Iran's drones vs missiles vs aircrafts

[GWXP]

I want to compare Iranian drones (Arash-2/Shahed-136) with Iranian ballistic missiles and combat aircrafts.

One Shahed-136 (50kg warhead) costs 20.000$ and one Arash-2 (150kg warhead) probably costs 70.000$

30.000 Arash-2 drones * 70.000$ + 70.000 Shahed 136 drones * 20.000$ ==3,5 bln dollars for 100.000 drones delivering 8.000.000 kg of payload (8000 tons of payload)


For comparison one Pershing II (1770km range) cost 4mln$ in 1986 and using inflation calculator it is equal to 10mln dollars in 2021 dollars....Iran produces missiles on a larger scale and production inputs in Iran are much cheaper than in US, so I assume one Iranian Khaybarshekan missile (1450km range) costs around 3,5mln$ per unit.....If so, with 3,5bln dollars Iran can buy 1000 Khaybarshekan missiles delivering only 500.000kg of payload (500tons)

So with 3,5bln$ you can buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed-136 drones delivering 8000tons of payload OR only 1000 Khaybarshekans delivering only 500tons of payload...Which is better?


Ballistic missiles are better than drones, because they are very difficult to intercept, but nearly 20% of missiles fail in flight and they are very expensive. On the other hand drones can be spoofed by GPS jammers. But even if 6,25% of those 100.000 drones hit their targets, they will still deliver the same 500 tons as 1000 Khaybarshekans...

For another comparison assuming one Su-35 costs 80mln dollars with spare parts...you can buy only 43 Su-35 with 3,5bln$, compared to 100.000 drones or 1000 ballistic missiles.

One Su-35 can carry 4tons of bombs per sortie...So each of the 43 Su-35 must make 46 sorties to deliver 8000 tons of payload that 100.000 drones can deliver.-------but will these 43 Su-35s survive long enough to make 46 sorties if they will have to operate against an enemy that has powerful air defense network like Israel or Saudi Arabia?

So what is your opinion?

If you have 3,5bln dollars.....

will you buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed 136 drones (8000tons of payload)

OR 1000 Khaybarshekan missiles (500tons of payload)

OR 43 Su-35s that might not survive long enough in a full scale war?

Also your opinion on whether Israel or Saudi Arabia can survive 100.000 drone strikes on their military and civilian infrastructure?

 

[GWXP]

We can make a similar comparison with tanks and helicopters.

Russia was the 2nd most powerful military in the world with a military budget of 65bln$ and Ukraine was a third world military with a budget of 5bln$

Russia had 3000 tanks and 3000 IFVs and APCs, while Ukraine was supplied with tens of thousands of NLAWs and Javelins....and we saw how this played out...Russian conventional forces were decimated and Russia lost 50% of its tank fleet

One Leopard 2A6 costs 16mln dollars.

For comparison one NLAW costs 17.000 dollars and one Kornet ATGM missile costs 30.000$

It is not just advanced ATGMs that threaten existence of the tank as a weapon...it's also emerging tactical loitering munitions like Switchblade, Lancet or Israeli HERO family loitering munitions----currently these loitering munitions have weak anti-tank capability, but we can assume they can develop anti-tank capability in the near future.

How 16mln dollar tank can survive against not just cheap advanced ATGMs, but also against cheap loitering munitions attacking from a long distance at the top of the tank.

For 16mln dollar price of Leopard 2A6 you can buy 940 NLAWs, OR 533 Kornet ATGMs or Javelin ATGMs or probably 320 Lancet loitering munitions...Just look at Ukraine war---do you think one tank like Leopard 2A6 can survive against that arsenal of ATGMs and loitering munitions?---probably this is the end of the era of tanks.

Same with helicopters.

One Ka-52 or Mi-28 attack helicopter costs 17mln dollars (the price of 280 Igla MANPADs) and when Russia sent its helicopters into Ukraine many were shot down showing little utility. In Afghanistan mujahedeen downed 358 Soviet helicopters using Stinger MANPADs

This war showed that when helicopters enter the area with large concentration of MANPADs helicopters become useless and when tanks enter the area with large concentration of ATGMs (and in the future-loitering munitions) they also become expensive useless pieces of metal.

So probably, Iran and other countries should think twice before spending their defense dollars on tanks and helicopters instead of drones, ATGMs and loitering munitions.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

I want to compare Iranian drones (Arash-2/Shahed-136) with Iranian ballistic missiles and combat aircrafts.

One Shahed-136 (50kg warhead) costs 20.000$ and one Arash-2 (150kg warhead) probably costs 70.000$

30.000 Arash-2 drones * 70.000$ + 70.000 Shahed 136 drones * 20.000$ ==3,5 bln dollars for 100.000 drones delivering 8.000.000 kg of payload (8000 tons of payload)


For comparison one Pershing II (1770km range) cost 4mln$ in 1986 and using inflation calculator it is equal to 10mln dollars in 2021 dollars....Iran produces missiles on a larger scale and production inputs in Iran are much cheaper than in US, so I assume one Iranian Khaybarshekan missile (1450km range) costs around 3,5mln$ per unit.....If so, with 3,5bln dollars Iran can buy 1000 Khaybarshekan missiles delivering only 500.000kg of payload (500tons)

So with 3,5bln$ you can buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed-136 drones delivering 8000tons of payload OR only 1000 Khaybarshekans delivering only 500tons of payload...Which is better?


Ballistic missiles are better than drones, because they are very difficult to intercept, but nearly 20% of missiles fail in flight and they are very expensive. On the other hand drones can be spoofed by GPS jammers. But even if 6,25% of those 100.000 drones hit their targets, they will still deliver the same 500 tons as 1000 Khaybarshekans...

For another comparison assuming one Su-35 costs 80mln dollars with spare parts...you can buy only 43 Su-35 with 3,5bln$, compared to 100.000 drones or 1000 ballistic missiles.

One Su-35 can carry 4tons of bombs per sortie...So each of the 43 Su-35 must make 46 sorties to deliver 8000 tons of payload that 100.000 drones can deliver.-------but will these 43 Su-35s survive long enough to make 46 sorties if they will have to operate against and enemy that has powerful air defense network like Israel or Saudi Arabia?

So what is your opinion?

If you have 3,5bln dollars.....

will you buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed 136 drones (8000tons of payload)

OR 1000 Khaybarshekans missiles (500tons of payload)

OR 43 Su-35s that might not survive long enough in a full scale war?

Also your opinion of whether Israel or Saudi Arabia can survive 100.000 drone strikes on their military and civilian infrastructure?

I will go with Su-35 package
I can defend my land from air strikes,and on need,i will be able to strike back at enemy

So it's a complete defense-offence package.

 

[GWXP]

I will go with Su-35 package
I can defend my land from air strikes,and on need,i will be able to strike back at enemy

So it's a complete defense-offence package.

Regarding defense-offence package

You can defend you skies cheaper with air defense systems like Ukraine does and by targeting enemy air bases with those 100.000 drones-----and with that many drones you can devastate your enemy more effectively than with 43 Su-35 which might not even penetrate enemy's air space due to enemy's air defenses...(like how it happens in Ukraine)

And these 43 Su-35 might not survive for long especially when we are talking about potential US-Iran war

Probably development of a drone in the 20.000$ - 70.000$ price range is a game changer that allows deployment of tens of thousands of such drones with serious implications.

 

[glablo]

A fighter aircraft operates for about 40 years and its cost is about twice the purchase price of the aircraft.
Thus the total cost of 43 Su-35s is only $175 million per year.

Even if a shahed-136 could be built for $50,000 (unlikely, but in other countries it would cost close to $1 million).
Using the same cost, the number of shahed-136s procured per year would be only 3,500.

For example, we know from lot no. that Iran manufactures 2,000 ATGMs per year of TOW and kornet, respectively.
This cost alone is $160 million (the price of Iranian industrial products is no different from other countries).
(The price of Iranian industrial products is not different from that of other countries.) In other words, Iran is spending only that much for the Su-35.

It is also hard to believe that Iran has allocated less money for the kamikaze drone than it has for ATGM.
In other words, they would have already spent more on the kamikaze drone than they spent on the Su-35 purchase.

 

[Beny Karachun]

I want to compare Iranian drones (Arash-2/Shahed-136) with Iranian ballistic missiles and combat aircrafts.

One Shahed-136 (50kg warhead) costs 20.000$ and one Arash-2 (150kg warhead) probably costs 70.000$

30.000 Arash-2 drones * 70.000$ + 70.000 Shahed 136 drones * 20.000$ ==3,5 bln dollars for 100.000 drones delivering 8.000.000 kg of payload (8000 tons of payload)


For comparison one Pershing II (1770km range) cost 4mln$ in 1986 and using inflation calculator it is equal to 10mln dollars in 2021 dollars....Iran produces missiles on a larger scale and production inputs in Iran are much cheaper than in US, so I assume one Iranian Khaybarshekan missile (1450km range) costs around 3,5mln$ per unit.....If so, with 3,5bln dollars Iran can buy 1000 Khaybarshekan missiles delivering only 500.000kg of payload (500tons)

So with 3,5bln$ you can buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed-136 drones delivering 8000tons of payload OR only 1000 Khaybarshekans delivering only 500tons of payload...Which is better?


Ballistic missiles are better than drones, because they are very difficult to intercept, but nearly 20% of missiles fail in flight and they are very expensive. On the other hand drones can be spoofed by GPS jammers. But even if 6,25% of those 100.000 drones hit their targets, they will still deliver the same 500 tons as 1000 Khaybarshekans...

For another comparison assuming one Su-35 costs 80mln dollars with spare parts...you can buy only 43 Su-35 with 3,5bln$, compared to 100.000 drones or 1000 ballistic missiles.

One Su-35 can carry 4tons of bombs per sortie...So each of the 43 Su-35 must make 46 sorties to deliver 8000 tons of payload that 100.000 drones can deliver.-------but will these 43 Su-35s survive long enough to make 46 sorties if they will have to operate against an enemy that has powerful air defense network like Israel or Saudi Arabia?

So what is your opinion?

If you have 3,5bln dollars.....

will you buy 100.000 Arash-2/Shahed 136 drones (8000tons of payload)

OR 1000 Khaybarshekan missiles (500tons of payload)

OR 43 Su-35s that might not survive long enough in a full scale war?

Also your opinion on whether Israel or Saudi Arabia can survive 100.000 drone strikes on their military and civilian infrastructure?

Iron Dome missiles cost 40,000 dollars and could cost effectively intercept Shahed drones.




Israeli Iron Beam and its airborne derivatives cost like 4$ per interception and could bankrupt Iran if it chooses to go all out on the drone route.

Israeli recon blimps can detect low flying drones from hundreds of kilometers away.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Iron Dome missiles cost 40,000 dollars and could cost effectively intercept Shahed drones.




Israeli Iron Beam and its airborne derivatives cost like 4$ per interception and could bankrupt Iran if it chooses to go all out on the drone route.

Israeli recon blimps can detect low flying drones from hundreds of kilometers away.

Go to hell from this Iranian thread you terrorist

 

[Muhammed45]

I will go with Su-35 package
I can defend my land from air strikes,and on need,i will be able to strike back at enemy

So it's a complete defense-offence package.

I will choose the one that i can produce without foreign assistance. No matter what.

@GWXP bro, you have overestimated the cost of Iranian produced ballistic missiles. It has inhouse supply chain. 1 Kheybarshekan for 3.5 million dollar is not realistic. And don't forget American army milks the federal budget by overestimating price of its products.

USA doesn't need cost effectiveness for its products unlike Iran with a limited defense budget.

 

[Beny Karachun]

For 16mln dollar price of Leopard 2A6 you can buy 940 NLAWs, OR 533 Kornet ATGMs or Javelin ATGMs or probably 320 Lancet loitering munitions...Just look at Ukraine war---do you think one tank like Leopard 2A6 can survive against that arsenal of ATGMs and loitering munitions?---probably this is the end of the era of tanks.

Wrong, APS and electronic warfare neutralize loitering munition threat and ATGM threat.

Israeli Drone Dome was recently transferred to Ukraine, which would not allow Lancet drones to be controlled at a 35~ kilometer radius from the Drone Dome.

APS makes Javelins, Kornets and NLAWs and all other ATGMs useless against protected vehicles, however Ukraine doesn't have any. But ATGMs would be powerless against a well managed combined arms effort as well.

The shitstorm Soviet/Russian origin tanks faced does not mean superior western tanks with APS and EW coverage would suffer the same fate.

I will choose the one that i can produce without foreign assistance. No matter what.

@GWXP bro, you have overestimated the cost of Iranian produced ballistic missiles. It has inhouse supply chain. 1 Kheybarshekan for 3.5 million dollar is not realistic. And don't forget American army milks the federal budget by overestimating price of its products.

USA doesn't need cost effectiveness for its products unlike Iran with a limited defense budget.

Only idiots like you think Iran can comfortably make tens of thousands of ballistic missiles. Also inhouse my ***, diagnostics show that almost all Iranian weapons are made with western parts.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Wrong, APS and electronic warfare neutralize loitering munition threat and ATGM threat.

Israeli Drone Dome was recently transferred to Ukraine, which would not allow Lancet drones to be controlled at a 35~ kilometer radius from the Drone Dome.

APS makes Javelins, Kornets and NLAWs and all other ATGMs useless against protected vehicles, however Ukraine doesn't have any. But ATGMs would be powerless against a well managed combined arms effort as well.

The shitstorm Soviet/Russian origin tanks faced does not mean superior western tanks with APS and EW coverage would suffer the same fate.


Only idiots like you think Iran can comfortably make tens of thousands of ballistic missiles. Also inhouse my ***, diagnostics show that almost all Iranian weapons are made with western parts.

Reported your nonsense

 

[Muhammed45]

Wrong, APS and electronic warfare neutralize loitering munition threat and ATGM threat.

Israeli Drone Dome was recently transferred to Ukraine, which would not allow Lancet drones to be controlled at a 35~ kilometer radius from the Drone Dome.

APS makes Javelins, Kornets and NLAWs and all other ATGMs useless against protected vehicles, however Ukraine doesn't have any. But ATGMs would be powerless against a well managed combined arms effort as well.

The shitstorm Soviet/Russian origin tanks faced does not mean superior western tanks with APS and EW coverage would suffer the same fate.

This one shows the range of Hezbollah's strategic ballistic missile forces capable of striking Israeli nuclear plant with below 10 meter accuracy.

This one is the occupied Palestine, you joker. Look at its strategic depth, its radius is less than 40 KM.

Palestine's west bank can be armed with mortar shells with 16 KM range. Look what happen if its delivered to Palestinian warriors. East of Tel-Aviv completely goes under fire with a simple mortar shell

This mortar shell with its 16 KM range can eliminate capital of that cancer

Thats why Israel is a joke

 

[Beny Karachun]

This one shows the range of Hezbollah's strategic ballistic missile forces capable of striking Israeli nuclear plant with below 10 meter accuracy.


View attachment 920933


This one is the occupied Palestine, you joker. Look at its strategic depth, its radius is less than 40 KM.

View attachment 920934

Palestine's west bank can be armed with mortar shells with 16 KM range. Look what happen if its delivered to Palestinian warriors. East of Tel-Aviv completely goes under fire with a simple mortar shell
View attachment 920936

This mortar shell with its 16 KM range can eliminate capital of that cancer
View attachment 920937

Thats why Israel is a joke

"10 meter CEP" that is if they're not part of the 35% of the rockets that fail to reach their target completely as shown in the Iraq airbase attack, not a part of the 40% of the rockets that will be blown up on the ground, or part of the 24% will be intercepted on their way here.

Israeli laser systems are fool-proof, Hezbollah's missiles won't be able to do shit, first of all because we will blow up all of Lebanon the day the war starts, second of all is because of our defense systems.

Also, how do you suggest giving mortar shells to the Palestinians of the West Bank you idiot? If it was that easy we would have mortars and rockets fired at us up until now. In reality all they have are small arms improvised pipe bombs that they try to throw at our armored vehicles with 0 effect.

This mortar shell with its 16 KM range can eliminate capital of that cancer

Also, let's pretend it is possible to hit Jerusalem with 120mm mortars from the West Bank, do you think a 1 million people city can be "eliminated" with 120mm mortars?

 

[Muhammed45]

Only idiots like you think Iran can comfortably make tens of thousands of ballistic missiles. Also inhouse my ***, diagnostics show that almost all Iranian weapons are made with western parts.

Ok Mr genius. Iran not only comfortably produces them but also delivers them to Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. Today Iranian strategic depth begins from Bab el Mandab.

Russians have used western parts inside Iranian drones, that's because they had no restrictions pre Ukraine war. And they are capable of producing them in Russia.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Ok Mr genius. Iran not only comfortably produces them but also delivers them to Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. Today Iranian strategic depth begins from Bab el Mandab.

Russians have used western parts inside Iranian drones, that's because they had no restrictions pre Ukraine war. And they are capable of producing them in Russia.

Deliver to Lebanon and Syria?
You can't deliver them to Syria because we blow them up and you can't deliver them to Lebanon because in order to do that they have to go through Syria.

 

[Muhammed45]

"10 meter CEP" that is if they're not part of the 35% of the rockets that fail to reach their target completely as shown in the Iraq airbase attack, not a part of the 40% of the rockets that will be blown up on the ground, or part of the 24% will be intercepted on their way here.

huh you joker!. Congratulations for gaining place of Mr.Bin of this forum

Israeli laser systems are fool-proof, Hezbollah's missiles won't be able to do shit, first of all because we will blow up all of Lebanon the day the war starts, second of all is because of our defense systems.

They have once screwed you, they can do that again and again.

Also, let's pretend it is possible to hit Jerusalem with 120mm mortars from the West Bank, do you think a 1 million people city can be "eliminated" with 120mm mortars?

The fear that those mortars can cause is devastating. Let's not pretend as if all those Jews expelled from Europe, live in occupied Palestine because of their faith. One shot and as we have seen before, occupiers will flee like rats.

Deliver to Lebanon and Syria?
You can't deliver them to Syria because we blow them up and you can't deliver them to Lebanon because in order to do that they have to go through Syria.

Launching bunch of guided missiles from north cannot make strategic differences. Iran has established underground bases inside Syrian territories enabling them to produced missiles without being detected and watched by foreign intelligence forces.