Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

tomi832 t1_j9z3efx wrote

Reply to comment by One-Fan-7296 in Iran unveils new 'Paveh' cruise missile that can reach Israel by MijTinmol

The iron done isn't meant for missiles like this, and trying to use the Iron Dome against Paveh will be most probably, if not definitely, useless.

Israel has other systems against this kind of missiles, like Arrow 2 and 3. But I'm pretty sure there's no official known number of this missiles, especially since Israel hasn't used them (thankfully) in real combat, yet. So technically, it is a possibility that Iran will have more missiles here than Israel.

The best defence is offence - so I'm pretty sure Israel would prefer just bombing the shit out of all their known bases, as simultaneously as possible, to prevent any missile from launching into Israel.

Edit: I do think that the EU really has a reason to support Israel in neutralizing Iran.

Iran and Syria, can easily shoot this missile into eastern Europe. Just looking on Google earth shows it can reach most of Ukraine, and all of Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and all the countries that reside in their area.

In a few short years, they can get it even further, and deeper into Europe...and guess who lately basically began a war on Iran, adding it into their terrorists list?

23

needypondy t1_j9zs9g3 wrote

Just for the sake of completeness, Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 would be used against long-range ballistic missiles. In particular, Arrow 3 was designed for exo-atmospheric interceptions, which would never involve a cruise missile.

More likely that David’s Sling and/or Patriot would be deployed against cruise missiles.

7

tomi832 t1_j9zsou0 wrote

Thanks, yeah. I read about the Iranian missiles beforehand on Telegram and he talked too about an exo-atmospheric ballistic missile (emm, ballistic missile means it's exo-atmospheric....no?) That they still didn't show but claim to have. So I was talking about Arrow 3 because of it.

Though I'm pretty sure arrow 2 could be used against paveh, no? 1650 KMs shouldn't be considered a long-range missile?

2

needypondy t1_j9zt6o2 wrote

> emm, ballistic missile means it’s exo-atmospheric….no?)

Not necessarily. Ballistic can fly within the atmosphere, but at longer distances they probably won’t because it’s not practical. Arrow 3 would intercept like above Iraq, whereas Arrow 2 would intercept at much closer distances to Israel.

> Though I’m pretty sure arrow 2 could be used against paveh, no? 1650 KMs shouldn’t be considered a long-range missile?

The problem is more related to the fact that Arrow 2 is designed to intercept in the upper atmosphere, whereas cruise missiles fly much lower. David’s Sling and Patriot have targeting systems and maneuvering that are more suitable for that.

The name of the game when it comes to Israeli (and American) missile defenses is to just have many different systems with different targets they are focused on.

3