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

[Secur]

I know, that's why i exactly mentioned that common sense point. Will you deploy all your MBRLs in a specific theater or you'll scatter them along with your other military units to support them?

And for your MBRLs, much of it is 122mm Russian Grad type, having range less than 40km.

I think we have enough MBRL's and other artillery if you talk about numbers and enough to deploy them effectively where the main battles will be fought ...

Possibly you missed the A100's and KRL-21 being produced in Pakistan for quite a time now besides others ...

It's a smart defensive system to protect assets - so yes it will be placed far from arty fire range.

Maximum range of a system isn't effective range , the more farther you go , the less response time you start to have ...

It is of course guided. No, it cannot employ any evasive maneuvers, so yes it can easily be intercepted by Iron Dome.

I have heard otherwise ... Are you sure it cant employ any evasive maneuvers ?

 

[Skull and Bones]

I think we have enough MBRL's and other artillery if you talk about numbers and enough to deploy them effectively where the main battles will be fought ...

Possibly you missed the A100's and KRL-21 being produced in Pakistan for quite a time now besides others ...

Yes, but numbers of the newer MBRLs are not enough compared to KRL-122 and Azar (Type-83), which are modified versions of Russian Grad.

 

[acid rain]

I think we have enough MBRL's and other artillery if you talk about numbers and enough to deploy them effectively where the main battles will be fought ...

Possibly you missed the A100's and KRL-21 being produced in Pakistan for quite a time now besides others ...



Maximum range of a system isn't effective range , the more farther you go , the less response time you start to have ...

Pakistan's arty units will be within Pakistan's borders, so calculate the distance - and ID has to intercept incoming projectiles - so it needs to be near the protected area and not in the battlefield - which definitely will be beyond arty range and ID is a mobile system so can be removed from the site whenever required.

It monitors the launch and trajectory of the projectile - and engages only when the projectile is sure to hit the protected area - the rest it can discard.

 

[Secur]

Yes, but numbers of the newer MBRLs are not enough compared to KRL-122 and Azar (Type-83), which are modified versions of Russian Grad.

Well , the numbers of A100's and KRL-21 aren't exactly known so its an unknown variable , the only thing in its favour is that its being produced in Pakistan for quite a time now ... Pakistan only revealed in Azm-Nau 3 exercise even though the first of these were received years ago but not revealed ... So , I cant say if they are enough or not enough ...

 

[Skull and Bones]

Well , the numbers of A100's and KRL-21 aren't exactly known so its an unknown variable , the only thing in its favour is that its being produced in Pakistan for quite a time now ... Pakistan only revealed in Azm-Nau 3 exercise even though the first of these were received years ago but not revealed ... So , I cant say if they are enough or not enough ...

According to various links, Pak army has around 30-40 A-100 and around 40 KRL-21s.

 

[Secur]

Pakistan's arty units will be within Pakistan's borders, so calculate the distance - and ID has to intercept incoming projectiles - so it needs to be near the protected area and not in the battlefield - which definitely will be beyond arty range and ID is a mobile system so can be removed from the site whenever required.

It monitors the launch and trajectory of the projectile - and engages only when the projectile is sure to hit the protected area - the rest it can discard.

Yes , it will be ... Iron Dome has to be placed closer to the border around 40-50 km - the maximum specifications for a system are just the max limit it can pushed to and its certainly not wise to place them at that range because it effectiveness gets reduced dramatically ... Israel uses it quite differently , see the deployments of the system there ... Actually , the things that need protection from artillery are in the battlefield , rest aren't the concern of army of each country but rather the airforce with their standoff weapons capability ... As for mobility of the system , the same is true for most of our artillery and other systems with " shoot and scoot " capability ...

 

[The Deterrent]

I have heard otherwise ... Are you sure it cant employ any evasive maneuvers ?

Yes, it was never designed that way. Furthermore there is a very little time window of employing any kind of evasive maneuvers given its lesser range.

While calculating all the possible outcomes, you guys should also bring anti-radiation missiles into the equation.

 

[Secur]

According to various links, Pak army has around 30-40 A-100 and around 40 KRL-21s.

Where did you check ? The links I have checked mostly declare them of unknown quantity ... Also the dates are important , both Pakistanis and Chinese are quite fast in producing and deploying systems ...

Yes, it was never designed that way. Furthermore there is a very little time window of employing any kind of evasive maneuvers given its lesser range.

While calculating all the possible outcomes, you guys should also bring anti-radiation missiles into the equation.

Hmmmm .... Well that is really strange ... It should have been designed that way with atleast some sort evasive methods ...

I do not feel the need for it in a theatre level warfare scenario that we are currently discussing ... Anti radiation missiles are usually for taking objects at a greater range , not the objects that are in a battlefield normally ... Otherwise MAR-1 and CM400 AKG are there in the arsenal ...

 

[acid rain]

Yes , it will be ... Iron Dome has to be placed closer to the border around 40-50 km - the maximum specifications for a system are just the max limit it can pushed to and its certainly not wise to place them at that range because it effectiveness gets reduced dramatically ... Israel uses it quite differently , see the deployments of the system there ... Actually , the things that need protection from artillery are in the battlefield , rest aren't the concern of army of each country but rather the airforce with their standoff weapons capability ... As for mobility of the system , the same is true for most of our artillery and other systems with " shoot and scoot " capability ...

Mobility will ensure the movement of the system out of potential damage range, and it being a defensive unit has to be near assets - like bases and towns, the radar range can be increased for sure and the interception can happen quite near the asset - I would rule out ID being anywhere near arty range. Within range of other MBRL's or MBRM's - yes, but then its there to counter that and exactly the one's which it thinks will land on the protected asset and could cause damage - the others it can discard, the engagement can be fed in it, so it's cost in not a factor when the system detects that the incoming projectile can cause more damage and intercepts it.

And, it will not be a stand alone defense unit, it will be combined with more defensive and offensive systems.

 

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

Pakistan's arty units will be within Pakistan's borders, so calculate the distance - and ID has to intercept incoming projectiles - so it needs to be near the protected area and not in the battlefield - which definitely will be beyond arty range and ID is a mobile system so can be removed from the site whenever required.

It monitors the launch and trajectory of the projectile - and engages only when the projectile is sure to hit the protected area - the rest it can discard.

Thats the point you are missing dude. Iron Dome is a Short Range Projectile Interceptor. Artillery shells is something different.

For Israel ID is useful because they have to deal with groups (not conventional army) to keep them away from bombing towns...

 

[Secur]

Mobility will ensure the movement of the system out of potential damage range, and it being a defensive unit has to be near assets - like bases and towns, the radar range can be increased for sure and the interception can happen quite near the asset - I would rule out ID being anywhere near arty range. Within range of other MBRL's or MBRM's - yes, but then its there to counter that and exactly the one's which it thinks will land on the protected asset and could cause damage - the others it can discard, the engagement can be fed in it, so it's cost in not a factor when the system detects that the incoming projectile can cause more damage and intercepts it.

The artillery is also mobile thus enhancing its survivability ... Iron Dome needs to be near assets in a battlefield , it isn't actually designed to protect bases and towns which are well beyond any artillery's range ... The radar's range can be increased and the interception too but again the cost will run high which is the main bottleneck in this whole system - each interceptor missile is $ 90k , add $ 50k for the batteries ... Iron Dome will be used to protect battlefield assets and will be well in the range of artillery M110 has some 50km range with normal fuse whilst it is 70km maximum range for Iron Dome ... Forget MBRL's for a second ... I know that it wont try to engage every single target but the credible threats enough would be in hundreds ... So , cost is a major factor here which can rise astronomically ...

 

[acid rain]

Thats the point you are missing dude. Iron Dome is a Short Range Projectile Interceptor. Artillery shells is something different.

For Israel ID is useful because they have to deal with groups (not conventional army) to keep them away from bombing towns...

I get what you are hinting at, we are just discussing the usability of it, and I guess it's not that super too in our scenario - but then as the article hints out, it can protect towns and populated areas from rockets like Fajr 5 specifically fired by militant groups if and only if they get the capability of making and firing them, which some experts might feel that they might have.

The artillery is also mobile thus enhancing its survivability ... Iron Dome needs to near assets in a battlefield , it isn't actually designed to protect bases and towns which are well beyond any artillery's range ... The radar's range can be increased and the interception too but again the cost will run high which is the main bottleneck in this whole system - each interceptor missile is $ 90k , add $ 50k for the batteries ... Iron Dome will be used to protect battlefield assets and will be well in the range of artillery M110 has some 50km range with normal fuse whilst it is 70km maximum range for Iron Dome ... Forget MBRL's for a second ... I know that it wont try to engage every single target but the credible threats enough would be in hundreds ... So , cost is a major factor here which can rise astronomically ...

We are not discussing about the survivability of the arty, but the safety of the asset that the ID is out to protect, now in the Israeli theater it was protecting towns and cities - and here to it might be used for that purpose including bases.

And, about cost factor, a rocket falling on an unprotected area will cause loss of life which is more worth than the cost of the ID interceptor. It will not be exactly protecting mobile units but more of bases and towns so yes it will out of arty range, and not directly on the front lines.

 

[Bang Galore]

Of course , I may be right or wrong but the evidence or discussion so far points to the fact that Iron Dome is close to useless in India-Pakistan theatre level warfare ... I know but the cost analysis is an important factor right considering the cost of the intercepting missile and its quantity ? If you starting to consider troops from artillery with the use of this system , then it becomes so expensive that even mighty US of A wont acquire it ... Actually , the thread itself lies in the realm of imaginary since you haven't even purchased the system ... But still a crude idea of how the system will be used in India-Pakistan scenario can be hypothesized which I have done in my previous posts , pointing out to the shortcomings of the system and astronomically high costs to the benefits it offers ... Both sides will fire 1000's of artillery shells and that is the smallest figure I have used ... Possibly , you haven't heard of artillery duels taking place on LOC before the ceasefire ... I haven't said that Pakistan Army will fire " huge " quantities to neutralize the advantage of the system , I have only pointed out that the usual warfare will be enough to overwhelm and render the system useless ... Our costs aren't going to rise that much with a few hundred more shells or rockets but yours are certainly going to hit the sky with the $ 50k tag of a single interceptor , combine that with the successful intercept probability ... About " Nasr " , Pakistan will most certainly try to take the Iron Dome out with artillery or stand off weapons and vice versa , if you field that system , the other side possesses weapon locating radar thus enabling artillery to take the Iron Dome down ... It isn't that simple as you assume it to be ...

You are making too many assumptions, I just pointed out that it is not necessary that India use the Iron Dome everywhere. You guys may just not know where. The costs are differently calculated by you & me. Even in artillery duels, one need not use the iron dome to try & take down each & every shell. It could be used against those that might be directly heading towards the guns themselves or the ammunition. You are aware that those will be a very small percentage of the shells fired & therefore the cost will be fairly limited especially when considering the cost of the gun itself. That puts you at a disadvantage because no such protection exists for your guns. Your logic simply does not hold. It isn't as simple as you suggest either when you assume that it offers no benefits. Your logic that it can work only against primitive rockets holds even less water. I'm sure those evaluating it will decide for themselves. On my part, I certainly see benefits to such a system but whether that is the best choice for India would be determined by people with a little more information than ourselves.

 

[LEGENDARY WARRIOR]

Alright, now this thread is going nowhere.. Let the indian generals and defence ministry decide what to do with the Iron Dome...

 

[Secur]

We are not discussing about the survivability of the arty, but the safety of the asset that the ID is out to protect, now in the Israeli theater it was protecting towns and cities - and here to it might be used for that purpose including bases.

And, about cost factor, a rocket falling on an unprotected area will cause loss of life which is more worth than the cost of the ID interceptor. It will not be exactly protecting mobile units but more of bases and towns so yes it will out of arty range, and not directly on the front lines.

Ok , alright but the Israeli theater is very very close to the battlefield ( not literally - since its not a proper battlefield ) , there it may protect cities , towns and bases but in our scenario the places aren't so close to be protected by such short range system , they are well beyond the range of the artillery and will be targeted by the airforces with their standoff weapons ... So here , it is of no use to you protecting bases but rather to a very limited extent effective in the battlefield for protecting fixed post installation , SAM sites and high level radars ...

You have just made the scenario more difficult for yourself by including every single falling shell or rocket in the equation because they will rain in thousands ! Previously , we were just discussing the Iron Dome protecting high value targets ... In such a case that you decide to engage every single of the incoming projectile to safeguard the troops on the field , the cost will become astronomically high not to mention the system itself will be quickly overwhelmed and therefore render the whole thing useless ... Actually , to protect the things on the battlefield , you need the system to be very close to the front lines if not exactly there not some 100-150 km far which would be a safe range from any artillery ...