Its design is based on a reverse engineered American RQ-170 UAV captured by Iran in 2011 and modified to carry guided missiles.[3] It is one of two Iranian flying wing UAVs based on the RQ-170, along with the Saegheh, a smaller version, with which it is often confused.
Etymology
Simorgh is a Persian word deriving from Middle Persian 𐭮𐭩𐭭𐭬𐭥𐭫𐭥 sēnmurw,[4][5] which was a benevolent bird in Persian mythology.
Design
The Simorgh is a reverse engineered RQ-170. There are multiple unknown variants, one of which is modified to play the role of a UCAV armed with 4 missiles. An author stated it was a crude mock-up mostly made out of fiberglass.[6][7] It was used with munitions during the 2020 Joint Exercise Zolfaghar 99.[8]
Status
According to the United States Government, a company associated with Imam Hossein University, Paravar Pars Company, was involved in the reverse engineering and research, development, and production of the Shahed 171.[9]
Two were under construction as of 2014.[10] In 2014 Iran said that they would have four in service by March 2015.[11]
The UAV was first seen in May 2015 and was shown flying on Iranian TV in October 2016.[12] Jane's analysis placed the UAV at Kashan Air Base.[12][13]
Some sources report that a Shahed 171 may have been shot down in the February 2018 Israel–Syria incident, but the UAV was probably the very similar Saegheh.[3]
^ a bIran Military Power (PDF). Defense Intelligence Agency. 2019. p. 68. ISBN 978-0-16-095157-2.
^Opall-Rome, Barbara (13 February 2018). "Israel Air Force says seized Iranian drone is a knockoff of US Sentinel".
^ a b c"Sentinels, Saeqehs and Simorghs: An Open Source Survey of Iran's New Drone in Syria". bellingcat. 13 February 2018.
^A. Jeroussalimskaja, "Soieries sassanides", in Splendeur des sassanides: l'empire perse entre Rome et la Chine (Brussels, 1993) 114, 117–118, points out that the spelling senmurv, is incorrect as noted by David Jacoby, "Silk Economics and Cross-Cultural Artistic Interaction: Byzantium, the Muslim World, and the Christian West", Dumbarton Oaks Papers 58 (2004): 197–240, esp. 212 note 82.