What's new

Iran's drones vs missiles vs aircrafts

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.

The problem is that Shahed-136 is not Qassam rocket of Hamas with its high infrared signature and predictable flight path.

Shahed-136 has low infrared signature, low radar signature, flies low, is small and difficult to intercept.....

You will need more advanced and more expensive missiles to take out Shahed-136 and since Shahed-136 costs only 20.000$, it can be produced in thousands and even tens of thousands. For example a drone factory that Iran is currently building in Russia will have a capacity of 6.000 drones per year.

Regarding Iron Beam, it is not battle tested, it is just a theory and it can evetually become a failed project just like failed US Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser.

 
Last edited:
Yemen is in charge of Bab el Mandab hence Iran. Not that hard to understand.

No they don't.. The saudi allied gov't controls them not Houthis.. There is one Island between both shores.. Who controls that Island controls bab al mandab which is the saudis in this case
 
No they don't.. The saudi allied gov't controls them not Houthis.. There is one Island between both shores.. Who controls that Island controls bab al mandab which is the saudis in this case
Depends on agreement between KSA and Yemen/Iran. Most probably KSA is going to leave Yemeni territories. If they want end of war, they have to do that. The Saudi allied forces heavily depend on foreign forces not people of Yemen. Even if a seperation happens, Houthis can target Israeli assets passing through Bab el Mandab strait.
 
The Iranians don't understand the concept of warfare.. But Boy they will be in for a rude awakening when the first bullet goes. Because Shaheed's or missiles won't win you conflict in a million years.. It does minimal infras damage.. The UAE alone can mess up Iran beyond recognition by destroying their airforce, air defense systems and from there on it would be free for all. The Peninsula shield has like over 2000 fighter jets.

I will take the Ukrainian conflict with the Rebels in 2014 as an example and the Ukraine-Russo war.

War is not based on cartoon.. I am not saying they are on par with the Ukraine armed forces but the rebels and Ukraine have been fighting for almost a year without Russia back in 2014 until 2015 and they were pushed back into two enclaves in Luhansk and Donetsk by the Ukrainian armed forces in the Donbass region who gained the upper hand after a tough 1 year fight But they fought fiercerely which ended with a ceasefire due to Russian threats but Ukraine armed forces could have defeated them anyways but still it would have taken them another 2 years.

They had small population of 2.5 million combined in Luhansk and Donetsk controlled rebel areas..

Conventional warfare's are never based on filmsy outcomes such as one entity doing Son Goku style rollover or going super-Saiyan.

when two large groups clash it comes down to alot of factors and it mostly ends in prolonged meat grind.

Anyone with a brain on his head and who understands conventional military warfare probabilities knew on before hand that Russia-Ukraine conflict would be a meat grinder. I do however believe that Russia will come on top but not now they need atleast another 6-7 more years of grinding.

Example look at Syria and Vietnam. It took 10 cruelling war with Russia involved and later US against non-state actors who aren't armed to the teeth except having what is necessary and it resulted in some form of a stalemate and alot of people never used that conflict as an example to study modern day conflict probablities. The war in Vietnam was going on for 20 years until a winner was found.

Also size doesn't mean anything or everything because a nation of 30-40 million can defeat a nation of 100-120 million if they are well organized and have the grid, manouveribility and tactical know how to outlast the bigger one and come out as the clear winner after approximately a 10-15 years of meat grinder and conquer the larger country in total but hey victory won't happen tho I mean on both ends only after approx 10 years of fighting minimum where both sides are skinned to the bones and maximum is 15 years of continued conventional warfare.

But size means something if your foes can mobilize from a larger pool it can come and bite down someone later on in the campaign.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that Shahed-136 is not Qassam rocket of Hamas with its high infrared signature and predictable flight path.

Shahed-136 has low infrared signature, low radar signature, flies low, is small and difficult to intercept.....

You will need more advanced and more expensive missiles to take out Shahed-136 and since Shahed-136 costs only 20.000$, it can be produced in thousands and even tens of thousands. For example a drone factory that Iran is currently building in Russia will have a capacity of 6.000 drones per year.

Regarding Iron Beam, it is not battle tested, it is just a theory and it can evetually become a failed project just like failed US Boeing YAL-1 Airbornes Laser.

Wrong lol.

Low infrared signature? simply wrong. Do you think the Balloon the F-22's AIM9X missile hit had more heat signature than your drones? Low radar signature is also wrong, it's easily detected. Flies low? Not really, it isn't ground hugging. And as I said, we got AWACS and blimps that can detect them over the horizon.

Iron Dome missiles are only 40,000 dollars, and Iron Beam costs nothing to intercept Iranian drones with.


Neither was the Iron Dome battle tested, it was also "just a theory", until it wasn't. Just a cope expectation.

YAL-1 is a chemical laser. And it isn't a "failed" project, in technology there are no "failures", there is only technological progress. Solid state lasers are a thing that works and works well. Range is more than enough, the whole system is compact and miniaturized, the laser power is high enough. The laser is completely ready.

Iron Beam will make all the billions of dollars spent on rockets to go to waste.
 
Depends on agreement between KSA and Yemen/Iran. Most probably KSA is going to leave Yemeni territories. If they want end of war, they have to do that. The Saudi allied forces heavily depend on foreign forces not people of Yemen. Even if a seperation happens, Houthis can target Israeli assets passing through Bab el Mandab strait.

Islah, and the gov't arent leaving nor are the saudis leaving them.. They are a military reality on the ground which can't be negotiated away
 
The Iranians don't understand the concept of warfare.. But Boy they will be in for a rude awakening when the first bullet starts. Because Shaheed's or missiles won't win you conflict in a million years.. It does minimal infras damage.. The UAE alone can mess up Iran beyond regcognition by destroying their airforce, air defense systems and from there on it would be free for all. The Peninsula shield has like over 2000 fighter jets.

I will take the Ukrainian conflict with the Rebels in 2014 as an example and the Ukraine war.

War is not based on cartoon.. I am not saying they are on par with the Ukraine armed forces but the rebels and Ukraine have been fighting for almost a year without Russia back in 2014 until 2015 and they were pushed back into two enclaves in Luhansk and Donetsk by the Ukrainian armed forces in the Donbass region who gained the upper hand after a tough 1 year fight But they fought fiercerely which ended with a ceasefire due to Russian threats but Ukraine armed forces could have defeated them anyways but still it would have taken them another 2 years.

They had small population of 2.5 million combined in Luhansk and Donetsk controlled rebel areas..

Conventional warfare's are never based on filmsy outcomes such as one entity doing Son Goku style rollover or going super-Saiyan.

when two large groups clash it comes down to alot of factors and it mostly ends in prolonged meat grind.

Anyone with a brain on his head and who understands conventional military warfare probabilities knew on before hand that Russia-Ukraine conflict would be a meat grinder. I do however believe that Russia will come on top but not now they need atleast another 6-7 more years of grinding.

Example look at Syria and Vietnam. It took 10 cruelling war with Russia involved and later US against non-state actors who aren't armed to the teeth except having what is necessary and it resulted in some form of a stalemate and alot of people never used that conflict as an example to study modern day conflict probablities. The war in Vietnam was going on for 20 years until a winner was found.

Also size doesn't mean anything or everything because a nation of 30-40 million can defeat a nation of 100-120 million if they are well organized and have the grid, manouveribility and tactical know how to outlast the bigger one and come out as the clear winner after approximately a 10-15 years of meat grinder and conquer the larger country in total but hey victory won't happen tho I mean on both ends only after approx 10 years of fighting minimum where both sides are skinned to the bones and maximum is 15 years of continued conventional warfare.

But size means something if your foes can mobilize from a larger pool it can come and bite down someone.
So you are trying to say that Israel can survive a war against Iran?

First mistake you make is comparing Ukraine with occupied Palestinian lands. Ukrainian people are not occupiers of their own houses, they have been to there for centuries. Israelis are the European Jews expelled by force and promise of wealth and peace. They are not there to fight a formidable force but disarmed and surrounded Palestinians.
Russian goal is a different thing, Iranian/Islamic goal is completely a different cause.

Wrong comparison.

Islah, and the gov't arent leaving nor are the saudis leaving them.. They are a military reality on the ground which can't be negotiated away
Islah is an Ikhwan oriented group. They are not foreign elements and they won't die for Wahabis.
 
So you are trying to say that Israel can survive a war against Iran?

First mistake you make is comparing Ukraine with occupied Palestinian lands. Ukrainian people are not occupiers of their own houses, they have been to there for centuries. Israelis are the European Jews expelled by force and promise of wealth and peace. They are not there to fight a formidable force but disarmed and surrounded Palestinians.
Russian goal is a different thing, Iranian/Islamic goal is completely a different cause.

Wrong comparison.

No..

Israel have a major handicap WHICH is stragetic depth and significiantly low population hence there regional threat treeshold is much lower then others.

Forget Israel's nukes which is the only deterence they have today.. Israel can't beat anyone conventionally in the region outside of Lebanon. I mean in the region as in pure conventional conflict they can't beat one country outside of Lebanon and maybe Syria and that is a major maybe because Syria has been thru alot of wars but other then that they can't beat anyone else in 1v1 conventional conflict.

The Israelis like to qoute the 7 days war which was a war that didn't even happen because due to Washtington threats once they rolled out there tanks they put it back again.
 
So you are trying to say that Israel can survive a war against Iran?

First mistake you make is comparing Ukraine with occupied Palestinian lands. Ukrainian people are not occupiers of their own houses, they have been to there for centuries. Israelis are the European Jews expelled by force and promise of wealth and peace. They are not there to fight a formidable force but disarmed and surrounded Palestinians.
Russian goal is a different thing, Iranian/Islamic goal is completely a different cause.

Wrong comparison.
Fool, Ukrainians themselves equated Ukraine to Israel and Russia to Arabs.
Small Ukraine was attacked by Russia just like small Israel was attacked by the Arabs.

We will nuke your weak nation.

No..

Israel have a major handicap WHICH is stragetic depth and significiantly low population hence there regional threat treeshold is much lower then others.

Forget Israel's nukes which is the only deterence today.. Israel can't beat anyone conventionally in the region outside of Lebanon. I mean in the region as in pure conventional conflict
We can beat literally everyone conventionally because we already did it 7 times
 
Neither can Jordan get it to there, if anyone wanna do it they're gonna have to fight through Israeli soldiers and low IQ inferiors know they have no chance doing that.


Of course we can and we could, unfortunately we didn't.
Why do you think there are millions of Palestinian refugees? They all ran away like cowards.


If you can't protect your top general's location what makes you think you can protect anything? By the way, this terrorist deserved it, and the way his body was turned into a huge Shawarma skewer makes me laugh until this day.


Try us, how many more Iranians do we need to kill around the world for your reaction?
Who said Iranians care about protecting their general my Jew friend??!.

You seem really don’t know most of Iranian generals and politicians died as martyrs because that what they believe something which jews don’t have or understand.
 
No..

Israel have a major handicap WHICH is stragetic depth and significiantly low population hence there regional threat treeshold is much lower then others.

Forget Israel's nukes which is the only deterence today.. Israel can't beat anyone conventionally in the region outside of Lebanon. I mean in the region as in pure conventional conflict
If you mean Arab kingdoms, we are going through reconciliation process
 
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.
APS might sound like an effective system in theory, but it was never tested in real war and it is very expensive with additional 1mln$ for Israeli Trophy system or South Korean KAPS....

When Israel said they will invade Lebanon with Merkavas equipped with Trophy APS, Hezbollah said they will launch 3 ATGMs at a tank at the same time and this will overwhelm Trophy APS.

Add to this cheap loitering munitions with anti-tank capability that will be developed in the near future and tank becomes an expensive piece of metal that becomes even more expensive to defend against current and future threats.

So while tank is an offensive weapon, it seems like defenders will have an upper hand in the near future.

Regarding quality of Western tanks - they performed poorly in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iraq- be it Merkava, Leopard 2 or M1Abrams.

Here is the famed Leopard 2's first battle experience in Syria

Here is M1Abrams in Iraq

You can find tens of such videos online

The truth is that Western countries haven't fought a war of the same scale as Russo-Ukraine War against an enemy equipped with tens of thousands of advanced ATGMs.

Otherwise their tanks could have experienced the same shitstorm as Russian tanks and armor in Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
Who said Iranians care about protecting their general my Jew friend??!.

You seem really don’t know most of Iranian generals and politicians died as martyrs because that what they believe something which jews don’t have or understand.
Oh they don't care? Well why won't they just send them on a truck to Israel or the US? They'll be martyrs.
 
We can beat literally everyone conventionally because we already did it 7 times

I am technically not anti-Israel hater or what not and you will find me to be amongst the fair and rational.

Israel has pros and cons.

The pros outweight the cons but the cons is natural aspect which can't be changed.

Israel has professional armed forces and well equipped from top to toe in conventional armed forces and with great airforce and defensive systems.

Now that being said in a modern day conventional conflict Israel will come out on the shorter end due to 3 things.

1. The enemy actully having the necessary arms to negate your impressive conventional arms. They have anti-tanks, anti-aircrafts, air defense systems, jammers, drones, tanks and other conventional means to engage and the capability to bring your airforce down which means it will finally come down to head to head conventional clash at the center of the octagon. They have more numbers and can outlast Israel.

2. Stragetic depth (Israel can't take many hits)

3. Low population and honestly majority of the Israeli civilians live a luxury life hence I expect majority of them to fly out at the crucial point

If someone attempted or mounted a serious campaign on that territory on Tel-Aviv etc etc and the Israeli population knew on before hand the level of threat majority will vacate and go to their second villas in Florida.

But but but.. This won't occur for as long as an infamous alliance exists due to one simple reason --NATO-- Now that is a foe no one in the region wants to bump heads with
 
Last edited:
APS might sound like an effective system in theory, but it was never tested in real war and it is very expensive with additional 1mln$ for Israeli Trophy system or South Korean KAPS....

When Israel said they will invade Lebanon with Merkavas equipped with Trophy APS, Hezbollah said they will launch 3 ATGMs at a tank at the same time and this will overwhelm Trophy APS.

Add to this cheap loitering munitions with anti-tank capability that will be developed in the near future and tank becomes an expensive peace of metal that becomes even more expensive to defend against current and future threats.

So while tank is an offensive weapon, it seems like defenders will have an upper hand in the near future.

Regarding quality of Western tanks - they performed poorly in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iraq- be it Merkava, Leopard 2 or M1Abrams.

Here is famed Leopard 2's first battle experience in Syria

Here is M1Abrams in Iraq

You can find tens of such videos online

The truth is that Western countries didn't fight a war of the same scale as Russo-Ukraine War against an enemy equipped with tens of thousands of ATGMs.

Otherwise their tanks could have experienced the same shitstorm as Russian tanks and armor in Ukraine.
Ah yes, the usual coping Russian. Russia itself created the Arena, except it's just garbage that doesn't work so it didn't deploy it on any tank.

It was tested lol, it defeated hundreds of Kornets, RPG-29s, RPG-7s, Metis and other rockets and missiles between 2011 and 2014. It only got better since. You see why Israel is smart? Because Israel pays 4 million dollars for a tank, and equips it with APS that will save them, whereas Russia buys 2 tanks for 5 million dollars, and both of them get blown up by missiles that would have been easily intercepted by an APS.

Foolish Hezbollah, they don't understand one thing. It takes 30 seconds to guide their missiles towards a Merkava, and the AESA radars of the Trophy system know where the enemy is launching missiles from, and they know how to move the turret to hit those Hezbollah terrorists with a 120mm shell and disrupt the guidance long before the missile gets close to the Merkava. The Trophy can handle 2 missiles, if they come from the same place all it needs is to rotate the turret, and if they come from both sides it doesn't even need to move. Also close together tank formation can protect each other with multiple Trophy systems.

Also, obviously, it is infinitely more difficult to successfully utilize 3 ATGM launchers when compared to one. Tactically this is not something feasible in a dynamic battlefield.

Again, loitering munition drones would be useless against EW attached to a tank battalion/brigade. Also, Lancet won't do shit to a Merkava, it can only destroy thinly armored Soviet tanks and such.

Performed poorly? Lol, again with the Russian cope machine. Only tanks that performed poorly are Russian tanks getting blown up by the thousands. How many Merkava Mk4 got destroyed, 3? 2 of those by ATGMs that are hopeless against it now? (2 other were Mk3 and Mk2 Merkavas)
How many Leopard 2A4s (lol, they're old as shit btw) got destroyed in Syria, 10? The Leopard 2A7+ got Trophy, which would have prevented all of those casualties.
That's an export variant M1 Abrams crewed by Arabs without DU armor, but doesn't matter, because this Abrams would be totally safe if it had Trophy, like the new Abrams SEPv3 and v4 have.

The truth is if western tanks with APS and EW protection were to fight against Russia, Russia would be powerless to destroy even a few dozen tanks.

I am technically not anti-Israel hater or what not and you will find me to be amongst the fair and rational.

Israel has pros and cons.

The pros outweight the cons but the cons is natural aspect which can't be changed.

Israel has professional armed forces and well equipped from top to toe in conventional armed forces and with great airforce and defensive systems.

Now that being said in a modern day conventional conflict Israel will come out on the shorter end due to 3 things.

1. The enemy actully having the necessary arms to negate your impressive conventional arms. They have anti-tanks, anti-aircrafts, air defense systems, jammers, drones, tanks and other conventional means to engage and the capability to bring your airforce down which means it will finally come down to head to head conventional clash at the center of the octagon. They have more numbers and can outlast Israel.

2. Stragetic depth (Israel can't take many hits)

3. Low population and honestly majority of the Israeli civilians live a luxury life hence I expect majority of them to fly out at the crucial point

If someone attempted or mounted a serious campaign on that territory on Tel-Aviv etc etc and the Israeli population knew on before hand the level of threat majority will vacate and go to their second villas in Florida.

But but but.. This won't occur for as long as an infamous alliance exists due to one simple reason --NATO-- Now that is a foe no one in the region wants to bump heads with
Tell me how is the situation any different than in 1948, 1967 and 1973, and why we will loose as opposed to the victories in those wars.
 

Back
Top Bottom