Israeli missile defence in operation (technical discussion only)

Sounds like someone is giving the Iranians electronic warfare (including cyber?) support.
 
t.me

Cyberspec News

An Israeli interceptor missile malfunctioned again.
t.me t.me

t.me

Cyberspec News

Another abnormal missile failure of the Israeli air defense system. This was already observed yesterday and the day before (once it led to the loss of an expensive air defense system). The systematic nature of the problem is interesting.
t.me t.me

t.me

Middle East Spectator — MES

—❗️/ WATCH: Full documentation of the failed Israeli interceptor launch @Middle_East_Spectator
t.me t.me

t.me

Mediterranean Man

⚡⚡ We are receiving Israel launching their AD missiles on themselves. Same incident from different angles. @medmannews
t.me t.me

t.me

Mediterranean Man

More of the same AD failure.
t.me t.me
 
Last edited:
"• The pinpoint accuracy of the strike suggests a CEP of less than 5 meters. pic.twitter.com/dYCUWOaRp4"

It suggests nothing of the sort.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jeffb said:
That would make them spectacularly bad decoys.
Click to expand...
It would be stupid to send the enemy decoys as heavy as the warheads instead of sending more warheads. Since the time of the Cold War, the decoys have been a perfected version of the Window. Light and numerous to form anti-radar clouds.
 
Galaxy said:
Probably more than one source. They have spy satellites or could also be using intelligence from other countries such as Pakistan. It’s also not difficult to triangulate air defenses based on media footage were the launches are coming from or hacking CCTV cameras. Iranian drones have also penetrated deep into Israel and something like a Shaheed can have cameras as Russia has modified some variants to use cameras. There is also spies, as recently Israel uncovered spies working for Iran.
Click to expand...
There is no physical difficulty in detecting launches using infrared sensors and rolling back the recording to detect the former launch vehicle sites and refuelling points.
 
Sineva said:
• The pinpoint accuracy of the strike suggests a CEP of less than 5 meters.
Click to expand...
I have a very minor substation across the road from me, you wouldn't need a sub 5m CEP to hit it. It's about a 10m frontage, but non-hardened, any close hit will do. A hit on my place would probably take it out, and that's a >30m CEP. Major substations, meanwhile, are area targets.

ETA: Slightly adjusted my wording, a 5m CEP will put you in the compound, but that's not needed to flatten what's essentially a light brick-built garage. And that's a very small substation, the lights will still be on about half a mile away.
 
Last edited:
 
DWG said:
I have a very minor substation across the road from me, you wouldn't need a sub 5m CEP to hit it. It's about a 10m frontage, but non-hardened, any close hit will do. A hit on my place would probably take it out, and that's a >30m CEP. Major substations, meanwhile, are area targets.

ETA: Slightly adjusted my wording, a 5m CEP will put you in the compound, but that's not needed to flatten what's essentially a light brick-built garage. And that's a very small substation, the lights will still be on about half a mile away.
Click to expand...
Also, any CEP estimate presumes one knows the intended target.
 
Justo Miranda said:
It would be stupid to send the enemy decoys as heavy as the warheads instead of sending more warheads. Since the time of the Cold War, the decoys have been a perfected version of the Window. Light and numerous to form anti-radar clouds.
Click to expand...
You don't need a decoy as heavy as a warhead, but you do need a decoy with the same ballistic coefficient.

As an example, a 6.5mm bullet weighing ~140grn has the same BC as a .30cal bullet weighing ~200gn. (Though stuff gets weird at large scales) Edit: this means that for the same starting velocity the two bullets will have the same flight path. It's what makes the 6.5mm Creedmore as good as the .300 winmag for practical rifle shooting or police sniping.
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
You don't need a decoy as heavy as a warhead, but you do need a decoy with the same ballistic coefficient.

As an example, a 6.5mm bullet weighing ~140grn has the same BC as a .30cal bullet weighing ~200gn. (Though stuff gets weird at large scales) Edit: this means that for the same starting velocity the two bullets will have the same flight path. It's what makes the 6.5mm Creedmore as good as the .300 winmag for practical rifle shooting or police sniping.
Click to expand...
That's true, but my point is that defense radars can differentiate between the ballistic drop velocities of both types of objects because of their different weight.
 
Justo Miranda said:
That's true, but my point is that defense radars can differentiate between the ballistic drop velocities of both types of objects because of their different weight.
Click to expand...
You are not understanding.

If two objects have the same ballistic coefficient, they will have the same drop velocity.
 
Justo Miranda said:
That's true, but my point is that defense radars can differentiate between the ballistic drop velocities of both types of objects because of their different weight.
Click to expand...
Scott and Dilandu beat me to it, but for clarity: if two objects have the same ballistic coefficient, they have identical drag characteristics, so they experience identical decelerations due to drag, while also experiencing identical accelerations due to gravity, so they fall at exactly the same rate. Engineer them to have identical radar and thermal signatures and you can't tell the difference between warhead and decoy.
 
DWG said:
Scott and Dilandu beat me to it, but for clarity: if two objects have the same ballistic coefficient, they have identical drag characteristics, so they experience identical decelerations due to drag, while also experiencing identical accelerations due to gravity, so they fall at exactly the same rate. Engineer them to have identical radar and thermal signatures and you can't tell the difference between warhead and decoy.
Click to expand...
With the same aerodynamic characteristics, the heavier object should fall faster, think of an empty suitcase and a full suitcase falling from a tall building.

A precision radar should detect the difference in speeds after following the trajectory for a certain time, at least that is the theory.

In my opinion it doesn't make sense to expend fuel to accelerate a heavy object unless it's a warhead, but a missile with multiple warheads can contain both types because their shape and external dimensions will be identical.

The detection and reaction time depends on the time when the warheads are separated from the carrier missile. If they are separated at too high altitude they facilitate the discrimination of interception systems, if they are separated at low altitude, the impact air and their effectiveness against multiple targets decreases.
 
DWG said:
Scott and Dilandu beat me to it, but for clarity: if two objects have the same ballistic coefficient, they have identical drag characteristics, so they experience identical decelerations due to drag, while also experiencing identical accelerations due to gravity, so they fall at exactly the same rate. Engineer them to have identical radar and thermal signatures and you can't tell the difference between warhead and decoy.
Click to expand...
And that would be the expensive part.

Well, the thermal signature. RCS enlargement is cheap.


Justo Miranda said:
With the same aerodynamic characteristics, the heavier object should fall faster, think of an empty suitcase and a full suitcase falling from a tall building.

A precision radar should detect the difference in speeds after following the trajectory for a certain time, at least that is the theory.

In my opinion it doesn't make sense to expend fuel to accelerate a heavy object unless it's a warhead, but a missile with multiple warheads can contain both types because their shape and external dimensions will be identical.

The detection and reaction time depends on the time when the warheads are separated from the carrier missile. If they are separated at too high altitude they facilitate the discrimination of interception systems, if they are separated at low altitude, the impact air and their effectiveness against multiple targets decreases.
Click to expand...
You are still not understanding ballistic coefficient.

Two objects with the same BC will fly exactly the same, no matter how much bigger one is than the other. They will lose speed due to aerodynamic drag at exactly the same rate. They will get pushed the exact same distance due to crosswinds. They will fall at exactly the same speed due to gravity.
 
Scott Kenny said:
And that would be the expensive part.

Well, the thermal signature. RCS enlargement is cheap.



You are still not understanding ballistic coefficient.

Two objects with the same BC will fly exactly the same, no matter how much bigger one is than the other. They will lose speed due to aerodynamic drag at exactly the same rate. They will get pushed the exact same distance due to crosswinds. They will fall at exactly the same speed due to gravity.
Click to expand...
I understand the concept of aerodynamic drag, but gravity cannot act on two ballistic trajectories in the same way if the weight is different.

Remember when Apollo 13's re-entry trajectory was too flat because NASA technicians forgot to include in their calculations that the spacecraft had not landed on the moon and the weight of the moon rocks was missing?

I am not trying to win the argument, but if I am wrong it would be good to know the cause.
 

Attachments

  • 871.jpg
    871.jpg
    551.3 KB · Views: 4
Justo Miranda said:
With the same aerodynamic characteristics, the heavier object should fall faster, think of an empty suitcase and a full suitcase falling from a tall building.
Click to expand...
Make an empty suitcase streamlined, with stabilizing fins, and it would fell as fast as full one, because drag would not slow it down as much.
 
Justo Miranda said:
I understand the concept of aerodynamic drag, but gravity cannot act on two ballistic trajectories in the same way if the weight is different.
Click to expand...
Okay, I will explain it more comprehensively.

There are two main forces acting on the falling body. Gravity accelerate it; drag is slowing it. The resulting acceleration & max velocity are the product of gravity vs drag equation.

By reducing the drag, we could compensate for one body being much lighter than another. Making the lighter body more streamlined, narrower, smoother, we could reduce its drag to the point, when it's acceleration would not distinguishable from the aceelration of heavier body. A classic example; a blunt body shaped warhead (heavy body, with GREAT drag) and X-profile metal rod decoy (light body, with LOW drag).
 
Dilandu said:
Make an empty suitcase streamlined, with stabilizing fins, and it would fell as fast as full one, because drag would not slow it down as much.
Click to expand...
The validity of the theory depends on the accuracy of the radar and the computing power of the interception system, perhaps a small difference in speed gives away the decoy, something that human senses cannot perceive.

There's a quote from Tom Clancy that impressed me: "A missile that flew too fast to see"
 
Justo Miranda said:
I understand the concept of aerodynamic drag, but gravity cannot act on two ballistic trajectories in the same way if the weight is different.

Remember when Apollo 13's re-entry trajectory was too flat because NASA technicians forgot to include in their calculations that the spacecraft had not landed on the moon and the weight of the moon rocks was missing?

I am not trying to win the argument, but if I am wrong it would be good to know the cause.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the math behind BC well enough to explain it, but the point of the number is to say that any two objects with the same BC will fly exactly the same regardless of weight.

I think momentum is the term included as part of the BC calculations, but it is included.

How else will a 6.5mm bullet that is 9grams fly the exact same flight path as a 7.62mm bullet that is 13 grams? Because that is exactly the thing that is being described.

Justo Miranda said:
The validity of the theory depends on the accuracy of the radar and the computing power of the interception system, perhaps a small difference in speed gives away the decoy, something that human senses cannot perceive.
Click to expand...
Ballistic Coefficient is literally measured by radar.
 
Justo Miranda said:
The validity of the theory depends on the accuracy of the radar and the computing power of the interception system, perhaps a small difference in speed gives away the decoy, something that human senses cannot perceive.
Click to expand...
Since you don't exactly know how fast the real warhead would fell, the ability to discriminate small differences in velocity would not do you any good. The idea of velocity discrimination is that inflatable decoys have SIGNIFICANT velocity difference in compairson to warheads, so the objects that slow down sifniciantly upon entering the atmosphere could be safely identified as decoys. If the difference is small, you just can't be sure what is decoy, and what is warhead.
 
Gravity accelerates everything at the same rate, it is independent of weight. A feather and a depleted Uranium round will accelerate at the same rate in a vacuum.
 
Dilandu said:
Since you don't exactly know how fast the real warhead would fell, the ability to discriminate small differences in velocity would not do you any good. The idea of velocity discrimination is that inflatable decoys have SIGNIFICANT velocity difference in compairson to warheads, so the objects that slow down sifniciantly upon entering the atmosphere could be safely identified as decoys. If the difference is small, you just can't be sure what is decoy, and what is warhead.
Click to expand...



I remember reading that the PAVE PAWS Early Warning Radar system was designed specifically for that problem, but now I can't find the references.

Can anyone confirm this?
 
Desertfox said:
Gravity accelerates everything at the same rate, it is independent of weight. A feather and a depleted Uranium round will accelerate at the same rate in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
In the void a feather and a coin fall at the same speed, this was already demonstrated in Renaissance times.
 
The game of decoys is life or death; I prefer to believe that there are technical instruments capable of discovering where the bomb is.
 

Attachments

  • c1d6f6af-9731-4bde-80e2-987e59336723_twitter-cordopolis-watermarked-aspect-ratio_default_0.jpg
    c1d6f6af-9731-4bde-80e2-987e59336723_twitter-cordopolis-watermarked-aspect-ratio_default_0.jpg
    63.6 KB · Views: 4
  • istockphoto-499060087-612x612.jpg
    istockphoto-499060087-612x612.jpg
    30.9 KB · Views: 2
Justo Miranda said:
A skydiver does not fall at the same speed as a suicide
Click to expand...
Because the drag is different, they have different ballistic coefficients.

Look.

I am telling you that we currently make objects that have two very different weights and yet when starting at the same velocity fly exactly the same flight path through the atmosphere. Hell, I have two examples in my house right now!

Radar speed measurement of exoatmospheric balloon decoys when they hit the atmosphere will reveal the warhead because the nearly-weightless balloons slow down quickly compared to the heavy warheads.

But radar speed measurement of atmospheric decoys is not going to reveal the warhead because atmospheric decoys lose speed from atmospheric drag at the same rate as the warheads.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Because the drag is different, they have different ballistic coefficients.

Look.

I am telling you that we currently make objects that have two very different weights and yet when starting at the same velocity fly exactly the same flight path through the atmosphere. Hell, I have two examples in my house right now!

Radar speed measurement of exoatmospheric balloon decoys when they hit the atmosphere will reveal the warhead because the nearly-weightless balloons slow down quickly compared to the heavy warheads.

But radar speed measurement of atmospheric decoys is not going to reveal the warhead because atmospheric decoys lose speed from atmospheric drag at the same rate as the warheads.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

The measurement problem is further complicated by the fact that the density of the air changes throughout the fall path towards the target.
 
Justo Miranda said:
The validity of the theory depends on the accuracy of the radar and the computing power of the interception system, perhaps a small difference in speed gives away the decoy, something that human senses cannot perceive.
Click to expand...
But if there's a difference in speed, is the slower one the decoy, or the slower one the warhead? You don't know, because you don't know the specifics of the incoming warhead to that level of precision.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom