Israel’s Antimissile System Attracts Potential Buyers

[JayAtl]

Although the article does not say so specifically, I know India is looking at this too for years now. and thought I saw an article here that spoke to renewed interest from the Indian military?

WASHINGTON — The success cited by Israel for its Iron Dome antimissile system in its confrontation with Hamas has re-energized American missile defense advocates and generated new interest in the global arms bazaar from nations like South Korea that face short-range rocket threats from hostile neighbors.

But even ardent supporters of a continent-size missile shield to guard the United States and other NATO members acknowledge the limitations of Iron Dome, which is a tactical system designed to shoot down unsophisticated rockets — basically flying pipe bombs — with a range of less than 50 miles.

Some American technical experts also say they want hard evidence before judging whether Iron Dome knocked out as many rockets as Israel has claimed. Iron Dome’s most salient feature, according to American experts now examining after-action reports from Gaza, may well be its software: The system rapidly discriminates between incoming rockets that are hurtling toward a populated area and others not worth expending a far costlier Iron Dome interceptor to knock down.

The conflict between Israel and Hamas focused global attention on missile defenses, and came as the United States and its Arab allies have undertaken a costly effort to knit together a regional shield in the Persian Gulf to protect cities, oil refineries, pipelines and military bases from a potential Iranian attack.

“This will ratify the common-sense notion that these systems can play a role in defending you,” said Eric S. Edelman, a former under secretary of defense for policy in the George W. Bush administration. “It will be especially relevant as we move into an era in which there will be more countries with small inventories of rockets and missiles — and more countries that will want to defend against them in a reasonable way.”

The effort in the gulf is envisioned to include advanced radar as well as sets of two antimissile systems with accompanying radar: Patriot Advanced Capability interceptors and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. Those weapons would be linked with the radars and missiles carried aboard American Aegis warships in nearby waters.

There is a similar effort in the Pacific centered on radars in Japan, Aegis warships at sea and land-based interceptors in Alaska and California.

The Obama administration’s more recent focus has been the system to protect NATO allies in Europe with advanced radars based in Turkey and long-range interceptors to be based first in Romania and subsequently in Poland. American officials have emphasized that the limited number of interceptors in Europe are all about Iran, and would be inadequate to blunt Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal; but the system remains an irritant in relations with Moscow.

During the conflict with Hamas, Israeli officials report that Iron Dome knocked down more than 400 rockets on flight paths to populated areas, with a kill rate of 85 percent. Hamas is said to have fired off more than 1,400 rockets in all, but Israel was able to limit Hamas’s ability to launch more of its arsenal of 12,000 rockets with pre-emptive attacks on the storehouses where they were kept.

But some antimissile experts have expressed doubt about Israeli claims for Iron Dome, which is built by Israeli defense firms but has received about $275 million in financial support from the United States. Bright flashes can create a visual impression of overwhelming interceptor success, when in fact they may represent nothing more than the interceptor warhead blowing up, these skeptics warn.

“I’ve met the guys in Israel, and they’re smart,” said Richard M. Lloyd, an antimissile expert with more than a dozen patents and two major textbooks on warhead design to his credit. “But I’m not seeing the things I want to see” to prove that Iron Dome actually succeeded to the extent described by Israel.

Mr. Lloyd, who works for Tesla Laboratories Inc., a defense contractor in Arlington, Va., said he had studied dozens of publicly available photographs of spent rockets that landed on Israel. Few of them, he said, showed signs of damage from Iron Dome’s exploding warhead and the specific mechanism by which the interceptor is designed to make its kill — a dense spray of speeding metal fragments. ( contd)

Israeli Success in Downing Hamas Rockets Has World?s Attention - NYTimes.com

 

[Abingdonboy]

Although the article does not say so specifically, I know India is looking at this too for years now. and thought I saw an article here that spoke to renewed interest from the Indian military?

Yes, apprently India has shown serious interest in the system:

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

India looks to Israel's Iron Dome to counter short-range rockets

 

[Mitro]

We don't need this crap that used $90,000 missile to destroy rocket i.e less then $500.waste of money when it come to indo-pak conflict we got Akash and its better to invest in indigenious project then buying ready made.

 

[janon]

We don't need this crap that used $90,000 missile to destroy rocket i.e less then $500.waste of money when it come to indo-pak conflict we got Akash and its better to invest in indigenious project then buying ready made.

That depends on how much destruction that $500 rocket can cause. What if that rocket can cause damage worth a million dollars or more? Would it then be worth taking it down using a $90,000 missile? And that is very much possible, if they hit a hangar or runway or radar system or a refinery or a fuel depot or a command and control center or a thickly populated civilian spot, like a stadium during a cricket match or....

Then would it seem worthwhile to expend a $90,000 missile to intercept it? I am sure the Indian military will choose wisely where to deploy it, to protect what targets. They do these cost benefit analyses much before and much better than we do.

Also, Akash is a medium range system, this is a short range one. And akash can't intercept rockets and mortar and artillery like this can. We don't have a domestic equivalent for the iron dome.

 

[500]

We don't need this crap that used $90,000 missile to destroy rocket i.e less then $500.waste of money when it come to indo-pak conflict we got Akash and its better to invest in indigenious project then buying ready made.

Lets imagine a situation. You discover, that in 30 seconds u are going to be hit by 5 cent bullet in your head.

Question, will you pay 10 $ to intercept this 5 cent bullet or not?

By the way, your numbers are not correct. Iron Dome missile costs 50,000$. Improved Grad costs several thousands, rocket like Fajr-5 and Nasr cost tens of thousands.

 

[Mitro]

That depends on how much destruction that $500 rocket can cause. What if that rocket can cause damage worth a million dollars or more? Would it then be worth taking it down using a $90,000 missile? And that is very much possible, if they hit a hangar or runway or radar system or a refinery or a fuel depot or a command and control center or a thickly populated civilian spot, like a stadium during a cricket match or....

Then would it seem worthwhile to expend a $90,000 missile to intercept it? I am sure the Indian military will choose wisely where to deploy it, to protect what targets. They do these cost benefit analyses much before and much better than we do.

In india pak war scenario if we see they are lots of aggressive weapon which can be use by pakistan to target strategic asset like airforce base ,industries,oil reserve and we have SAM for that .
I dont understand why we are spending top dollar for defensive weapons when we can buying offensive weapon and let pakistan spend money in SAM but its vice versa.though pakistan is small but all the weapon system they have is very offensive in nature and on other hand we are busy making AAD and PAD,

We should develop or buy more aggressive weapon system not defence i.e i think we don't need iron dome.

 

[janon]

In india pak war scenario if we see they are lots of aggressive weapon which can be use by pakistan to target strategic asset like airforce base ,industries,oil reserve and we have SAM for that .
I dont understand why we are spending top dollar for defensive weapons when we can buying offensive weapon and let pakistan spend money in SAM but its vice versa.though pakistan is small but all the weapon system they have is very offensive in nature and on other hand we are busy making AAD and PAD,

We should develop or buy more aggressive weapon system not defence i.e i think we don't need iron dome.

The red part is answered by the blue part.

We need defensive weapons because pak has offensive weapons.

And we have plenty of offensive weapons too. We need both, as does every country.

 

[Mitro]

Lets imagine a situation. You discover, that in 30 seconds u are going to be hit by 5 cent bullet in your head.

Question, will you pay 10 $ to intercept this 5 cent bullet or not?

By the way, your numbers are not correct. Iron Dome missile costs 50,000$. Improved Grad costs several thousands, rocket like Fajr-5 and Nasr cost tens of thousands.

for 5 cent bullet i will buy i rocket launcher to Fcuk them up,we already have too much defensive system and we need something very aggressive and fast and let the enemy go on defensive .
let them buy your SAM not us

and number are from wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome

 

[janon]

for 5 cent bullet i will buy i rocket launcher to Fcuk them up,we already have too much defensive system and we need something very aggressive and fast and let the enemy go on defensive .
let them buy your SAM not us

What Pakistan buys is not our choice. We can't order them to buy only defensive weapons. They have missiles and rockets which can attack us, whether we like it or not. So we need defensive counter measures. We cant go on an offensive and destroy every single piece of their artillery and rocket launcher and missile system before they fire. Nobody can. They will fire at us offensively in war, their rockets and missiles are not simply for show.

And we are not just making AAD and PAD, we are also making brahmos and agnis and prithvis and nirbhays and shauryas and a lot of other offensive missiles - all of them made in India, and all of them world class. As I said before, we need both, since Pakistan has both, and we can't expect them to comply with our wish of only buying defensive stuff.

 

[Mitro]

The red part is answered by the blue part.

We need defensive weapons because pak has offensive weapons.

And we have plenty of offensive weapons too. We need both, as does every country.

If we have the offensive weapon then why pakistan is not buying any Long range SAM we are playing very defensive here .
pakistan has Lots of SAM choice from china and can buy in long term loan but they choose to buy offensive weapons so we have to change our strategy and go for offensive weapons

Attack is the best form of defence:

 

[sancho]

We don't need this crap that used $90,000 missile to destroy rocket i.e less then $500.waste of money when it come to indo-pak conflict we got Akash and its better to invest in indigenious project then buying ready made.

First of all, Akash has a different purpose than Iron dome and beeing indigenous is not an argument!
But I agree that we don't need a missile system to intercept rocket and mortars, when a gun system for similar purpose could be much more cost-effective.
Iron Dome is defenitely a very good system, but more suited for Israel, where bigger cities with several thousands of people must be protected in a smaller area. For India this is not the case, we have a large border region with and can use such systems only in smaller numbers to protect high value targets, like forwarded air force or army bases. Not to mention that rockets and mortars are the least problems that we have, which makes capable SAM systems more important.

 

[janon]

First of all, Akash has a different purpose than Iron dome and beeing indigenous is not an argument!
But I agree that we don't need a missile system to intercept rocket and mortars, when a gun system for similar purpose could be much more cost-effective.
Iron Dome is defenitely a very good system, but more suited for Israel, where bigger cities with several thousands of people must be protected in a smaller area. For India this is not the case, we have a large border region with and can use such systems only in smaller numbers to protect high value targets, like forwarded air force or army bases. Not to mention that rockets and mortars are the least problems that we have, which makes capable SAM systems more important.

And that precisely is the intended use, to protect high value targets. India will have a layered air defence system, with different systems for different uses. So this one will be for point air defence of the kind of targets you said, so why isn't it suited for India, although in a different way from how it is useful for Israel?

 

[Mitro]

What Pakistan buys is not our choice. We can't order them to buy only defensive weapons. They have missiles and rockets which can attack us, whether we like it or not. So we need defensive counter measures. We cant go on an offensive and destroy every single piece of their artillery and rocket launcher and missile system before they fire. Nobody can. They will fire at us offensively in war, their rockets and missiles are not simply for show.

And we are not just making AAD and PAD, we are also making brahmos and agnis and prithvis and nirbhays and shauryas and a lot of other offensive missiles. As I said before, we need both, since Pakistan has both, and we can't expect them to comply with our wish of only buying defensive stuff.

why waste money in AAD and PAd when it can be easily destroyed by MIRV and decoy.and we can easily change them go defensive if and only if we act and buy more offensive weapon system if israel make any offensive system we should buy it first then this SAM.

 

[Viper0011.]

What Pakistan buys is not our choice. We can't order them to buy only defensive weapons. They have missiles and rockets which can attack us, whether we like it or not. So we need defensive counter measures. We cant go on an offensive and destroy every single piece of their artillery and rocket launcher and missile system before they fire. Nobody can. They will fire at us offensively in war, their rockets and missiles are not simply for show.

And we are not just making AAD and PAD, we are also making brahmos and agnis and prithvis and nirbhays and shauryas and a lot of other offensive missiles - all of them made in India, and all of them world class. As I said before, we need both, since Pakistan has both, and we can't expect them to comply with our wish of only buying defensive stuff.

Interesting discussion. Entirely focused on Pakistan. Yet, the common understanding you get is that 'India's way passed the Pakistani threat and it's focus is China and other big countries now. Pakistan isn't even in the picture'. Well...it doesn't seem here so. Seems like the whole defense / offense is Pakistan focused.

I think, I would invest into Indian ABMs. That's something you guys have invested in, integrated technology and support structure. Israeli systems are one of the best techs out there. But if you as India, already has a base system. Why not advance it? Money can buy you anything. So if some specific tech is lacking, I am more than positive Israelis will be ready to share or sell it to you guys for $$.

 

[500]

for 5 cent bullet i will buy i rocket launcher to Fcuk them up

Do you think that rocket launcher will make u immune to bullets?

we already have too much defensive system and we need something very aggressive and fast and let the enemy go on defensive .
let them buy your SAM not us

Iron Dome can guide your artillery against sources of fire.