PAC-3 CRI vs Fateh-110: Cost-Exchange Ratio & Combat Analysis
Compare
2026-03-21
3 min read
Overview
This analysis compares the PAC-3 CRI, a US Terminal (cost-red) system costing $3.5M per unit, against the Fateh-110, an Iranian SRBM costing $300K per unit. The cost-exchange ratio of 11.7:1 favors the attacker — meaning it costs the defender 11.7x more to intercept than the missile cost Iran to produce. Cost Reduction Initiative variant of PAC-3 with 90% of MSE capability at lower unit cost Solid-fueled SRBM family — Fateh-110/313/360 variants with 300-400km range
Side-by-Side Specifications
| Dimension | Pac 3 Cri | Fateh 110 |
|---|
| Unit Cost |
$3.5M |
$300K |
| Cost-Exchange Ratio |
11.7:1 |
11.7:1 |
| Range |
Terminal (cost-red) |
400 km |
| Inventory |
~700 |
~500 |
| Annual Production |
200/yr |
— |
| Role |
Terminal (cost-red) |
SRBM |
| Manufacturer |
Lockheed Martin |
Iran / IRGC |
| Fuel |
Solid rocket |
— |
Head-to-Head Analysis
Cost-Exchange Economics
The PAC-3 CRI costs $3.5M per unit while the Fateh-110 costs just $300K, creating a 11.7:1 cost-exchange ratio. Highly unfavorable for the defender. Extended engagements at this ratio are unsustainable. Iran can produce 11 Fateh-110 units for the price of a single PAC-3 CRI interceptor.
The Fateh-110 has a 11.7:1 cost advantage over the PAC-3 CRI. This asymmetry is a key factor in the conflict's economic sustainability.
Inventory & Depletion
Coalition forces have approximately 700 PAC-3 CRI interceptors with annual production of 200 units. Iran maintains an estimated 500 Fateh-110 units. The PAC-3 CRI is already 50% depleted vs operational requirements.
Coalition holds an inventory advantage, but at 11.7:1 cost ratio, this is offset by economics.
Tactical Engagement
The PAC-3 CRI engages the Fateh-110 during the terminal phase. At 400km range, the Fateh-110 is primarily a short-range threat. 90% of MSE capability at 83% cost.
The PAC-3 CRI is designed to counter threats like the Fateh-110, but sustained engagement at 11.7:1 cost ratios creates long-term sustainability challenges.
Scenario Analysis
Mass salvo of Fateh-110 missiles
In a saturation attack using Fateh-110 systems, the PAC-3 CRI battery would need to engage multiple targets simultaneously. At $3.5M per interceptor, a salvo of 5 Fateh-110 missiles would cost $1.5M to launch but $17.5M to intercept.
Fateh-110
Extended conflict (30+ days)
Over 30 days of sustained combat, the PAC-3 CRI inventory faces significant depletion pressure. Annual production of 200 units translates to just 0.5 per day — far below consumption rates during active operations. Meanwhile, Iran produces approximately 3.3 ballistic missiles and 6.7 drones per day.
Attacker (Iran) — production outpaces defender replenishment
Complementary Use
The PAC-3 CRI should be integrated into a layered defense architecture, not relied upon as a standalone solution against Fateh-110 threats. Cost-effective lower-tier systems (Iron Dome at $80K, or Iron Beam laser at $2/shot) should handle cheaper threats when possible, preserving expensive PAC-3 CRI interceptors for high-value targets.
Overall Verdict
The PAC-3 CRI vs Fateh-110 matchup produces a 11.7:1 cost-exchange ratio favoring the attacker. This is one of the most economically asymmetric engagements in modern warfare. For sustained conflict planning, interceptor production ramp-up and cost-reduction programs are critical to maintaining defensive capability.
Frequently Asked Questions
Related News & Analysis