenance+upgrade packages and batteries for their AIM-54s.
>
> Why couldn't they make their own batteries? It's not exactly rocket
> science is it? (Unless you're putting it in a rocket, but you know
> what I mean).

It's not a "rocket science", but not far from it either. At the time there
was simply no capability in Iran to produce such batteries.

Besides, they were not lacking the batteries all the times: most of the
times they could easily get new ones at a price of something like $10.000 on
the "black market".

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

phil hunt

September 29th 03, 08:49 PM

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:25:42 GMT, Tom Cooper > wrote:
>
>"phil hunt" > wrote in message
. ..
>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:48:56 GMT, Tom Cooper > wrote:
>> >
>> >The Iranians knew this so they also never asked for complete missiles.
>> >What
>> >they were looking for instead (and what was usually smuggled) were
>> >maintenance+upgrade packages and batteries for their AIM-54s.
>>
>> Why couldn't they make their own batteries? It's not exactly rocket
>> science is it? (Unless you're putting it in a rocket, but you know
>> what I mean).
>
>It's not a "rocket science", but not far from it either. At the time there
>was simply no capability in Iran to produce such batteries.
>
>Besides, they were not lacking the batteries all the times: most of the
>times they could easily get new ones at a price of something like $10.000 on
>the "black market".

What's special about these batteries then? Obviously they aren't
going to pay 10 grand for the sort of battery I can buy at my
local corner shop. Is it a matter of how much energy the batteries
store? That they take up a small space? That they have low internal
resistance?

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia

Matt Wiser

September 30th 03, 04:11 PM

"Tom Cooper" > wrote:
>
>"Matt Wiser" > wrote
>in message
>news:3f786cc9$1@bg2....
>
>> Then why were new Phoenixes on Iran's shopping
>list during those secret
>> (and illegal) deals? Were those the rounds
>that were ordered but not
>delivered?
>
>But, Matt,
>they haven't ordered any, nor ever got any additional
>AIM-54s after autumn
>1978 (in the sence of complete rounds).
>
>
>Tom Cooper
>Co-Author:
>Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
>http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
>and,
>Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
>http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585
>
>
Then I stand corrected. I would assume they have replenished the stocks
of those they fired with their reverse-engineered version.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Tom Cooper

September 30th 03, 05:20 PM

"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message
news:3f799d30$1@bg2....

> >
> Then I stand corrected. I would assume they have replenished the stocks
> of those they fired with their reverse-engineered version.

That's what they are probably trying to do right now: after all, their
AIM-54-copy is in a low-scale production only since the last year - which
makes this issue a "completely different story".... ;-))

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

Matthew G. Saroff

October 2nd 03, 02:49 AM

(phil hunt) wrote:

>
>What's special about these batteries then? Obviously they aren't
>going to pay 10 grand for the sort of battery I can buy at my
>local corner shop. Is it a matter of how much energy the batteries
>store? That they take up a small space? That they have low internal
>resistance?
They are probably militarized thermal (single use)
batteries.
They are designed to match the needs of the missile
fairly precisely in terms of power, duration, and quality
(stability and precision) of the power supplied.
It's a non-trivial activity, to say the least.
That's just an educated guess as someone who worked on
mechanical packaging of batteries though, there are lots of
people with more electronic/battery background than me.
--
--Matthew Saroff
Shrub stole the election, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt
http://www.pobox.com/~msaroff/liar