Israel, U.S. Develop Short-Range Defense

[Herschel]

Israel and the U.S. are to spend at least $57 million for development of a laser cannon that can shoot down short-range missiles, an Israeli legislator and security officials said Tuesday.

A recent Israeli delegation successfully lobbied Congress to approve the new funding package for the joint U.S.-Israeli Nautilus laser weapon project, said Israeli lawmaker Yuval Steinitz, who was part of the delegation.

Israel wants the Nautilus to help protect its northern border towns from Katyusha rockets fired by the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah. Israel claims that Hezbollah now has 11,000 rockets aimed at Israel.

cut

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-israel-laser-weapon,0,3022100.story

======================

Wonderful news. Another benefit of this marvelous alliance. Hezbollah
beware.

[Forkboy]

1. Wonderful news

another monetary boondoggle.Yippeee!!!

[Herschel]

2. See the article

"Israel wants the Nautilus to help protect its northern border towns from Katyusha rockets fired by the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah. Israel claims that Hezbollah now has 11,000 rockets aimed at Israel."

Do you prefer Israel have inadaquate defenses against these missles?

[Forkboy]

4. I read the article

Do you support GW's missile defense program also?

And can you provide any info on where the 11,000 number comes from? Where in "Israel" are these claims coming from.

And if the 11,000 IS true,what system will stop them all,and how much will it cost?

[Herschel]

6. Any domestic missle program

is not the topic. The cost is mentioned in the article. I assume the estimate is based on military intellegence.

[Forkboy]

9. I have reasons to doubt the cost stated

but that's another thread subject.

[Darranar]

10. 57 million is almost certainly too little to finance such a project...

especially if it is to actually have real affect on mass bombardments of the sort they are supposed to prevent.

[The Magistrate]

11. A Sound Instinct, Sir

Cost estimates for weapons development are generally akin to the camel's nose beneath the tent flap....

[The Magistrate]

7. These Rockets, My Friend

Are merely field artillery rounds, rocket propelled. They are descended from the old "Stalin Organ" of World War Two, and not much improved. They have no guidance system, a range on the order of ten to twenty miles at most, depending on the model, and their fall is essentially random, with a single round doing well to land within a quarter mile of its aiming point. They are meant accordingly to be fired en masse, with literally hundreds loosed in a few moments, and can have signifigant military effect only when thus used.

[Forkboy]

12. This is one of my points

They are meant accordingly to be fired en masse, with literally hundreds loosed in a few moments, and can have signifigant military effect only when thus used.

If they are used in this manner what system will stop them from doing damage? Given the...uh...success of the missile defense system being developed and the poor performance of the Patriot system I strongly doubt that a working system will be built for just a mere $57 million.

[The Magistrate]

14. It Seems A Boon-Dogle To Me, My Friend

Toward the Gallilee, however, these things are generally fired by ones and twos. They have, accordingly, almost no real effect, though they do frighten people, understandably.

[Darranar]

3. Is this more wishful thinking on the part of defense contractors?

Or is there real, effective, technology already existing that can do this?

[The Magistrate]

5. There Are Real Problems With It, Sir

At least by my limited understanding of such matters.

Over any distance, air tends to reduce the coherence of laser beams, reducing the energy they deliver. A great deal of research has been directed towards over-coming this, but it has been going on for decades, and there does not seem any reason to suppose a solution is much nearer.

The thing requires tremendous electrical power, and exorbitant cost. This, too, rather reduces its practical utility.

All technical problems, of course, can be presumed susceptible to eventual solution.

[Darranar]

8. Okay...

I see nothing wrong with advancing technology in such areas; I just wouldn't do it through the Pentagon and the defense contractors if it was up to me.

I doubt there are many other options available, however. Perhaps some should be created.

[bemildred]

13. A few additional points.

It requires a certain amount of time for the "beam" to act.,
during this time it must be kept aimed at one spot on the moving
target.

There is generally a considerable recovery time.

If one uses a higher frequency laser to increase delivered energy, it
also tends to increase atmospheric interference.

On the whole it is a very expensive approach to the problem, relative
to ballistic methods, where the problems have more to do with guidance.

There are obvious countermeasures, not least the point forkboy made.

It is much more interesting in space, outside the atmosphere.

[bemildred]

15. Another point ...

There are some theoretical methods now being discussed that would
solve the problem of energy delivery using a form of "pumping" of certain
isotopes of the element Hafnium, these are also under discussion with regard to
explosives, a sort non-nuclear small scale nuke, and in other applications
with high energy drains. These are still very speculative, and far from any
practical application.

[bemildred]

16. Some technical poop on this:

Edit: Oh yeah, read elsewhere projected deployment is four
years, which is possibly optimistic.

---
Type : Deuterium fluoride (DF), chemical laser.
Wavelength : 2 mm
Power : Less powerful than MIRACL
Fuel supply : up to 60 shots
Fuel cost : $3,000 per kill
Range : 5 km
Optics : High-power un-cooled optics
control system : C3I and radar (THEL radar was
developed by Israel)
Purpose : Rupture fuel tank of a Katyusha rocket (like
those used by Hezbollah guerrillas in southern
Lebanon)

http://members.rogers.com/biglasers/continuous/thel.html

---

The fixed-site version Advanced
Concept Technology
Demonstration (ACTD) Tactical
High Energy Laser (THEL) THEL,
was developed by TRW Inc. under
a $89 million contract. During
several tests in teh USA, the
system has shot down 25
Katyusha rockets, but has not been
deployed.

The system has not progressed
much since the end of the
demonstration program, since the
lack of mobility and the fixed base limitations of the system made in
insufficient to counter long range rockets currently employed by Hezbulla at
the Israeli northern border with Lebanon. While Katyusha rockets had a
range of 20 kilometers, and could hit only a few urban targets, the long range
rockets have a range of 70 kilometers and can hit strategic facilities and
large urban areas in the Haifa bay. A laser-based defense against such
weapons must rely on more systems, which could be rapidly mobilized to
protect a much larger area. Similar threats could face US contingencies in
other parts of the world. This requirement is driving the need for an
air-mobile version of the beam weapon.

...

http://www.defense-update.com/directory/THEL.htm

[bemildred]

17. This is a year out of date, but offer a lot of info on the Arrow:

After struggling through some difficulties early in its development process, the Arrow
has performed fairly well in its tests. However, the Arrow has never gone up against
an actual Scud. In September 2000, the Arrow successfully intercepted Rafael's Black
Sparrow missile, which was acting like a Scud and was launched from an F-15. A
second successful intercept occurred during the ninth flight test in August 2001. An
intercept test was to occur in July 2002 but has been delayed. Israeli officials are
hoping to have an Arrow flight test on U.S. territory by 2004 because it will allow them
to use longer-range target missiles. Right now, the primary Israeli test facility (the
Palmachim Test Range) is encroaching some of Tel Aviv's suburbs. In the meanwhile,
the Arrow's accuracy in war-time circumstances is uncertain.

The Arrow's intercept altitude is 40 kilometers to 100 kilometers, since it is planned to
provide terminal-phase missile defense, would intercept missiles at the end of their
trajectories. What this means is that if the AWS hits a warhead with a chemical or
biological fill, at best it could disperse the molecules fairly high in the atmosphere. At
worst, it could allow the chemical/biological agents to land in Israeli territory. In a Sept.
19 hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee, under questioning by Sen. Ted
Kennedy, D-Mass., U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted that the latter
scenario "is a possibility."

The AWS program has potential but has not shown that it can stand alone as a
defensive system. The other primary weapon that Israel might use against ballistic
missiles is not really much of help. Israel does have an earlier version of the PAC-3,
known as the PAC-2, but it is significantly less capable and evolved than the PAC-3
and is mostly geared toward an air defense mission. Besides, the PAC-2 was used to
practically no avail during the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq's Scuds. Later analysis by
Congress' General Accounting Office put the destruction rate at around 10 percent;
outside experts question whether any missiles at all were intercepted by the Patriots.

Israel is doing its citizens a great disservice by depending so heavily on a system
(like the Arrow) that has not been tested in realistic circumstances against actual
Scuds. If Israel's new blustery posture of reprisal is based on an unwarranted faith in
its ability to repel all missile attacks, then it also must be ready for the possibility that
some warheads or chemical/biological agents may get through.

http://www.cdi.org/missile-defense/arrow.cfm