Iranian Nuclear Doctrine

[SalarHaqq]

we have a lot parallel drone program, we could easily half the type of drones we had and by the mean the cost to acquire them , for example if there was Shahed 129 program then Kaman 22 didn't make that much sense or instead of producing Shahed-149 they must have focused on Fotros or they must decide which one they one Kaman-12 or Mohajer-6 or Ababil-5 having all of them don't make much sense or air-force if retired half its fleet that have no practical use
by doing mentioned measures and also such measure in other branches of army and IRGC used the money they use for keeping the circus airplane flight worthy or have 2-3 similar projects for each thing used that money on producing domestic light/Medium fighter . we were in a lot better situation there

Yes and no. To free up resources by streamlining and simplifying the domestic catalogue of weaponry and by eliminating redundancy does make sense indeed. But here's the question: what would be the most cost-effective recipient for this surplus of funds? The asymmetrical logic would still tend to say UCAV's and missiles, more of them (and/or more advanced ones), would be preferable an investment over manned air power (a partial exception being if the latter remains especially affordable and confined to a subordinate auxiliary role, which among other things would translate into limited numbers).

 

[Hack-Hook]

Yes and no. To free up resources by streamlining and simplifying the domestic catalogue of weaponry and by eliminating redundancy does make sense indeed. But here's the question: what would be the most cost-effective recipient for this surplus of funds? The asymmetrical logic would still tend to say UCAV's and missiles, more of them (and/or more advanced ones), would be preferable an investment over manned air power (a partial exception being if the latter remains especially affordable and confined to a subordinate auxiliary role, which among other things would translate into limited numbers).

by omitting one aspect of the defense you make one flank open for enemy to exploit . you free the money you fill the gaps and the biggest gaps in our defense is air force . the situation is so dire there that even supreme leader last year warned about that .
and you can't say air force can't be fitted in asymmetrical warfare . those thing are good but sadly they can't complement your air defense and can't deny your airspace to the enemy . we must cover that flank otherwise later it bite us.

and honestly that auxiliary role you mention must be defined clearly .

 

[SalarHaqq]

by omitting one aspect of the defense you make one flank open for enemy to exploit . you free the money you fill the gaps and the biggest gaps in our defense is air force . the situation is so dire there that even supreme leader last year warned about that .
and you can't say air force can't be fitted in asymmetrical warfare . those thing are good but sadly they can't complement your air defense and can't deny your airspace to the enemy . we must cover that flank otherwise later it bite us.

You seem to be basing yourself on the assumption that the IADS can't handle the job on its own, and also that Iran's missile forces won't succeed in their opening A2/AD mission. As PeeD remarked in the linked discussion, for example, in a war against the Saudis one single volley of air to ground munitions is all their fighter jets are ever going to be able to fire - after that, they'll be rendered unusable.

Concerning the Supreme Leader's statement, the way I recall it he didn't strike an alarming tone but called for focusing some more on the air force at the present time. Which could simply translate into maintaining its operational capabilities at constant levels (including if needed through new acquisitions, domestic or otherwise, since obviously the useful life of IRIAF's ageing fleet can only be extended by so much).

and honestly that auxiliary role you mention must be defined clearly .

It means the air defence task will essentially be incumbent upon the IADS. And that any manned jet interceptors will only be there to take off some pressure on key points subjected to the most intensive air raid attempts, while budgetary imperatives will keep being observed (i.e. no investment into manned aircraft will come at the expense of the requirements a maximum strength IADS may have).

 

[Hack-Hook]

You seem to be basing yourself on the assumption that the IADS can't handle the job on its own, and also that Iran's missile forces won't succeed in their opening A2/AD mission. As PeeD remarked in the linked discussion, for example, in a war against the Saudis one single volley of air to ground munitions is all their fighter jets are ever going to be able to fire - after that, they'll be rendered unusable.

whatever last time our defense system faced enemy incursion it was from Azerbaijan in the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan , enemy drones in one case penetrated around 100km inside Iran before being shoot down

It means the air defence task will essentially be incumbent upon the IADS. And that any manned jet interceptors will only be there to take off some pressure on key points subjected to the most intensive air raid attempts, while budgetary imperatives will keep being observed (i.e. no investment into manned aircraft will come at the expense of the requirements a maximum strength IADS may have).

ground air defense alone never was enough , you for example mentioned Russia , didn't Ukraine helicopters penetrated Russia border and hit some target inside Russia.
what if in that first volley you mentioned they hit some air defense launcher or worse radars in one area how it will take to fix it ? what enemy can do in that time ?

Concerning the Supreme Leader's statement, the way I recall it he didn't strike an alarming tone but called for focusing some more on the air force at the present time. Which could simply translate into maintaining its operational capabilities at constant levels (including if needed through new acquisitions, domestic or otherwise, since obviously the useful life of IRIAF's ageing fleet can only be extended by so much).

he was clear , his tone was clear , he was disappointed in the situation of the force.

and if you want to keep operational capability constant . you must consider then enemy capabilities , when enemy capabilities keep increasing , you can't say I keep my current level of capabilities and my operational capability remain the same . it means your operational capabilities is degrading constantly .

 

[jauk]

I am not trying to come across as rude, but I dont understand why certain Iranian members like to claim that Iran does not need to have a modern air force since it has lots of ballistic missiles and UCAV's. You still need a air force.

China with the largest conventional missile force in the world is spending hundreds of billions of dollars on its air force. If you can have a strong air force+large ballistic missile/UCAV inventory why not?

That’s a poor example. Iran leads this thinking rather than follow it. Anyway, the IRIAF thread is the right place for this conversation.

 

[jauk]

For tickles:

Iranian Breakout Timeline Now at Zero
By David Albright and Sarah Burkhard June 1, 2022
Iran has crossed a new, dangerous threshold; Iran’s breakout timeline is now at zero. It has enough 60 percent enriched uranium or highly enriched uranium (HEU) to be assured it could fashion a nuclear explosive.1 If Iran wanted to further enrich its 60 percent HEU up to weapon- grade HEU, or 90 percent, it could do so within a few weeks with only a few of its advanced centrifuge cascades……

Iranian Breakout Timeline Now at Zero | Institute for Science and International Security

ISIS is a non-profit, non-partisan institution providing public knowledge of nuclear proliferation and international security.

isis-online.org

 

[SalarHaqq]

whatever last time our defense system faced enemy incursion it was from Azerbaijan in the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan , enemy drones in one case penetrated around 100km inside Iran before being shoot down

Wide-reaching general conclusions can seldom be inferred from anecdotes. Multiple reasons are possible for the non-interception of that drone, lack of appropriate technical means of air defence being the least probable.

ground air defense alone never was enough , you for example mentioned Russia , didn't Ukraine helicopters penetrated Russia border and hit some target inside Russia.

Doesn't Russia have an air force much larger and up to date than Iran's? Didn't Iranian-made drones fly past expensive Saudi air defenses backed up by a multi-billion dollar air force composed of mostly modern western fighter jets? The odd helicopter or drone will always manage to wiggle its way through the IADS, even if the latter was complemented by thousands of upgraded Kousars. Exceptions always confirm the rule.

what if in that first volley you mentioned they hit some air defense launcher or worse radars in one area how it will take to fix it ? what enemy can do in that time ?

One or two targets of value could well be hit with that single volley, of course. Just as they would if the IRIAF was flying a large fleet of Kousars. But it wouldn't be enough to make a difference, Iran's defence relying not upon a handful but upon hundreds of high value assets. Numbers rule here.

he was clear , his tone was clear , he was disappointed in the situation of the force.

To my knowledge the tone wasn't an alarming one and it doesn't imply he was calling for a massive expansion of the air force.

and if you want to keep operational capability constant . you must consider then enemy capabilities , when enemy capabilities keep increasing , you can't say I keep my current level of capabilities and my operational capability remain the same . it means your operational capabilities is degrading constantly .

Iran's response to enemy air power is (and will remain) non-asymmetrical. There is no equivalent to US air power yet Iran chose an asymmetric strategy to counter it, which has proved successful since it deterred military aggression.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Doesn't Russia have an air force much larger and up to date than Iran's? Didn't Iranian-made drones fly past expensive Saudi air defenses backed up by a multi-billion dollar air force composed of mostly modern western fighter jets? The odd helicopter or drone will always manage to wiggle its way through the IADS, even if the latter was complemented by thousands of upgraded Kousars. Exceptions always confirm the rule.

and how effective Russians air force reacted in that war. they were reduced to drop iron bombs

One or two targets of value could well be hit with that single volley, of course. Just as they would if the IRIAF was flying a large fleet of Kousars. But it wouldn't be enough to make a difference, Iran's defence relying not upon a handful but upon hundreds of high value assets. Numbers rule here.

that would be enough to made some whole in the grid or at least made the grid weaker in some places but if the air defense grid is complemented with air force that weak points can be filled with air coverage till something is done with air defense grid as air based air defense is a lot more dynamic than ground based ones

 

[SalarHaqq]

and how effective Russians air force reacted in that war. they were reduced to drop iron bombs

Ukrainian intrusions into Russian airspace were very few and the damage they caused negligible.

that would be enough to made some whole in the grid or at least made the grid weaker in some places but if the air defense grid is complemented with air force that weak points can be filled with air coverage till something is done with air defense grid as air based air defense is a lot more dynamic than ground based ones

Higher tier assets, those whose absence may produce "holes" in the AD grid, will be better defended and are therefore less likely to be hit in a single enemy strike. Also Iran has potent mobile, self-sufficient air defence systems like 3rd of Khordad which are well suited to fill such gaps.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Ukrainian intrusions into Russian airspace were very few and the damage they caused negligible.



Higher tier assets, those whose absence may produce "holes" in the AD grid, will be better defended and are therefore less likely to be hit in a single enemy strike. Also Iran has potent mobile, self-sufficient air defence systems like 3rd of Khordad which are well suited to fill such gaps.

reassigning their position take time , air crafts can be redirected there in far less time
and that single strike may contain 100 or more cruise missile

 

[Stryker1982]

reassigning their position take time , air crafts can be redirected there in far less time
and that single strike may contain 100 or more cruise missile

Iran is way to big to have full coverage of AD systems. People don't seem to understand that.

 

[SalarHaqq]

reassigning their position take time , air crafts can be redirected there in far less time

Enemy air power will have been neutered by then.

and that single strike may contain 100 or more cruise missile

A hundred cruise missiles will not incapacitate Iran's warfighting ability.

---

Iran is way to big to have full coverage of AD systems. People don't seem to understand that.

Detection, tracking and targeting systems on fighter jets don't have ranges superior to those of ground based long-range AD.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Enemy air power will have been neutered by then.

if you think so

A hundred cruise missiles will not incapacitate Iran's warfighting ability.

but a hundred Iranian missile will certainly destroy enemy air force .
in the war against Iraq the number was more in line of 1000 in first waves of the attack

Detection, tracking and targeting systems on fighter jets don't have ranges superior to those of ground based long-range AD.

well depends , the detection really can be a lot better for a high flying aircraft or Airborne Radar but that's not the point , the point is the platform is mobile and can be diverted any place necessary , if your early warning radars like Sepehr detect enemy aircraft coming toward you , you can send 100 aircraft to intercept them (well if you have that many aircraft) but you don't have enough time to send 2 extra 3rd of Khordad to help the air defense in the area you expect enemy is coming from.

 

[SalarHaqq]

if you think so

Not just me.

but a hundred Iranian missile will certainly destroy enemy air force .
in the war against Iraq the number was more in line of 1000 in first waves of the attack

Potentially up to tens of thousands. Also enemy fighter jets needn't be physically annihilated to the last one for enemy air power to be neutered.

well depends , the detection really can be a lot better for a high flying aircraft or Airborne Radar but that's not the point , the point is the platform is mobile and can be diverted any place necessary , if your early warning radars like Sepehr detect enemy aircraft coming toward you , you can send 100 aircraft to intercept them (well if you have that many aircraft) but you don't have enough time to send 2 extra 3rd of Khordad to help the air defense in the area you expect enemy is coming from.

AD concentration is adjusted to value of assets.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Not just me.



Potentially up to tens of thousands. Also enemy fighter jets needn't be physically annihilated one by one for enemy air power to be neutered.



AD concentration is adjusted to value of assets.

what value of asset , consider it .
you see on sepehr radar suddenly see 150 KSA airplane fly toward Iran how the air defense system want to cope with it
the airplanes are consisted of F-15se and Eurofighter . those f-15 have 6 pylon it means each can carry up to 10t of weapons
those Eurofighters are equipped with AGM-88 and Brimstone
on Persian gulf they divide to 3 group one smaller group go toward Bushehr , one toward Bandar Abbas and one bigger group move some how westward then move north toward central Iran, suddenly your radar took another group of fighters taking of from UAE around 100 probably F-16 and Mirage - 2000 they fly north north west toward Bushehr and suddenly they become two group one go toward (about 25 continue toward Bushehr and 75 move north and go toward Shiraz.
at the same time your early warning radar pick up some missile launch and you conclude the target is somewhere in central and western Iran and south Iran (in hormozgan province)
wonder how your defense plan against them would be without any air force?

that's a first strike scenario I come with , it seems KSA and UAE at last decided to put in motion their cut the head of snake plans