US Secretary of State Blinken Says Only China Can ‘Seriously Challenge’ Global System

[ekemenirtu]

Sayad-4 is derived from Sayad-3/2 which is derived from Standard-1.

You should provide evidence for your claim.

I am not proficient with computer graphics. That's why I hope you or other members or silent readers would be able to make sense out of my amateurish attempt at pointing out some external (aerodynamic) features of the Sayyad-4, Sayyad-3, Sayyad-2 and SM-1 (the latter is a desperately old and outdated system for the modern era) missiles.​

Here, you can see the control surfaces on the Sayyad-2 missile (ignoring the strakes for a reason).

Here, you can see the control surfaces on the Sayyad-4, Sayyad-3, Sayyad-2 and the hopelessly outdated SM-1 missile compared.

Can you view the images? What about other members?

If you can view the images, I hope it should be abundantly clear that the aerodynamic features of the Sayyad-4 missile differs from the Sayyad-2 missiles.

We also do not know if the same set of guidance, propulsion, warhead or algorithms are used in all of these Iranian missiles - the Sayyad 2, Sayyad 3 and Sayyad 4 missiles. There is ample evidence to suggest that the Sayyad-4 missile with thrust vectoring system would be intended to shoot down a different class of enemy targets than the shorter ranged, lower altitude, less maneuverable and lower-G capable Sayyad-2 missile.​

The hopelessly outdated SM-1 missile is not comparable in this regard to the Sayyad-4 because it lacks any thrust vectoring, uses outdated guidance systems, seekers and lags behind in maximum altitude and range parameters.

Of course, if you only look at the dimensions or the external aerodynamic control surfaces, the missiles differ quite significantly too.

However, looking at the externally visible aerodynamic control surfaces alone is also
inadequate and could be misleading in a wide variety of cases.

They are far far more advanced and complicated. Less than 5 countries in the world can make such systems. SAM is not a big deal nowadays.

1. Whether exoatmospheric BMD systems are "far far more advanced" is irrelevant since that was never the topic of discussion.

2. There is no evidence that such BMD systems developed by the USA work adequately well.

If the proponents of the Arrow-2, Arrow-3 or THAAD systems believe they work, without fail, they should happily abandon

I. their nuclear weapons arsenal
II. their ballistic missile arsenal
III. cease anti-regime activities in Iran, North Korea, China or Russia since none of these 4 countries would be capable of delivering a conventional or nuclear payload to any enemy targets, thanks to the flawlessly accurate Arrow-2, Arrow-3 or THAAD.


If the above is accomplished, it would prove that the proponents of the THAAD, Arrow-2 or Arrow-3 systems believe in the efficacy of the above BMD systems.

However, we have yet to see any of the proponents of the THAAD, Arrow-2 or Arrow-3 systems do any of the above.

Arrow-2 is 100% Israeli design.

Arrow-3 is 80-85% Israeli design. (US designed some secondary components: motor cases, shroud, canister, Safe & Arm/Ignition Devices, power devices (batteries), and Inertial Navigation Units, as well as several avionics packages and actuators & valves).

https://thenewatlantis.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-pdfs/20171004_arrow_overview.pdf

Thank you for a controlled press release.

As you may very well know, official press releases often need to be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to matters of strategic significance.

Defence companies, by default, belong to that category.

There would be no conceivable need to involve the USA or any foreign enterprises in minor tasks anyway when all the critical design, test, production tasks can be accomplished in house.

I saw Iron Dome effect with my own eyes, during 2015 war when Hamas and PIJ launched dozens of Fajar-5 rockets at Tel Aviv and all were intercepted.

Good to hear your personal anecdote.

Unfortunately, as you may know, personal anecdotes are often inadmissible as evidence for a valid reason.

Of course, apart from personal bias, such anecdotes may suffer from selection bias or sampling bias. Disinterested parties may be able to provide better, more neutral evaluations.

Israel's 'Iron Dome' air defense is a failure, Russia's systems actually work - here's why -- Sott.net

During the latest round of clashes in Gaza, the Israeli 'Iron Dome' air defence system (used for repelling local rocket and mortar attacks) managed to intercept less than 25 percent of the missiles fired into Israel by Palestinian armed groups....

www.sott.net

Citing a study of the 2012 Gaza-Israeli clash, Postol points out conclusions made by the report that Iron Dome achieved an interception rate of less than 5 percent; when Palestinian rocket attacks were again mass-fired into Israel in 2014, post-attack reports on Iron Dome performance suggested very little improvement in the system.

In contrast to this, Syrian air defences confronted a joint American-British-French cruise missile attack in April this year and succeeded in intercepting 71 of the 103 missiles - all of which were sophisticated guided missile types designed to fly low, regularly change course and were aided by a barrage of radar countermeasure jamming from various sources.

Now, it would not be unexpected if you accuse the author or the publisher of the report of bias. That is expected.

You may also call them Russian propaganda. I believe that is a fair call and is to be expected as well. However, I hope you and other members will consider the possibility that, as an active member of the so called IDF, you can not publish or reveal any scandalous information that may diminish the artificially constructed 'image of invincibility' that "Israel"/Zionist regime would like to disseminate.

Part of this intense marketing effort would entail portraying any weapons used by the "IDF" as invincible, or failing which, as the best that is available on Earth today. This is equally valid for its "allied" entities such as the USAF, US Navy or US Army, for example.

In that case, I would like to refer you to the original work by the author. He is not a Russian citizen and quite ironically, a citizen of the USA. One might expect his personal tilt, if any, to be towards Western/allied entities. At worst, he is expected to be neutral in his analysis.

The evidence that shows Iron Dome is not working

Close study of photographic and video imagery of Israeli Iron Dome defense inceptors engaging with Hamas rockets—both in the current conflict and in the 2012 hostilities—shows that the Israeli rocket-defense system's success rate has been very low—as low as 5 percent or, perhaps, even less.

thebulletin.org

The evidence that shows Iron Dome is not working​

By Theodore A. Postol | July 19, 2014

During the November 2012 conflict, a detailed review of a large number of photographs of Iron Dome interceptor contrails revealed that the rocket-defense system's success rate was very low—as low as 5 percent or, perhaps, even less. A variety of media outlets have attributed the low casualty number to the supposed effectiveness of the Iron Dome system, quoting Israeli officials as saying it has destroyed 90 percent of the Hamas rockets it targeted. But close study of photographic and video imagery of Iron Dome engagements with Hamas rockets—both in the current conflict and in the 2012 hostilities—shows that the low casualties in Israel from artillery rocket attacks can be ascribed to Israeli civil defense efforts, rather than the performance of the Iron Dome missile defense system.

You are free to dispute this analysis, too, if you wish. Hopefully, you would be able to provide supporting evidence rather than mere press releases from the involved companies, individuals or entities.

David's Sling is specially designed against ballistic missiles. Its similar in capabilities or even higher to Patriot Pac-3 MSE.

Interesting that you say that.

It is interesting because promotional brochures from entreprises often tend to say their product is the best in the market. That is a common trait observed in many capitalist societies. Active promotion helps improve sales prospects.

Customers or third party analysts may take such words with a grain of salt.

Is there any proof/evidence of David's Sling or Pac-3 MSE successfully protecting any area/region against a salvo of ballistic missiles? You are free to attach such evidence; the more, the merrier.

The success rate of David's Sling or Pac-3 MSE may be worth studying. I hope you would be able to furnish the necessary evidence.

RQ-4 is slower and less maneuverable than Boeing-747. Shooting it easier than stealing a candy from a child.

I have no interest in stealing "candy from a child". Quite shameful if you do.

A USAF drone on a surveillance mission in the airspace over Iran should be able to protect itself - either through ECM or even chaff or flare.

If not, they should not have entered that airspace, or loitered near its vicinity collecting intelligence.

In either case, it points to a failure on the part of the USA. Whether you attribute the failure to the USAF or the prime contractor in charge of constructing the RQ-4 is entirely your prerogative since it would be a futile effort trying to allocate blame to one party over the other in a matter that cost them well over $100 million (more than the price of most fighter jets on the market).

As it stands, the 3rd Khordad air defence system has a successful "kill" against enemy aircraft.

The David's Sling - none.

Arrow 2 - none.

Arrow 3 - none.

 

[Kaptaan]

Can China alone counter the entire West, Japan, India, maybe South Korea and Taiwan?

As a student of history I have no doubt it will. For bad or good it will happen. At end of the day "money talks". There is nothing more potent then money in the long term. Economics is the primary human driver even it might be dressed under other isms.

For most of the human history China has led in economics and innovation. Even if we disagree with statement most will agree China has been one of the global centres of power for millenia.

Time. What everybody is ignoring is time. Before the dragon has even stood up they are posing questions and then dismissing it. I am middle aged man and in my school geography lessons in 1970s our teacher would use the word 'famine' with China and then clips of hungry looking Chinese riding barefoot on bikes.

Today in 2021 people are asking the question will China push USA from top slot. This alone tells us the trajectory China has taken in last 35 years. So the real question is what will the world look like the end of this century. I think I know that China will in all probability be numero uno.

All the other East Asian countries will eventually fall within the orbit of the confucian world.

The West was not ready made but was born of century of conflict and geo-economic evolution. That process has only began in the East Asian world. Give it time. The other argumant about aging population does not hold water. It assumes that everything will remain the same. The reality is with increasing AI and robotics will compensate for any issues coming out of aging population.


We must all understand that increasing populations is not a viable or sustainable solution for the future. That model would mean at some point populations would become unsustainable. The future is less people, AI, robotics, higher productivity.

 

[ekemenirtu]

As a student of history I have no doubt it will. For bad or good it will happen. At end of the day "money talks". There is nothing more potent then money in the long term. Economics is the primary human driver even it might be dressed under other isms.

For most of the human history China has led in economics and innovation. Even if we disagree with statement most will agree China has been one of the global centres of power for millenia.

Time. What everybody is ignoring is time. Before the dragon has even stood up they are posing questions and then dismissing it. I am middle aged man and in my school geography lessons in 1970s our teacher would use the word 'famine' with China and then clips of hungry looking Chinese riding barefoot on bikes.

Today in 2021 people are asking the question will China push USA from top slot. This alone tells us the trajectory China has taken in last 35 years. So the real question is what will the world look like the end of this century. I think I know that China will in all probability be numero uno.

All the other East Asian countries will eventually fall within the orbit of the confucian world.

View attachment 15954

The West was not ready made but was born of century of conflict and geo-economic evolution. That process has only began in the East Asian world. Give it time. The other argumant about aging population does not hold water. It assumes that everything will remain the same. The reality is with increasing AI and robotics will compensate for any issues coming out of aging population.


We must all understand that increasing populations is not a viable or sustainable solution for the future. That model would mean at some point populations would become unsustainable. The future is less people, AI, robotics, higher productivity.

I have to disagree with you almost 100%.

Most of your arguments were addressed in my earlier comment that was quoted by you, but only partially.

Many of the limitations of the Chinese were addressed in that comment.

AI or robotics can not replace human beings in their entirety. If you talk about economics, then human beings act as both producers and consumers.

A country with a much smaller population is bound to have far fewer consumers. AI or robotics can not make up for lack of consumer demand. AI or robotics may aid in repetitive, monotonous tasks in the manufacturing or simplistic and repetitive tasks in the service sector, at best. That can not make up for lack of consumer demand.

I don't agree that increasing population is not sustainable or viable. More than 100 billion or even 200 billion people may not be unsustainable in the future in this planet. There are lots of countries with lots of empty space, unused land, low population density and on top of that, most of Earth's surface consists of sea water. Artificial islands or land reclamation on sea can create more land, which can then be used for creating human settlements. More cities, more industries, more entertainment, more recreation, more research, more spiritual activities. More nature. And more of most other things.

If you look at Greater Tokyo, highly developed, high tech, clean, neat, very organized, punctual, dynamic, lively, vibrant, "electric" - it is no bigger than "Israel"/Zionist regime. Probably, Greater Tokyo is smaller in area.

In that area, there lives the entire population of Canada.

Effective and efficient urban planning and development can do wonders.

I also disagree that "money talks". If it were true, then Indonesia (with all due respect to our Indonesian brothers and sisters) would be approximately 65% to 85% as powerful as Russia. Can any Indonesian citizens or foreign citizen seriously believe Indonesia is anywhere near as powerful as Russia militarily? Technologically? As a space power? In espionage? In geopolitical influence? In scientific advancement? In industry (even though their manufacturing sectors are almost equally as big, if we look at the market exchange rate based values of their respective manufacturing sectors)? In aerospace? In any other instrument of hard or soft power?

Why do you believe China alone can surpass the combined West (around 1 billion people) + Japan (126 million people) + Korea (51 million people) + Taiwan (23 million people) + India (1300+ million people) and possibly many more regions such as Latin America (under US influence due to Monroe doctrine) or Arab dictatorial/authoritarian regimes (due to uncontested military presence and threat or use of organized, systematic violence against the innocent and defenceless Arab peoples of the wider Middle East. Your ethnic Pashtun cousins have been at the receiving end too, unfortunately) combined?

The end of this century is too far away. Another 79 years. If you are as old as you say, then you most probably (more than 99.99% probability) won't survive that long. Most members here won't either. You may say medicine will advance. Irrelevant. Even if that happens, you would have lost interest in the topic by then. It's too late to be of any relevance.

Prediction into the future 30 years ahead is already fraught with risks. Predicting 79 years ahead is a no go area.

The fact that you are suggesting it might take China another 79 years means China is a failure.

Simple.

30 years is all it should take, maximum.

Otherwise, there is nothing whatsoever that is noteworthy, impressive, worthy of mention in such an endeavour. The USA is a big nothing in the grand scheme of things. It has no history or sophisticated culture to fall back on. It is no heir to a great civilization. Built on conquered land of vanquished natives, it is also not a country noted for superlative intellectuals or intelligentsia.

Much hype aside, it (USA) has failed to defeat, vanquish, conquer, subjugate any country that is more populous than itself. Ever.

Let alone defeating, vanquishing, conquering, subjugating an enemy that is at least 10 times as populous. If we compare with the Mongols, who lived in the pre-industrial era, we notice the ease with which the Mongols swept through China and had it subjugated, conquered for close to a century. All this while, it also occupied and subjugated, if not massacred, the inhabitants of Central Asia where our Turkish brothers and sisters are said to find many of their ethnic cousins, if not ancestors.

Ancient historical Iran was entirely subjugated by the same Mongols, as were the ancestors of present day Iraqis and Syrians. Anatolia - the bulk of today's Turkey - was repeatedly devastated by the same Mongols. The very popular and likeable Turkish serials such as Diriliş: Ertuğrul, Kuruluş: Osman or Mendirman Jaloliddin (and many others) document some of these events with some fantasy inserted in the storyline for captivating the audience, understandably.

Russians, Ukrainians, many more Eastern Europeans were not spared. Considering that was the pre-industrial era, it was all the more "impressive" (if you can call wanton massacre and destruction "impressive"). And the Mongolians today number less than the population in a megacity like Greater Tokyo or Greater Jakarta.

If faced with such an overhyped US military, the Chinese take another 79 years to surpass them - by the time that most members in this forum would be dead or retired, then it is a sign of absolute failure on the part of the Chinese.

 

[500]

You should provide evidence for your claim.

I am not proficient with computer graphics. That's why I hope you or other members or silent readers would be able to make sense out of my amateurish attempt at pointing out some external (aerodynamic) features of the Sayyad-4, Sayyad-3, Sayyad-2 and SM-1 (the latter is a desperately old and outdated system for the modern era) missiles.​

Here, you can see the control surfaces on the Sayyad-2 missile (ignoring the strakes for a reason).

Here, you can see the control surfaces on the Sayyad-4, Sayyad-3, Sayyad-2 and the hopelessly outdated SM-1 missile compared.

Can you view the images? What about other members?

Rearanging fins is not a big deal. Here is evolution of Russian Buk missile:

1. Whether exoatmospheric BMD systems are "far far more advanced" is irrelevant since that was never the topic of discussion.

BMD is the next level of air defence.

2. There is no evidence that such BMD systems developed by the USA work adequately well.

They proved themselves in many tests. Your Russia is currently developing S-500 system which should be similar to US THAAD and Israel Arrow-3. Iran is nowhere close in this race.

If the proponents of the Arrow-2, Arrow-3 or THAAD systems believe they work, without fail, they should happily abandon

I. their nuclear weapons arsenal
II. their ballistic missile arsenal
III. cease anti-regime activities in Iran, North Korea, China or Russia since none of these 4 countries would be capable of delivering a conventional or nuclear payload to any enemy targets, thanks to the flawlessly accurate Arrow-2, Arrow-3 or THAAD.

Thats claim. No one says that BMD provides 100% defence. Even 80% would be a good result.

Thank you for a controlled press release.

As you may very well know, official press releases often need to be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to matters of strategic significance.

I show u official US statement which says that Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 are Israeli designs. You provide nothing to ur claim.

Good to hear your personal anecdote.

It's not anecdote, but fact. In 2015 Hamas and PIJ fired dozens of Fajar-5 rockets at Tel Aviv and failed to make any damage.

Of course, apart from personal bias, such anecdotes may suffer from selection bias or sampling bias. Disinterested parties may be able to provide better, more neutral evaluations.

Israel's 'Iron Dome' air defense is a failure, Russia's systems actually work - here's why -- Sott.net

During the latest round of clashes in Gaza, the Israeli 'Iron Dome' air defence system (used for repelling local rocket and mortar attacks) managed to intercept less than 25 percent of the missiles fired into Israel by Palestinian armed groups....

www.sott.net

Good joke. Unfortunately satellite images prove that Russian air defences could never protect anything. Israeli repeaditly destroyed military objects even right near S-300 and S-400.

I have no interest in stealing "candy from a child". Quite shameful if you do.

A USAF drone on a surveillance mission in the airspace over Iran should be able to protect itself - either through ECM or even chaff or flare.

It was over international airspace. This slow cow RQ-4 is totally not designed to fly over the enemy airspace.

As it stands, the 3rd Khordad air defence system has a successful "kill" against enemy aircraft.

The David's Sling - none.

Arrow 2 - none.

Arrow 3 - none.

By logic ancient Soviet SA-2 is far far better than Sayad-4 because SA-2 shot down many aircraft, including some 4th gen in 1991 war, while Sayyad-4 - none.

 

[ekemenirtu]

Rearanging fins is not a big deal. Here is evolution of Russian Buk missile:

View attachment 15962

Apart from aerodynamic features, what else can you use as an argument that a certain missile X is a copy of another missile Y based on photographic evidence alone?

Russian Buk missiles are not a matter of discussion here.

You argued without evidence that Sayyad-4 missile is a copy of Standard series of SM-1 missiles. Present your evidence. Otherwise, your argument holds no water.

BMD is the next level of air defence.

Bavar-373 has also been tested against ballistic missiles and successfully so.

In comparison, the only recent case of any successful interception by an "Israeli"/Zionist SAM was against an Indian Air Force helicopter. The user of the Spyder SAM was also Indian, just for your information.

The Indians managed to shoot down their own aircraft with "Israeli"/Zionist Spyder SAM.

I see that you are pretty curt with your response.

Whether that reflects your lack of intellect, education or a result of personal suffering is not clear to me nor does it matter much to me. I have reported your post for personal or ad hominem

I hope moderators @Test7 @Cabatli_53 @webslave will deal with your impertinent behaviour.

They proved themselves in many tests. Your Russia is currently developing S-500 system which should be similar to US THAAD and Israel Arrow-3. Iran is nowhere close in this race.

As I have described above, your frivolous "arguments" bordering on insults and consisting of ad hominems should not be tolerated by mods @webslave @Test7 and others.

Arrow-2 or Arrow-3 are also unproven, were funded, developed and manufactured largely by the USA and not even trusted by their developers, including in the USA.

Thats claim. No one says that BMD provides 100% defence. Even 80% would be a good result.

There was no claim on my part there, the question of such a claim being silly does not even arise.

There is no independent verification of controlled reports coming out of "Israeli" media. Their defense establishment is no different. Painting an "image of invincibility" is as important to them as it is to the US military, as an example.

As it stands, the Arrow-2 or Arrow-3 are ineffective.

I show u official US statement which says that Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 are Israeli designs. You provide nothing to ur claim.

Official US statements have been proven to be false on more than one occasion.

Falsified statements or evidence were presented to justify their invasion and subsequent occupation of Vietnam, Iraq and many other countries.

In that context, official statements from their military or defense establishments by themselves do not constitute adequate evidence.

The undeniable fact that "Israel"/Zionist regime had to get the Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 systems funded, designed, manufactured in the USA tells us a different story.

If the projects were entirely, or mostly, indigenous, there would be no need to engage the USA or its defense establishments - at all.

It's not anecdote, but fact. In 2015 Hamas and PIJ fired dozens of Fajar-5 rockets at Tel Aviv and failed to make any damage.

It is an anecdote.

Repeating an anecdote multiple times will not turn it into a fact.

You seem to be lacking in reasoning ability. You should realize repeating, ad nauseum, a statement does not turn it into an indisputable fact.

You should have furnished evidence in support of your dubious claims or your personal anecdotes.

Good joke. Unfortunately satellite images prove that Russian air defences could never protect anything. Israeli repeaditly destroyed military objects even right near S-300 and S-400.

Another one of your ad hominems bordering on the irrational. "Good joke" only reduces the credibility of your arguments and your person, if you had any to begin with.

You should have presented your arguments without any such irrational ad hominems.

The evidence has been provided by me. If you dispute the evidence, you should have provided the evidence. Instead, you have posted a one-liner.

It was over international airspace. This slow cow RQ-4 is totally not designed to fly over the enemy airspace.

Again, you have not provided any evidence that the RQ-4 was over international airspace. Whether such evidence is admissible or tainted due to association with an involved party with vested interest is another matter.

The fact that you have assumed that the RQ-4 was over international airspace when you were not present in the theatre of opeations or in the control room also leads me to believe you are not generally trustworthy.

You should not describe RQ-4 as "silly cow" either, as the tone and tenor of your argument lends no credence to any of your arguments, which have consisted so far of no more than ad hominems, frivolous one-liners, lack of evidence for your unsupported claims and assertions without any sound or logical basis.

By ur logic ancient Soviet SA-2 is far far better than Sayad-4 because SA-2 shot down many aircraft, including some 4th gen in 1991 war, while Sayyad-4 - none.

That is another non sequitur.

As far as SA-2 operating against aircrafts/targets of the era in which it was developed, certainly, SA-2 is superior against the Bavar-373 in its track record.

However, in the modern era, against aerial targets of the same characteristics, SA-2 is not a comparator to the Bavar-373 system. Bavar-373 far outclasses the SA-2 in numerous performance parameters.

As of now, the 3rd Khordad air defence system has a kill against enemy aircraft.

David's Sling - None

Arrow 2 - None

Arrow 3 - None


I hope moderators and admins @webslave @Cabatli_53 @Test7 and other mods will take a close look at your ad hominems and frivolous, curt one-liners that lend no credence to your arguments and deserve warnings for misbehaviour.

 

[500]

Apart from aerodynamic features, what else can you use as an argument that a certain missile X is a copy of another missile Y based on photographic evidence alone?

Russian Buk missiles are not a matter of discussion here.

You argued without evidence that Sayyad-4 missile is a copy of Standard series of SM-1 missiles. Present your evidence. Otherwise, your argument holds no water.

Sayyad-2 is clear copy of SM-1.
Sayyad-3 has same body diameter clearly prolonged version of Sayyad-2.
Sayyaad-4 is enlarged Sayyad-3.

All entered service about same time second half of 2010-es.

Bavar-373 has also been tested against ballistic missiles and successfully so.

Show us these tests. Something like these:

In comparison, the only recent case of any successful interception by an "Israeli"/Zionist SAM was against an Indian Air Force helicopter. The user of the Spyder SAM was also Indian, just for your information.

The Indians managed to shoot down their own aircraft with "Israeli"/Zionist Spyder SAM.

I don't know why you are repeating it second time. This example shows two things:
1) Spyder can shot down a helicopter.
2) Indian armed forces have poor coordination.

I see that you are pretty curt with your response.

Whether that reflects your lack of intellect, education or a result of personal suffering is not clear to me nor does it matter much to me. I have reported your post for personal or ad hominem

I hope moderators @Test7 @Cabatli_53 @webslave will deal with your impertinent behaviour.

You say I lack intellect and education and in same time cry about my personal attacks against you, although I said nothing about u at all.

As I have described above, your frivolous "arguments" bordering on insults and consisting of ad hominems should not be tolerated by mods @webslave @Test7 and others.

You keep crying ad hominem although I said not a single word about u.

Let me give you a free lesson. There are very few exotmospheric direct hit ABMs today:

Israeli Arrow-2, Arrow-3
US THAAD, GBI, SM3
Chinese SC-19
Indian PDV MK II

Russia is lagging behind and only developing exoatmospheric S-500.

Iran is nowhere in this race. Sorry to say. You can see it in terms of space race as well. Israel launched 160 kg satellite with solid rocket against the earth rotation in 1988. While best Iran could do by 2021 is a cubesat, using liquid powered rocket.

Arrow-2 or Arrow-3 are also unproven, were funded, developed and manufactured largely by the USA and not even trusted by their developers, including in the USA.

You repeat baseless words which I already debunked using an official US document. Here more for you:

The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs. [...] This has to do with the seekers that have greater flexibility and other aspects, such as propulsion systems – it will be an extremely capable system.

— Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency,

It is an anecdote.

Repeating an anecdote multiple times will not turn it into a fact.

It's a fact. Even in Iran, which is am extremely brutal dictatorship you can't hide an exploded rocket in middle of the Tehran. Obviously it is totally impossible in democratic Israel.

Another one of your ad hominems bordering on the irrational. "Good joke" only reduces the credibility of your arguments and your person, if you had any to begin with.

Can you stop whining for god's sake. We saw Russian vaunted Pantsir destroyed many times with very simple glide bombs and drones. That is a newest Russian system which is primary designed to shoot down cruise missiles. Yet you want us to believe that ancient Russian SAMs shot down dozens of stealthy terrain hugging cruise missiles without any proofs?

And when Israel repeatedly destroyed military targets right near vaunted S-300 and S-400?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279114237026144257

Again, you have not provided any evidence that the RQ-4 was over international airspace. Whether such evidence is admissible or tainted due to association with an involved party with vested interest is another matter.

The argument is simple: RQ-4 was shot down over sea in Hormuz straights.

Risking super expensive UAV just for couple kms of water does not make any sense at all.

This UAV is huge, unstealthy, super slow, and totally unmaneuverable. It is absolutely not designed to operate over the enemy territory.

 

[ekemenirtu]

Sayyad-2 is clear copy of SM-1.
Sayyad-3 has same body diameter clearly prolonged version of Sayyad-2.
Sayyaad-4 is enlarged Sayyad-3.

All entered service about same time second half of 2010-es.

None of this counts as evidence.

Having same, or similar, diameters do not make two different missiles identical.

Dassault MD-620 missile was repackaged/rebadged as Jericho 1 missile, from which Jericho 2, Jericho 3 and Shavit SLV were derived.

MD 620 Jericho: origins, characteristics and performance data

In 1962, Dassault designed a ballistic missile on behalf of the State of Israel, called the MD 620 Jericho.

www.dassault-aviation.com

That is supported by evidence from the system developer.

None of what you claim is tenable, not supported by evidence or thorough and comprehensive analysis and insults the intelligence of lurkers and intelligent, well informed active members alike.

The Sayyad-3 missile is painted red, smaller and with vastly different control surfaces than the Sayyad-4 missile, painted white. No noticable commonality in aerodynamics, no known similarity in thrust vector control, no known similarity in motor and propellant (not much info on those parameters have been revealed either).

The Arrow-2 endoatmospheric missile, with identical diameter with the French Dassault MD-620 missile, should instead be called a scaled down MD-620 missile. The seeker, of course, comes from the USA.

The Arrow-3 is a further improvement on the Arrow-2 with development, funding and manufacturing done in the USA.

None of what I have said is baseless speculation or guesswork, they are well supported by facts. The evidence for Dassault MD-620 missile being rebadged as Jericho 1 has also been attached.

Show us these tests. Something like these:

Controlled tests against simulated targets. Using Sparrow target missiles.

Here is video of real life interception by Sayyad-2 missile against possibly the most capable air force in the world.

Video: Iran's Khordad 3 SAM system shoots down US drone

The video shows the moment an indigenous Khordad 3 air defense system fires a surface-to-air missile at an intruding US spy drone.

www.presstv.com

Video footage from both sides of the political divide.

I don't know why you are repeating it second time. This example shows two things:
1) Spyder can shot down a helicopter.
2) Indian armed forces have poor coordination.

Your Indian friends like @Nilgiri @Jackdaws and others I forget to mention may not like your 2nd statement.

Apparently, your Vietnamese clients do not like the Spyder SAM systems either.

Vietnam may drop purchase of new batch of Israeli air defense missile systems – source

A source close to Vietnam’s Defense Ministry told TASS Israeli SPYDER short-range air defense missile systems "operate poorly in tropical conditions and regularly break down”

tass.com

A source close to Vietnam’s Defense Ministry told TASS Israeli SPYDER short-range air defense missile systems "operate poorly in tropical conditions and regularly break down”

“The Defense Ministry of Vietnam is against purchasing a new batch of Israeli SPYDER short-range systems. Specifically, in the estimate of military specialists, these systems operate poorly in tropical conditions and regularly break down,” the source said.

“The Israeli systems have been test-fired in Vietnam since the beginning of this year and in most cases these firings failed,” the source noted.

You say I lack intellect and education and in same time cry about my personal attacks against you, although I said nothing about u at all.


You keep crying ad hominem although I said not a single word about u.

This may be down to poor comprehension or miscommunication. To quote my earlier remarks:

Whether that reflects your lack of intellect, education or a result of personal suffering is not clear to me nor does it matter much to me. I have reported your post for personal or ad hominem

I did not point out whether you lack intellect, lack education or you suffered personally. I pointed out that it is not clear to me whether any of those (or maybe some other factors) are the cause of your curt responses.

Let me give you a free lesson. There are very few exotmospheric direct hit ABMs today:

Israeli Arrow-2, Arrow-3
US THAAD, GBI, SM3
Chinese SC-19
Indian PDV MK II

Russia is lagging behind and only developing exoatmospheric S-500.

Iran is nowhere in this race. Sorry to say. You can see it in terms of space race as well. Israel launched 160 kg satellite with solid rocket against the earth rotation in 1988. While best Iran could do by 2021 is a cubesat, using liquid powered rocket.

Your free lesson, unfortunately, is inadequate since they are chock full of errors.

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test

U.S. Space Command says it's the second test this year of a missile that can destroy satellites in low Earth orbit.

www.c4isrnet.com

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test​

Nathan Strout
December 16, 2020

“Russia has made space a war-fighting domain by testing space-based and ground-based weapons intended to target and destroy satellites.

...

The USA has not transferred space-based anti-satellite weapons technology to "Israel"/Zionist regime, yet, in much the same manner that they have transferred ground based LEO (Low Earth Orbit) anti satellite tech in the form of Arrow-3.

A more comprehensive list of Russian anti satellite capabilities are explained there. Readers are urged to visit that link, if they so desire.

The Chinese or Indian systems are merely in trial phase.

The Indian system is just a Prithvi (Short range) ballistic missile re-purposed as BMD (low altitude systems). Their Green Pine-derived radar is also of not much use in discerning targets moving at higher speeds or using advanced decoys (for Re entry vehicles). The Green Pine-radar, of course, contains plenty of US origin tech.

You repeat baseless words which I already debunked using an official US document. Here more for you:

The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs. [...] This has to do with the seekers that have greater flexibility and other aspects, such as propulsion systems – it will be an extremely capable system.

— Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency,

1. Wikipedia is not a source.

2. It is the official US stand, alone. As has been explained before, their official stand or their media propaganda needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The reasons are well documented and easy to understand, too.

3. You should have tried, even if you failed, to provide some other source to justify your theory.

Let me provide an example to help you understand better.

Arrow 2 Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System, Israel - Army Technology

The Arrow 2 anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) system Recommended White Papers Whitepaper Customised SMV surveillance vehicles Whitepaper GATRIA modular awareness…

www.army-technology.com

Boeing is responsible for production of approximately 50% of the missile components in the US, including the electronics section, booster motorcase and missile canister.

Boeing also coordinates the production of Arrow missile components being manufactured by more than 150 American companies, including ATK (first and second stage rocket motor cases and first stage nozzle).

IAI is responsible for integration and final assembly of the missile in Israel. Boeing delivered its first consignment of Arrow components in November 2005.

The warhead is a high explosive directed blast fragmentation warhead developed by Rafael, which is capable of destroying a target within a 50m radius.

Since Arrow-2 contans a warhead, by default, it is not a direct hit-to-kill BMD interceptor.

The infrared seeker is an indium antimonide focal plane array developed by Raytheon (formerly Amber Engineering).

The intercept altitudes are from a minimum of 10km up to a maximum of 50km.

If you did not know, space is commonly considered to begin about 100 km above the sea level. At an altitude of 50 km, an interceptor would still usually be considered to be within the atmosphere, or endoatmospheric.

Fins or other control surfaces are used only within the atmosphere. Outside the atmosphere, there is no air that the fins can use for changing course.

It's a fact. Even in Iran, which is am extremely brutal dictatorship you can't hide an exploded rocket in middle of the Tehran. Obviously it is totally impossible in democratic Israel.

This is a false line of reasoning. Firstly, it assumes "Israel"/Zionist regime is a democracy, yet the entity itself is not recognized by a single democracy in the wider region except for Turkey and not recognized by any of the authoritarian regimes/dictatorships until recently (Trump presidency) except in the cases of Egypt and Jordan (both kingdoms/dictatorships/authoritarian regimes).

Moreover, it is built on Palestinian lands where the Palestinians remain oppressed and subject to brutal treatments that are well documented and recognized as such. On top of that, Iran holds some form of elections which gives the citizens some ways or means of venting out their frustration at the old fogeys still ruling the country.

Beyond the political characterisation or mischaracterisation applied on various regimes, the fallacious argument that insists nothing can be "hidden" in a democracy is also false. This line of argument was also made in this very forum in a separate thread by such other members as Costin84 .

This is the comment I am alluding to:

Azerbaijan Armenia Tensions

Also armenia is pretty much an oligarchy. An exceptionally corrupt one at that. To believe its some kind of flourishing democracy is also another tall Armenian tale. The idea that the numbers of dead couldn't be covered up is hilarious. Especially when you consider that the deaths occurred in...

defencehub.live

The only honest conversation is that Armenia may be many things but it's not Soviet Russia or commie China,thus, it's impossible for a small democratic country of 3.3 million to hide thousands of deaths to their population, even in Nagorno Karabag as those presumed thousands of dead people have mothers, fathers, brothers, etc and they can't go unnoticed in such a small country.

Afterwards, his conjecture turned out to be false.

Azerbaijan Armenia Tensions

The only honest conversation is that Armenia may be many things but it's not Soviet Russia or commie China,thus, it's impossible for a small democratic country of 3.3 million to hide thousands of deaths to their population, even in Nagorno Karabag as those presumed thousands of dead people have...

defencehub.live

After 74, 9 more found. sharing the armenian news link here,
https://armenpress.am/eng/news/1042100.html

9 more bodies of fallen servicemen found during search operations, Artsakh says

(Crude) Rockets have often struck Tel Aviv and other regions in Occupied Palestine. That has nothing to do with what has often been described as the Apartheid Regime in Occupied Palestine or how many times elections are conducted in the region.

Many other examples could be cited, however, that may be considered spam if done in excessive quantity.

Can you stop whining for god's sake. We saw Russian vaunted Pantsir destroyed many times with very simple glide bombs and drones. That is a newest Russian system which is primary designed to shoot down cruise missiles. Yet you want us to believe that ancient Russian SAMs shot down dozens of stealthy terrain hugging cruise missiles without any proofs?

And when Israel repeatedly destroyed military targets right near vaunted S-300 and S-400?

View attachment 16066

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279114237026144257

1. Stop whining. If that is how moderators and admins let you operate, I suppose, I can return the favour, too.

2. We saw outdated Russian S-200 shooting down "Israeli"/Zionist F-16 fighter jets deep inside "Israel".

It was a s-200 that shot down the Israeli F-16 fighter jet - Fighter Jets World

DAMASCUS- The Arabic-language website of Sputnik was reporting that the Syrian air defense units tar

fighterjetsworld.com

A suspicious "bird strike" on an F-35 also caused severe damage.

This might be sufficient grounds for believing that Russian air defence systems in Syria, under Russian operational control and in collaboration with the "Zionists", may be intentionally disabled when Syrian targets are struck.

Syria, reeling from a decade of civil war that has been worsened by military involvement of lots of countries from near and far, is understandably in not the best position to retaliate fully.

In that context, a "bird strike" on an F-35 and an old, outdated S-200 shooting down F-16 deep inside "Israel" is worth taking into consideration. The F-16 still forms the bulk of the air force of the Zionist regime, for your info.

The argument is simple: RQ-4 was shot down over sea in Hormuz straights.

Risking super expensive UAV just for couple kms of water does not make any sense at all.

This UAV is huge, unstealthy, super slow, and totally unmaneuverable. It is absolutely not designed to operate over the enemy territory.

That is merely guesswork on your part.

If you are unsure, you should not have said/stated with authority that the drone was in international airspace.

The hitherto secretive RQ-170 drone was also downed by the Iranians well inside Iranian airspace and the US officials still continued to deny it, even going so far as to mock those claims in their media in a quite amateurish fashion, until the truth was revealed - with photographs and video as supporting the claim.

Verified account of a very pro-Western Iranian FM, who had studied in the USA for your information and is very chummy with John Kerry, had this to say:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141772824086028288

Instead of relying on guesswork, you could have simply admitted you did not know.

If you find the Iranian official account untrustworthy, others may find the US official account untrustworthy, too.

In that case, you should have claimed the drone was shot down near Iranian borders.

 

[Jackdaws]

None of this counts as evidence.

Having same, or similar, diameters do not make two different missiles identical.

Dassault MD-620 missile was repackaged/rebadged as Jericho 1 missile, from which Jericho 2, Jericho 3 and Shavit SLV were derived.

MD 620 Jericho: origins, characteristics and performance data

In 1962, Dassault designed a ballistic missile on behalf of the State of Israel, called the MD 620 Jericho.

www.dassault-aviation.com

That is supported by evidence from the system developer.

None of what you claim is tenable, not supported by evidence or thorough and comprehensive analysis and insults the intelligence of lurkers and intelligent, well informed active members alike.

The Sayyad-3 missile is painted red, smaller and with vastly different control surfaces than the Sayyad-4 missile, painted white. No noticable commonality in aerodynamics, no known similarity in thrust vector control, no known similarity in motor and propellant (not much info on those parameters have been revealed either).

The Arrow-2 endoatmospheric missile, with identical diameter with the French Dassault MD-620 missile, should instead be called a scaled down MD-620 missile. The seeker, of course, comes from the USA.

The Arrow-3 is a further improvement on the Arrow-2 with development, funding and manufacturing done in the USA.

None of what I have said is baseless speculation or guesswork, they are well supported by facts. The evidence for Dassault MD-620 missile being rebadged as Jericho 1 has also been attached.




Controlled tests against simulated targets. Using Sparrow target missiles.

Here is video of real life interception by Sayyad-2 missile against possibly the most capable air force in the world.

Video: Iran's Khordad 3 SAM system shoots down US drone

The video shows the moment an indigenous Khordad 3 air defense system fires a surface-to-air missile at an intruding US spy drone.

www.presstv.com

Video footage from both sides of the political divide.



Your Indian friends like @Nilgiri @Jackdaws and others I forget to mention may not like your 2nd statement.

Apparently, your Vietnamese clients do not like the Spyder SAM systems either.

Vietnam may drop purchase of new batch of Israeli air defense missile systems – source

A source close to Vietnam’s Defense Ministry told TASS Israeli SPYDER short-range air defense missile systems "operate poorly in tropical conditions and regularly break down”

tass.com

This may be down to poor comprehension or miscommunication. To quote my earlier remarks:


I did not point out whether you lack intellect, lack education or you suffered personally. I pointed out that it is not clear to me whether any of those (or maybe some other factors) are the cause of your curt responses.




Your free lesson, unfortunately, is inadequate since they are chock full of errors.

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test

U.S. Space Command says it's the second test this year of a missile that can destroy satellites in low Earth orbit.

www.c4isrnet.com

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test​

Nathan Strout
December 16, 2020

“Russia has made space a war-fighting domain by testing space-based and ground-based weapons intended to target and destroy satellites.

...

The USA has not transferred space-based anti-satellite weapons technology to "Israel"/Zionist regime, yet, in much the same manner that they have transferred ground based LEO (Low Earth Orbit) anti satellite tech in the form of Arrow-3.

A more comprehensive list of Russian anti satellite capabilities are explained there. Readers are urged to visit that link, if they so desire.

The Chinese or Indian systems are merely in trial phase.

The Indian system is just a Prithvi (Short range) ballistic missile re-purposed as BMD (low altitude systems). Their Green Pine-derived radar is also of not much use in discerning targets moving at higher speeds or using advanced decoys (for Re entry vehicles). The Green Pine-radar, of course, contains plenty of US origin tech.




1. Wikipedia is not a source.

2. It is the official US stand, alone. As has been explained before, their official stand or their media propaganda needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The reasons are well documented and easy to understand, too.

3. You should have tried, even if you failed, to provide some other source to justify your theory.

Let me provide an example to help you understand better.

Arrow 2 Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System, Israel - Army Technology

The Arrow 2 anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) system Recommended White Papers Whitepaper Customised SMV surveillance vehicles Whitepaper GATRIA modular awareness…

www.army-technology.com

Since Arrow-2 contans a warhead, by default, it is not a direct hit-to-kill BMD interceptor.




If you did not know, space is commonly considered to begin about 100 km above the sea level. At an altitude of 50 km, an interceptor would still usually be considered to be within the atmosphere, or endoatmospheric.

Fins or other control surfaces are used only within the atmosphere. Outside the atmosphere, there is no air that the fins can use for changing course.





This is a false line of reasoning. Firstly, it assumes "Israel"/Zionist regime is a democracy, yet the entity itself is not recognized by a single democracy in the wider region except for Turkey and not recognized by any of the authoritarian regimes/dictatorships until recently (Trump presidency) except in the cases of Egypt and Jordan (both kingdoms/dictatorships/authoritarian regimes).

Moreover, it is built on Palestinian lands where the Palestinians remain oppressed and subject to brutal treatments that are well documented and recognized as such. On top of that, Iran holds some form of elections which gives the citizens some ways or means of venting out their frustration at the old fogeys still ruling the country.

Beyond the political characterisation or mischaracterisation applied on various regimes, the fallacious argument that insists nothing can be "hidden" in a democracy is also false. This line of argument was also made in this very forum in a separate thread by such other members as Costin84 .

This is the comment I am alluding to:

Azerbaijan Armenia Tensions

Also armenia is pretty much an oligarchy. An exceptionally corrupt one at that. To believe its some kind of flourishing democracy is also another tall Armenian tale. The idea that the numbers of dead couldn't be covered up is hilarious. Especially when you consider that the deaths occurred in...

defencehub.live

Afterwards, his conjecture turned out to be false.

Azerbaijan Armenia Tensions

The only honest conversation is that Armenia may be many things but it's not Soviet Russia or commie China,thus, it's impossible for a small democratic country of 3.3 million to hide thousands of deaths to their population, even in Nagorno Karabag as those presumed thousands of dead people have...

defencehub.live

(Crude) Rockets have often struck Tel Aviv and other regions in Occupied Palestine. That has nothing to do with what has often been described as the Apartheid Regime in Occupied Palestine or how many times elections are conducted in the region.

Many other examples could be cited, however, that may be considered spam if done in excessive quantity.




1. Stop whining. If that is how moderators and admins let you operate, I suppose, I can return the favour, too.

2. We saw outdated Russian S-200 shooting down "Israeli"/Zionist F-16 fighter jets deep inside "Israel".

It was a s-200 that shot down the Israeli F-16 fighter jet - Fighter Jets World

DAMASCUS- The Arabic-language website of Sputnik was reporting that the Syrian air defense units tar

fighterjetsworld.com

A suspicious "bird strike" on an F-35 also caused severe damage.

This might be sufficient grounds for believing that Russian air defence systems in Syria, under Russian operational control and in collaboration with the "Zionists", may be intentionally disabled when Syrian targets are struck.

Syria, reeling from a decade of civil war that has been worsened by military involvement of lots of countries from near and far, is understandably in not the best position to retaliate fully.

In that context, a "bird strike" on an F-35 and an old, outdated S-200 shooting down F-16 deep inside "Israel" is worth taking into consideration. The F-16 still forms the bulk of the air force of the Zionist regime, for your info.






That is merely guesswork on your part.

If you are unsure, you should not have said/stated with authority that the drone was in international airspace.

The hitherto secretive RQ-170 drone was also downed by the Iranians well inside Iranian airspace and the US officials still continued to deny it, even going so far as to mock those claims in their media in a quite amateurish fashion, until the truth was revealed - with photographs and video as supporting the claim.

Verified account of a very pro-Western Iranian FM, who had studied in the USA for your information and is very chummy with John Kerry, had this to say:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141772824086028288

Instead of relying on guesswork, you could have simply admitted you did not know.

If you find the Iranian official account untrustworthy, others may find the US official account untrustworthy, too.

In that case, you should have claimed the drone was shot down near Iranian borders.

Of course that day Indian Armed Forces had poor coordination - that resulted in friendly fire shooting down a chopper. @500 is right in his assessment. Indians wrongly assumed that Pakistani forces crossed the LoC. After Kargil, apparently that seems to be red line and Pakistanis are averse to do so after their defeat and retreat in the 1999. In the next engagement, this will be taken into account.

 

[500]

None of this counts as evidence.

Having same, or similar, diameters do not make two different missiles identical.

We have air defence missile of same diameter missiles coming in about same time. You trying to say they are not related to each other. That would be a total waste of resources.

Dassault MD-620 missile was repackaged/rebadged as Jericho 1 missile, from which Jericho 2, Jericho 3 and Shavit SLV were derived.

MD-620 is 500 km range rocket with 4 nozzles.
Shavit is space launcher with 1 nozzle.

Controlled tests against simulated targets. Using Sparrow target missiles.

Here is video of real life interception by Sayyad-2 missile against possibly the most capable air force in the world.

You claimed that Sayyad was tested against ballistic missiles. And you failed to provide any proof to your claim. Instead you continue to brag about shooting down big, slow, totally maneuverability target.

Sparrow is air launched ballistic missile.

Arrow was tested against real Scud-B as well:

Arrow destroys Scud-B target in US ballistic-missile test

www.flightglobal.com

Apparently, your Vietnamese clients do not like the Spyder SAM systems either.

Vietnam may drop purchase of new batch of Israeli air defense missile systems – source

A source close to Vietnam’s Defense Ministry told TASS Israeli SPYDER short-range air defense missile systems "operate poorly in tropical conditions and regularly break down”

tass.com

You keep quoting Russian propaganda.

1. Wikipedia is not a source.

2. It is the official US stand, alone. As has been explained before, their official stand or their media propaganda needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The reasons are well documented and easy to understand, too.

3. You should have tried, even if you failed, to provide some other source to justify your theory.

I did not use Wikipedia, but quote of US general and official Boeing document. You failed to provide any source to your claim.

Boeing is responsible for production of approximately 50% of the missile components in the US, including the electronics section, booster motorcase and missile canister.

Where did I deny that? In order to enjoy from US military aid Israel is moving production into US. I argued about your development claim. You still failed to provide any backup to it. While I proved the opposite.

I did not point out whether you lack intellect, lack education or you suffered personally. I pointed out that it is not clear to me whether any of those (or maybe some other factors) are the cause of your curt responses.

You fail to deal with my facts and arguments and swichted to discussion of my personality.

Your free lesson, unfortunately, is inadequate since they are chock full of errors.

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test

U.S. Space Command says it's the second test this year of a missile that can destroy satellites in low Earth orbit.

www.c4isrnet.com

Space Command calls out another Russian anti-satellite weapon test​

Nathan Strout
December 16, 2020

“Russia has made space a war-fighting domain by testing space-based and ground-based weapons intended to target and destroy satellites.

Russia is only TESTING it.

US, Israel, China and India have operational systems.

Since Arrow-2 contans a warhead, by default, it is not a direct hit-to-kill BMD interceptor.

Arrow-2 is designed to act both in atmosphere and exosphere. Thats why it has both aerodynamic controls and TVC, both radar and IR seekers. Here it is achieving a direct hit:

(Crude) Rockets have often struck Tel Aviv and other regions in Occupied Palestine. That has nothing to do with what has often been described as the Apartheid Regime in Occupied Palestine or how many times elections are conducted in the region.

Good you posted this pic. This is a house in Mishmeret village struck by Gaza rocket in 2019. You can see a scale of destruction. DOZENS of such rockets were fired at Tel Aviv in 2015 and yet they failed to do any damage thanks to the Iron Dome.

Its extraordinary success.

1. Stop whining

In contrast to you I did not discuss your personality nor cry to the moderators.

So I will repeat my argument which you ignored:

We saw Russian vaunted Pantsir destroyed many times with very simple glide bombs and drones. That is a newest Russian system which is primary designed to shoot down cruise missiles. Yet you want us to believe that ancient Russian SAMs shot down dozens of stealthy terrain hugging cruise missiles without any proofs?

2. We saw outdated Russian S-200 shooting down "Israeli"/Zionist F-16 fighter jets deep inside "Israel".

Thats the point, they attacked F-16 deep inside Israel when it did not expect the attack. They fired dozens of missiles at 8 F-16s and managed to shoot down one. Minutes after that S-200 was destroyed.

What are you trying to prove with this example?

A suspicious "bird strike" on an F-35 also caused severe damage.

Russian Su-30 crashed and both pilots killed because of bird strike in about same time. So?

Verified account of a very pro-Western Iranian FM, who had studied in the USA for your information and is very chummy with John Kerry, had this to say:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141772824086028288

This pic from the Iranian propagandist confirms my point. Risking super expensive UAV just for couple kms of water does not make any sense at all.

This UAV is huge, unstealthy, super slow, and totally unmaneuverable. It is absolutely not designed to operate over the enemy territory.

 

[Glass🚬]

US Secretary of State Blinken Says Only China Can ‘Seriously Challenge’ Global System​

and Turkey

 

[xizhimen]

and Turkey

The more, the merrier.

 

[TR_123456]

@ekemenirtu
"Israeli"/Zionist
You need to stop this.
Would you like it if people called Iran Mullah regime?

 

[Indos]

On what basis can you say China just started 10 years ago?

According to most historians and many a proud Chinese, many of them hardcore nationalists, China is 5,000 years old.

If you are referring to the People's Republic of China, was it not established in 1949? By my calculation, that would be about 72 years ago. Do you disagree with this calculation?

If you are referring to the opening up of Chinese economy and the reforms initiated by former leader Deng Xiaoping, were they not started in 1979?


I disagree with you that economy is the be all and end all for a country.

Otherwise, Indonesia with a GDP at market exchange rates and Purchasing Power Parity very close to that of Russia (more than 65% at exchange rates, and more than 80% at purchasing power parity) would be almost equally as powerful militarily, in scientific and technological advancements, in geopolitical influence and in intellectual achievements, with all due respect to our Indonesian brothers and sisters.

Nevertheless, I am yet to see any Indonesian designed micrprocessor with indigenously developed Instruction Set Architecture. To be fair, neither the Chinese nor the Indians have so far developed a microprocessor with an indigenously developed instruction set architecture from what has been revealed publicly.

Likewise, I am yet to see any supersonic bomber, nuclear powered submarine, submarine launched ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, supersonic fighter jets, surfacet to air missiles, anti ballistic missiles, early warning radars, AEW&C, main battle tanks, destroyers, cruisers, frigates, diesel-electric (AIP) submarines, self propelled howitzer and numerous other types of equipment used in the defense sector developed by Indonesians.

There is an acute lack of any form of a functioning space programme within the territory of Indonesia.

There is no known semiconductor wafer fabrication facility in Indonesia although there may not be full blown commercially profitable semiconductor wafer fabrication facilities within the Russian Federation, they do possess semiconductor wafer fabs used for pilot production of IC used for defence applications. Mass production is often delegated to Taiwan at TSMC or Malaysia at Silterra and X-Fab.

By the way, X-Fab may be notionally considered German but their operations in Malaysia, apparently, owe their existence to a former Malaysian owned entreprise known as 1st Silicon (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, which was subsequently acquired by German firm X-Fab.

Still, the government of the Malaysian state of Sarawak is said to own a significant stake in X-Fab and in that sense, we might as well consider at least two "indigenous" Malaysian semiconductor wafer foundries - SilTerra and X-Fab.

Indonesia is also yet to produce an indigenous automobile brand, yet. Unlike Malaysia, which has produced at least two - Proton and Perodua. While Geely from China has recently acquired a 49.9% stake in Proton, the former PM and statesman Dr Mahathir Mohamed mooted the idea of creating a new, third national car brand.

Likewise, Iranian ballistic missile arsenal - in the variety and quantity of them present in their inventory easily outclass the nonexistent ballistic missile arsenal of Indonesia.

Iran has also managed to launch a payload to Low Earth Orbit (not a huge payload by any means, just to be clear about it) and they have achieved this feat on more than one occasion. Indonesia - so far - is yet to achieve any modicum of success.

Iranian Bavar - 373 SAM system is also not matched by any known indigenous system in the wider Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia, South Asia, ASEAN, Latin America, Oceania and Western European regions.

Pakistan has also managed to develop nuclear warheads, nuclear reactors, ballistic missiles of medium range, cruise missiles, affordable low-end fighter aircraft (with foreign, Chinese assistance much like the recently revealed Korean KF-X), main battle tanks and small arms of various types.

Turkish defence industry, under the close supervision of President Erdogan, has embarked on more than 600 projects, reportedly and have made significant progress in a short period of time in at least a few of them. Listing 600 projects within a single reply may be seen as spam, therefore, I refrain from doing so.

Moreover, "Israeli"/Zionist regime has an economy which is puny, tinier than not only Indonesia's but also Iranian, Turkish, Saudi, Emirati, Australian, Taiwanese, Brazilian or Canadian economy.

Yet, its air force - certainly as measured by inventory and solely by inventory as Zionist member @500 did in another thread - is more advanced and powerful than any of the countries in the list above.

When we add in the quality of the training, integration, indigenous equipment available, EW capabilities, close alliance with their protector/"ally" USA and numerous other factors, there is no reason to believe any of the countries listed above have a stronger air force than tiny "Israel"/Zionist regime.

The political influence in both the USA-led West and in the Russia-led CIS enjoyed by the "Israelis" is also enormous and that is another element of "power" that Indonesian GDP, or the GDP of any other country, can not come close to matching.

Considering all of the above and many other factors, too many of them to list here, I am inclined to disagree with your opinion that economy is the be all and end all for a country, its influence and estimation of its hard and soft power.

Hi , shows your flag of origin first before start talking big again and once again belittle Indonesian again and again....look , if you are so obsessif in belittle Indonesia, it means you have severe inferiority complex toward Indonesians

 

[ekemenirtu]

To my great amusement, I have noted that many a member here and quite a few lurkers appear to take cues from discussions on this forum. Whether that reflects the success of this forum or the ignorance or short sightedness of the said members/lurkers is a separate matter altogether.

Responding to a comment, or not responding to a comment, is not a sign of ignorance, or concession of defeat nor is it a sign of victory or knowledge. Likewise, citation of a particular source does not necessarily imply approval or disapproval of the political stance adhered to by the related authors or institutions.No opinions expressed by such authors are necessarily approved nor accepted as a fait accompli by any means. It may often be a mere indication of the inescapable fact that many participants may have other preoccupations apart from exchanging one-liners and
certainly, virtual world is separate from the real world. With that out of the way, let me try to address some of the points mooted by 500.

We have air defence missile of same diameter missiles coming in about same time. You trying to say they are not related to each other. That would be a total waste of resources.

They may/may not be the same missiles.

You should not make unfounded assumptions. Most of your errors about foreign issues, apparently, originate from your assumptions, many of them being totally baseless.

Moreover, the Sayyad-2 missiles and Sayyad-3 missiles were displayed a few years apart from each other. According to your simplistic and crude estimates, if rearranging control surfaces and lengthening the missile is all it takes, then development of the superior performance Sayyad-3 SAM should not have taken a few years.

Ancile

deagel.com

You may take a look and figure out that Sayyad-3 missile was revealed quite a few years after the Sayyad-2 missile.

Defense World

View News at Defense World

www.defenseworld.net

In 2011, Iran had successfully test-fired the Sayyad 2 air-defense missile system

Ancile

deagel.com

The Sayyad-3 was developed for the Talash 3 air defense system which entered service in April 2015.

"Merely" lengthening the missile and rearranging the fins should not have taken these few years, if we believe the gist of your argument. These observations would render much of your arguments null and void.

MD-620 is 500 km range rocket with 4 nozzles.
Shavit is space launcher with 1 nozzle.

What u are babbling for gods sake.

If I were indeed babbling, that would be in keeping with your incoherent "arguments", if we could call your inconsistent conjectures as such.

As I have shown, with reference to the original equipment developer/supplier, that "Israeli"/Zionist Jericho-1 missile was indeed just a rebadged MD-620 missile from Dassault. Of course, the Jericho-1 had a single nozzle instead of the four rotating nozzles on the MD-620 ballistic missile.

Likewise, the Shavit is merely the Jericho-2 as confirmed by many intelligence agents. The difference lies in the warhead, which is replaced by the second stage of the Shavit.

Israel | Countries | NTI

www.nti.org

In 1995, one U.S. official stated that, "the Jericho-2 is a Shavit minus the upper stage, which is replaced by a warhead." [52] In 2001, a spokesman for the IDF admitted that the "Shavit is Jericho.

These are all publicly available information.

Nothing novel about them for interested observers, researchers or analysts since they are common knowledge.

Solid fuelled rockets/missiles are also less complicated to develop or build than their liquid fuelled counterparts.

Changing a few nozzles, moreso in simpler solid fuelled rockets, is not indicative of anything. As an example, here is the Soviet/Russian Soyuz rocket with four nozzles.

Here is the Soyuz-2-1v with a single nozzle.

The Soyuz rockets are, of course, liquid fuelled and more complicated compared to simpler MD-620 or their derivatives/imitations Jericho/Shavit series of rockets/ missiles.

BTW, your comment has been reported for accusing me of "babbling".

You claimed that Sayyad was tested against ballistic missiles. And you failed to provide any proof to your claim. Instead you continue to brag about shooting down big, slow, totally maneuverability target.

Sparrow is air launched ballistic missile.

Arrow was tested against real Scud-B as well:

Arrow destroys Scud-B target in US ballistic-missile test

www.flightglobal.com

This was not a claim on my part. If that was an unverfiable claim, then the responsible individual might be

Brigadier General Mahmoud Ebrahiminejad.

Iran’s Homegrown Missile Defense System Successfully Tested: Commander - Defense news - Tasnim News Agency

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The deputy commander of the Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base (the central headquarters of Iran’s Air Defense) announced that the homegrown missile defense system ‘Bavar-373’ has successfully passed its tests of intercepting ballistic missiles.

www.tasnimnews.com

September, 10, 2018 - 17:32
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The deputy commander of the Khatam al-Anbia Air Defense Base (the central headquarters of Iran’s Air Defense) announced that the homegrown missile defense system ‘Bavar-373’ has successfully passed its tests of intercepting ballistic missiles.

I believe this video interview records his comments adequately well.

Your Mossad founded MEMRI could help with the translation if you are interested. If not, I suppose, the news report linked above might be adequate.

Scud-B is a mere 300 km range SRBM. Moreover, a single test is bound to be inadequate for the purposes of qualification and certification of any BMD system.

That said and done, none of that is really a topic of discussion here.

Surface to air missiles somehow got you agitated. You should return to the original topic, if you can.

You keep quoting Russian propaganda.

Perhaps, it is truly Russian propaganda. Perhaps, it is truly the incompetence of the "Israeli"/Zionist defense industry. How can you assure us that "Israel"/Zionist regime has never engaged in propaganda or information warfare or disinformation campaigns? On the contrary, the existence of Mossad and its various acts of subterfuge, deceits and sabotage are pretty well known and documented. Considering these facts, your curt comments and one-liners are likely not to be taken seriously by any neutral observers.

I did not use Wikipedia, but quote of US general and official Boeing document. You failed to provide any source to your claim.

Here is one of your earlier quotes:



The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs. [...] This has to do with the seekers that have greater flexibility and other aspects, such as propulsion systems – it will be an extremely capable system.

— Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency,

The links in that quote direct you to a Wikipedia page.

Moreover, contrary to your baseless assertion, I provided you with a decent source of information. It has been reposted if you had earlier missed it for some reason.

Arrow 2 Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System, Israel - Army Technology

The Arrow 2 anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) system Recommended White Papers Whitepaper Customised SMV surveillance vehicles Whitepaper GATRIA modular awareness…

www.army-technology.com

Where did I deny that? In order to enjoy from US military aid Israel is moving production into US. I argued about your development claim. You still failed to provide any backup to it. While I proved the opposite.

Here is one of my previous quotes if you had any doubts about the contents of our earlier exchange.

Official US statements have been proven to be false on more than one occasion.

Falsified statements or evidence were presented to justify their invasion and subsequent occupation of Vietnam, Iraq and many other countries.

In that context, official statements from their military or defense establishments by themselves do not constitute adequate evidence.

The undeniable fact that "Israel"/Zionist regime had to get the Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 systems funded, designed, manufactured in the USA tells us a different story.

If the projects were entirely, or mostly, indigenous, there would be no need to engage the USA or its defense establishments - at all.

Not sure which of these you find hard to comprehend.

It is good that you concede that the Arrow 2, much like the Arrow 3, or the David's Sling were largely funded, developed, produced by the USA.

If you insist that only the Arrow 2 programme did not involve the USA in the development phase, I would have to disagree. Allow me to share only five sources that confirm, once again, this widely known fact.

This one is an "Israeli"/Zionist source.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-successfully-tests-arrow-2-missile-interceptor-1.90687"

Israel successfully tested the Arrow 2 ballistic missile interceptor, developed in collaboration with the United States, on Wednesday

Arrow 2 missile-defense system successfully tested in joint US-Israel exercise - JNS.org

The system successfully intercepts a simulated long-range surface-to-surface warhead • Netanyahu: “Those who seek our ill should know the State of Israel is prepared for any threat.”

www.jns.org

The United States and Israel signed a memorandum of understanding in 1986 to co-develop and co-fund the Arrow program, as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative.

Arrow

www.globalsecurity.org

The US Department of Defense began developing the system in 1988, and the Arrow 2 version was first tested in 1995. Israeli Aircraft Industries signed a contract with Boeing in February 2003 to purchase Arrow 2 systems manufactured in the US.

Arrow 2 (Israel) | Missile Threat

Arrow 2 is a missile defense interceptor used in the Arrow Weapon System, the upper layer of Israel’s missile defense system. Co-developed by the United States and Israel, the Arrow system is designed to defeat short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. The two-stage, solid-propellant missile...

missilethreat.csis.org

Arrow 2 is a U.S.-Israeli developed system designed for theater defense against short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.

Israel PM: Arrow-2 missile defence system tested successfully

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Tel Aviv has successfully tested the Arrow-2 ballistic missile interceptor, developed in collaboration with the United States. “I commend the defense establishment and...

www.middleeastmonitor.com

the Arrow-2 ballistic missile interceptor, developed in collaboration with the United States.

Russia is only TESTING it.

US, Israel, China and India have operational systems.

Not sure what this topic is doing on this thread but in any case, you are wrong, once again.

IAF Indicates It Does Not Want U.S. Made NASAMS-II Missiles, Prefers Made In India BMD System

The ' Pradyumna' Prithvi Defence Vehicle ( PDV) & 'Ashwin' Air Defence (AAD) interceptors by Shiv Aroor It’s official: The...

www.indiandefensenews.in

TUESDAY, JULY 21, 2020
The IAF has pledged full support to the Indian BMD program and the necessary logistics to see it roll into operational service on time.

Can you show us evidence that anti satellite weapons are in active inventories of the Chinese or the Indian Armed Forces?

Having said that, I do not see any reason to deviate from the original debate.

The topic does not involve Russian ASAT weapons, or Russian Avangard Hypersonic Glide Vehicle, or RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, Novator KS-172 a.k.a "AWACS Killer", T-14 Armata MBT, Kirov class cruisers with more VLS cells than any warship in existence, Typhoon class nuclear powered, ballistic missile submarines or SSBN with the greatest displacement of any submarine ever built, MiG-31 supersonic interceptor, or Russian/soviet designed microprocessors using indigenous Instruction Set Architecture, or seemingly straightforward service providers such as indigenous search engines, social media or video sharing sites, or providing asylum to Edward Snowden, or hosting Taliban leaders for peace talks in Russia, or continuing to hold on to Kuril islands despite the bigger Japanese economy and the supposed
military advantages that economic might supposedly confers, or deploying space based anti satellite weapons, or Kalibr cruise missiles or any other irrelevant issue.

Arrow-2 is designed to act both in atmosphere and exosphere. Thats why it has both aerodynamic controls and TVC, both radar and IR seekers. Here it is achieving a direct hit:

That is the same controlled test of a simulated target that has been dismissed before. In that video, the interceptor and the target do not meet head-on. With its narrow field of view/regard, the Arrow 2 interceptor could not have acquired the target with its onboard seekers. The target data needed to have been provided by offboard sensors possibly from the ground.

Good you posted this pic. This is a house in Mishmeret village struck by Gaza rocket in 2019. You can see a scale of destruction. DOZENS of such rockets were fired at Tel Aviv in 2015 and yet they failed to do any damage thanks to the Iron Dome.

Its extraordinary success.

I have often heard and read that much like the CIA/NSA/co and MI6, the Mossad too engages in cyberwarfare as well as cyberpropaganda. Apparently, those Mossad activists are known as Hasbara. It is supposedly a paid, full time job and considered of vital importance. Many members here might be interested to know your experiences as a Hasbara activist, if you admit to being one.


It is not a secret that Iron Dome has failed more than once. I intentionally did not post more images since that might be considered spam. If you are a glutton for punishment, you might look up and find lots more. Here is a starter.

Some videos too.

http://imgur.com/78cEJFI

http://imgur.com/PCkfY5E

http://imgur.com/F49TtdP

This is a good write up by the same author with detailed analysis of the failings of the Iron Dome system.

http://www.magenlaoref.org.il/IndicatorsofIronDomePerformanceMarch122013.pdf

Some images

In contrast to you I did not discuss your personality nor cry to the moderators.

So I will repeat my argument which you ignored:

We saw Russian vaunted Pantsir destroyed many times with very simple glide bombs and drones. That is a newest Russian system which is primary designed to shoot down cruise missiles. Yet you want us to believe that ancient Russian SAMs shot down dozens of stealthy terrain hugging cruise missiles without any proofs?

It is not hard to insult you. However, I fail to find a single instance where I did so. Instead, in this very comment, you have accused me of "cry(ing) to the moderators". Any reasonable observer on his own, irrespective of his political or other ideological bias, can affirm this too if he/she so desires.

Not sure why you are talking about "vaunted" Russian Pantsir system.

American "vaunted" Tomahawk failed to do any notable damage to Assad regime airbases when fired by the dozens, apparently.

Yet, the same airbase was back in operation by the following day.

https://www.khou.com/article/news/politics/national-politics/syrian-air-base-reopens-less-than-24-hours-after-us-missile-strike/285-429792556

Syrian air base reopens less than 24 hours after U.S. missile strike
The Syrian air base struck by dozens of U.S. Tomahawk missiles this week in retaliation for a nerve gas attack on civilians is back in business.

Thats the point, they attacked F-16 deep inside Israel when it did not expect the attack. They fired dozens of missiles at 8 F-16s and managed to shoot down one. Minutes after that S-200 was destroyed.

What are you trying to prove with this example?

That is a pitiable excuse.

If the F-16 fighter jet could be shot down deep inside "Israel"/Zionist regime by the outdated S-200 system, it is quite easily deducible that more advanced systems are likely to enjoy higher rates of succcess.

Do you have any evidence that dozens of missiles were fired at 8 F-16 aircrafts and that only a few minutes later, that very S-200 system was destroyed?

Before you post any American/Western/"Israeli"/Zionist source, let us recall your usual refrain:

You keep quoting Russian propaganda.

If you can call any Russian source "Russian propaganda", others may return the favour too.

With that caveat, you are free to present evidence in favour of your unsupported claims (regarding the destruction of the S-200 minutes after it shot down an F-16 fighter jet and that dozens of them were fired at 8 F-16 fighter jets).

Russian Su-30 crashed and both pilots killed because of bird strike in about same time. So?

Russians do not claim, rightly so, that Su-30 is the world's best, most modern, most advanced fighter jet with the best sensors, stealth, sensor integration or such.

Only the Indians used to boast about their Su-30MKI until that fateful event in 2019 when their pilot was captured and exhibited by their adversary in public.


Countries like Turkey have been expelled from the F-35 project, Saudis, Egyptians, Indonesians, Pakistanis or even Emiratis or Qataris have so far been denied access to this fighter project. Moreover, this fighter plane remains the best fighter jet in the inventory of "Zionist regime"/"Israeli" air force.

Not hard to see what a "bird strike" on the F-35 could mean.

This pic from the Iranian propagandist confirms my point. Risking super expensive UAV just for couple kms of water does not make any sense at all.

This UAV is huge, unstealthy, super slow, and totally unmaneuverable. It is absolutely not designed to operate over the enemy territory.

You are merely guessing.

This line of argumentation is also false based on ample evidence gleaned from real life.

By this line of reasoning, the USA would not have escalated and killed Qasem Soleimani, a prominent and highly cherished Iranian commander within Iran. Given the much higher risks involved with that decision, they should not have done so. Yet, that incident occurred.

Likewise, given the tremendous loss of lives, limbs, blood, property and immense sufferings faced by the innocent Iraqis, Syrians, Afghans, Libyans, Yemenis and many other hundreds of millions of people over the last few decades, the USA should not have invaded, attacked, occupied or killed/wounded many tens of millions in all these countries and elsewhere stretching all the way to Vietnam and Korea, by your line of argumentation.

However, the USA still did so.

Most of your arguments rest on guesswork and false information as seen above.

This must be disappointing for your bosses if you are paid to be a Hasbara activist.

If not, it still does not engender confidence in your character.

Instead of readily admitting where you are wrong (such as the lack of any operational BMD in Indian service), you have gone to great lengths to try to improve the image of "Israel"/Zionist regime not with the slightest bit of success.

As I have important commitments in real life besides participating in a virtual forum, unfortunately, I can not always allocate adequate amount of time to refute some of your baseless allegations or false arguments. The same applies to the allegations or arguments of many other members too.

A virtual forum should be seen for what it is and not as the end all and be all of every disputes, every conflict.

 

[ekemenirtu]

@ekemenirtu
"Israeli"/Zionist
You need to stop this.
Would you like it if people called Iran Mullah regime?

This is somewhat problematic on multiple counts.

1. Iran could be described as a Mullah regime, or any other regime. That has little bearing on this discussion nor do I belong to that regime, so it is unclear why that issue has been cited as an example.

FYI, the IRGC from Iran has been formally listed as a terrorist organization by the USA. That does not mean others have to follow suit.

Likewise, many countries do not recognize the Zionist entity/"Israel" and perhaps, rightly so. That does not mean all others have to follow suit either.

If you notice, no other member except me has used Zionist entity/"Israel" in this discussion when describing that political entity.

If anything, that should be considered the most neutral of all descriptors used. I did not refer to it as the Zionist entity alone, all the time, nor did I recognize it as "Israel" anywhere at all.

2. By trying to impose your own personal political views on others, you are trying to break with diplomatic conventions and niceties. This is precisely why I described your request as problematic.

Much like the USA can not force/demand that others recognize Iranian IRGC as a terrorist organization, it would be impudent to force others to recognize the Zionist entity as "Israel".

The most neutral descriptor could be, as I have often used, Zionist entity/"Israel". Readers are free to pick whichever descriptor they see fit.

 

[ekemenirtu]

Hi lady, shows your flag of origin first before start talking big again and once again belittle Indonesian again and again....look lady, if you are so obsessif in belittle Indonesia, it means you have severe inferiority complex toward Indonesians

Your comment has been reported for personal attacks.

You would be ill-advised to use ad hominems.

Since there is no better example than Indonesia (for the notion that GDP/economy alone does not equal military might, geopolitical heft or diplomatic influence), I mentioned Indonesia. Other populous (100 million+, or even 200m+) OIC members without proportionate military might and geopolitical influence are Nigeria and Bangladesh.

These are well known facts that have been explained clearly before.

Why do you think I feel inferior towards Indonesians?

In fact, I would be extremely glad if Indonesia, or any/all other OIC members pull up their socks and get their acts together.

 

[TR_123456]

This is somewhat problematic on multiple counts.

1. Iran could be described as a Mullah regime, or any other regime. That has little bearing on this discussion nor do I belong to that regime, so it is unclear why that issue has been cited as an example.

FYI, the IRGC from Iran has been formally listed as a terrorist organization by the USA. That does not mean others have to follow suit.

Likewise, many countries do not recognize the Zionist entity/"Israel" and perhaps, rightly so. That does not mean all others have to follow suit either.

If you notice, no other member except me has used Zionist entity/"Israel" in this discussion when describing that political entity.

If anything, that should be considered the most neutral of all descriptors used. I did not refer to it as the Zionist entity alone, all the time, nor did I recognize it as "Israel" anywhere at all.

2. By trying to impose your own personal political views on others, you are trying to break with diplomatic conventions and niceties. This is precisely why I described your request as problematic.

Much like the USA can not force/demand that others recognize Iranian IRGC as a terrorist organization, it would be impudent to force others to recognize the Zionist entity as "Israel".

The most neutral descriptor could be, as I have often used, Zionist entity/"Israel". Readers are free to pick whichever descriptor they see fit.

No bs,on this forum we call countries by their international names,follow the forum rules.

 

[500]

Moreover, the Sayyad-2 missiles and Sayyad-3 missiles were displayed a few years apart from each other. According to your simplistic and crude estimates, if rearranging control surfaces and lengthening the missile is all it takes, then development of the superior performance Sayyad-3 SAM should not have taken a few years.

Few years are nothing in missile development. Sayyads are nothing but old generation crude force SAMs. Not capable to intercept ballistic targets.

As I have shown, with reference to the original equipment developer/supplier, that "Israeli"/Zionist Jericho-1 missile was indeed just a rebadged MD-620 missile from Dassault. Of course, the Jericho-1 had a single nozzle instead of the four rotating nozzles on the MD-620 ballistic missile.

MD-620 is short range ballistic missile. Shavit is space launcher which is capable to launch 400 kg tgo 500 km orbit against the earth rotation. There is absolutely nothing common between them (completely different sizes wheits, nozzles, number of stages..).

Iran does not have anything even close to Shavit in capabilities.

I believe this video interview records his comments adequately well.

So you don't have any video of ballistic missile interception by Sayyad. Thanks for proving my point.

Here is one of your earlier quotes:



The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs. [...] This has to do with the seekers that have greater flexibility and other aspects, such as propulsion systems – it will be an extremely capable system.

— Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency,

The links in that quote direct you to a Wikipedia page.

Thats because u can't do basic Googling:

Tools of War

A weapon, arm, or armament is any device used with intent to inflict damage or harm to living beings, structures, or systems. Weapons are used to increase the efficacy and efficiency of activities such as crime, law enforcement, self-defense, and warfare. In a broader context, weapons may be...

books.google.co.il

Moreover, contrary to your baseless assertion, I provided you with a decent source of information. It has been reposted if you had earlier missed it for some reason.

Arrow 2 Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System, Israel - Army Technology

The Arrow 2 anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) system Recommended White Papers Whitepaper Customised SMV surveillance vehicles Whitepaper GATRIA modular awareness…

www.army-technology.com

This source does not contradict anything I said. Production is moved to US in order to benefit from US aid. But design is Israeli as I showed u in official documents.


Other notable IAI activity with Boeing includes
• The Arrow missile project. In 2003, IAI and Boeing signed an
agreement to manufacture components of the IAI-developed Arrow missile in the United States.

https://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2008/may/mainfeature.pdf

Boeing and IAI co-produced the Arrow 2 interceptor and are co-developing the Arrow 3 interceptor for the Israel Ministry of Defense (MOD). Boeing was responsible for production of about 35 percent of the Arrow 2 interceptor components, including major components and subsystems. IAI, the prime contractor for the Arrow system, is responsible for total system integration and final interceptor assembly in Israel. Boeing production and management are in Huntsville, Ala.

For Arrow 3, Boeing is responsible for 15-20 percent of the development content and 40-50 percent of the production content. Expected work content includes motor cases, shroud, canister, Safe & Arm / Ignition Devices, power devices (batteries), and Inertial Navigation Units, as well as several avionics packages and actuators & valves.

https://thenewatlantis.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-pdfs/20171004_arrow_overview.pdf

* Arrow 2 is all Israel design. But 35% produced in US (prior 2005 they were produced fully in Israel).
* Arrow 3 is 80-85% Israeli design (US designs secondary parts like motor cases sade arm, batteries etc). And 40-50% produced in US.

Can you show us evidence that anti satellite weapons are in active inventories of the Chinese or the Indian Armed Forces?

Here the test of Indian PDV MK II:

Why India’s ASAT Test Was Reckless

Publicly available data contradicts official Indian assertions about its first anti-satellite test.

thediplomat.com

Now show me something similar made by Russia.

Having said that, I do not see any reason to deviate from the original debate.

The topic does not involve Russian ASAT weapons, or Russian Avangard Hypersonic Glide Vehicle, or RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, Novator KS-172 a.k.a "AWACS Killer", T-14 Armata MBT, Kirov class cruisers with more VLS cells than any warship in existence, Typhoon class nuclear powered, ballistic missile submarines or SSBN with the greatest displacement of any submarine ever built, MiG-31 supersonic interceptor, or Russian/soviet designed microprocessors using indigenous Instruction Set Architecture, or seemingly straightforward service providers such as indigenous search engines, social media or video sharing sites, or providing asylum to Edward Snowden, or hosting Taliban leaders for peace talks in Russia, or continuing to hold on to Kuril islands despite the bigger Japanese economy and the supposed
military advantages that economic might supposedly confers, or deploying space based anti satellite weapons, or Kalibr cruise missiles or any other irrelevant issue.

Awesome. Can you show us a video of Russia intercepting a ballistic missile? Especially at altitudes above 30 km.

Sorry but Russia lags behind Israel in this matter.

It is not a secret that Iron Dome has failed more than once. I intentionally did not post more images since that might be considered spam. If you are a glutton for punishment, you might look up and find lots more. Here is a starter.

You repost same house hit in 2019 not protected by Iron Dome. These pics only prove my point:

* Iranian rockets can do huge damage if not intercepted.
* Dozens of them were fired in 2014 at Tel Aviv metropolis.
* No damage any serious damage was done in Tel Aviv metropolis thanks to Iron Dome.

Thats tremendous success.

It is not hard to insult you. However, I fail to find a single instance where I did so. Instead, in this very comment, you have accused me of "cry(ing) to the moderators". Any reasonable observer on his own, irrespective of his political or other ideological bias, can affirm this too if he/she so desires.

Not sure why you are talking about "vaunted" Russian Pantsir system.

American "vaunted" Tomahawk failed to do any notable damage to Assad regime airbases when fired by the dozens, apparently.

Yet, the same airbase was back in operation by the following day.

Americans warned them prior the strike, so they evacuated most of the aicraft. Beside this there is noting much u can do with airbase. Its just concrete.

That is a pitiable excuse.

If the F-16 fighter jet could be shot down deep inside "Israel"/Zionist regime by the outdated S-200 system, it is quite easily deducible that more advanced systems are likely to enjoy higher rates of succcess.

Do you have any evidence that dozens of missiles were fired at 8 F-16 aircrafts and that only a few minutes later, that very S-200 system was destroyed?

Before you post any American/Western/"Israeli"/Zionist source, let us recall your usual refrain:



If you can call any Russian source "Russian propaganda", others may return the favour too.

With that caveat, you are free to present evidence in favour of your unsupported claims (regarding the destruction of the S-200 minutes after it shot down an F-16 fighter jet and that dozens of them were fired at 8 F-16 fighter jets).

Here 3 radars of S-200 destroyed by Israel:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/994923033503715328

Since that even S-200 in Damascus area never fired again. Israel on the other hand destroyed at least 4 Pantsirs after that in addition to S-200. And continued hitting Iranian objects all over Syria.

Russians do not claim, rightly so, that Su-30 is the world's best, most modern, most advanced fighter jet with the best sensors, stealth, sensor integration or such.

Su-30 is two engine and larger so it supposed to be more resistant to bird hit. Yet it crashed killing two pilots, while F-35 landed safely.

 

[ekemenirtu]

No bs,on this forum we call countries by their international names,follow the forum rules.

Is that the official stance of this forum? @MisterLike

That "Israel"/Zionist entity needs to be described only as "Israel" and anything else is described as BS?

If so, you should clarify it within the forum rules section:

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

defencehub.live

In any case, if @MisterLike/@Webslave decides that the only way to describe "Israel"/Zionist entity is "Israel", then I will not hesitate to stop visiting the forum. It is your personal forum and your choice, after all. Just seeking clarifications here.

Thanks.

 

[ekemenirtu]

I see that most of your responses are one liners and meaningless. Not only do they fail to address the points brought up and evidence brought forth, they often deflect the course of discussion.

There is not much point in holding such silly one-liner arguments.

Few years are nothing in missile development. Sayyads are nothing but old generation crude force SAMs. Not capable to intercept ballistic targets.

According to you, rearranging control surfaces, lengthening a missile or expanding its diameter is a minor task. In that case, these matter should not take a few years.

On the other hand, you argue that few years are "nothing in missile development".

By no means should minor tasks take a few years.

MD-620 is short range ballistic missile. Shavit is space launcher which is capable to launch 400 kg tgo 500 km orbit against the earth rotation. There is absolutely nothing common between them (completely different sizes wheits, nozzles, number of stages..).

Shavit is the Jericho ballistic missile.

Jericho ballistic missile was a rebadged MD-620 missile gifted by France and developed and produced by Dassault.

Nozzles can be easily modified.
Shavit is just the Jericho with the different stages accounting for warheads or tiny payload to LEO.

Iran does not have anything even close to Shavit in capabilities.

Shavit is a minor launcher, the same sort that it has been for decades with a puny payload to LEO only.

Italian VEGA space launcher can send a much heavier payload and send multiple payloads on one vehicle indicating MIRV capability.

"Israel"/Zionist entity does not have anything close to this "monster" today, and nothing of the sort in the pipelines.

The gentleman with his back towards the camera is the late/Shahid Hassan Tehrani Moghadam who departed in 2011 in an accidental explosion.

Ergo, the image was captured before his untimely death in 2011. By my calculations, this is 2021 in the Christian/Gregorian calendar, which means at least a good decade has elapsed since then.

So you don't have any video of ballistic missile interception by Sayyad. Thanks for proving my point.

This proves nothing since prior to the revelation of the indigenous and unique Bavar 373 SAM/AD system, which is unsurpassed in the entirety of the Middle East/North Africa, Subsaharan Africa, South Asia, Central Asia, Western Europe, ASEAN, Oceania and Latin American region in terms of capability there were many detractors, too, and no publicly available image to support the claims from the Iranian government.

However, as we have seen, with the earlier Patriot series BMD system during 1991, they failed miserably as did the Iron Dome and unsurprisingly, the publicly revealed test footage - which could easily be a doctored image - only showed a side on interception.

By default, side on interceptions are bound to have much lower chances of success and what's worse, due to the inherently narrow field of view of the onboard seekers, a side on interception as depicted in that footage could only be facilitated by target acquired and tracked by offboard sensors (such as ground based radars).

In other words, the Arrow 2 is also a miserable failure.

This source does not contradict anything I said. Production is moved to US in order to benefit from US aid. But design is Israeli as I showed u in official documents.

At least five sources were presented to confirm that the development of the Arrow-2 programme was conducted by the USA.

Boeing and IAI co-produced the Arrow 2 interceptor and are co-developing the Arrow 3 interceptor for the Israel Ministry of Defense (MOD). Boeing was responsible for production of about 35 percent of the Arrow 2 interceptor components, including major components and subsystems. IAI, the prime contractor for the Arrow system, is responsible for total system integration and final interceptor assembly in Israel. Boeing production and management are in Huntsville, Ala.

You are repeating, ad nauseum, the same tired old statements. Evidence to the contrary has been posted earlier. I do not see any point in repeating the same quotes, copied from elsewhere, indefinitely.

Here the test of Indian PDV MK II:

Why India’s ASAT Test Was Reckless

Publicly available data contradicts official Indian assertions about its first anti-satellite test.

thediplomat.com

Now show me something similar made by Russia.

Where is the evidence of PDV MK II in Indian inventory?

Do you know the difference between a product under testing and one that is operational/in active inventory?

You said Indian and Chinese BMD systems were in their inventory/operational. Now you show me links of a test by the Indians. You have just corroborated my argument that Indian BMD systems are undergoing tests.

Awesome. Can you show us a video of Russia intercepting a ballistic missile? Especially at altitudes above 30 km.

I can not show you a video of a Russian nuclear warhead detonating over the United States or France, either.

Do you mean to imply that Russian nuclear warheads can not detonate over the United States or France because there is no video of that? I hope not.

Sorry but Russia lags behind Israel in this matter.

No need to feel sorry since Russia leads Israel on this and many other matters, too.

For example, the Nudol ABM were deployed many decades ago around Moscow and it certainly did not need any external financing, technological aid in development or production or marketing. Moreover, the Americans have accused Russians of deploying space based ASAT weapons which none of India or "Israel"/Zionist entity has deployed or able to deploy today or anytime in the near future.

On top of that, there is nothing comparable to, let alone superior to, the Akula, Borei, Sarmat, Satan, S-300, S-400, S-500, Kilo class, Su-35, Su-57, Kirov class cruisers, Slava class cruisers, Kalibr/Klub cruise missiles, Zircon Hypersonic Glide vehicles, Armata MBT and on and on and on.... that has been developed by India/"Israel"/Zionist entity.

However, none of those fall within the scope of this discussion.

You repost same house hit in 2019 not protected by Iron Dome. These pics only prove my point:

* Iranian rockets can do huge damage if not intercepted.
* Dozens of them were fired in 2014 at Tel Aviv metropolis.
* No damage any serious damage was done in Tel Aviv metropolis thanks to Iron Dome.

They are different locations. You need to check carefully. A few videos were attached, too, for your convenience showing the failure of the Iron Domes.

These basic rockets fired by Palestinian resistance groups are quite rudimentary in nature and hard to compare with Iranian ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, drones or artillery as provided to the Houthis in Yemen, for example.

In that sense, it might be reasonable to believe that if any of the resistance factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria or such were to be armed in a comparable fashion to the Houthi faction in Yemen, the Iron Dome, David's Sling and possibly the Arrow-2 systems might turn out to be complete failures.

Since such an event has not yet occurred, we have to hold our horses for the time being.

Thats tremendous success.

If you wish to call the few images and videos of Iron Dome's failure that I have presented as a great success, that is your entirely choice. If other members or readers decide to think otherwise, that is also their choice.

Americans warned them prior the strike, so they evacuated most of the aicraft. Beside this there is noting much u can do with airbase. Its just concrete.

Then they should not have fired them in the first place and wasted so many of their much vaunted Tomahawk cruise missiles. These invented stories of yours do not fit well with the actual events.

Here 3 radars of S-200 destroyed by Israel:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/994923033503715328

That is merely a (an unverified) Twitter account.

It shows a Pantsir radar being targeted, not the radars of S-200. Did you view the video?

A twitter account can not be considered evidence for obvious reasons.

Since that even S-200 in Damascus area never fired again. Israel on the other hand destroyed at least 4 Pantsirs after that in addition to S-200. And continued hitting Iranian objects all over Syria.

You could continue hitting targets in Tehran, Tabriz or Isfahan if you want to and if you can, successfully, without facing the same fate as the US Navy drone downed by Iran.

That does not change anything regarding the F-16 - the mainstay of the "Israeli"/Zionist air force - fighter jet downed deep inside "Israel"/Zionist entity far from the borders of Syria by an entirely outdated S-200 AD system (developed more than 50 years ago, probably older than you unless you happen to be well over 60 years of age.

Su-30 is two engine and larger so it supposed to be more resistant to bird hit. Yet it crashed killing two pilots, while F-35 landed safely.

Because the Su-30 is twin engined, a crash might indicate bird hit. There have been multiple instances of birds interfering with civil and military aviation leading to a crash.

Near hit by a surface to air missile might have allowed at least one engine to stay operational allowing the aircraft to land safely.

If a surface to air missile hits, or explodes near, a single engined aircraft (like the F-35), it is unlikely it could survive.

My earlier comment on this matter might help you understand better:

Russians do not claim, rightly so, that Su-30 is the world's best, most modern, most advanced fighter jet with the best sensors, stealth, sensor integration or such.

Only the Indians used to boast about their Su-30MKI until that fateful event in 2019 when their pilot was captured and exhibited by their adversary in public.


Countries like Turkey have been expelled from the F-35 project, Saudis, Egyptians, Indonesians, Pakistanis or even Emiratis or Qataris have so far been denied access to this fighter project. Moreover, this fighter plane remains the best fighter jet in the inventory of "Zionist regime"/"Israeli" air force.

Not hard to see what a "bird strike" on the F-35 could mean.