Help support TMP


"'Iron Dome' proving itself against Gaza rockets" Topic


43 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Modern Discussion Message Board


1,097 hits since 13 Mar 2012
©1994-2014 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member13 Mar 2012 1:53 p.m. PST

Not bad. A 75% success rate.

Israel says 'Iron Dome' proving itself against Gaza rockets
by Staff Writers
Jerusalem (AFP) March 12, 2012


Israel says its unique "Iron Dome" short-range air defence system is performing well, intercepting the vast majority of rockets fired at southern cities in the latest barrage by Gaza militants.

So far three experimental batteries have been deployed since March 2011 -- around Ashkelon, Ashdod and the Negev desert capital of Beersheva, which have a combined population of more than half a million.

Experts say that a total of 13 batteries are needed to give a full nationwide umbrella.

By Monday afternoon, Palestinians had fired more than 200 rockets and mortar rounds from Gaza into southern Israel since a latest round of fighting erupted on Friday, the military said.

Gaza emergency services said that at least 23 Palestinians had been killed and 73 wounded since Friday as Israeli launched 36 air strikes against the territory.

On Monday, 31 rockets headed for urban centres were targeted by Iron Dome, which scored 23 hits, the military said, a 75 percent success rate.

"The system is working very well," Brigadier General Doron Gavish briefed reporters at one of the batteries in the vicinity of Ashdod, 25 kilometres (15 miles) from the Gaza border.

"Rockets shot at the cities of Israel are being intercepted by the warriors who are operating the system," said Gavish head of Israel's national air defences.

Visiting a battery on Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke of the system's "impressive achievements."

"You are doing exceptional work," he told its crew. "I take the Israeli peoples hat off to you."

The system, the first of its kind in the world, was developed by Israel's Rafael Advanced Defence Systems with the help of US funding. It is designed to intercept rockets and artillery shells fired from a range of between four and 70 kilometres (three and 45 miles).

Each battery comprises detection and tracking radar, state-of-the-art fire control software and three launchers, each with 20 interceptor missiles, military sources said.

Militants in Gaza and Lebanon's Hezbollah militia have fired thousands of rockets at Israel in the past.

The first batteries were deployed facing the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, from where militants have repeatedly fired improvised rockets, prompting Israel to launch a devastating 22-day offensive into the territory in December 2008.

It is later to be deployed along the Lebanese border, from where Hezbollah militants fired some 4,000 rockets into northern Israel during a 2006 war. It was that experience which prompted the development of Iron Dome.

Israel believes Hezbollah now has an arsenal of some 40,000 rockets.

But a complete deployment is expected to take several years.

Iron Dome joins the Arrow missile defence system in an ambitious multi-layered programme to protect Israeli cities from rockets fired from Gaza or Lebanon, or missiles fired from Iran or Syria.

"It is a new tool being brought into the basket of tools… a tool we didn't have before," Gavish said.

"We have something new in the arena that obviously plays in our favour."

The defence ministry says a third system, known as David's Sling, is currently being developed with the aim of countering medium-range missiles."

link

Terrement Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 2:07 p.m. PST

Israel believes Hezbollah now has an arsenal of some 40,000 rockets.

How many "Iron Dome" rounds do you imagine Israel has? How well can it handle a saturation raid? How expensive are the rounds expended vs the improvised and sometimes totally crap rockets being fired into Israel?

On Monday, 31 rockets headed for urban centres were targeted by Iron Dome, which scored 23 hits, the military said, a 75 percent success rate.

Thirty one whole rockets. Not all at once. I know I'd be sleeping much better…

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they have it. I'm just not convinced it is the near invulnerable shield it is being portrayed to be, and if 25% are getting through with current attacks, how many more might get through with smarter raids?

How hard are the sites themselves to be taken out? What happens with a coordinated attack to take out some of the launchers or control sites just prior to the next deluge of incoming rockets?

JJ

Mako1113 Mar 2012 2:12 p.m. PST

Given that the system is new, I'm surprised the success rate is so good. No doubt, it will improve over time.

Your concerns are valid though, e.g. ammo supplies, and cost.

I'm sure the old adage still applies, e.g. "the best defense is a good offense".

morrigan13 Mar 2012 2:27 p.m. PST

Well, if my house was among those targeted by the %75 that were shot down, I would think it was quite good value.

Terrement Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 3:09 p.m. PST

Not claiming otherwise. Just that the system has not really been tested. Plus, if the numbers are bad (pulling from the south end of a northbound mule) let's assume for a moment that Hamas has 40,000 (not even questioning how many Hezbollah can bring to the table), and that Israel can match them round for round. That means "only" 10,000 will hit.

In the grand scheme of things, does that really make much difference? At some point, I'm guessing well before the 10,000th one hits, they've been rubbleizing rubble for some time.

Now what if Israel doesn't have 40,000? Loses a site? Has to deal with Hezbollah?

Is it part of a good idea? ABSOLUTELY. Is it to the point that they should be crowing about it and giving the homies a false sense of security? Not so sure. Just sayin'

JJ

kyotebluer than blue Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 3:13 p.m. PST

Didn't David Drake come up with this idea in one of his Hammers Slammers stories??

emckinney13 Mar 2012 3:17 p.m. PST

Well, if my house was among those targeted by the %75 that were shot down, I would think it was quite good value.

I wouldn't. The CEP on the rockets is truly terrible. For years, they've mostly been missing the kibbutzes that they're fired at and landing randomly in fields. The number of Israeli deaths has been staggeringly small--1 or 2 most months. In one spate of attacks, the only death was a heart attack running to a bomb shelter. Spending the money to get the Israelis to stop smoking and to use their turn signals would, quite literally, save far more Israeli lives.

In all seriousness, you should go back and look at the casualty rates from the rocket attacks for the last few years.

Personal logo zippyfusenet Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 3:24 p.m. PST

This isn't a war of mass casualties. It's a war of nerves and morale. The Israelis need all the morale boosters they can get. Iron Dome! WOO-HOO!!!!!

Wolfprophet13 Mar 2012 3:54 p.m. PST

How many "Iron Dome" rounds do you imagine Israel has? How well can it handle a saturation raid? How expensive are the rounds expended vs the improvised and sometimes totally crap rockets being fired into Israel?

Given these considerations. I suspect it would be cheaper in the long run to go in, wipe out armed resistance and mass evict the residents of the Gaza strip to somewhere on the coast of North Africa far far away and make sure they have plenty of food, water, medical and camping supplies to survive their trip. When that's done, then bulldoze the entire city, recover the materials and use them to repair any damage from the rockets and start building a new settlement for their own citizens. All the while, totally ignoring the international outcry since frankly, it's none of the UN's business.

Though, I'm admittedly biased. I sorta have a soft spot for Israel since they generally don't take Bleeped text from anyone and I admire that quality in a country when everyone is being so PC these days.

Personal logo Ditto TwoThree Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 4:51 p.m. PST

I have to wonder though if the high success rate might be exagerated? Wasn't the success rate of the Patriots initially over-estimated?

Plus, why would they announc this? Doesn't it give impetus for their enemies to try and overcome the system?
--
Tim

Mako1113 Mar 2012 6:10 p.m. PST

Well, something must be working, e.g. either Iron Dome, or the Israeli suppression attacks into Gaza (probably both), since the cessation of hostilities happened pretty quickly, apparently initiated by the guys firing the rockets over the border.

Then again, perhaps it was just meant as a test of their current state of defenses.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member13 Mar 2012 6:44 p.m. PST

Rafael eyes Iron Dome exports after Gaza
by Staff Writers
Tel Aviv, Israel (UPI) Mar 13, 2012


Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems is looking to export its Iron Dome counter-rocket system because of its high interception rate against a four-day onslaught by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip.

"The Iron Dome system has proved to a major game-changer in the most recent round of conflict with Islamist terror organizations operating in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip," The Jerusalem Post crowed in an editorial Tuesday.

"Israel will be able to profit from Iron Dome, which has proved itself in combat, by selling it to other countries."

Foreign sales, potentially worth several billion dollars, would help the financially strapped Israeli government fund production of such systems to counter an unprecedented missile threat that will target Israelis cities.

The United States, which has provided some $400 USD million toward developing and producing Iron Dome since 2007, India, South Korea and some NATO members have expressed interest in acquiring the system.

The military boasted that the three Iron Dome batteries deployed in the southern Negev Desert knocked out close to 90 percent of the short-range Qassam and longer-range, Soviet-designed Grad rockets launched toward Beersheba, Ashdod and Ashkelon from Friday through Monday.

The military said a fourth battery will be deployed soon. Nine batteries are scheduled for deployment by mid-2013.

The Israeli air force, which operates all air-defense systems, says 20 batteries are needed to provide effective cover for the entire country.

Until the latest surge of fighting on the border with Gaza, Iron Dome's interception rate was around 75 percent following its first operational deployment in March 2011.

The military said that the battery protecting Beersheba allowed two Grad rockets through Sunday because of what it described as a "technical failure in one of the system's components."

One hit an empty school and the other blew up a parked car in a residential neighborhood, although no casualties were reported.

That prompted Col. Tzvika Haimovich, of the air force's air defense division, to downplay the high expectations of the Israeli defense establishment that Iron Dome is a wonder weapon that can provide 100 percent protection.

"Iron Dome has many components and in spite of its technical achievements, it has technical failures," Haimovich said, echoing what many critics of the system have long maintained.

"I have to say, there is no hermetic seal and so only a combination of Iron Dome and civilians adhering to the Home Front Command's directives will be able to maximize the defense arch."

Iron Dome, designed to intercept rockets and missiles with a range of 2.5-43 miles, locks on to those that the system's computer plots will impact in populated areas or strategic facilities.

The system ignores projectiles whose trajectories point to open ground.

The military said some 230 Qassams, manufactured in makeshift factories in Gaza's labyrinthine urban sprawl, and the Russian-made 122mm Grad battlefield rockets smuggled in from Egypt, were fired into Israel during the recent clashes.

Iron Dome shot down more than 40 of those it engaged.

The Grads were the Israelis' main concern because they can reach the urban areas and carry a more destructive warhead than the Qassams.

Haimovich conceded that Iron Dome was "stretched to the max" in terms of its capabilities but was protecting larger areas than before.

But this begs the question whether the system, if it's stretched coping with 200-plus missiles over four days, will be able to effectively counter the massive barrages Israel's military chiefs anticipate from Iran, Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Palestinian hardliners in Gaza if all-out war breaks out.

Iron Dome is the bottom tier of a planned four-level Israeli air defense shield, with state-owned Rafael's David's Sling, under development, handling the medium-range missiles and Arrow 2 and 3 missiles, produced by Israel Aerospace Industries, the ballistic missiles in Iran and Syria.

Israel estimates that Hezbollah alone has up to 45,000 rockets and missiles.

During the 34-day 2006 war, when Israel first grasped the extent of the missile threat it faces and scrambled to seeking defensive systems, Hezbollah fired 3,900 projectiles into northern Israel, an average of some 120 a day.

In the nightmare scenario now envisaged by the military, Israel faces being hammered by up to 400 a day for several weeks."

link

Personal logo Ditto TwoThree Supporting Member of TMP13 Mar 2012 7:10 p.m. PST

Thanks, Mako and to Kaos for the SpaceWar.com article.

I'm really not trying stir up any controversy, but I do remember the Patriot performance reports and later reports that indicated these were overly optimistic. So that's why I'm a bit sceptical. grin Truth first casualty of war, etc, etc. I remember a link someone posted here about a wartime report in a magazine going on about how fabulously successful the first turret stabilizers were; those of us WWII wargamers who know anything about Shermans (and the Stuarts and Lee/Grants who had them) know what the historical truth was there! grin

That's not to say it is not performing well, of course. Either way, the important thing is if the missile idiots believe most of their efforts are for naught and just bring on retaliatory raids, I would think they would be more likely to be discouraged. And that in itself, if it works with other efforts to bring up a solution to the mess, would be all the better.
==
Tim

Personal logo The Editor The Editor of TMP Fezian13 Mar 2012 7:28 p.m. PST

How hard are the sites themselves to be taken out? What happens with a coordinated attack to take out some of the launchers or control sites just prior to the next deluge of incoming rockets?

1. Hopefully, this equipment is mobile. If not, hopefully it is a hardened target.
2. I doubt the rockets are sophisticated enough to target something as specific as a missile site/launcher.

Pat Ripley Fezian13 Mar 2012 8:18 p.m. PST

2. I doubt the rockets are sophisticated enough to target something as specific as a missile site/launcher.

luckliy they seem to have enough trouble hitting towns let alone a counter battery site.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member13 Mar 2012 8:37 p.m. PST

From what I understand Bill its supposed to be mobile. Robert

picture

picture


The radar of the Iron Dome CRAM system

picture

Pictured here is the Iron Dome battery in Ashkelon which intercepted approximately 8 rockets and Grad missiles launched from the Gaza Strip since its deployment on April 4th.

picture

Wolfprophet13 Mar 2012 9:21 p.m. PST

Ooooh. Now we have pictures. So then, who wants to start sculpting them in 28mm, 15mm and then several sci-fi versions?

:)

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member13 Mar 2012 11:29 p.m. PST

picture

picture

bsrlee14 Mar 2012 2:17 a.m. PST

As was mentioned above, its been 'done' before with 'Patriot' – claims of successful intercepts which just turned out to be missiles self destructing in flight while there was a Phoenix in flight somewhere. Very good for the manufacturers share prices & export sales, but not actually effective.

Terrement Supporting Member of TMP14 Mar 2012 6:15 a.m. PST

2. I doubt the rockets are sophisticated enough to target something as specific as a missile site/launcher.

Never said that was how they'd do it. If you accept the premise (not saying it is the case, but if it is) that their enemies perhaps with assistance from Iran who wants to keep Israel's hearts and minds elsewhere, do decide to do a concentrated blitz bombing rather than a few dozen at a time, it would seem that these sites would become priority targets to be taken out by any means the opposing forces have at their disposal. High casualties to the attackers? Yup. In the grand scheme of things, worth them making these priority targets? You tell me.

VCarter14 Mar 2012 6:28 a.m. PST

"How hard are the sites themselves to be taken out? What happens with a coordinated attack to take out some of the launchers or control sites just prior to the next deluge of incoming rockets?"

Attacking the sites works, however, they can only be attacked after they have fired and even then the media is all over the destroyed target area.

Great choice, defend your civilians and get painted as the villain or allow the attacks to continue from the same sites.

latto6plus214 Mar 2012 9:13 a.m. PST

@ wolfprophet – deport an entire population based on their ethnicity, take them miles away from their homes and put them in nice camps, so that another people can expand and gain living space at their expense?

That all sounds strangely familiar, has it been tried before, historically? Who was it tried on? How did it work out? Because it sounds like a good sensible non pc plan.

emckinney14 Mar 2012 2:11 p.m. PST

VCarter, the question was about attacks against the ABM sites, not attacks against the Hamas rocket sites.

Personal logo Sparker Supporting Member of TMP14 Mar 2012 2:49 p.m. PST

The number of Israeli deaths has been staggeringly small--1 or 2 most months.

There is no such thing as an acceptable level of violence. Israeli civilians have as much a right to go about their business as anyone else without having terrorist mortar bombs and missiles rain down on them, and any measures which reduce these chances are to be welcomed.

WarpSpeed14 Mar 2012 3:37 p.m. PST

What cost is every interception,i mean the Israeli government probably shot down some poor kids science fair $10 USD dollar estes model rocket.Some hobby shop should donate a few thousand and have a special young rocketter day in Gaza.See if iron dome is cost effective then.

latto6plus214 Mar 2012 3:38 p.m. PST

I agree, but there seems to be an acceptance that its Ok to rain 155mm shells and 500kg bombs on the civilians living on the other side of the wall. Terrorism is terrorism whether its a couple of desperate fanatics, an armed group or a government policy.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member14 Mar 2012 4:07 p.m. PST

"I agree, but there seems to be an acceptance that its Ok to rain 155mm shells and 500kg bombs on the civilians living on the other side of the wall. Terrorism is terrorism whether its a couple of desperate fanatics, an armed group or a government policy."

And the thread is about the Iron Dome system,its recent use, and how effective it is. Though it seems that its "OK" for others to fire rockets ,artillery and mortar rounds across the wall. IMO how cost effective is what is in the minds of the Israeli military and Government on whether it is .It seems to be that to them any amount of rockets,missiles and shells that are intercepted being fired at Israeli populations are worth it. Robert

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member14 Mar 2012 4:28 p.m. PST

"On Monday, the system proved 75% effective against incoming fire. But that was an off day. Overall, the system has negated as much as 90% of incoming projectiles that had been deemed a threat. In the latest clash, that amounted to well over a hundred shells and rockets that were exploded harmlessly in midair before landing on Israeli soil.

Though Iron Dome might one day protect all of Israel's borders – including its northern border with Lebanon – it is not fully deployed. Even in those areas where it has been deployed, it isn't perfect, so Israelis who live close to Gaza must periodically live as though they are under siege: Schools are closed, large public gatherings are cancelled and families are advised to stay close to bomb shelters.

Nevertheless, the early results from Iron Dome are hugely promising. The system will bring real psychological relief to Israelis living in the south, and has made the job of Gazan terrorists much harder. Their enormous investment in rockets and ammunition just lost somewhere between 75% to 90% of its value. It will be difficult recruiting terrorists to risk their lives staffing launch cells when even a successful launch likely will just mean another notch on an Iron Dome battery.

Iron Dome has cost Israel more than a billion dollars. The American taxpayer has kicked in hundreds of millions, in exchange for access to the technology. Each Iron Dome missile costs an estimated $60,000. USD It's a pricy system, to be sure. But for Israelis, the system is worth every penny.

Iron Dome is more than just a life-saving weapon system. It acts as a sort of technological metaphor for the Middle East conflict as a whole. While Palestinian militants in Gaza waste what few resources they have on smuggled weaponry that kill citizens indiscriminately, the Israelis produce life-saving high-tech refinements that one day will be protecting American military bases in the Gulf – and who knows what else besides – from attacks by Iran and its proxies."

link

BattlerBritain15 Mar 2012 3:59 a.m. PST

60,000 dollars a pop phew, that's pricey!

Wonder if it would be more economically viable to do what the Romans/Italians would do, and bribe them not to fire them?

Just an idea?

Say pay the Palestinians a going stipend of say, 10,000 a pop not to fire, and how many would they normally fire in a year? Say a 1,000, that'd be what? A billion?

A billion a year. How much benefit would that bring to Gaza?

Then if they start firing then the money flow stops.

Just a bit of reverse logic. Wonder if it'd work?

The Gazans would be happier as a billion a year would improve their lives quite a bit.

Israel would be happier coz no more rockets and it's cheaper than Iron Dome. And the neighbours'd be happy. Win-Win all round.

Personal logo zippyfusenet Supporting Member of TMP15 Mar 2012 8:43 a.m. PST

It's been tried and failed.

The premise of the Oslo Accords was to pay off the Arabs for peace. That effort has decisively failed. From my perspective, either the Arabs would not stay bought, or the price they demanded was too high for Israel to pay.

I would game the conflict using the tic-tac-toe rules, which, when perfectly played, always result in a stalemate.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member15 Mar 2012 11:12 a.m. PST

I was surprised at the price also.

"On Monday, the system proved 75% effective against incoming fire. But that was an off day. Overall, the system has negated as much as 90% of incoming projectiles that had been deemed a threat. In the latest clash, that amounted to well over a hundred shells and rockets that were exploded harmlessly in midair before landing on Israeli soiL"

At least 100 rockets at 60.000 a pop? Robert

Bangorstu15 Mar 2012 12:02 p.m. PST

Sparker – of course that right extends to Palestinian civilians too.

And we're dealing with an army (IDF) which has used WP against civilian targets and indiscriminate violence agaisnt heavily populated areas.

Just because the Israeli attack on Gaza a few years back didn't get the same coverage as that against Homs, doens't mean they're not similar.

Bottom line – if you stop stealing other peoples' land then you won't need to spend so much on defence.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member15 Mar 2012 1:30 p.m. PST

"One of the issues surrounding the Iron Dome according to critics is the cost. Reuven Pedatzur, a military analyst, former fighter pilot and professor of political science at Tel Aviv Universitysays it is simply too expensive compared to the cost of the primitive Kassam rockets being fired from Gaza. He says the estimated cost of the Tamir interceptor missile is $35,000 USD$50,000, whereas a crudely manufactured Kassam rocket costs around 800 dollars.

Rafael responded that the cost issue was exaggerated since Iron Dome intercepts only rockets determined to constitute a threat, and that the lives saved and the strategic impact are worth the cost.

Based on the lower figure of $35,000 USD per Tamir interceptor missile, this morning's operation of the Iron Dome amounted to a minimum of $875,000 USD assuming only one rocket was required to intercept each incoming rocket."

link

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member15 Mar 2012 4:22 p.m. PST

I haven't found yet how many it took to hit one shell or rocket. Robert

Personal logo Sparker Supporting Member of TMP15 Mar 2012 4:27 p.m. PST

Bottom line if you stop stealing other peoples' land then you won't need to spend so much on defence.

That might be the bottom line if anyone had stolen anyone's land in the region.

Put down your copy of the Guardian, look beyond the BBC, and study some history. The various Arab groupings, including the Palestinians, used the 1948 demarcations as spring boards to attack and invade the lands allocated to Israeli in 5 wars. The Israelis finally lost patience and have occupied strategically vulnerable land, making clear that they would be more than happy to leave as soon as the Arab world gives signs that it can coexist peacefully with Israel…

If you are searching for a bottom line, it is this:

peace and a just settlement for the region depend on the Arab world accepting peaceful coexistence with Israel.

Until they do, Israel will defend itself and its people just as any other sovreign state would, and should, do…

kyotebluer than blue Supporting Member of TMP15 Mar 2012 4:34 p.m. PST

Please take the politics to the Blyue Fezzy.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member15 Mar 2012 10:11 p.m. PST

Here is a marketing pamphlet from Rafael .

PDF link
Robert

Legion 416 Mar 2012 6:46 a.m. PST

Impressive system … and yes … politics need to go to the Blue Fezz …

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member16 Mar 2012 3:08 p.m. PST

Thanks Legion. I agree on both points. grin Robert

goragrad17 Mar 2012 8:19 a.m. PST

Actually, I am surprised at how relatively cheap the Iron Dome missiles are. Tech has improved considerably.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member17 Mar 2012 4:45 p.m. PST

This has shown that it certainly has. What other systems is there like this and the costs? Robert

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member18 Mar 2012 12:45 p.m. PST

I did find this as to how many may have been fired for each rocket/shell. Robert

"The system's opponents had clear arguments: Downing a simple rocket with a $50,000 USD missile is not right in financial or moral terms, they said. (The current policy is to fire two missiles at each incoming rocket, at a cost of NIS 315,000. ) Developing the system would take a long time, and it wouldn't actually enable protection of the entire country, they added."

link

latto6plus222 Mar 2012 4:16 a.m. PST

Interesting opinion here link

Suggesting iron domes succesful test might be mainly connected to allaying the israeli publics fears about a strike on iran while at the same time moulding public opinion by linking the gaza rockets to the iranians.

Sorry - only trusted members can post on the forums.