Iron dome

does anyone have an idea of what the Tamir interceptor production rate might be? the israelis seem to fire a shitton of these without ever running out. hitting rockets from both gaza and lebanon. although the number of rockets from gaza decreased dramatically after the war and the rockets fire from the north isn't that large.

you would think they would run out of interceptors taking into consideration how advanced a single interceptor is compared to katshuya like rocket

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's impossible to say. That's the simple answer.

    Iron Dome is extremely cost inefficient for what it's used for. The original idea of intercept small attacks consisting of mortars or Qassam rockets by Hamas made sense, but things have changed considerably in the past 20 years since Iron Dome was designed.

    Rayhteon claims that quote "The majority of Tamir missile components are procured through the Raytheon supply chain in the United States."

    This AP article is from October of last year and lays out plans to produce 1000-2000 missiles per year in the US.
    https://apnews.com/article/arkansas-missile-production-israel-defense-contractor-8bbc9786b3cf5517234f7f2e1a9f91ee

    Maybe it has just been a few hundred a year for the past 15 years, maybe more. No doubt they have a shitload of them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Inefficient if you’re an Israeli tax payer and it’s Israel paying an American company for them
      Efficient if you’re somebody invested in Israel and Raytheon paying taxes to Raytheon for Israel

      You can call this irrelevant but the determination of efficiency relies on (mitigating) costs - here, the user is offloading the costs and so the tool becomes significantly more efficient for them to use

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >oh vey the taxes in Israel are too high

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          They are!

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What would be "efficient" in your opinion?
      ID seems to work, and it don't need to intercept 100% of missiles fired by Hamas. It's more like 10-20% of missiles that will land in urban areas.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >ID seems to work, and it don't need to intercept 100% of missiles fired by Hamas. It's more like 10-20% of missiles that will land in urban areas.
        This is the genius behind the Iron Dome system: it back computes the launch point and from flight characteristics determines the impact point. It then decides whether the impact point is worth defending (apartment building) or a don't care (ocean, desert).
        Iron Dome spam missiles at every incoming because it doesn't need to.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I wonder how it would do against drone spam, since they don't follow a measurable ballistics trajectory. Their slower speeds would make interceptions higher, but they would have to expend more since they wouldn't know which ones are targeting what.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's were EW should come into action, since Israel borders with enemy actors are comparatively small I suspect they have arrays of jamming systems which basically render actual attempts at drone swarms basically useless unless they are part of a major incursion, aside from that merkava blown out in October 7th where they were caught flat footed it seems their EW defenses have been doing their job.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Iron Beam laser defence system is intended to counter drones, so that'll probably do the job once they actually get the thing ready for action.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Inefficient if you’re an Israeli tax payer and it’s Israel paying an American company for them
      Efficient if you’re somebody invested in Israel and Raytheon paying taxes to Raytheon for Israel

      You can call this irrelevant but the determination of efficiency relies on (mitigating) costs - here, the user is offloading the costs and so the tool becomes significantly more efficient for them to use

      >Iron Dome is extremely cost inefficient
      >Inefficient
      You are the same kind of morons who argue it's too expensive to take down a shahed with a sam.
      You do not calculate the cost of the interdicted weapon, you have to calculate what it would have destroyed/killed.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      > Iron Dome is extremely cost inefficient for what it's used for.
      This is true, but the insane thing is that it fricking works. It’s the best air defense system in the world. If a breakthrough in production cost occurs, then these frickers will be bought by every ally.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It’s actually pretty cost-effective. A man feature of Iron Dome is target-selection intelligence; it can calculate the impact point of targets and only engage those which it projects will land somewhere valuable. The huge majority of those rockets land somewhere unimportant 9ie empty desert) so it dramatically cuts down own on the number of interceptors actually used up. That’s why it’s been constantly effective during even large rocket attacks — it’s not that they have an unlimited supply of interceptors it’s that the rockets attack are mostly useless fireworks and Iron Dome only needs to handle a light amount of work.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >man feature of Iron Dome is target-selection intelligence
        point was made above here

        >ID seems to work, and it don't need to intercept 100% of missiles fired by Hamas. It's more like 10-20% of missiles that will land in urban areas.
        This is the genius behind the Iron Dome system: it back computes the launch point and from flight characteristics determines the impact point. It then decides whether the impact point is worth defending (apartment building) or a don't care (ocean, desert).
        Iron Dome spam missiles at every incoming because it doesn't need to.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Iron Dome is extremely cost inefficient for what it's used for. The original idea of intercept small attacks consisting of mortars or Qassam rockets by Hamas made sense, but things have changed considerably in the past 20 years since Iron Dome was designed.
      That's what Iron Beam is for, where the cost per interception is like $2 and theoretically have infinite ammo. Granted, the actual laser-generating unit will be expensive as hell and only start out working on small stuff like Qassams, but assuming that Israel isn't a smoking crater before 2025, it has a lot of potential ahead if the technology can be adapted to down bigger targets.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It depends on what you count for interception. By specific missiles? Like 90% but regarding them all probably lower because it doesn’t track all of them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Black person say what?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Most of what hamas uses is to fool the system into intercepting it, it’s bright but not very lethal and often doesn’t have the explosive power to be a threat. Israel designed the dome to target actual threats.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          what in the ESL are you trying to say? that doesn't even seem to have anything to do with my question

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They're made in the US by raytheon, so you can get this information if you want.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >you would think they would run out of interceptors taking into consideration how advanced a single interceptor is compared to katshuya like rocket
    Why would they care when their paypigs provide them with all the missiles they need free of charge?

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Uncle Sam foots the bill so what do they care?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *