These numbers are manufacturer's published data none of which is proven in real battles or even in any known published exercise. Furthermore, if such numbers were to be taken for granted, then the US made Patriot SAM systems PAC-3, PAC-3 MSE or the newer PAAC-4 would erase any air target with ease, and yet, to this day since the first Gulf war in 1990, then the Iraqi freedom war (?) in early 2000, and the conflict in Yemen the system failed to shoot down a single old Iraqi SCUD missile or even come close to intercept any of the dozens of Iranian Drones and missiles aimed at Saudi oil installations. In a span of 9 years of the war in Yemen, the system "conformed" downed only two crude Drones while the Yemenis were wreaking havoc on the Saudis and their US allies. According to Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Reuven Pedatzur of Tel Aviv University testified before a US House Committee stating that, according to their independent analysis of video tapes, the Patriot system had a success rate of below 10%, and perhaps even a zero success rate" End of quote.
Almost forgot; 48 hours ago a salvo of 30 Patriot PAC-3 MSE "or a cluster of 8 batteries each having 4 missiles" failed to intercept a single Russian missile and ended up being destroyed by a Russian Kenzal missile.
With such absurd logic all of Iran’s air defense systems are useless as well. If you understand how the type of radars used for search, tracking, and engagement, how kinetic energy of a AD missile works, F-pole bleed maneuvering, then you will realize air defense systems are built similarly based on what they are asked to intercept.
Some air defense systems of more KE expenditure in their interceptors to face off against BMs (ex THAAD) versus others that would likely bleed too much energy against the enemy RV countermeasures.
There is so much wrong in the post, I’m not going to waste time by arguing with you. With such logic S-300 is useless because they couldn’t detect TB2 during Armenian war or Ukrainian war. The air defense system is only as good as the data it is fed. A system outside of network is much weaker than a system connected to information sharing network with hundreds of radar points sending data.
If you truly think Patriot missile system has an intercept rate of “less than 10%” and didn’t intercept any missiles during Yemen war, you are lost and are also saying Iranian air defense systems are garbage too.
There is no world where equivalent versions of the Iranian system to THAAD, PAC, Arrow, David’s Sling (if they existed) would do 90% vs their western counterpart of 10%.
I’m not trying to talk about Western products. I’m just saying reality of situation. These systems all operate on laws of physics and are developed with costs vs select engagement of a list of targets in mind. Ex. Increase the performance of a type of groud based radar comes at high performance cost when on which means it’s off most of the time. Hence why most high grade radars outside of wartime or alerts from other systems (Early warning) are not operating….to save costs.
The numbers you stated are even worse since operating an Aircraft during a conflict is many folds more complex and prone to human error versus a simple SAM system which has a single function. In the best of conditions these numbers are phony hypothetical estimates printed on the Lockheed Martin's sales catalogues to impress the US congress and the Pentagon to buy those gadgets even though both the congress and the Pentagon know for sure that all these numbers are false and fabrications but they are all in it as partners in crime to defraud the American public.
More conjecture. A SAM system is anything but “simple”. In fact a SAM intercepting a BM is magnitudes more complex than building a fighter jet. Nazi Germany had fighter jets 80 years ago, when was the first air defense system that could intercept a BM?
Let me educate you, BM existed since V1 and V2 so again 80 years. Attempts to build an air defense system by USA started in 1950’s. Never went anywhere.
Soviets had the first successful intercept in 1960’s of a BM during a test. Considered not cost:feasible. It wasn’t until 1980’s when mass production of air defense system capable of intercepting a BM was produced. So “simple SAM” is ironic comment.
Simplistic conclusion based on data given by weapons manufacturers most of which is hogwash.
Pretty much everything you wrote is hogwash and denial. Militaries all around the world test their radars (both airborne and grounded) against the RCS of various size objects including Iran and literally every other military power on this planet. It is literally hypothesis and scientific testing 101 to determine wether a system should advance in R&D. This is information is usually classified, but US military industrial complex is composed of publically traded companies.
Not that it matters at the topic at hand which is radar detection of RCS objects at specified intervals, which is based on the type of radar, wavelength, and RCS. It’s mostly physics. So manufacture cannot “make things up” as you like to allude. Based on the type of radar a fighter jet Carries you can deduce the performance within a reasonable margin of error.
Thus Conclusions are the same. F-35/J-20 can obliterate Kowsar and F-14. Even if both 5th Gen fighters were RCS exposed at a .5m2 RCS (nearly 50x their calculated frontal RCS) neither F-14 or Kowsar could get a lock before being destroyed by a BVR.
Iran knows this, hence it operates on concept of deterrence via BMs and its magnitude Missile arsenal to make up for the weaknesses in Air Power.
But like myself and others have alluded to, BMs alone are not the solution. You need a stop gaps alongside a serious domestic fighter program. Requires enormous commitment of capital and vision.
