What's new

India eyes Israel's Iron Dome to counter Pak, puppets

Why the heck ? I will tell you exactly why ... Because they call it an international forum , open to all all members of every nationality allowing everyone to express his opinion appropriately , this isn't your usual BRF or Indian forum where only one sided opinions praising the country , its army and defense equipments are appreciated ... I am getting the idea of whats irking you at the moment :D
oh for love of god stop, the more i read ur post more I am amused. I have been laughing 4 hrs together so pls stop. DO u know what the punchline was "where only one sided opinions praising the country ".

Is the diameter and range of a missile the only determining factor of their capability ? :azn: ... Or possibly speed , guidance , ECCM sophistication and missile evasion methods also come into play ?

Nasr wont be facing Iron Dome , this much is certain ... Pakistan will try to take out as much SAM sites it can before launching a tactical nuke ...
Oh is that so we will be playing cards when you are doing so !!
 
.
You are making too many assumptions, I just pointed out that it is not necessary that India use the Iron Dome everywhere. You guys may just not know where. The costs are differently calculated by you & me. Even in artillery duels, one need not use the iron dome to try & take down each & every shell. It could be used against those that might be directly heading towards the guns themselves or the ammunition. You are aware that those will be a very small percentage of the shells fired & therefore the cost will be fairly limited especially when considering the cost of the gun itself. That puts you at a disadvantage because no such protection exists for your guns. Your logic simply does not hold. It isn't as simple as you suggest either when you assume that it offers no benefits. Your logic that it can work only against primitive rockets holds even less water. I'm sure those evaluating it will decide for themselves. On my part, I certainly see benefits to such a system but whether that is the best choice for India would be determined by people with a little more information than ourselves.

This is a whole game of assumptions , my friend ... You can correct me any time , I am open to corrections ... Sure , do not use it everywhere but there are places where the battles are most likely to take place , those are the deserts of Cholistan , Thar and Rajasthan ... Pakistan Army is a highly optimized for network centric warfare and with weapon locating radar and satellite feeds from the Chinese , it is close to impossible to effectively hide such a system ... No , I am calculating the costs for protecting high value targets too which are still sky-rocketing because the credible threats ( i.e the rockets and shells that are going to fall on high value targets ) are again in hundreds ... Our artillery is enough to tackle down any such threat ... A slight disadvantage which can be easily countered by mass producing MBRL's which we are doing at the moment ... The benefit it offers is not worthy of the money spent , that is the simple point ... My logic was that it has around 70% successful intercept probability against Qassam and Fajr missiles it usually faces ... Yes , I agree to the last part , the planners have access to more data than you or I can ever have :)

kṣamā;3635588 said:
oh for love of god stop, the more i read ur post more I am amused.
Oh is that so we will be playing cards when you are doing so !!

Good ! It will help in bringing your blood pressure down by stimulating GABA transmitting signals to the autonomic nervous system :D

No , your side is assuming that we will be ... I will repeat it again " hypothesizing best scenario for themselves and worst case for others " is the quality of your lot , not mine ...
 
.
Ok , alright but the Israeli theater is very very close to the battlefield ( not literally - since its not a proper battlefield ) , there it may protect cities , towns and bases but in our scenario the places aren't so close to be protected by such short range system ,

U R right, theater is different so might require longer range radars - interceptors can remain the same - we are talking of fixed trajectory here so the projectile can be intercepted quite near the asset.

So here , it is of no use to you protecting bases but rather to a very limited extent effective in the battlefield for protecting fixed post installation , SAM sites and high level radars ...

and will be targeted by the airforces with their standoff weapons ...

There are other counter measures for those. But again u r right - not quite sure about the usage - let's leave it to Indian and Israeli experts as to why they would need ID.

You have just made the scenario more difficult for yourself by including every single falling shell or rocket in the equation because they will rain in thousands ! Previously , we were just discussing the Iron Dome protecting high value targets ... In such a case that you decide to engage every single of the incoming projectile to safeguard the troops on the field , the cost will become astronomically high not to mention the system itself will be quickly overwhelmed and therefore render the whole thing useless ... Actually , to protect the things on the battlefield , you need the system to be very close to the front lines if not exactly there not some 100-150 km far which would be a safe range from any artillery ...

We are going too ahead of the actual scenario.

I don't think artillery can target 100 - 150 KM's so strike out artillery ever taking out this system. 50 - 55 KM away from artillery units are safe distances and the ID can cover this area efficiently. Stray rockets that can potentially target border towns and bases can be intercepted.

I don't think the system can be quickly overwhelmed, because that's the purpose of the system - not to be overwhelmed by strays and to just intercept the potentially damaging one.

Cost of the interceptor hardly matters when it distinguishes between strays and potential targets.

Safeguard the troops on the field?? don't get confused here.
 
.
I don't think artillery can target 100 - 150 KM's so strike out artillery ever taking out this system. 50 - 55 KM away from artillery units are safe distances and the ID can cover this area efficiently. Stray rockets that can potentially target border towns and bases can be intercepted.

I don't think the system can be quickly overwhelmed, because that's the purpose of the system - not to be overwhelmed by strays and to just intercept the potentially damaging one.

Cost of the interceptor hardly matters when it distinguishes between strays and potential targets.

Safeguard the troops on the field?? don't get confused here.

Nah , you didn't read my post properly , I said that 100-150 km would be a safe range from any artillery , not that it can strike targets from that range :) 50-55 km from any artillery isn't safe distances nor can Iron Dome protect an area when a barrage of shells are fired ... Most of the shells or rocket will target border towns and more importantly troops and high value targets in the vicinity , do you plan to intercept each of them ? TBH , it isn't neither feasible nor possible ...

Yes , it can be ... Palestinians usually fire a few missile with a few hours or days delay ... Do you think that the same applies to our scenario ? :no: You are confused yourself - either you chose to intercept every single missile or shell which will target the troops or the populations which will be in thousands or either you chose only to intercept high value targets for whom credible threats would be in hundreds ... Iron Dome will have to detect , identity and engage each one of them in a very short time something that the system is widely criticized for ... Not to mention the cost which is $ 90k for every interceptor missile ... Not even the US can afford such luxury let alone your country ...

You want to save troops and high value troops too so the costs automatically goes sky-rocketing ...

Yeah , safeguard the troops as one member here pointed out ...
 
.
Yes, it was never designed that way. Furthermore there is a very little time window of employing any kind of evasive maneuvers given its lesser range.

How hard would it be to add MIRV-like capability to the missile where it breaks up into separate projectiles at some point?

P.S. I know it would be hard, but was wondering if Pakistan has the capability to develop that technology.
 
.
NEW DELHI: As Fajr V rockets rained down on Israel from battleground Gaza for a week, many Indian defense planners were keeping a close watch on the performance of Israel's Iron Dome, which is probably the only deterrent to these homegrown short-range missiles.

It was not just out of curiosity regarding one of the most effective systems against rockets, but also because of the possibility of India acquiring an indigenous version of Iron Dome.

Several months ago, the military scientists in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) had suggested that India look at a joint development programme with Israeli firms to develop an Indian version of Iron Dome, which is touted as the most effective system against short-range missiles such as Fajr V rockets. The Indian scientists believe Israel's plight has several parallels to its threat from Pakistan as well as the vulnerability of its cities from terrorists.

The Iron Dome, according to reports, intercepted 87% of the rockets fired at Israel by the Hamas. The system, produced by Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and at work since 2011, is believed to have the capability to shoot down rockets and artillery shells with ranges of up to 70 km. The system has been shown to be effective against rockets or shells that might target populated areas.

In the Indian military establishment, the temptation for acquiring this new toy is explained by the fact that India is ringed by hostile neighbours. Pakistani terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) could well acquire similar capability that would threaten large groups of Indian population. Even otherwise, the strategic planners have for long been worried about the deadly effect of short-range rockets fired at Indian cities or from across the border.

Unlike ballistic missiles, against which DRDO claims to have a fairly good anti-ballistic missile shield, there is almost no protection against short-range rockets or artillery fire. DRDO is currently collaborating with Israeli firms to develop medium range surface to air missiles (MRSAMs) and LRSAMs. However, Iron Dome is in a different class all together, Israeli diplomatic sources here argue.

One of the reasons why some Indian defence planners is pushing for it is the possibility of another conflict with Pakistan, where a system like the Iron Dome might be useful to deter even conventional artillery attacks. In addition, Pakistan has developed a tactical nuclear weapon like the Nasr, which is a solid fuelled battlefield range ballistic missile. While Pakistani analysts say this was developed in anticipation of India's supposed Cold Start doctrine, some Indian sources say the Iron Dome might be an effective deterrent against this new weapon.

On the other hand, acquiring such defensive systems in anticipation of similar attacks might prove to be too much a temptation for groups like LeT. While they haven't yet developed rockets like the ones the Hamas has been using, the lure of such home-grown weaponry should not be under-estimated, say diplomatic sources.

According to sources, there have been some discussions between DRDO and their Israeli counterparts for a possible joint development of Iron Dome for India. "The Israeli team comes and works in our laboratories. Our team goes and works in their laboratories and industries. There is a learning that is taking place which was not there when we buy things and integrate with existing products... In directed energy weapons — we are focusing on fibre laser, high powered micro-waves, etc. We have also started discussions with Iron Dome for co-development (in India)," Dr W Selvamurthy, Chief Controller looking after international cooperation, told the Economic Times recently.

How it works:

* The system detects launches of rockets and quickly determines their flight path. If it is headed toward populated areas or sensitive targets, it fires an interceptor with a special warhead that strikes the incoming rocket within seconds. Rockets headed toward open areas area allowed to land.

* Currently, five Iron Dome batteries are deployed in Israel. Most are located in the south near Gaza. A fifth battery was deployed outside Tel Aviv on Saturday, two months ahead of schedule. Hours later, it shot down a rocket headed toward Tel Aviv.

*Missiles cost around $40,000 a piece. In 2010, the US provided $200 million to expand development. Additional funding is currently being considered, with $70 million already allocated for this fiscal year.

*The system is part of what Israel calls its "multilayer missile defense". It is meant to protect against the tens of thousands of short-range rockets possessed by militants in the Gaza Strip and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon. Israel has also deployed its " Arrow" missile defense systems for long-range threats from Iran. The military says its new "David's Sling" system, being developed by Rafael to stop medium-range missiles, will be activated by 2014.


(Source: AP)

India eyes Israel's Iron Dome to counter Pak, puppets - The Times of India

Nah , you didn't read my post properly , I said that 100-150 km would be a safe range from any artillery , not that it can strike targets from that range :) 50-55 km from any artillery isn't safe distances nor can Iron Dome protect an area when a barrage of shells are fired ... Most of the shells or rocket will target border towns and more importantly troops and high value targets in the vicinity , do you plan to intercept each of them ? TBH , it isn't neither feasible nor possible ...

Yes , it can be ... Palestinians usually fire a few missile with a few hours or days delay ... Do you think that the same applies to our scenario ? :no: You are confused yourself - either you chose to intercept every single missile or shell which will target the troops or the populations which will be in thousands or either you chose only to intercept high value targets for whom credible threats would be in hundreds ... Iron Dome will have to detect , identity and engage each one of them in a very short time something that the system is widely criticized for ... Not to mention the cost which is $ 90k for every interceptor missile ... Not even the US can afford such luxury let alone your country ...

You want to save troops and high value troops too so the costs automatically goes sky-rocketing ...

Yeah , safeguard the troops as one member here pointed out ...

You have the answer for all your queries in the article itself, and Hamas fired 1500 rockets into Israel within 8 days out of which 421 were intercepted.
 
.
You have the answer for all your queries in the article itself, and Hamas fired 1500 rockets into Israel within 8 days out of which 421 were intercepted.

Calculate the successful intercept possibility yourself ... See , how many rocket were fired per day and will it be the same amount and time if our nations go to war ? :no:
 
.
Calculate the successful intercept possibility yourself ... See , how many rocket were fired per day and will it be the same amount and time if our nations go to war ? :no:

87% interception is very good by all standards.
 
.
Calculate the successful intercept possibility yourself ... See , how many rocket were fired per day and will it be the same amount and time if our nations go to war ? :no:

It doesn't intercept all the incoming projectiles, only those heading for the protected area. Go figure....
 
.
It doesn't intercept all the incoming projectiles, only those heading for the protected area. Go figure....

Something which you wont be able to do considering the high number of incomings and the relatively short time , it becomes even worst if you want to save both high value targets and troops on ground ... $ 90 / interceptor missile ... Go figure ... Pakistan can very well use dummies and other counter measures too ...
 
.
How hard would it be to add MIRV-like capability to the missile where it breaks up into separate projectiles at some point?

P.S. I know it would be hard, but was wondering if Pakistan has the capability to develop that technology.

It is not a big deal, given that Pakistan already produces artillery shells containing cluster munitions. Only the munitions need to be bigger, aerodynamic and deployed at higher altitude to prevent effective interception.
But this application will lack accuracy and won't provide enough punch. However, in the future, sensor-fuzed smart munitions can be developed to make Nasr an effective weapon conventionally.
 
.
87% interception is very good by all standards.

How is it 87 % if 421 rockets were intercepted out of 1500 ? I am assuming all of them to be headed for protected areas ...
 
.
Something which you wont be able to do considering the high number of incomings and the relatively short time , it becomes even worst if you want to save both high value targets and troops on ground ... $ 90 / interceptor missile ... Go figure ... Pakistan can very well use dummies and other counter measures too ...

The calculations and the trajectory of the incoming projectiles will be done by the computer, launch any numbers you want, interception will only be limited by the availability of Iron Dome warheads.
 
.
Something which you wont be able to do considering the high number of incomings and the relatively short time , it becomes even worst if you want to save both high value targets and troops on ground ... $ 90 / interceptor missile ... Go figure ... Pakistan can very well use dummies and other counter measures too ...

Pakistan will be worried about saving it's assets from Indian bombardments, it will do a shoot and scoot in almost all cases, so there will not be repetitive firings on a given asset. So ID will need to safeguard against the initial attacks.
 
.
How is it 87 % if 421 rockets were intercepted out of 1500 ? I am assuming all of them to be headed for protected areas ...

No, assumption is wrong. Katyusha and Fajr-5 like other rockets lacks guidance system to be effectively heading for the protected areas. It's a matter of percentage.

One noobie noobie noob question, if all rockets were heading for protected areas, and Iron dome failed. Then exactly how many Israelis were killed in this recent war?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom