PAC-3 CRI vs Shahed-238: 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 Shahed-238, an Iranian Jet drone costing $75K per unit. The cost-exchange ratio of 46.7:1 favors the attacker — meaning it costs the defender 46.7x 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 Jet-powered attack drone with 2,000km range and 85kg warhead — faster than Shahed-136
Side-by-Side Specifications
| Dimension | Pac 3 Cri | Shahed 238 |
|---|
| Unit Cost |
$3.5M |
$75K |
| Cost-Exchange Ratio |
46.7:1 |
46.7:1 |
| Range |
Terminal (cost-red) |
2000 km |
| Inventory |
~700 |
~500 |
| Annual Production |
200/yr |
— |
| Role |
Terminal (cost-red) |
Jet drone |
| 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 Shahed-238 costs just $75K, creating a 46.7:1 cost-exchange ratio. Highly unfavorable for the defender. Extended engagements at this ratio are unsustainable. Iran can produce 46 Shahed-238 units for the price of a single PAC-3 CRI interceptor.
The Shahed-238 has a 46.7:1 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 Shahed-238 units with high-volume production capacity. The PAC-3 CRI is already 50% depleted vs operational requirements.
Coalition holds an inventory advantage, but at 46.7:1 cost ratio, this is offset by economics.
Tactical Engagement
The PAC-3 CRI engages the Shahed-238 during the terminal phase. With 2000km range, the Shahed-238 can be launched from deep within Iranian territory, complicating launch detection. 90% of MSE capability at 83% cost.
The PAC-3 CRI is designed to counter threats like the Shahed-238, but sustained engagement at 46.7:1 cost ratios creates long-term sustainability challenges.
Scenario Analysis
Mass salvo of Shahed-238 missiles
In a saturation attack using Shahed-238 systems, the PAC-3 CRI battery would need to engage multiple targets simultaneously. At $3.5M per interceptor, a salvo of 5 Shahed-238 missiles would cost $375K to launch but $17.5M to intercept.
Shahed-238
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 Shahed-238 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 Shahed-238 matchup produces a 46.7:1 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