IRIAF | News and Discussions

[PeeD]

@BlueInGreen2

Iran knows that no Su-30 would be able to enter contested airspace or even enemy IADS and take out a defended high value target (and come back). The only thing that could carry out such a operation without being killed on its way are BMs and below it CMs.

All possible enemies have selected manned airpower as main warfare tool. Good for us because all their airbases (area targets) will be such high priority targets which will be instantly neutralized.

The cultural influence of American airpower (VEVAK) and Russian airpower (drmeson), built up from childhood have created a distorted mindset for them. I was also a fan of manned airpower before I recently realized, due to sober thinking and listening to some experts, that it is overrated.

Irans BM and CM deterrence is capable to create such devastating effect on enemy warfighting capability, not to talk about industry and cities, that they will come to the negotiation table very fast.
In the case they don't, airpower becomes useful, not manned conventional but unmanned asymmetric one. Combined with armored ground forces, it is the most cost effective way to force a enemy to submission.

I talk about novel warfare methods; a fleet of small cheap/expandable unmanned UACVs with 4 Sadid bombs and 24 hours loitering time. Any enemy that pops up would get a Sadid PGM because a UACV would be just 5km away on loitering station (the rest is done by the ground forces).
I also would like to see a RQ-170 bomber variant with 6x Mk82 dumb bombs, launched from 20k feet alt, unguided, but via a SVP-24 gefest like automatic ballistic system. In that way even the low numbers of hardened static targets would be neutralized without the cost of PGM use.
For all that we need prices in the following range:

-Expandable flying-wing propeller UACV (24 hours endurance with 4 Sadid) = 100k $ (3000 necessary)

- RQ-170 bomber with reduced stealth capability for better cost and wide field optics/SAR/MTI (8 hours/1500km operation radius, 6 unguided Mk.82) = 3m $ (200 necessary)

- Karrar MBT = 200k $ (3000 neccessary)

These are roughly the prices necessary to win against a much superior force if it is stubborn enough to not agree for a ceasefire to our conditions after the BM/CM phase.

Now everyone is free to judge what added value a 8m $ Qaher could provide or a 60m$ Su-30SM.
There is no space for a 60m $ conventional heavy fighter in a asymmetric force structure we see developing in Iran.

 

[Blue In Green]

@BlueInGreen2

Iran knows that no Su-30 would be able to enter contested airspace or even enemy IADS and take out a defended high value target (and come back). The only thing that could carry out such a operation without being killed on its way are BMs and below it CMs.

All possible enemies have selected manned airpower as main warfare tool. Good for us because all their airbases (area targets) will be such high priority targets which will be instantly neutralized.

The cultural influence of American airpower (VEVAK) and Russian airpower (drmeson), built up from childhood have created a distorted mindset for them. I was also a fan of manned airpower before I recently realized, due to sober thinking and listening to some experts, that it is overrated.

Irans BM and CM deterrence is capable to create such devastating effect on enemy warfighting capability, not to talk about industry and cities, that they will come to the negotiation table very fast.
In the case they don't, airpower becomes useful, not manned conventional but unmanned asymmetric one. Combined with armored ground forces, it is the most cost effective way to force a enemy to submission.

I talk about novel warfare methods; a fleet of small cheap/expandable unmanned UACVs with 4 Sadid bombs and 24 hours loitering time. Any enemy that pops up would get a Sadid PGM because a UACV would be just 5km away on loitering station (the rest is done by the ground forces).
I also would like to see a RQ-170 bomber variant with 6x Mk82 dumb bombs, launched from 20k feet alt, unguided, but via a SVP-24 gefest like automatic ballistic system. In that way even the low numbers of hardened static targets would be neutralized without the cost of PGM use.
For all that we need prices in the following range:

-Expandable flying-wing propeller UACV (24 hours endurance with 4 Sadid) = 100k $ (3000 necessary)

- RQ-170 bomber with reduced stealth capability for better cost and wide field optics/SAR/MTI (8 hours/1500km operation radius, 6 unguided Mk.82) = 3m $ (200 necessary)

- Karrar MBT = 200k $ (3000 neccessary)

These are roughly the prices necessary to win against a much superior force if it is stubborn enough to not agree for a ceasefire to our conditions after the BM/CM phase.

Now everyone is free to judge what added value a 8m $ Qaher could provide or a 60m$ Su-30SM.
There is no space for a 60m $ conventional heavy fighter in a asymmetric force structure we see developing in Iran.

Agreed on everything especially the last part that being Iran is the world's foremost example of what an asymmetrical military looks like.

Real question to ask (and one that I've practically came to a conclusion to) is how many CM And BM does Iran have? Me and Soheil had a good discussion about it and I will take the more radical plunge and say that Iran does indeed have BM in the thousands and CM in the thousands. It's really the only logical conclusion given the fact that none of Iran's enemies have attacked her and some IRGC members have gone on record saying that Iran is producing so many missiles that it is having a hard time finding places to store them.

But, this is a question that's been circling around my head for a little while now. From Iran's enemies point of view. How many BM's can a country get to, to where they collectively act as sort of a WMD. Maybe I'm just in over thinking it, but to the Israelis if they attack Iran and Iran responds with an overwhelming volley of BM''s will Israel retaliate with nukes same with the Saudis and so forth.

I guess it's really all speculation but I do believe Iran has the world's largest stockpile of BM's. It just makes the most sense to me.

 

[AmirPatriot]

@PeeD there a few holes in your arguments.

In desert storm the coalition's cruise missiles were not used against hardened targets like aircraft shelters. They were used against high priority soft targets. Even in the recent Shayrat airbase attack, many of the tomahawks only damaged, not destroyed, the HAS' they were attacking.

As for runways, when I say specialised runway busting bombs, I don't mean any ordinary bunker buster.

"Designed to be dropped from low altitudes, the bomb's fall is slowed by a parachute. The maximum release speed is 550 knots (1,020 km/h; 630 mph) and the minimum release altitude is 200 feet (61 m). When the bomb has reached a 40° angle due to the parachute's drag, it fires a rocket booster that accelerates it into the runway surface. The 100-kilogram (220 lb) primary charge explodes once the weapon has penetrated the concrete and drives the secondary charge even deeper. The 15-kilogram (33 lb) secondary charge then explodes after a one-second delay. Later production weapons have a programmable fuze that can delay the secondary detonation up to several hours.

The weapon can penetrate up to 40 centimetres (16 in) of concrete, and creates a crater 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) deep and approximately 5 metres (16 ft) in diameter. In addition, concrete slabs around the crater are disturbed in an area approximately 15 metres (49 ft) in diameter. The disturbed slabs are displaced up to 50 centimetres (20 in) above the original surface, making repair more difficult than the simple crater from a conventional bomb.[1]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matra_Durandal

Oh, and I have no idea where you get the idea that 3000 Karrar MBTs will cost just $200k each. Maybe the first 500 or so as they can be upgrades of existing T-72s, but the other 2500 new build Karrars costing $200k each?

 

[PeeD]

@BlueInGreen2

Israel would certainly retaliate with nukes if Iran wanted to spend all its BMs on it.

I think the calculation is easy: enemy warmachine uses primary airpower --> determine how many potential hostile airbases are within 2000km around Iran --> depending on the size, hardening and missile defense, a number of 300-1000, 750-1000kg HE-frag/cluster warheads are necessary for stop of operations and high degree of asset neutralization --> calculate the totals and make an estimation on cost per missile and cost per nuclear-hardened mountain base.

What many simply ignore is that all of Irans airbases would be destroyed by nukes in a serious war. Only the missile arsenal in mountain bases could survive a nuclear war and potentially carry out second strikes that although conventional, would still have devastating effects in a counter-value employment. But I expect Iran to have nuclear weapons.

@AmirPatriot

CMs like Tomahawks have much less destructive power than BMs but are more accurate. If you want to knock out a certain HAS just send 4 Tomahawks 5 minutes behind each other with a penetration warhead. The chances to take out that hardened HAS will be very high.

Your anti-runway bomb is good for the variant with several minutes/hours delay fuse. In that way you can hinder airbase operations.
A good idea for a sub-munition warhead of a BM with parachute retarding. In any other case, the BMs normal HE warhead would create a much larger crater due to the kinetic energy than a durandal like bomb ever could.

Finally as for the Karrar cost. I think 200k $ is feasible in a 3000 production run. I know that you have values of 8m $ a shot in you mind for a M1A2, 40 times the price of my Karrar, but this is misleading.

The Karrar looks to be king in price-performance. I list you the subsystem costs:
Diesel engine + drivetrain = 40k
Complete TI (something that used to be very expensive in the past years) and EO sight system = 50k
Gun and autoloader system = 30k
Chassis =50K
Armour + ERA =50k
The rest =30-80k

The total should be ~250-350k (1-1,4b toman). Export price? 1m$.
T-90 export price? 2m$, internal maybe 500k$.
So don't ask my how the American capitalists were able to produce a 8m$ tank with the M1A2SEP...
From the 80s to the late 2000s, prices for TI sights and availability was such that it easily costed 200-500k for each tank. That was a reason why prices exploded for TI equipped tanks, but today Iran can produce a complete TI sight system at a friction of that price.

A MBT makes only sense at a certain price tag and the T-90SM/Karrar are the world leaders in that field. MBTs with prices like M1, Leo2, K2, Altai ect. are nonsense. In 1989, for each western tank there where 10+ Soviet T tanks... it would have been a bloody massacre of westen tanks if WWIII happened...
Numbers = firepower = what counts.
I just hope Karrar has serious backers so that no corruption pulls the price higher than that.

 

[yavar]

http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg

 

[AmirPatriot]

CMs like Tomahawks have much less destructive power than BMs but are more accurate. If you want to knock out a certain HAS just send 4 Tomahawks 5 minutes behind each other with a penetration warhead. The chances to take out that hardened HAS will be very high.

OK, 4 cruise missiles per HAS. Lets say that works.

Taking the RSAF as an example, adding the combat aircraft they have on order will be upwards of 300. So upwards of 1200 CMs just for HAS. And that's not including any HAS from other countries Iran may have to fight.

Your anti-runway bomb is good for the variant with several minutes/hours delay fuse. In that way you can hinder airbase operations.
A good idea for a sub-munition warhead of a BM with parachute retarding. In any other case, the BMs normal HE warhead would create a much larger crater due to the kinetic energy than a durandal like bomb ever could.

The question is if a BM would just create a massive crater that can be patched up quickly with asphalt, or will it do what the durandal does and actually shift the surrounding concrete slabs which is much more difficult to fix.

The Karrar looks to be king in price-performance. I list you the subsystem costs:
Diesel engine + drivetrain = 40k
Complete TI (something that used to be very expensive in the past years) and EO sight system = 50k
Gun and autoloader system = 30k
Chassis =50K
Armour + ERA =50k
The rest =30-80k

The total should be ~250-350k (1-1,4b toman). Export price? 1m$.
T-90 export price? 2m$, internal maybe 500k$.
So don't ask my how the American capitalists were able to produce a 8m$ tank with the M1A2SEP...
From the 80s to the late 2000s, prices for TI sights and availability was such that it easily costed 200-500k for each tank. That was a reason why prices exploded for TI equipped tanks, but today Iran can produce a complete TI sight system at a friction of that price.

A MBT makes only sense at a certain price tag and the T-90SM/Karrar are the world leaders in that field. MBTs with prices like M1, Leo2, K2, Altai ect. are nonsense. In 1989, for each western tank there where 10+ Soviet T tanks... it would have been a bloody massacre of westen tanks if WWIII happened...
Numbers = firepower = what counts.
I just hope Karrar has serious backers so that no corruption pulls the price higher than that

Russia sells its T-90MS, which the Karrar is comparable to, for $4.5 million. Now, either Iran can make tanks cheaper than the practically legendary Uralvagonzavod, or Russia is running over 2300% profit margins. I think neither is likely.

 

[Blue In Green]

View attachment 419287

http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg

New tracking system?

 

[PeeD]

@AmirPatriot

Iran would not use CMs for HASes, particularly Saudi superbases would be attacked with HE warheads. No HAS, not even Saudi ones would survive a direct 1ton BM hit. 1 BM is not precise enough but the numbers do it.
When BMs start to hit the base every several minutes, operation will be shut down.

Cluster warhead craters and mach 3 impact craters will have a very adverse effect on a runway, even without durandal imitating submunitions or delayed warheads.


Russia sells T-90SM to the free world market. If the next (similar capability) tank is the Leo2 in terms of price, they will not offer it for 1 million but for something like Leo2's 4m, but somewhat less. If the profit margin is huge for them, well be it, its a free market, they certainly wont have a production run of more than a few hundert.
In total the T-90SM pushes the technology to the limits, with systems that would be much cheaper with just somewhat less capability, if for no other reason then because its a export-oriented tank with gimmicks and extras that can be sold for a large profit margin. Compared to this the Karrar is a more sober, simple T72 mod but with very similar fighting capability.

Iran got the T-72S for 400k $ a piece back in the mid-90's plus the license for nearly everything, even the engine.
Now using that production capability and expanding it saves a lot.
If Russians sold T-72S with profit margin in 1994 to Iran for 400k $ a piece, be sure that their own production cost was not more than 200k $. The Karrar is is T-72S with much advanced Armour, a TI sight and FCS system made by 2017 prices, a remote controlled MG and a somewhat up-rated engine. The war fighting capability has increased enormously by this modifications but the extra money necessary for it is rather small.

I did the subsystem breakdown, if Iran was wise enough to copy the V-84 engine and add a turbocharger to it (unlike the foolish idea of the Chinese to copy a western engine and get unreliable crap out of it), all subsystems are made locally. So I'm open for critics on the costs I predict.

 

[Draco.IMF]

View attachment 419287

http://cdn.mashreghnews.ir/old/files/fa/news/1394/7/1/1237675_912.jpg

some info yavar please, so we should guess, lets see:

can it divine somebodys thoughts? a thought-reader ?

 

[VEVAK]

@VEVAK


With obsolete I didn't mean titanium but this argumentation of you that Ti is without alternatives.
You claim again and again that the lack of Ti is one main reason the IRIAF was not able to do R&D...

I'm not saying that Ti is bad, I just say the lack of it is no show stopper.

Your information is outdated. I told you about the alternatives available today.

Now, if you have a already existing Ti supply line, tools and vast experience, industry/companies you will keep it and use it. No need to go for steel super alloys or carbon fiber, as Ti is still competitive. I just told you that meanwhile there are alternatives which would potentially have only a acceptable performance penalty.
So no, the lack of Ti is not the reason why the IRIAF R&D didn't go beyond the Saeghe, that's the point.

Let me repeat myself: Today it is possible to develop state of the art fighters and engines without any use of Ti.


Your idea that Russians not want to start high number production of the Pak Fa because they await U.S 6th gen fighter is wrong.
Agreed the Su-35 is potent enough for F-22/35. But why should the Russians not acquire as much Pak Fa they can? If 5th gen. fighter are so detrimental for war fighting capability, they should reduce production of Iskander-M and S-400, put the resources on Pak Fa production.
They don't because neither Su-35 nor Su-57 has a higher priority for them as Iskander and S-400. Irans stance to weapon class priority should be going in the same direction and it does.



How so?

NO! I never said the lack of Titanium prevents Iran from doing R&D the lack of Ti production & other super alloys prevents Iran from producing an Engine more powerful than the J-85 & prevents Iran from producing a fighter larger & more powerful than the F-5, Azarakhsh, Saegheh,.... But it doesn't prevent R&D

And when it comes to Jet engines Titanium is the least of Iran's worries you need high grade chrome, Nickle & alloys far rarer than Titanium
BUT if you don't pursue an RD program You'll never know if you'll be able to replace the combustion chamber or the ball brings with ceramic composites more assessable alloys using minerals available & mined inside the country!

Other industries in Iran may not need high grade chromium or Nickle which leaves it up to the Air Forces R&D program in metallurgy & composites to lead the way in how those alloys are produced & hand the info to a MOD or government owned mining company for production or to a privet company with guaranties of orders

The problem in Iran is that the Air force thinks these things should just be handed to them & should naturally be produced in the country! If Iran's Missiles program had operated under those assumptions Iran's missile program wouldn't be where it is today!
Today the IRGC Aerospace will likely be more officiant and better adapted to coming up to a solution in terms of metallurgy and composites for an Iranian Turbojet or Turbofan engine than Iran's own Air Force

And having 50 guys in a lab doing R&D on metallurgy & combining different elements together to gain specific properties required in Aircrafts & equipment used by the Air Force using different methods with lab scale sized equipment & your own personal is not going to cost a lot of money & this is something that should have been done over decades with tools and equipment being added over time & that's how you turn your Air Force into a beacon of innovation & progress that contributes to the country in various ways rather than just a tool used when needed & imposed upon the country because of threats
And yes it may be hard for a company like HESA to hire 50 guys for R&D just in metallurgy where as IRIAF already has the personal it's just a matter of how they choose to allocate resources & then that info can be sold to the HESA or another company in exchange for further tools or equipment that you may need

As for the J-85 that engine just doesn't have the diameter to be turned into a more powerful engine

As for the Q-313 your suggesting to build over 600 of them to be operated in area's and conditions where they rely mostly on Ground Data & Support & if that's the case why exactly do you need a pilot in that Aircraft? If your so sure that your comme's can't be damaged, jammed or destroyed you might as well just build a UCAV that's far cheaper, far stealthier, lighter, faster, more maneuverable, more payload, easier & faster to produce... piloted by pilots in deep underground bunkers

600 at $10million per = $6 Billion USD (Not including spare parts, weapons, maintenance & operating equipment & facilities, Pilot training,....) for a subsonic Aircraft that can't even go 250km outside Iranian Airspace & is too slow to intercept modern fighters???

So IRIAF can somehow afford to train over 1200 pilots on the Q-313, afford the maintenance nightmare in terms of repair crews on the ground, tools, facilities & equipment of repairing 1200 jet engines & 600 aircraft,.... With the facilities, tools and manpower to build over 100 Q-313 a year & over 200 J-85's a year all for an Aircraft that can't go 250km outside Iranian Air Space BUT they can't afford an R&D program?

 

[Stryker1982]

NO! I never said the lack of Titanium prevents Iran from doing R&D the lack of Ti production & other super alloys prevents Iran from producing an Engine more powerful than the J-85 & prevents Iran from producing a fighter larger & more powerful than the F-5, Azarakhsh, Saegheh,.... But it doesn't prevent R&D

And when it comes to Jet engines Titanium is the least of Iran's worries you need high grade chrome, Nickle & alloys far rarer than Titanium
BUT if you don't pursue an RD program You'll never know if you'll be able to replace the combustion chamber or the ball brings with ceramic composites more assessable alloys using minerals available & mined inside the country!

Other industries in Iran may not need high grade chromium or Nickle which leaves it up to the Air Forces R&D program in metallurgy & composites to lead the way in how those alloys are produced & hand the info to a MOD or government owned mining company for production or to a privet company with guaranties of orders

The problem in Iran is that the Air force thinks these things should just be handed to them & should naturally be produced in the country! If Iran's Missiles program had operated under those assumptions Iran's missile program wouldn't be where it is today!
Today the IRGC Aerospace will likely be more officiant and better adapted to coming up to a solution in terms of metallurgy and composites for an Iranian Turbojet or Turbofan engine than Iran's own Air Force

And having 50 guys in a lab doing R&D on metallurgy & combining different elements together to gain specific properties required in Aircrafts & equipment used by the Air Force using different methods with lab scale sized equipment & your own personal is not going to cost a lot of money & this is something that should have been done over decades with tools and equipment being added over time & that's how you turn your Air Force into a beacon of innovation & progress that contributes to the country in various ways rather than just a tool used when needed & imposed upon the country because of threats
And yes it may be hard for a company like HESA to hire 50 guys for R&D just in metallurgy where as IRIAF already has the personal it's just a matter of how they choose to allocate resources & then that info can be sold to the HESA or another company in exchange for further tools or equipment that you may need

As for the J-85 that engine just doesn't have the diameter to be turned into a more powerful engine

As for the Q-313 your suggesting to build over 600 of them to be operated in area's and conditions where they rely mostly on Ground Data & Support & if that's the case why exactly do you need a pilot in that Aircraft? If your so sure that your comme's can't be damaged, jammed or destroyed you might as well just build a UCAV that's far cheaper, far stealthier, lighter, faster, more maneuverable, more payload, easier & faster to produce... piloted by pilots in deep underground bunkers

600 at $10million per = $6 Billion USD (Not including spare parts, weapons, maintenance & operating equipment & facilities, Pilot training,....) for a subsonic Aircraft that can't even go 250km outside Iranian Airspace & is too slow to intercept modern fighters???

So IRIAF can somehow afford to train over 1200 pilots on the Q-313, afford the maintenance nightmare in terms of repair crews on the ground, tools, facilities & equipment of repairing 1200 jet engines & 600 aircraft,.... With the facilities, tools and manpower to build over 100 Q-313 a year & over 200 J-85's a year all for an Aircraft that can't go 250km outside Iranian Air Space BUT they can't afford an R&D program?

I agree with Vevak here, Q-313 is not sufficient for defending the airspace of Iran. It could be good as a CAS bomber for supporting the troops, or anti-shipping (assuming armed with anti-shiiping cruise missiles), but otherwise insufficient. Still the future seems to lie in UCAV's and R&D should go towards developing reliable, and fast reactive UCAV CAS, and survallence using Forward observers like the americans do with thier airforce. I envision foward obervers calling in UCAV support with a few percision guided munitions and karrar like drone bombing designated targets for drone pilots.

 

[PeeD]

@VEVAK

Ti aside. The IRIAF could have gone for R&D on larger fighters after the Saeghe without Ti and something like a RD-33 copy also without Ti. They didn't and to me it looks like they were not given a go ahead from upper tiers. We even know their next project, a JF-17 like fighter, a step higher than the F-5.
Every fundamental technology was available to start that R&D project but from 2005 onward IRIAF R&D on such scale was stopped. Today they have, together with the MOD, created the Kowsar and many primary avionic subsystems that could be used in a future F-313. Gathering avionic subsystems is quite important. For me a good decision to not go for the next step, that JF-17 like fighter because it would likely have taken more than a decade for the IRIAF R&D to come up with a prototype.

You correctly said that nickel super alloys are the real critical material for any R&D on engines necessary for fighters. But I have a good news for you, MAPNA is the main force in that field for Iran, no need for IRIAF R&D.
They are so advanced in that field that without announcement, they certainly produce single crystal turbineblades.

So we have neither a problem when hot turbine parts are necessary for engine R&D, nor are we forced to use Ti in engines and airframes. On that I have another good news from another field: Irans uranium centrifuges use steel superalloys for some critical parts and high grade carbon fiber for the rotors.
Ti is available anyway via the Chinese.

Metallurgy and materials are incredibly important and hard to master, we need at least several hundred experts for that field. I bet, or rather hope that the IRGC-ASF would go directly to MAPNA for nickle base alloys and to the centrifuge department for marraging steels if they want to copy the RQ-170 powerplant.

On the Qaher:
If your airpower can survive the high intensity phase of a conflict and actively fight in it, then airpower has a degree of flexibility that is very much desired.
I painted a scenario in which the F-313 is such a low maintenance design, with such a small logistical footprint and rugged operation regime that it would have the necessary survivability, distributed around the country and camouflaged.
This is the basis for manned airpower in Iran and if Q-313 are operational within the high intensity phase their flexibility and situational awareness can be used. When is it superior to a similar UACV?
In air to air combat, foremost BVR. A unmanned S-171 bomber can always attack its target even without communication link on a pre-programmed course. A pilot can acquire the target, decide and shot with no communications working.
The mobility of a aircraft is uncontested, with two Fakkur-90 (pop-up --> shoot --> dive and run) the F-313 is a fast and flexible "SAM site" and with bombs it can attack targets of opportunity. If IADS has problems to do the task with SAMs, a F-313 is guided via a short communication contact to the coarse airspace where the enemy aircraft should roughly operate, and the F-313 will switch on its own small 100km range AESA to find the target and attack it with all its AAMs and disappear via terrain masking (maybe take a second look for mid course update in safe distance).

The F-313 needs to be extremely low maintenance (15% of that for a Su-30). I require it to fly 100 hours with just fueling and maybe new oil/filter. I want it's two engines to operate max. at just 60% duty cycle with no afterburner and still power it to mach 0,95 at sea level.
I require a huge amount of automation in order to reduce pilot training + advanced simulators.
I require all the other things already described on rugged/short take-off and landing on dirtfields.

 

[AmirPatriot]

No HAS, not even Saudi ones would survive a direct 1ton BM hit.

1. The same principle follows. How many BMs do you need to be sure of getting a direct hit on a HAS? 3? 4? 5? Assuming 30/50 metre CEP, At least 3 and probably 4 would be a good number. But then you have to fire 1200 missiles just for HAS.

2. And since you advocate basically no offensive air force capability, you still need thousands more missiles to hit actual runways, command posts, air defence sites, EW radars, ports, oil production/refinery... I'd love it for Iran to have a million missiles but unfortunately, unlike aircraft, using BMs to hit absolutely everything is not financially feasible.

3. The accurate missiles that Iran would use against a regional enemy are the Fateh class of missiles, with 650 kg or 750 kg warheads. Iran's liquid fuelled missiles with the 1 ton payload are nowhere near accurate enough.

Cluster warhead craters

Which would be really bad against runways. Cluster bombs are small and the holes are easy to patch.

mach 3 impact craters will have a very adverse effect on a runway

The question remains. Will they just create a big hole that can be filled with asphalt, or will they cause damage that is difficult to fix, like dislodging concrete slabs?

Moreover, since you don't want an offensive air force capability, you do realise that you will have to keep sending hundreds of BMs to keep those runways down? 1 strike is not enough. It can be repaired. You need persistence.

Russia sells T-90SM to the free world market. If the next (similar capability) tank is the Leo2 in terms of price, they will not offer it for 1 million but for something like Leo2's 4m

Leo 2A6 cost in 2010 dollars = $6 million

T-90 = "In 2010, Uralvagonzavod received 18 billion rubles (US$294 million) to deliver 261 units until the end of 2010." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90

So $1.13 million. With no export. Now unless Uralvagonzavod, which is a public limited company, is charging a nearly 600% profit margin... a Karrar is going to cost Iran more than $200 k. Certainly it will cost more than what Russia is making.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Why not develop supersonic cruise missiles, cheaper for conventional payloads

 

[Blue In Green]

Why not develop supersonic cruise missiles, cheaper for conventional payloads

Ramjet. Iran hasn't developed a reliable ramjet yet.