>1 Arrow 3 Interception (first ever instance of space warfare)
>2+(?) Arrow 2 interceptions
>60 David's Sling interceptions
>thousands of iron dome interceptions
>idf reports iron dome 88% interception rate per-interceptor
what's interesting about this is that they seem to have an automated system for assigning interceptors to targets and a system for redirecting and re-assigning interceptors in the air after launch which as far as i remember i dont think was ever done by other air defense systems.
?si=yF5RvA6rAmSUectp
could this be used to essentially have a sequential stream of interceptor rockets in the air targeting the enemy aircraft/munitions (assuming theyre bunched up) spaced apart so if the first interceptor misses the second one targets the same target but if it hits the second one can be quickly redirected?
this system is basically controlling a 'swarm' of interceptors except they are centrally controlled
>space warfare
A BM missile isn't in orbit retard.
a missile destroyed an enemy object in space , this is a fact
> object in space
take your marketing somewhere else
Ah yes using the redefined new definition of "space" lmao.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karman_line
Get fucked OP it doesn't count.
But they destroyed missile above Karman line.
What does orbit Asheville to do with anything. Was the shoot down above the karman line? Then it’s space. If not, then it’s not. That’s it. Since the distance the missile was to fly is 1000 miles, its max height was probably over 400 miles. That’s close to space station height. Even if israel intercepted at 75% distance to target that comes out at over 150 miles, or triple the karman line. That’s space by far and the highest shoot down in war ever documented by a margin of 10x
I don’t know why the word Asheville was randomly inserted into the first sentence here by spellcheck. It does weird stuff sometimes
it was 'space warfare under the karman definition' TECHNICALLY
but it was NOT 'real' space warfare since all participants were in suborbital trajectories and it was not 'orbital warfare'
Hence why the word “space” was used and not “orbital”. Orbital is another order of magnitude (although according to some reports arrow 3 can reach at least LEO as well)
It's real space because space is legal definition. You can shoot objects at 99km altitude it's you legal space. But shooting objects at 101 km altitude is war crime.
thats retarded theres nothing special about 100km
law does not define what is space its just dumb law stuff
It's just legal line. You need to draw it somewhere.
>nope your spy musk satellites can't fly over my territory because my borders go up without limits
its a retarded definition
you can instead just chill and dont be a tight ass about precise definitions
yemenites did
its not that hard you can do it given enough time and money the hard part is hitting something which they didnt
>shots down your sattelites because trespasing
qrd? how did hamas sand naggers get a rocket into space?
they were given it by iran
good to see you paid shills still trying to pretend the earth isn't flat
spacetime is flat
>first ever instance of space warfare
Americans shot down a satellite with a missile first
One of our own, though, yeah? I think the israelites have got the first hostile space takedown. Mel Brooks predicted this:
prove it
>shoots your own soldier in the face while he’s asleep
>”look guys we defeated the enemy”
>first ever instance of space warfare
Fuck off
Mischling supremacy achieved and browns are pissed. Hitler was a mischling.
Where's my fucking israeli space laser you fucks promised me at the beginning of the war
i remember a flying laser drone but when did they say space laser?
israeli space rockets cant launch anything bigger than 0.5 ton into orbit i think
>could this be used to essentially have a sequential stream of interceptor rockets in the air targeting the enemy aircraft/munitions (assuming theyre bunched up) spaced apart so if the first interceptor misses the second one targets the same target but if it hits the second one can be quickly redirected?
Most missiles follow a direct path to avoid air drag, that means their path is predictable for the most part.
Israel does this layer system to save shekels due to the absurd costs of using something like patriot or david sling for a hamas meme rocket, or using patriot on a scud when it's already on a descending path makes little sense even if it may work.
As for the "if it hits the second one can quickly be redirected", i think the israeli python v had that capability.
Also one of the cold war anti ICBM techs here is some data on it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_Kill_Vehicle
but this was basically an arrow 3 style stuff except the last layer had multiple of the things you see on video automatically selecting targets on it's path.
isnt python essentially fire-and-forget? tamir missiles seem to be datalink guided all the way until their proximity fuze goes off thats how they made em cheap/easy to make
i read a few years ago that i has the option to be fired at a place and choose it's target (this missile histoy is interesting because it's an independent development that was first used in the 60s.)
Basically it can find a target in an area so i guess it does what you want if you send two over an area with some seconds of difference if one fails the other will try to do it.
so its like an air defense missile right?
thats how they claim it can be used to shoot at enemy planes behind the launching plane
such a weapon would absolutley annihilate any russian type planes in a dogfight since you can just boom past them on max afterburner and when they bleed speed to turn towards you they catch a missile you fired backwards at them , since theyre slow they cant dodge it.
wtf I'm a zionist now
The ability to redirect interceptors is the interesting part, if the kinematics are good enough it could allow for a massive increase in effective PK without compromising intercept time.
i dont think its technically that hard whats unusual is that it does this automatically
also i thinnk there's enough data in their air defense database to literally train an ai reinforcment learning model so you can have ai guided missiles, this is needless complexity for intercepting single threats but for large volleys it could use interceptors in a smarter way guiding consecutive missiles in an ideal trajector for redirection depending on hits/misses of initial missiles.
Implessive
>[arrow3] first ever instance of space warfare
ABM intercepts are notable but this one isn't unique. to be 'first' at space warfare you'd have to exclude:
(a) classified shenanigans between the US and china's CNSA/PLASSF
(b) satellite attacks not known to have involved ASATs, like the russia/ukraine viasat attacks
(c) every operational ballistic missile intercept for which no altitude was disclosed.
you'd also have to reconcile the claimed altitude with the claim of a launch from yemen and intercept over the negev desert. these strike me as incompatible but i haven't bothered to napkin-math it. either way, this is a case of american missile defence tech doing things we know it can do, so ¯_(ツ)_/¯
>what's interesting about this is that they seem to have an automated system for assigning interceptors to targets and a system for redirecting and re-assigning interceptors in the air after launch which as far as i remember i dont think was ever done by other air defense systems.
variations on this have existed for roughly as long as MIRVs have, i believe. you can find US publications on the problem from the late 70s, early 80s.
for modern usage, just look up how missile defence systems use tdl16. you can find visual evidence of an AD missile retargeting in flight over ukraine, if you know where to look. nowadays the US also places particular emphasis on doing this at sea.
it was space warfare, deal with it
see
and revise your opinion until it aligns with my statements, i.e. becomes correct
on a long enough timeline, humans are just converging on agreement with me
shitpoasting aside, if someone knows what missile / family the target would have been, and/or what sort of trajectory it would have had from yemen, drop that shit in tha thread
houthis leaving the atmosphere is some real aspirational kerbal stuff
>KSP is actually Kurdistan Space Programme
It was a burkan 2 according to reports (maybe also confirmed by houthis). Should be above 50 mile line for over 90% of descent time after reaching maximum altitude, by my napkin math
i offer this waifu as thanks
i dont know nuthin. fuckery's definitely afoot tho. but until public disclosure is forced upon one side or the other, US and CN incentives are aligned on keeping the fuckery unpublicized. (don't have to worry about the management of breaking a taboo until the public is aware that one exists to be broken.)
US side has been pushing hard for a symmetrical declaration of a space-based weapon no first installation/use policy from china in the past 2 years or so. it doesn't seem to be going well. hopefully space is high on the list for the upcoming military liaison thaw summit thing. (there's political chatter about reestablishing basic protocols for communication between militaries, which have been shelved since covid -> chip war -> russia/iran angst -> pelosi & taiwan & balloons)
>classified shenanigans between the US and china's CNSA/PLASSF
explain
(cont.)
>link: Millennium 7 * HistoryTech
this guy is a hack. don't take him at face value. his ukraine videos are probably his worst (
) but i've never seen him not be wrong about at least a couple obvious things in a video.
in this one,
1. he uses a video watermarked by a social media channel known to publish misinfo, like the iron beam thing – a vid which is readily available minus the watermark, from wire services, if you aren't a hack who gets news via shit-tier telegram channels.
2. he misrepresents missile launch footage as "couples" in a way that makes no sense and required him to misleadingly crop & cut the clip.
3. he uses specific milshit jargon in a completely incorrect manner – "weapon reallocation" is stratcom-speak for 'agile combat deployment' reconfiguration of nuclear triad assets to handle a class of tasks known as WTA problems (enwp.org/weapon_target_assignment_problem). it has nothing to do with the in-flight behaviors of interceptors.
4. he speculates on whether iron dome can do x when you can literally just search "missile interceptor retargeting" and find relevant rafael promo materials in the first few results. and if he knew his own channel's subject matter in any depth, he'd know that tamir missile retargeting with two-way datalink was field tested for the american MML program, ages ago.
>no pics of the laser yet
it's been around for a few years at this point.
first time it's seen real world use but it was a joint israel/usa project iirc.
>>idf reports
stopped reading here. never trust israelites.
no it hasnt its literally still in development and they said they'll rush it for the war
I still wonder how well the Arrow system will fare against Houti Rebel's ICBMs, especially if Houti upgrades them with (non nuclear) MIRV capability
>Houti Rebel's ICBMs,
they have ICBMs. where?
the one they shot down was an icbm no?
would be the same since israeli interceptors itnercept before payload seperation
More like a MRBM, but still
>they seem to have a system for dynamic retargeting
>can this be used for dynamic retargeting?????
~2000 iron dome interceptions
>curved light beam
>what is a lens
>t autist
Kek retard. You mean a prism that can angle a beam? Or do you think there's a fiber optic cable flopping around like a limp dick?