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

[Skull and Bones]

That is something I cant do at the moment ... Youtube is banned in Pakistan so leave it ... Arm chair General ? You guys haven't been able to answer a single of my question instead of resorting to we will place it here or Pakistan doesn't have enough artillery or the shells and rockets cant be in thousands ... You do not even understand where the major battles are likely to take place !

Yes , but Israel produces them on a mass scale right ? Think of 421 interceptions , equal number of missiles used ! But still the cost is $ 90 k a pop for the interceptor ... How larger ? There's a limit to what you can bring it down to ...

There's a cost of human value, if single Iron Dome intercepts a rocket heading towards populated area and saves 3 lives, the cost of the interceptor will be nullified, given Israeli GDP/Capita is at $30K.

Weird how you cant understand how we are rapidly replacing that They are produced in Pakistan so its not a problem for us to mass produce it ...

Unless you come up with the existing number, and production unit per year, this argument prevails.

 

[acid rain]

That is something I cant do at the moment ... Youtube is banned in Pakistan so leave it ... Arm chair General ? You guys haven't been able to answer a single of my question instead of resorting to we will place it here or Pakistan doesn't have enough artillery or the shells and rockets cant be in thousands ... You do not even understand where the major battles are likely to take place !

Yes , but Israel produces them on a mass scale right ? Think of 421 interceptions , equal number of missiles used ! But still the cost is $ 90 k a pop for the interceptor ... How larger ? There's a limit to what you can bring it down to ...

OK, from your posts

1. The system will be overwhelmed - No.

2. Will it take down your so called "sophisticated rockets" - Yes.

3. Thousands and thousands of arty and rockets willl be fired at a given target that the iron dome is protecting - if the Generals are foolish enough to do that then yes we have a problem there and ID will not be effective to safeguard the asset its protecting.

4. Nasr cannot be intercepted - yes it can be.

5. Artillery will take out the ID - No, it will deployed at a safer distance.

6. Cost is too high - yes and that's our problem how we evaluate the cost of the asset it will protect against the cost of the interceptor.

7. Reaction time is too slow - No, reaction time is excellent.

8. Is useless - No, it has a success rate of 87% so quite good.

9. Will it be useful in a battle scenario - most probably yes.

10. Is it scalable - definitely.

 

[Secur]

OK, from your posts

1. The system will be overwhelmed - No.

2. Will it take down your so called "sophisticated rockets" - Yes.

3. Thousands and thousands of arty and rockets willl be fired at a given target that the iron dome is protecting - if the Generals are foolish enough to do that then yes we have a problem there and ID will not be effective to safeguard the asset its protecting.

4. Nasr cannot be intercepted - yes it can be.

5. Artillery will take out the ID - No, it will deployed at a safer distance.

6. Cost is too high - yes and that's our problem how we evaluate the cost of the asset it will protect against the cost of the interceptor.

7. Reaction time is too slow - No, reaction time is excellent.

8. Is useless - No, it has a success rate of 87% so quite good.

9. Will it be useful in a battle scenario - most probably yes.

10. Is it scalable - definitely.

One Liners aren't of much value here since I have explained each and every of your points from my first post in this thread ...

1) Easily - since PA isn't going to fire a few rockets or shells with a delay of hours or days like Hamas does

2) Yes it can , I haven't doubted that ...

3) That depends on what you are trying to protect - if the target is of immense value then efforts will be made to neutralize that ... Your Generals would be foolish if they decide to save even troops on ground besides high value targets because that will raise the cost to that much that even US wont be able to afford that luxury !

4) Yes it can be , but it isn't as simple as you perceive it to be ...

5) Easily - Iron Dome would have to be placed on the battlefield if it has to protect targets there ... Not 100 km behind ... Maximum range is 70 km while US artillery operated by PA can easily take out targets upto 55 km just with normal fuse ...

6) You are actually confused what do you want to protect

7) This is the opinion of Israeli defense experts , not mine ...

8) Different scenarios - Different results

9) Most probably it will be overwhelmed

10) That is possible ...

 

[acid rain]

One Liners aren't of much value here since I have explained each and every of your points from my first post in this thread ...

1) Easily - since PA isn't going to fire a few rockets or shells with a delay of hours or days like Hamas does

2) Yes it can , I haven't doubted that ...

3) That depends on what you are trying to protect - if the target is of immense value then efforts will be made to neutralize that ... Your Generals would be foolish if they decide to save even troops on ground besides high value targets because that will raise the cost to that much that even US wont be able to afford that luxury !

4) Yes it can be , but it isn't as simple as you perceive it to be ...

5) Easily - Iron Dome would have to be placed on the battlefield if it has to protect targets there ... Not 100 km behind ... Maximum range is 70 km while US artillery operated by PA can easily take out targets upto 55 km just with normal fuse ...

6) You are actually confused what do you want to protect

7) This is the opinion of Israeli defense experts , not mine ...

8) Different scenarios - Different results

9) Most probably it will be overwhelmed

10) That is possible ...

Good so we have narrowed your doubts to a few..

Lets assume a Iron dome unit is protecting a base.

Now, As per your wish PA Generals launch thousands and thousands of arty shells and rockets at this base when there are no IA offensive units nearby, then your scenario of overwhelming the ID comes true, but practical logic says otherwise...figure it out.

Secondly there will be a lot of things between your artys and the ID unit, u r right if an ID unit is left close to the border with no IA artys or armamanents nearby ..then u r right a barrage of arty shells will take out the ID unit..but again practical logic says otherwise..figure that out too.

If in a real world scenario, assume that 4 rockets from 2 nasr launchers or say 40 A 100s are launched at this base, this will not overwhelm the system.

lastly as for the success ratio and the reaction times are concerned, pls go through some data from the just concluded live demo of IDs performance.

 

[acid rain]

Finally cost, lets just say thats open for improvement.

 

[Secur]

Good so we have narrowed your doubts to a few..

Lets assume a Iron dome unit is protecting a base.

Now, As per your wish PA Generals launch thousands and thousands of arty shells and rockets at this base when there are no IA offensive units nearby, then your scenario of overwhelming the ID comes true, but practical logic says otherwise...figure it out.

Secondly there will be a lot of things between your artys and the ID unit, u r right if an ID unit is left close to the border with no IA artys or armamanents nearby ..then u r right a barrage of arty shells will take out the ID unit..but again practical logic says otherwise..figure that out too.

If in a real world scenario, assume that 4 rockets from 2 nasr launchers or say 40 A 100s are launched at this base, this will not overwhelm the system.

lastly as for the success ratio and the reaction times are concerned, pls go through some data from the just concluded live demo of IDs performance.

I never had any doubts to begin with , I have merely summarized what I have been saying from the first post in this thread whilst you tried to get away with writing one liners

They aren't actually meant for that purpose but ok

I am not hypothesizing that no Indian artillery units will be present and there will no zero resistance , check my posts again , I have said repeatedly that " thousands of shells and rockets will be fired from both sides " in the fog of war thus making things more difficult for the system ...

What things ? You do not need to leave it alone , the barrage of artillery in the crossfire will be enough to overwhelm it ...

Nobody's launching Nasr ! You do not even understand its role , you are just using the name of that missile without even knowing its purpose ... This will easily overwhelm the system , which of the rockets to engage when all are headed your way and the credible threats are in hundreds range ? A100's have a very high accuracy close to the Russian Smerch ...

I have gone through much data and Israeli experts opinion on their system say otherwise ...

Finally cost, lets just say thats open for improvement.

Israel even today mass produces the system and it costs $ 90k for a single interceptor ... This surely cant be the exporting price so the cost will go up astronomically I must say , not down ...

 

[acid rain]

I never had any doubts to begin with , I have merely summarized what I have been saying from the first post in this thread whilst you tried to get away with writing one liners

They aren't actually meant for that purpose but ok

I am not hypothesizing that no Indian artillery units will be present and there will no zero resistance , check my posts again , I have said repeatedly that " thousands of shells and rockets will be fired from both sides " in the fog of war thus making things more difficult for the system ...

What things ? You do not need to leave it alone , the barrage of artillery in the crossfire will be enough to overwhelm it ...

Nobody's launching Nasr ! You do not even understand its role , you are just using the name of that missile without even knowing its purpose ... This will easily overwhelm the system , which of the rockets to engage when all are headed your way and the credible threats are in hundreds range ? A100's have a very high accuracy close to the Russian Smerch ...

I have gone through much data and Israeli experts opinion on their system say otherwise ...



Israel even today mass produces the system and it costs $ 90k for a single interceptor ... This surely cant be the exporting price so the cost will go up astronomically I must say , not down ...

It's widely used for area protection so for all practical purposes we should assume that it will be used for the same here too.

Things like India's own artillery and rockets and paraphernalia.

A few rockets will not overwhelm it, and in the dreamy sequence where thousands and thousands of Pakistan's arty shells and rockets are fired at this protected area without India's own offensive systems any where in sight - then as I said earlier, we can say goodbye to the protected area.

So, according to this data that you have gone through - what was the mean reaction time of Iron Dome to intercept the rockets fired by Hamas?

We most probably will be manufacturing in house so lets work out the statistics if that happens.

 

[Edevelop]

------- nasr -------- fajr-5
Caliber- 300mm ---- 333 mm
Range -- 60 km ---- 75 km

So what exactly makes nasr better?

Speed of the Missile, Precision/Guidance control and Ability to carry Nuclear Warhead

 

[andyfisher]

I dont see how any iron dome will help ind.

pak doesnt shoot simple rockets like what the palestinian rebels shoot their qassam rockets.

anyways..ind shld worry abt influx of more kasabs from pak than abt dodgy rockets

There is more to this...anyway go israel..at least they take their defence seriously..

 

[acid rain]

I dont see how any iron dome will help ind.

pak doesnt shoot simple rockets like what the palestinian rebels shoot their qassam rockets.

anyways..ind shld worry abt influx of more kasabs from pak than abt dodgy rockets

There is more to this...anyway go israel..at least they take their defence seriously..

Even if it's used, will be very limited and probably against Militant attacks.

 

[Developereo]

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.

A smaller punch but more probability of each punch getting through Iron Dome. It also reduces Iron Dome's advantage of only targeting credible threats, since each attacker missile can now target a wider cone. A missile heading at a tangent cannot be ignored as 'safe' since the daughter missiles could shoot off at sharp angles (assuming they can be equipped with their own motor). The other option would be for Iron Dome to shoot down every attacker before it can split which, again, negates the advantage of optimizing for credible threats.

If Pakistan can make the splitting variant have the same external characteristics as the current one, so the defender cannot distinguish, then a salvo can contain a mix of the two variants to overwhelm Iron Dome's defence mechanism, thus increasing the probability for the heavier missiles to get through.

 

[PRINCE_THE_SHOWSTOPPER]

Well , if Israel cant bring its cost down , what makes you think you can , mate ? They actually make the system , it wont be sold at the same rate it is produced for , right ?

There's the problem , they aren't a " few " rockets ...

because we r not going to buy the "exact" iron dome which israel now places today... it will take a few years of R&D from drdo scientists and their israeli counterparts to make this system "tailor made" for indian use. once we have the technology,we can mass produce it in our ordinance factories,using our cheap labour and locally produced resources to bring down the cost...but still it would remain high and thats why there has no decision been taken yet whether we r going to work on the system or not..thats just a possibility which the article mentions

yes,there aren't a "few" rockets to intercept..but we cannot (or need not) intercept anything or everything thats comes our way... u have mentioned in your post that you will see our high value targets by using chinese satellite feeds & drones and hit them,overwhelming the system.But i've mentioned earlier that we r never going to defend ourselves only...we will also get feeds from our domestic and israeli satellites to see from where fire is comming and strike there precisely,using russian glonass..in there way ther would be a balancing act of attack and defence,whereas there would be no such defence from the pakistani side.This system cannot give us 100% security or defend a system completely,but u thinking of firing thousands of rockets to us is illological to say the least,as we would also be striking simultaneously

 

[Secur]

but still it would remain high and thats why there has no decision been taken yet whether we r going to work on the system or not..thats just a possibility which the article mentions

yes,there aren't a "few" rockets to intercept..but we cannot (or need not) intercept anything or everything thats comes our way... u have mentioned in your post that you will see our high value targets by using chinese satellite feeds & drones and hit them

Exactly ! Iron Dome today is tailor made for Israeli needs which are protecting its cities from primitive rockets which are fired quite few in numbers ( most of them not even threatening anything ) and with days of delay at best ... Even then , the cost is $50k/battery and $90k/interceptor for them with obvious flaws I pointed out quoting the Israeli defense experts themselves ... If its tailor made for you with complete ToT , then the cost is only expected to rise from there considering that you face much more sophisticated threats at your borders , labour cost will only make a little difference , locally produced resources will remain to be seen ...

I presented you the situation for both the scenario ... Even if I start to only include the " credible threats ( against the assets whose destruction costs more than the price of the interceptor and results in decrease of fighting capability of the army ) , even then the rockets or shells headed your way will be in hundreds and they are all low cost , if you dont understand how artillery duels are fought , check the reports of them fought along LOC before ceasefire and as @notorious_eagle pointed out the Bosnian war , I never said IA will be sitting idle but when shells or rockets are being lobbed from both sides , that results in something called " the fog of war " which is another disadvantage ... Hope this makes sense now ...

P.S That response of " network centric warfare " was for gambit who thought a system like Iron Dome can be easily hidden ... I didn't mean to suppose any superiority over IA by that because the same is true otherwise ...

 

[gambit]

I know , I was just pointing out the obvious shortcomings of the system in this scenario ... The criticism was made after Iron Dome failed to stop several rockets which caused dozens of deaths in Israel ...

I mentioned " sophistication " in the case of rockets , not artillery ... Does Palestinian Hamas possess artillery ? ... Both Indo-Pak and Hamas-Israel are extremely different and by no chance one is comparable to another ... Well , the day they start to deploy decoys , they will cease to exist as a shell

Agreed , there are too many unknown variables but the same will be true for the interceptor missile too , right ? Again , we aren't thinking of using missiles against Iron Dome , we are confident that our artillery shells and rockets will be enough to do the trick of overwhelming and later neutralizing the system ...

Exactly , the defense has no ways of precisely knowing where exactly ( an approximate trajectory calculation by system's radar is another thing ) the hostile object is going to fall ... Again , the defense will be costlier but by a factor of what ? In this case , it is getting so expensive that it is ceasing to become even feasible for any army in a theatre level warfare ...

You are again assuming that Pakistan Army like Hamas will fire a few missiles with a delay of hours or days in a war !

I will indulge you and play with artillery for now.

The kill blast radius for a naval 16in shell, like the type the Iowa class battleship shoot, is about 100 meters. The 155mm land howitzer the US Army shoot have a kill radius of about 50 meters. For both, each CEP is about the same as each kill blast radius. That is actually not very good odds of hitting a target. So the attacker must launch several shells to try to destroy one target. He may be lucky and destroy on the first shell, but because he probably does not know it, he will end up sending several more anyway.

But what if he missed on the first, second, and third? Typical artillery assault is to keep on shooting until either an observer call it quits, or he may quit precisely because he does not know and does not want to expend his stores. So say that he shot 5 rounds and the 3rd of 5 just happened to be on the ideal trajectory to destroy the enemy's command bunker. What if that round was intercepted?

The flawed calculus here is one expensive interceptor against one cheap artillery shell.

The correct calculus is one expensive interceptor against five cheap artillery shells. The calculus should be against the final and total expenditure of shells by the attacker. It may still be more expensive, but command bunker was successfully defended.

 

[Secur]

The correct calculus is one expensive interceptor against five cheap artillery shells. The calculus should be against the final and total expenditure of shells by the attacker. It may still be more expensive, but command bunker was successfully defended.

Make it so , but the odds are ever increasing due to the large numbers of shells or rockets being fired PA has enough US artillery to make that sure , you simply cant field the x number of Iron Dome system for x number of threats , has the US army ever deployed any system like that ? , it is more likely that the system will be overwhelmed by the number of hundreds of credible threats alone increasing the probability of the target being destroyed , you are again using the flawed assumption that Pakistan Army functions the same as insurgents with too limited resources , besides the Iron Dome is known for difficulty in intercepting hostiles which have a short distance and flight envelope in Israel which is again low in our scenario ... I know , that system will start to make more sense if its inducted to protect only " high value targets " but still it doesn't change the fact that the cost will be astronomically high making it unfeasible ... and still the five shells which may be used for a target like you hypothesized will be still cheaper than $90,000 interceptor missile !

P.S Tell you what ... Some fanboys here want to engage each and every incoming to protect troops too with Iron Dome besides those that might hit a high value target !