[Goose]

FWIW Iran has also been using shahed type drones in this round. Israel has published videos of them being taken out by Iron Dome missile interceptors along with helicopter machine guns.

Whether the APKWS are necessary too is beyond me.

Israel has also published videos of F-16s taking down the Shahed type drones. The ones being taken out by Iron Dome are "leakers". The Israelis have AWACs capability that allows them to vector helicopters to Shahed type drones that the F-16s didn't get. Iron Dome relies on its own radar to acquire the target. APKWS has (at best) an infrared target acquisition capability. The Shahed is a poor infrared target. Its hot (but relatively small) piston engine is behind the delta wing and fuselage, which shield the drone pretty well from head-on acquisition by a MANPADS. If the MANPADS operator is not "on" the target and can get a side view or, better still, a rear view the MANPADS (and APKWS) has a good shot.

The US bases in the Middle East therefore can not be defended by MANPADS unless the are deployed at some significant distance from the base itself. That carries force protection issues for those isolated operators. The cure is worse than the disease. IMO the US would rely on our own air defense forces as the primary defense against Shahed type drones. Up until now, the vast majority of missile attacks upon US forces have been by Iran-backed militias firing ballistic artillery rockets. MANPADS/APKWS are not effective against such missiles. I doubt that Iran would launch Shahed type drones from Iran toward US targets. These slow drones would certainly be detected and almost certainly shot down. Iran would then risk direct retaliation by the US. Attacks by militias (Iran-backed or otherwise) have not produced a US reaction. Direct attacks from Iran very well might. I doubt they would risk it.

It's crazy to me that despite all of the signalling something was coming, Iran did not disperse their mobile ballistic missile launchers or air defense systems,

They may have, at least to the best of their ability.

and their top military leaders were all sleeping in their homes.

Indeed this is strange. I would have thought they would all be required by some Iranian DEFCON level to be sleeping in their "official" well-protected quarters.

Is Israel much better at SEAD/DEAD than Russia? Probably. But Ukraine also did a much better job at preserving their air defenses.

Russia doesn't do SEAD as a separate activity, period. That has never been part of their doctrine. During the Cold War their manuals indicated they might target e.g. a bunch of HAWK batteries on the way in, but it would be part of a strike mission, not an end in itself. Israel, like the US and NATO, regards SEAD as its own mission. This reflects the fact that Russia regarded Air Defense as the "primary" mission of their air force. Offensive action was secondary.  The US and its "allies" look at it exactly opposite. Our air forces are a primary weapon of defeating our enemies and destroying their ability to fight. That requires attaining initial air superiority at an absolute minimum and prosecuting the offensive to obtain air supremacy as an "end state". That is what Israel did.

On Day 2/3 it seems Israel has air superiority and freedom of movement- even their non-stealth fighters are operating safely over major Iranian cities and military bases. The Ukraine conflict would have been over a long time ago if Russia could have achieved that, as they had planned.

To be fair, Israel ran a fairly comprehensive SEAD operation against Iran late last year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_20...es_on_Iran. All of Iran's long range detection radars were destroyed. Iran was effectively blinded. That matters a lot. Iran never had nearly as effective IADS as Ukraine possessed in 2022, not even close. Iran also didn't have the US telling them exactly what to expect. Ukraine also had at least somewhat of an air force. Iran does not.
 
Russia had no "plan" to destroy the Ukrainian air defenses. They flew a few suppression missions accompanying their initial attacks, but unlike the IAF Russia had no "softening up"  missions with BDA and re-attack as needed. Russia was heavily relying on surprise, so such missions were not possible. That is why they had un-escorted IL-76s flying paratroopers into the teeth of a Ukrainian air defense network that still functioned. Subsequently, Russia's lack of any SEAD capability was on full display. After heavy losses, the VKS effectively left the war for quite awhile.

Israel is claiming full air supremacy in Iran, at least in the Tehran area. https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defens...cle-857689 One important point in this article is that Israel can now violate the airspace of Syria and Lebanon at will. The is allows them to fly over Iraq and directly into Northern Iran. While Russia was still in Syria and defending it's airspace, that wasn't possible (except possibly for F-35s). Now it is, and that is a very "big deal".

[Goose]

FWIW Iran has also been using shahed type drones in this round. Israel has published videos of them being taken out by Iron Dome missile interceptors along with helicopter machine guns.

Whether the APKWS are necessary too is beyond me.

Israel has also published videos of F-16s taking down the Shahed type drones. The ones being taken out by Iron Dome are "leakers". The Israelis have AWACs capability that allows them to vector helicopters to Shahed type drones that the F-16s didn't get. Iron Dome relies on its own radar to acquire the target. APKWS has (at best) an infrared target acquisition capability. The Shahed is a poor infrared target. Its hot (but relatively small) piston engine is behind the delta wing and fuselage, which shield the drone pretty well from head-on acquisition by a MANPADS. If the MANPADS operator is not "on" the target and can get a side view or, better still, a rear view the MANPADS (and APKWS) has a good shot.

The US bases in the Middle East therefore can not be defended by MANPADS unless the are deployed at some significant distance from the base itself. That carries force protection issues for those isolated operators. The cure is worse than the disease. IMO the US would rely on our own air defense forces as the primary defense against Shahed type drones. Up until now, the vast majority of missile attacks upon US forces have been by Iran-backed militias firing ballistic artillery rockets. MANPADS/APKWS are not effective against such missiles. I doubt that Iran would launch Shahed type drones from Iran toward US targets. These slow drones would certainly be detected and almost certainly shot down. Iran would then risk direct retaliation by the US. Attacks by militias (Iran-backed or otherwise) have not produced a US reaction. Direct attacks from Iran very well might. I doubt they would risk it.

It's crazy to me that despite all of the signalling something was coming, Iran did not disperse their mobile ballistic missile launchers or air defense systems,

They may have, at least to the best of their ability.

and their top military leaders were all sleeping in their homes.

Indeed this is strange. I would have thought they would all be required by some Iranian DEFCON level to be sleeping in their "official" well-protected quarters.

Is Israel much better at SEAD/DEAD than Russia? Probably. But Ukraine also did a much better job at preserving their air defenses.

Russia doesn't do SEAD as a separate activity, period. That has never been part of their doctrine. During the Cold War their manuals indicated they might target e.g. a bunch of HAWK batteries on the way in, but it would be part of a strike mission, not an end in itself. Israel, like the US and NATO, regards SEAD as its own mission. This reflects the fact that Russia regarded Air Defense as the "primary" mission of their air force. Offensive action was secondary.  The US and its "allies" look at it exactly opposite. Our air forces are a primary weapon of defeating our enemies and destroying their ability to fight. That requires attaining initial air superiority at an absolute minimum and prosecuting the offensive to obtain air supremacy as an "end state". That is what Israel did.

On Day 2/3 it seems Israel has air superiority and freedom of movement- even their non-stealth fighters are operating safely over major Iranian cities and military bases. The Ukraine conflict would have been over a long time ago if Russia could have achieved that, as they had planned.

To be fair, Israel ran a fairly comprehensive SEAD operation against Iran late last year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_20...es_on_Iran. All of Iran's long range detection radars were destroyed. Iran was effectively blinded. That matters a lot. Iran never had nearly as effective IADS as Ukraine possessed in 2022, not even close. Iran also didn't have the US telling them exactly what to expect. Ukraine also had at least somewhat of an air force. Iran does not.
 
Russia had no "plan" to destroy the Ukrainian air defenses. They flew a few suppression missions accompanying their initial attacks, but unlike the IAF Russia had no "softening up"  missions with BDA and re-attack as needed. Russia was heavily relying on surprise, so such missions were not possible. That is why they had un-escorted IL-76s flying paratroopers into the teeth of a Ukrainian air defense network that still functioned. Subsequently, Russia's lack of any SEAD capability was on full display. After heavy losses, the VKS effectively left the war for quite awhile.

Israel is claiming full air supremacy in Iran, at least in the Tehran area. https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defens...cle-857689 One important point in this article is that Israel can now violate the airspace of Syria and Lebanon at will. The is allows them to fly over Iraq and directly into Northern Iran. While Russia was still in Syria and defending it's airspace, that wasn't possible (except possibly for F-35s). Now it is, and that is a very "big deal".