Yemeni Conflict: News

Werewolf wrote:Defending an entire country how small it be is always a big deal that requires technologies and independence from other countries or political games of other possible providers. Israel does not have a MIC, they do not produce domestic products for military that are above operational level of weapons plattforms, communition or coordination technologies to be useful against other countries. It is a very tiny country that has no such means and could not do anything besides produce Merkawas which they do in very tiny numbers and their entire MIC is in no mangitude to provide their own little country with necessary technology nor with quantity to become independent or at least sustain or repel enemy attacks.

Agreed. I could be wrong, but back in 2013 when they were bombing and shelling the s*** out of the Gaza Strip, I thought they effectively ran out of ammo and had to request resupply from the US and several EU countries. An inability to produce your own ordinance does indeed make you a paper tiger at the strategic level.

Werewolf wrote:


You do understand what a MIC is?

Producing just a tank is not a developed MIC. Tanks will not defend your country against a equal military.

Were talking about Poland here. MIC is Military Industrial Complex, and Poland don't have any atm.

I don't really care what you think about Israeli MIC  but comparing it to Polish is megafunny.

kvs wrote:

So Poland produces its own tanks, jet aircraft, surface to air missiles, etc?

Really?

Germany owns Poland.

No shit ? Really ?  

Or maybe Poland rules Universe ... or not.  

Do you know what Fiat126p is ?



So Polish MIC is like this and Israeli like Merkava, i thought that was clear

BTW. There was big scandal here with israeli military contract for i think more than 15 years ago.
Nothing come to fruition of it though.

But this is Yemen thread and we've got probably another Bullshit ceasefire:

reuters : Yemen's warring sides say ceasefire to begin on Monday

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-ceasefire-idUSKBN0TV0AI20151212

kvs wrote:So Poland produces its own tanks, jet aircraft, surface to air missiles, etc?

Really?

Germany owns Poland.

I said poland has a better MIC then Israel does, they still do not produce jack shit to be independent they rely on east and west, however they have embedded old facilities from Soviet times, most crumbled over time but they still have to some part what they had. Germany owns jack shit, it does not even own its "own" technologies.

Kadmos45 wrote:
Or maybe Poland rules Universe ... or not.  

So Polish MIC is like this and Israeli like Merkava, i thought that was clear

BTW. There was big scandal here with israeli military contract for i think more than 15 years ago.
Nothing come to fruition of it though.

But this is Yemen thread and we've got probably another Bullshit ceasefire:

reuters : Yemen's warring sides say ceasefire to begin on Monday

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-ceasefire-idUSKBN0TV0AI20151212

Failed humorous remarks won't help you making an arguement. The thing is that you try to paint it black and white like people usually do. If someone is even 0.1% better people tend to see it or portray it as some giant gap. Producing firearms and some electronics and upgrade kits are not a highly developed MIC Poland does the same but in more fields, both are failures for the market. Israelis just push their PR far better but so far with some exceptions i can't speak of quality coming from them. Their rifles are just either copies or designs without any advantages for any market, their tanks are unbearable for any military doctrine of conventional use of tanks, not bad tanks at all but just useless for any other country in their current configuration. Trophy seems to be good which is the only exception not to mention how many links such technology has with foreign parts and many of their UAV are directly linked to US technology.

teshub wrote:Agreed. I could be wrong, but back in 2013 when they were bombing and shelling the s*** out of the Gaza Strip, I thought they effectively ran out of ammo and had to request resupply from the US and several EU countries. An inability to produce your own ordinance does indeed make you a paper tiger at the strategic level.

That is not just ammunition but absolutley everything. You can't build up an policy and military based on foreign technologies and mostly imports while relying on foreign military aid in technology and finances like US does, Germany, France, UK and Russia in personal aid of scholars, scientists and trained personal aswell ToT license with no strings attached, lot of patents were right out stolen by Jews leaving their former countries. Patents in shady 90's manner have been lost, blue prints and alike.

With the very aggressive nature of their domestic and foreign policy invading all neigbouring states while relying on their lobby hasbara groups in western countries to back them up is also a very dangerous game. That won't work for ever and we already have clear signs that people are fed up with bullshit victimhood and controlled MSM making stories up and biased reports about Israel and what it does. It is a paper tiger the only might it has is how it controlls US foreign policy for its own needs, if there would be no oil in the ME, Israel would be already destroyed because US only goes on rampage in ME because they can make big profit with it otherwise they would not play bully for Israels little crusade to pursue Erez Israel.

Werewolf wrote:

I said poland has  a better MIC then Israel does,

I'm seriously advising you reading what natoists make of Poland in the last 20 years. Having some outdated info doesn't help at all. We don't have anything right now, no useful indigenous designs, no industry ,no know-how,no patents,no lobbies, no contracts, no nothing. Only some laughable scraps. Just one sorry western junkyard.
And no you can't really compare Israel to that in any meaningful way unfortunately.

So enough about that here. If you really want , then try Poland section, maybe i can correct your data there.


Yemen

New sod-babia successes :

#Saudi-Led Coalition Airstrikes Have Targeted Fishermen Boats In Al Khawkhah Port

JohninMK wrote:

Teshub wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Defending an entire country how small it be is always a big deal that requires technologies and independence from other countries or political games of other possible providers. Israel does not have a MIC, they do not produce domestic products for military that are above operational level of weapons plattforms, communition or coordination technologies to be useful against other countries. It is a very tiny country that has no such means and could not do anything besides produce Merkawas which they do in very tiny numbers and their entire MIC is in no mangitude to provide their own little country with necessary technology nor with quantity to become independent or at least sustain or repel enemy attacks.

Agreed. I could be wrong, but back in 2013 when they were bombing and shelling the s*** out of the Gaza Strip, I thought they effectively ran out of ammo and had to request resupply from the US and several EU countries. An inability to produce your own ordinance does indeed make you a paper tiger at the strategic level.

The fundamental problem that Israel has is that it is interlinked at a really deep level with the US MIC. They clearly have the ability to produce really advanced gear, particularly electronics related, and especially gear optimised for their particular requirements. But, because of the US link, they do not see the need to replicate that which they can get for free from the US, like munitions.

In any conflict that the US is OK with Israel should not have a problem getting supplies but if it went out on its own the result is less sure. Bear in mind that many believe that the Israeli political teams, like AIPAC, operating in US Government direct that Government in positive ways for Israel.

They are certainly being a bit circumspect in Syria, they have to try and keep on the good side of the US, Russia and Turkey, quite a challenge.

Not quite sure how this discusion got here in the Yemen thread

Big off-topic.

That's not actually the real issue, being interlinked with the US (and Europe let's not forget half their mission critical components for a tank like the Merkava were German at their conception) means a good part of the cost of having to build them home, is gone. With a fully domestic industry Israel would be way differently burdened (it still spends 6% on it's military or better said 20% of the GDP are MIC related).

Assume they double their expenditures and Israel becomes a failed state by the 2030. Don't forget that Israel is doing a lot of things to try and finish the legal issue with the Palestinians, because the cost of this war for a modern economy is obviously too high.

Yemen's army on Sunday said the destruction of the American drone aircraft that performed reconnaissance flight in the interest of the coalition under the leadership of Saudi Arabia. UAV Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk crashed in southern province of Sanaa, according to Iranian news agency FARS.

UAV has repeatedly been seen in the sky over the province of Sana'a and served as a gunner Saudi aviation. But to destroy it failed because of the high altitude.

On Sunday, the UAV descended below normal. 23 mm twin-Zu-23-2, facing the army of Yemen, easily dealt with the enemy object that was flying at an altitude of about 2 km above the earth.

More detailed information yet.

RQ-4 Global Hawk - US strategic reconnaissance UAVs. First flew on 28 February 1998. The first Global Hawk unit was handed over to the naval forces of the United States in 2004 and began to carry out combat missions in March 2006. UAVs can patrol for 30 hours. Widely used in military conflicts in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia.

Yesterday during landing at the airbase of Al-Ahad was destroyed F-16 fighter of the Air Force of Saudi Arabia. On the plane were fired, as he went on the glide path at a height of about 50 meters above the ground. Yemen's Defense Ministry confirmed this information, adding that the plane was destroyed as a consequence of the explosion of one of the bombs on the suspension wing fighter.

sepheronx wrote:Well, PAC-3 Anti Ballistic missile system failed horribly in Saudi Arabia.  So I wouldn't really count on that being effective against a large scale attack from 1960's basic ballistic missiles.

Failed in the sense of shooting down friendlies you mean, all incident were human error.
Against Saddam's missiles PAC-3 did well in 2003, it's a solid system and I wouldn't dismiss it and the PAC-2 so easily.

Looks like the kimono-wearing flip flopers will soon go to space
I assume they used this (SA-2 conversion?) to fire against the base.

KiloGolf wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Well, PAC-3 Anti Ballistic missile system failed horribly in Saudi Arabia.  So I wouldn't really count on that being effective against a large scale attack from 1960's basic ballistic missiles.

Failed in the sense of shooting down friendlies you mean, all incident were human error.
Against Saddam's missiles PAC-3 did well in 2003, it's a solid system and I wouldn't dismiss it and the PAC-2 so easily.

Nope he is talking about recent conflict where out of 12 scuds fired saudi PAC-3 only managed to intercept only 3. I have shared it on yemen previous thread or maybe this one, check it out.Rest whatever floats your boat.


@kotemore: Yup those wars are costly thats why US sends billion dollars in aid to israel every year. I don't think it will turn into a failed state at all.


I disagree with werewolf as Militarov stated Israeli MIC is well established. He has mentioned many examples why so and they even posses their own Arrow-3 SAM which is used to intercept MRBM's . Iron dome is only good against home made dumb bottle rockets( nice interception rates no doubt.) Rest their ATGMs and Barak missiles are also good.

Though it's not nice if Russian MIC is dependent on Israel elibit for its EW systems but fine for commercial purpose. As Israel can leak secrets of Russian systems to americans.

They were the first one to bring drones in a war and they revolutionized the warfare tactics.

Rest if someone thinks Israel Samson Option can nuke european cities or Moscow then you should stop dreaming because their nukes lacks such range and they don't posses threat to Europe as a single pair of SLBM from french ssbn or rusian or british ssbn is enough to level Israel alongside Palestine

KiloGolf wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Well, PAC-3 Anti Ballistic missile system failed horribly in Saudi Arabia.  So I wouldn't really count on that being effective against a large scale attack from 1960's basic ballistic missiles.

Failed in the sense of shooting down friendlies you mean, all incident were human error.
Against Saddam's missiles PAC-3 did well in 2003, it's a solid system and I wouldn't dismiss it and the PAC-2 so easily.

In first gulf war, it was a total failure too. The ones you are referring to are Al-Samoud missiles which 2 were launched and 2 intercepted but debris hit the first target. Of course no casualties. Second time launched though there was no interceptions.

Recent incidences in Yemen also showed that it isn't that capable of a system.

max steel wrote:Nope he is talking about recent conflict where out of 12 scuds fired saudi PAC-3 only managed to intercept only 3. I have shared it on yemen previous thread or maybe this one, check it out.Rest whatever floats your boat.

I've underlined the important bit.

sepheronx wrote:In first gulf war, it was a total failure too.  The ones you are referring to are Al-Samoud missiles which 2 were launched and 2 intercepted but debris hit the first target.  Of course no casualties.  Second time launched though there was no interceptions.

Recent incidences in Yemen also showed that it isn't that capable of a system.

First Gulf war both in Kuweit and possibly Israel, it was quite bad, I agree. Back then there's was only the early PAC-2 version available. Concerning performance of anybody's kit in Saudi, I wouldn't be so fast to blame the kit, but rather the creativity/training of the user

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:Nope he is talking about recent conflict where out of 12 scuds fired saudi PAC-3 only managed to intercept only 3. I have shared it on yemen previous thread or maybe this one, check it out.Rest whatever floats your boat.

I've underlined the important bit.

sepheronx wrote:In first gulf war, it was a total failure too.  The ones you are referring to are Al-Samoud missiles which 2 were launched and 2 intercepted but debris hit the first target.  Of course no casualties.  Second time launched though there was no interceptions.

Recent incidences in Yemen also showed that it isn't that capable of a system.

First Gulf war both in Kuweit and possibly Israel, it was quite bad, I agree. Back then there's was only the early PAC-2 version available. Concerning performance of anybody's kit in Saudi, I wouldn't be so fast to blame the kit, but rather the creativity/training of the user

Lets not even mention fact their software had major silly glitch.

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:Nope he is talking about recent conflict where out of 12 scuds fired saudi PAC-3 only managed to intercept only 3. I have shared it on yemen previous thread or maybe this one, check it out.Rest whatever floats your boat.

I've underlined the important bit.

sepheronx wrote:In first gulf war, it was a total failure too.  The ones you are referring to are Al-Samoud missiles which 2 were launched and 2 intercepted but debris hit the first target.  Of course no casualties.  Second time launched though there was no interceptions.

Recent incidences in Yemen also showed that it isn't that capable of a system.

First Gulf war both in Kuweit and possibly Israel, it was quite bad, I agree. Back then there's was only the early PAC-2 version available. Concerning performance of anybody's kit in Saudi, I wouldn't be so fast to blame the kit, but rather the creativity/training of the user

Everyone failed to mention the worst aspect about the PAC-3 SAM, it's worst aspect is that it's completely compromised by *cough, PLA, cough* hackers, with it's blueprints on the black market:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/a-list-of-the-us-weapons-designs-and-technologies-compromised-by-hackers/2013/05/27/a95b2b12-c483-11e2-9fe2-6ee52d0eb7c1_story.html

PAC-3 blueprints found their way to Iran, a gift from the PLA in the form of Sayyad-2:

So now you're saying that Export Version PAC-3 is unreliable and saudi towelheads don't know how to use it even after their training on how to operate it by American counterparts themselves? only US own PAC-3 would have intercepted all 12 ? It's just like saying Israel managed to hack Syrian S-300 but they can't do so against Russian ones. I dont know the exact difference in US domestic and Export.PAC-3 model but while dealing with facts they fare poorly with only 3/12 interception against Scud-B's.


I guess why are they even selling it to foreign countries then isn't it?

max steel wrote:So now you're saying that Export Version PAC-3 is unreliable and saudi towelheads don't know how to use it even after their training on how to operate it by American counterparts themselves? only US own PAC-3 would have intercepted all 12 ? It's just like saying Israel managed to hack Syrian S-300 but they can't do so against Russian ones. I dont know the exact difference in US domestic and Export.PAC-3 model but while dealing with facts they fare poorly with only 3/12 interception against Scud-B's.


I guess why are they even selling it to foreign countries then isn't it?

I didn't mention differences in export variants as I'm not aware of any. Just the user at hand being notoriously.. useless.

magnumcromagnon wrote:
PAC-3 blueprints found their way to Iran, a gift from the PLA in the form of Sayyad-2:

That IRI missile looks more like PAC-2 in size, not PAC-3. More like a copy of the Standard (Shah's force had the air-launched in service since the 70s), maybe some Kub aspects are there too. AGM-78 was quite popular in Vietnam, busting SA-2 sites. IIAF had many of them in service by the time the old regime fell.

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:So now you're saying that Export Version PAC-3 is unreliable and saudi towelheads don't know how to use it even after their training on how to operate it by American counterparts themselves? only US own PAC-3 would have intercepted all 12 ? It's just like saying Israel managed to hack Syrian S-300 but they can't do so against Russian ones. I dont know the exact difference in US domestic and Export.PAC-3 model but while dealing with facts they fare poorly with only 3/12 interception against Scud-B's.


I guess why are they even selling it to foreign countries then isn't it?

I didn't mention differences in export variants as I'm not aware of any. Just the user at hand being notoriously.. useless.

A lot of it is automated, and this goes for S-300 variants of even older models.  It comes down to monitoring and pushing some buttons.  It all comes down how communication works between the launchers and the radar, as well as communication from the higher command.  Outside of that, it is the system.  Failures happen due to poor reading on radar systems, as well as response time of the launchers and the missile already inflight.  If the system has active radar homing, then problems can easily arise from that too.

That is why I prefer just command guided systems like Iron Dome, as it is just cheaper/simpler missiles and relies on the radar to strike at the target.

As for the Iranian model, that is indeed a cross-creation from using known info, mixed in with their own capabilities to develop. Let us not forget, Iran's MiC relies heavily on systems they already had in active service 30 years ago, and reverse engineering it and using it for what they need to do. I am not against that as it gets the job done as well as gets what they need without needing outside help.

25-30% success rate with your latest upgrade against old gen of missiles will be termed 'useless' only though let alone their cost.

max steel wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Well, PAC-3 Anti Ballistic missile system failed horribly in Saudi Arabia.  So I wouldn't really count on that being effective against a large scale attack from 1960's basic ballistic missiles.

Failed in the sense of shooting down friendlies you mean, all incident were human error.
Against Saddam's missiles PAC-3 did well in 2003, it's a solid system and I wouldn't dismiss it and the PAC-2 so easily.

Nope he is talking about recent conflict where out of 12 scuds fired saudi PAC-3 only managed to intercept only 3. I have shared it on yemen previous thread or maybe this one, check it out.Rest whatever floats your boat.


@kotemore: Yup those wars are costly thats why US sends billion dollars in aid to israel every year. I don't think it will turn into a failed state at all.


I disagree with werewolf as Militarov stated Israeli MIC is well established. He has mentioned many examples why so and they even posses their own Arrow-3 SAM which is used to intercept MRBM's . Iron dome is only good against home made dumb bottle rockets( nice interception rates no doubt.) Rest their ATGMs and Barak missiles are also good.

Though it's not nice if Russian MIC is dependent on Israel elibit for its EW systems but fine for commercial purpose. As Israel can leak secrets of Russian systems to americans.

They were the first one to bring drones in a war and they revolutionized the warfare tactics.

Rest if someone thinks Israel Samson Option can nuke european cities or Moscow then you should stop dreaming because their nukes lacks such range and they don't  posses threat to Europe as a single pair of SLBM from french ssbn or rusian or british ssbn is enough to level Israel alongside Palestine

Israel is locked on a deficitary spending circle. They're on pace for 3% deficit this decade. Double that = and the deficit spending can jump at 7/10% if cuts are made, up to 15% without cuts.

Israel has long forgotten the time it could slash its defence sector back to green.

[quote="KoTeMoRe"]

max steel wrote:Israel is locked on a deficitary spending circle. They're on pace for 3% deficit this decade. Double that = and the deficit spending can jump at 7/10% if cuts are made, up to 15% without cuts.

Israel has long forgotten the time it could slash its defence sector back to green.

I've read here and there (during Cast Lead) that they can't keep mobilised forces (> 50.000) active for more than a month, before their Economy basically takes a deep dive. They can afford using their active forces plus 20-30.000 for a few months. That's the negative side of small countries with large conscript armies.

max steel wrote:25-30% success rate with your latest upgrade against old gen of missiles will be termed 'useless' only though let alone their cost.

Austin posted on the forums here the success rate during all the tests for PAC-3 and SM-3 and it was pretty dismal. But heck, the system sells.

max steel wrote:25-30% success rate with your latest upgrade against old gen of missiles will be termed 'useless' only though let alone their cost.

Still you can launch with better chance of success anything ranging from UAVs, fighters, bombers and slow-speed cruise missiles. Both PAC-2 and PAC-3 are very good systems which in eastern terms fill the gap between the Gainful/Gadfly and the much bigger Grumble. Both of the latter have never been used against Scud equivalent in anger. Likewise the Patriot was hardly used against an Air Force eager to fly within its reach.

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:25-30% success rate with your latest upgrade against old gen of missiles will be termed 'useless' only though let alone their cost.

Still you can launch with better chance of success anything ranging from UAVs, fighters, bombers and slow-speed cruise missiles. Both PAC-2 and PAC-3 are very good systems which in eastern terms fill the gap between the Gainful/Gadfly and the much bigger Grumble. Both of the latter have never been used against Scud equivalent in anger. Likewise the Patriot was hardly used against an Air Force eager to fly within its reach.

That is true, but can be said for all air defence systems.

sepheronx wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:25-30% success rate with your latest upgrade against old gen of missiles will be termed 'useless' only though let alone their cost.

Still you can launch with better chance of success anything ranging from UAVs, fighters, bombers and slow-speed cruise missiles. Both PAC-2 and PAC-3 are very good systems which in eastern terms fill the gap between the Gainful/Gadfly and the much bigger Grumble. Both of the latter have never been used against Scud equivalent in anger. Likewise the Patriot was hardly used against an Air Force eager to fly within its reach.

That is true, but can be said for all air defence systems.

The only thing we can extrapolate about KSA folk here is that they are notorious in using (or better misusing) some solid kit out there. Be it MBTs, APCs and MRAPs, while their air assets haven't shown any talent in this war. No visible CAS attempts and their attack helicopters are nowhere to be seen.