What's new

Who Would Win In A Saudi Arabia vs. Iran Showdown?

they think patriots are just for show and are useless against anything other then scuds.

Actually no, I've done a fair amount of research on the PAC-3 and PAC-2. I am not underestimating it at all. Are you aware of something called maximum target speed? The electronics in a missile can only react so fast. In the PAC-2 and PAC-3, the maximum target speed is 2,200 m/s and 1,600 m/s respectively. The Sejjil flies at Mach 13, which is 4,800 m/s. Therefore, the patriot cannot intercept the Sejjil.

upload_2016-11-21_9-24-18.png


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile_system)#Comparison_with_other_systems

This does not mean the Patriot cannot intercept the lower tier of Iranian missiles, but Iran's higher tier missiles (and cruise missiles) can penetrate it. By Lockheed Martin's own admission, the PAC-3 is meant to intercept Tactical Ballistic Missiles, which typically do not have a range greater than 300 km. The Sejjil is a medium range ballistic missile with 8 times the range.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_ballistic_missile

while they have the air defense system which can easily destroy the squadrons before they even reach Persian gulfs.

Not quite before they even reach the Persian Gulf, it would be foolish to place launchers too close to the shore. But aircraft are much, much slower than missiles, and are on a more predictable trajectory. Aircraft are always going to be easier to intercept than missiles. That's why countries develop specific anti-ballsitic missile systems. The Bavar-373 and S-300 are anti-aircraft systems (though the S-300 does have an anti-ballistic capacity, and the Bavar-373 is due to be tested on a ballistic missile).

forgetting about the E 3 AWACS are we.

Yes, I did. But now you reminded me, how often is the E-3 airborne? Is it's radar always in look-down mode? Is it used in a more defensive or offensive capacity? I'm guessing offensive, in which case it would not be looking for cruise missiles, it would be supporting air raids, guiding and organising RSAF aircraft towards targets and threats. That's their most common historical use. And even if it was looking for missiles, do the Saudis have any short range missiles defending their patriot batteries (which, as you can see in the above image, cannot shoot lower than 60 metres)? Who knows.

you wouldn't be making that claim if you knew the upkeep cost of a ballistic missile.

So? This is Iran's main deterrent. We are going to spend a lot of money on it. Besides, upkeep costs of a missile are minuscule compared to an aircraft. It only has to be fired one you know...

just baseless claims like f 313

What you just said is a baseless claim. You have no proof whatsoever to back up that statement, while I do.

https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/...rsion-of-s-300-outdoes-russian-model-in-range

None other than the commander of all of Iran's air defence force :rolleyes:

We have been making surface to air missiles for 30 years. Our country specifically set out to develop a long range air defence system almost a decade ago. There is no point in wanting a long range missile system and it having 50 km range. 300 km range is well within Iran's capability, after all, we have a plethora of solid fuel ballistic missiles. Hell, even the 1960s era S-200 has a 300 km range.
 
Opinion
Who Would Win In A Saudi Arabia vs. Iran Showdown?

With the growing tensions in the Persian Gulf after the Saudi embassy in Tehran was stormed and set on fire in the wake of Saudi Arabia’s execution of a Shia cleric, Americans ought to take notice. Five of the top seven oil producing nations are in the region of the Persian Gulf. So, even though fracking has helped increase American oil reserves to a 42-year high, things could get rocky if Iran and Saudi Arabia go to war.

How bad could it get? Well, keep in mind, in the Iran-Iraq War back in the 1980s, oil tankers became targets. The United States Navy ended up escorting neutral tankers in the Persian Gulf, and two frigates, the Stark (FFG 31) and the Samuel B. Roberts (FFG 58) were damaged. American forces also got into a few engagements with the Iranians. So, what might happen if the Saudis and Iranians end up in a fight? It has happened before.

On June 5, 1984, Iranian F-4 Phantoms threatened Saudi oil fields. The Saudis scrambled F-15s to engage the Iranian planes, and downed two of them using AIM-7 Sparrow missiles. That was over 30 years ago – but the Saudis had the technological edge then, and that edge has only grown. Today, the backbone of the Saudi Air Force consist of variants of the F-15E, while Iran’s best planes are less than 30 MiG-29 Fulcrums. The Saudis, though, have been bringing the Eurofighter Typhoon into service – and have at least two squadrons in service, with more on the way.

Iran has 44 F-14 Tomcats, but these planes have been without technical support from the United States since the fall of the Shah in 1979. Most of the rest of Iran’s air force are aging F-4 Phantoms and F-5E Tigers. While Iran probably has had an easier time getting spare parts for these planes due to their widespread use across the world, these planes are still old, while the Saudis have been getting much newer jets. The Saudis have also seen combat.


If a fight breaks out, expect the Saudis to get control of the air pretty quickly. The good news is that it will also mean that Iranian surface units could also be swept from the Persian Gulf by Saudi Arabia’s air power and the Royal Saudi Navy. But that doesn’t cover the entire naval balance. The Iranian submarine force, including three Kilo-class subs and one 1200-ton Besat-class submarine. But in the narrow waters of the Persian Gulf, Iran could also deploy over two dozen smaller submarines, mostly under 600 tons displacement, and similar to North Korean designs.

While it might be tempting to disregard the midget submarines, just remember that a North Korean mini-sub about the size of the Ghadir-class minisubs was able to sink a South Korean corvette in 2010 firing a 533mm torpedo. The question then becomes one of whether the Saudis would be able to bottle up the Iranian subs in port, most likely by using mines, or if they would end up having to engage in an anti-submarine warfare (ASW) campaign. ASW is tough in the best of conditions (Winston Churchill famously noted that his only worry in World War II was “the U-boat menace”), but in the shallow waters of the Persian Gulf, it gets much more difficult, as towed-array sonars do not work. Worse, in those waters, American submarines do not have much room to operate. Iran’s subs might be small, but the Persian Gulf is a target-rich environment for them, and the confined environment leaves those targets with very few options in terms of sailing routes.

Saudi Arabia is reportedly looking to buy submarines from Germany, probably the Type 212 or 214, but those subs will be years away when they are ordered. Now that Saudi Arabia finds itself facing a conflict with Iran, it may well find that a naval deficiency could create serious problems.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/05/who-would-win-in-a-saudi-arabia-vs-iran-showdown/

Well let's go over everything,

Saudi Arabia vs Iran

Saudi Budget: 87.2 billion USD (ranked 3rd, 2016)

Iranian Budget: 10.2 billion USD (2015)

Beginning with the budget you already see that KSA has numerous more resources at their disposal then Iran.


688,000 active personal with about 300,000 army troops

200,000 National guard

25,000 tribal levies

60,000 Navy members

40,000 soldiers for air defense and strategic rocket forces

Air forces 63,000 men.

vs Iran

425,000 army personnel of regular armed forces

350,000 Islamic republic of iran personnel

18,000 navy personnel

52,000 airmen

120,000 of the revolutionary guards with it's own Navy, Aerospace and ground and special forces

Basic volunteer force numbers are relatively unclear iran says there are over 12.6 million members with 3 million battle capable with some 2,500 battalions.

GlobalSecurity.orgs says there is some 90,000 active full time uniformed members with 300,000 reservists and a total of 11 million to be mobilized



But when it comes to numbers Iran handily beats Saudi Arabia


So in total Saudi Arabia would have(in Infantry)

a 913,000 total men

vs Iran's total (In infantry and if we go by Iranian sources)

is a whopping 5,895,000 (Hard to believe but this is by Iranian sources)


Iranian total with GlobalSecurity.org Estimates(In infantry)

Is 1,285,000 not including the 11 million to be mobilized

P.S I will not go over Proxies or Militias like Hezbollah or numerous Shia Iraqi Groups or Allies like Jordan,America or UAE or Kuwait and so on because if I did this would take damn near a decade to measure them all up and their capabilities.

So if we were to go by Iranian sources then Iran handily beats Saudi Arabia by a LOT. Assuming that Iran spends a lot LESS on each soldier then Saudi Arabia.


So let's go over each of their Air forces,


Saudi Arabias

Air forces 63,000 men.

But Saudi Arabia has the heavy tech edge in both Infantry and Air force.



Screen Shot 2016-11-21 at 2.00.09 PM.png
Screen Shot 2016-11-21 at 2.00.20 PM.png


Iran has a total of

52,000 airmen

and an unknown number of Revolutionary guard pilots.

Iranian air force inventory
Screen Shot 2016-11-21 at 10.35.43 AM.png


Now let's go over their Naval forces

Saudi Arabia has a total of

60,000 Navy members

While Iran has a total of


18,000 navy personnel


Saudi Arabia clearly has the edge here knowing that their navy is far more superior.



So deriving from these Sources then it is ok to assume that Iran would heavily focus on land doctrine vs Saudi Arabia which would focus on Air doctrine and some Naval focus.


I could go on and on but other people have gone over this a million times before





So please refer to each source as you will


So now we will go into the their geography and their supposed Tactics.


So as we all know Saudi Arabia is REALLY close to Iran.

saudi-iran-map.jpg



My best guess is that Iran will focus on defense and protecting their homelands Saudi Arabia relying on it's superior navy and Air force.


Saudi Arabia will want this war done as soon as possible because of their fragile economy and not so large population so it is normal to assume that Saudi Arabia would push the offensive on this one.

My best guess is that Saudi Arabia pushes their navy into the Persian gulf and immediately attack some ports of Iran most likely the port city of Qeshm but that's only if it is Saudi Arabia surprising Iran by attacking.

Iran anticipating an attack on this
front would be normal and would have mobilized troops all along their Persian gulf border. Of course by this time Iranians would be raining a storm of missiles on Saudi Arabia mainly targeting bases,oil fields and infrastructure so to deter Saudi Forces but Saudi Arabia has the patriot missile defense system and I believe to this day maintains one of the largest missile defense systems in the Middle east.



Iran most likely realizing this would have realized that bombarding Saudi Arabia is essentially useless and would only waste money and time.


2014-07-17-qeshm.jpg


As you can see that Qeshm is really close to the Arabian peninsula and would make an excellent staging point to the Iranian mainland but Iran would know this and most likely fortify it leading to the Saudis needing to use heavy naval power to break it.

Should Saudi Arabia take this point they will have a pretty decent position to hold and defend will close access to the Arabian peninsula for supplies,men and weapons. From there my best guess is that Iran counter attacks the position and then push through Iraq towards northern Saudi Arabia. At this point the Saudi Navy and Air force would do it's best to deter and destroy the Iranian troops but the mass amount of them would be too much. Saudis would put up a amazing fight and kill a lot but in the end the armies of Iran would come tumbling over them.


So I would chalk it up to a sort of the Greco-Persian war where they put up a valiant fight but in the end lose. Saudi Arabia would be the King Leonidas and Iran would be the Persians.

I would chalk it up to a Pyrrhic victory for Iran.


Of course please keep in mind that this was done without any of Saudi allies like the gulf Arab states or other Sunni countries that would support Saudi Arabia nor does this account for other world super powers that would eventually come to the aid of the Saudi's like the U.S or China.



But then again why can't we all be friends? In the end this would only lead to the eventual collapse of both Nations.





Iran-Saudi-Arabia.jpg


You could both accomplish so much more together.



news_2284.jpg
 
I totally agree with you on the last part...
By the way KSA has another 48 Typhoons on order
If (god forbid) any conflict is declared between the two, KSA should be counted as GCC plus most Sunni nations, that is 400 million Arabs plus some of the more populous Muslim countries on the planet, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia, Egypt, Morocco, Jordan, Sudan and Turkey will all send troops, so even in the eventuality of ground war, they will make sure it will be at least a match in numbers, and as We all know if it comes to defending Al Haramein the Sunnis will fight with a more sacrificial spirit than the Iranians while matching their 20 million Basij with 40 million ready to die fighters.. that is why a conflict like this won't take place and won't be allowed, since it is about the survival of Islam itself..
When one combines these humongous potential forces and their fighting spirit (both for Islam if we take politics apart and they will be eventually taken apart and minimized), he can see the true potential of forces that can defend the Whole Middle East.. a 60 million men Muslim army (in extreme cases) with Iranians, Arabs and other interested parties standing side by side..
Another positive perspective is to have the same number of scientists with the same fighting spirit doing R&D in Universities and institutions, in addition to this potential formidable army..
 
Last edited:
The Saudis wouldn't fight. They'd get the US/UK and covertly the Israelis to fight for them.

And there is only ever going to be one winner in that scenario.
 
USA with all their oil.

But most probably Saudi Arabia because they are FAR more effectively equipped. Though they will take some pretty tough damage.

@Faravahar thanks for mentioning me.

@Serpentine I know this thread is pointless, but maybe we will crush some illusions 8-)

I won't make any conclusions, I'll explain with very simple facts and pictures so everyone can understand. People can make their own conclusions.

This ballistic missile, the Sejjil 2, with a range of 2500 km, can hit anywhere in the entire Arabian Peninsula. And with a Mach 13 top speed, it will blast past any missile defence in possession of Arab countries.

(for comparison, the scuds which the patriot just manages to intercept, fly at a maximum of Mach 5)

68C87786-2112-474F-A63E-A1FEFF5716E0_mw1024_mh1024_s.jpg


This Soumar cruise missile, with a range of 2000 km, can sneak under Arab radar coverage to hit the defences.

soumar_1021.jpg


Iran has thousands of ballistic and cruise missiles, and it can make as many as it likes, without importing them.

1614335.jpg


All of Iran's missiles are either fully mobile;

sako2.jpg


sako1.jpg


https://defence.pk/threads/irgc-rec...ium-range-ballistic-missile-launchers.254575/

Or in hardened launch silos;

32024A1800000578-3483465-image-a-72_1457521784357.jpg


or both;

151015094810-iran-missiles-underground-fars-4-exlarge-169.jpg


There is no air base, oil facility, port, army base, or ship safe from the onslaught that Iran's missile forces can unleash.

And thats just the offensive...


@SOHEIL bro do you have anything to add?
Saudi Arabia also has the DF-21 and DF-3A Ballistic Missiles. Those things can cover all of Iran and fly over Mach 10.
 
On the defensive...

This Russian S-300 can destroy targets out at 200 km.

%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B1_%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%87_%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B4%DA%A9%DB%8C_S300_%D8%AF%D8%B1_%D9%81%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%88_%D9%81%DB%8C%D9%84%D9%85_%D9%88_%D8%B9%DA%A9%D8%B3_kolbenews_ir.jpg


This Iranian Bavar-373 can destroy targets from 300 km away.

1044484802.jpg


It is also fully mobile

zoljanah_l4.jpg


And its Meraj 4 radar can track over 100 targets from 450 km away

147176235036086100.jpg


photo_2016-08-21_21-06-27-jpg.327874


This Sepehr radar, with a range of 3000 km, can cover the entire middle east.

139404131955109435624624.jpg


No Arab air force is safe from the S-300 and Bavar-373.
They don't even have stealth on their side.
Saudi has the PAC-3 and are looking to buy the S-400 too though.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201611011046947471-s-400-saudi-arabia-russia/
https://sputniknews.com/business/201511091029798918-saudi-arabia-s-400/
http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2016/11/3/7346/?h
http://idrw.org/china-india-saudi-arabia-eyes-russian-s-400-air-defense-systems/
 
Of the two, if Persians are intelligent, Saudis are intellectuals.
This wont be any conventional war involving men & machines.
Saudi knows its Naval weakness.

But here is another angle, that of Israel (Iran's staunch enemy), which has covert & tacit understanding with Saudis, who clandestinely gave access to Israeli air fighters to pass over its territory in case of any sudden raid over Iran's nuclear reactor.

I think Saudis are paying good amount of $ to Israelis to produce and infect Iran a la Stuxnet II.

Its going to be a cyber related war.
Saudis say the opposite..That Usrael has cover relations wit Iran (one can always refer to the Irangate affair).. if this is true at all , it only means that Usrael is the "Third Party", meaning it is the one who is stirring these troubles..
 
Saudi has the PAC-3
While I still think the S-300 is a better system than the PAC-3 (I don't know more specs/details of Bavar-373 so as someone who likes to speak academically I cannot say it is better or worse just because I'm Iranian) it is absolutely pointless to compare their defence with ours. You measure a defence by how good it is at repelling an attack. And as I have already explained, the PAC-3 cannot intercept the higher (or maybe even mid, though I'm not sure about that) tier of Iranian ballistic missiles, and I doubt it is very effective against swarms of cruise missiles (being specialised in anti-ballistic missile).

I don't think Russia will sell the S-400 to KSA. They have only sold to China so far, after much difficulty. Saudi is a close ally of the US...

Saudi Arabia also has the DF-21 and DF-3A Ballistic Missiles.
Again, comparing an offensive capability to another is pointless. But what I will say is that the DF-3A have no use other than terror weapons owing to their inaccuracy. And although the DF-21 is indeed quite accurate, KSA's limited numbers of them reduces its effectiveness.

Another problem for Saudi is that they appear to use static launch pads. I'm sorry but that is completely retarded. They couldn't have chosen a more vulnerable and easy to disable method.

THUMB.jpg

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ith-launch-pads-aimed-at-Israel-and-Iran.html

All Iran's missile launch capabilities are either fully road mobile, or in hardened missile silos. Saudi's are ridiculously easy to destroy.

 
Last edited:
The KSA's petroleum installations are the weakest point of Saudi Arabia. All what Iran has to do is destroy the Ras et tanura and the Ambar complexes to turn 3/4 of the Saudi territory, a wasteland. All these installations are with the reach of Iran.
 
A stalemate I would guess. Saudis have the technological edge but Iran has a competent air defense system, and also a larger manpower base to defend its soil. There is a reason both are resorting to proxies.
Saudis just need to repel the Iranian + Allies attacks whether they come from Yemeni or Iraqi territories as expected. Manpower will not be a problem for Saudis as Muslim Fighters from all over the world will pour into the Arabian Peninsula to counter any attack from enemies of Islam & Muslims. These fighters will be with a zeal to sacrifice their lives for the cause of Islam as no Muslim wants destability in land of Harmain Sharifain even they don't like the present ruling regime.

is that even a question

iran would be a clear winner in any showdown against saudis
It's just dream. Muslim all over the world would not like that a Deviant and Corrupt Ideology conquer heart of Islam and they remain idle.
 
If war happens between Saudi Arabia and Iran, both will suffer losses, but at the end Saudi will win. Look, Saudi have deep strike fighters and good defense system such as patriot missile defense system. Iran lacks in this field.
In war, it is machine and better strategy which matters.
 
The patriot is a joke, can barely defend against some Yemeni scuds never mind missiles with manoeuvrable warheads like Iranian Emad. Try listening to actual missile experts before commenting:
Bro, seriously?

PAC 1 failed during the Persian Gulf War (1991) because they were not true ABM systems, they were just technology demonstrators towards this end.

PAC 2 and 3 systems are actual ABM systems, with ballistic missile interception history in real-time. PAC 3, in particular, can intercept even cruise missiles. It is foolish of you to dismiss them.

Theoretically speaking .. in a confrontation between KSA (GCC and Iran _God forbid_

God forbid.. in a theoretical confrontation like this, there won't be any winner on either sides but massive destruction that is not beneficial to either..both need their money and resources to further invest in their future and advance in all fields, be it social or scientific..
Yemen is a very mountainous country, meaning it is a very difficult terrain.. even the US couldn't do anything there, one can compare it to Afghanistan terrain very easily, where American and allies boots on the ground in the hundreds of thousand, with massive air support got next to nil results.. So, one should not say that Saudi miliary is incompetent , but some elements lack discipline ,this the Saudis themselves found out during the Yemeni campaign that when the weather is too hot (most of the time) Saudi soldiers don't wear there protective gear and that raised causalities among them..
On what grounds are you assuming that American forces got next to nil results in Afghanistan? They routed Taliban-led government, replaced it with a friendly government and killed thousands of militants.

Now, of-course, there is in-fighting between Afghan warlords and when has it ever stopped?

Taliban remnants have to accept the current Afghan governmental setup or remain irrelevant. No ifs and buts about it.

By the way, American role in Yemen is limited to COIN. Saudi Arabia is involved on a much deeper level there.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom