Hamas launched at least one Ayyash 250 rocket — a two-year-old weapon believed to be the longest-range rocket that the militant group has with an operational range of 155 miles — at Israel from the Gaza Strip.

Unlike, the mobile Iron Dome, David’s Sling is stationary and can protect the entirety of Israel from its permanent location. The IAF received the defense system from the Defense Ministry in July 2017.

David’s Sling’s advanced, multi-mission interceptor, also known as the Stunne or the SkyCeptor, a joint endeavor of Rafael & Raytheon, two world leaders in advanced weapons system development, offer interceptor as lethal, flexible and affordable hit to-kill to defeat mass raids of  threats.

David’s Sling system is modular, scalable, and flexible to tailor-fit the area and topology to be defended.

The David’s Sling interceptor (Stunner/ SkyCeptor ) delivers superior kinematics, maneuverability and lethality by combining novel innovative steering control, multi-pulse propulsion and a next-generation seeker into a lightweight airframe.

Benefits

It is designed for “plug and play” insertion into fielded air and missile defence systems with open architecture. It has a Next-gen multi-sensor seeker. With  large interception envelope, it can effectively intercept threats during saturation attack.

The launcher carries up to 12 stunner interceptors, launched in a near-vertical orientation. It has multi-pulse propulsion and precision hit-to-kill aim point selection in the terminal phase.

Israel’s Air Defence Architecture

David’s Sling is the middle part of Israel’s sophisticated and multi-layer air-defense network. It strengthens the anti-missile defence already provided by the Iron Dome, Arrow 2, and Arrow 3.

Israel’s air defence systems are stationed throughout the country and are prepared to respond 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

David’s Sling is the middle layer of Israel’s sophisticated air-defense network and is complemented by the Iron Dome and the Arrow systems, for smaller and larger threats, respectively. Together, these protect Israel and its nearly 9,000 square miles of territory from artillery, drones, rockets, and missiles of all sorts.

According to Israel’s foreign ministry, many of the initiatives that fall under the country’s Missile Defense Organization (IMDO) operate in close collaboration with the US and receive joint funding. The three aforementioned weapons systems, for example, were developed as a result of cooperation between the two countries.

Iron Dome

First developed in 2011 and widely considered to be one of the most advanced air-defense systems in the world, the Iron Dome is designed to intercept short-range rockets and artillery.

It consists of batteries that have multiple launchers, each of which can hold up 20 Tamir interceptors. The batteries — consisting of a radar and a battle management system — are scattered around Israel and can defend nearly 60-square miles. Interceptors are capable of engaging projectiles from 40 miles away.

The Iron Dome is the most well-known of Israel’s air-defense systems and has been put to serious work since fierce fighting broke out between Israel and Hamas over the weekend.

The IDF said that as of 13 October 2023, Hamas had fired over 6,000 rockets at Israel, keeping the Iron Dome busy as it works to defend civilian the country’s centers.

David’s Sling

David’s Sling is the next layer of Israel’s air-defense network, and its deployment on Friday marks one of only a few times that the system has been used since it became operational in 2017. Also known as the Magic Wand, it fires an interceptor called the Stunner (which doesn’t have a warhead) to defeat medium- to long-range rockets and missiles at a range of up to 185 miles.

The David’s Sling system includes a missile firing unit, a fire control radar, a battle management station, and the interceptor.

Arrow

The upper layer of Israel’s air-defense network consists of Arrow systems. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington-based think tank, Arrow-2 was first deployed in 2000 and was later followed by Arrow-3 in 2017.

Both types of systems use two-stage solid-fueled interceptors to engage targets like short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in the upper atmosphere, and they each include a launcher, radar, and battle management system.

Arrow-3 serves as the top layer of Israel’s defense array. Its interceptor is a world-class missile that, together with the Arrow-2, significantly expands the State of Israel’s defense capabilities. The Arrow-3 system’s capabilities enable longer range, higher altitude (exo-atmospheric), and more precise ballistic missile engagements.

Patriot

Outside of those defense systems, Israel is also one of nearly 20 countries that operates the MIM-104 Patriot missile defense battery, which is a US-made truck-mounted surface-to-air missile system.

The Patriot is a top US air and missile defense system and is capable of engaging ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, aircraft, drones, and loitering munitions. One battery consists of eight launchers that are armed with four interceptor missiles, each of which can eliminate targets at at altitude of nearly 80,000 feet.

MANPADS

The basic air defence system with the IDF are the notorious Stinger man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS). The Stinger, fired from the shoulders, is a battlefield short-range weapon system mainly for low-level and slow-moving threats like helicopters.

The missile had earned its notoriety in Afghanistan, when it was used by the Taliban to fight the Russian occupation. However, the latest variants of the Stinger can also target higher and fast-flying fixed wing aircraft within about 15,000 feet in air, besides cruise missiles and low-flying drones.

SHORADS

Israel also operates the Machbet short-range air defence system (SHORADS). This is a gun-and-missile system on a self-propelled tracked vehicle, based on the M113 armoured personnel carrier. The missiles on the vehicles are Stingers and can be used against incoming cruise missiles and drones. These vehicles usually travel with the mechanised forces to provide battlefield defences.

Spyder

The Spyder family of Short/Extended/ Medium/Long-Range Mobile Air Defence Systems (ADS) is used by Israel against a wide spectrum of threats, such as attack aircraft, helicopters, bombers, cruise missiles, UAVs and stand-off weapons.

Iron Beam

The Iron Beam is a new directed energy air defence system that is still being tested by Israel. This will not replace the Iron Dome, but will complement it.

The 100-kilowatt Iron Beam is designed to neutralise rockets, artillery and mortars (RAM), besides unmanned aerial systems (UAS), counter-unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS) and anti-tank missiles. It can function by itself or be integrated with other, broader defence systems. It uses a fibre laser to generate a laser beam to destroy an airborne target.

Each battery of the Iron Beam will consist of an air defence radar, a command and control (C2) unit, and two High Energy Laser (HEL) systems.

Naval AD System

While a naval air defence system is used usually to defend one’s own assets, given the location and size of Israel, it is also used as an alternative counter-measure for missiles travelling over the sea.

Installed on board an Israeli Navy Sa’ar-class corvette is the C-Dome, the naval version of the Iron Dome.

These corvettes are armed with two C-Dome systems, each having 20 Tamirs besides Barak-8 surface-to-air missiles, which are launched from 32 vertical launch cells.

While Barak-8 is long range, C-Dome is designed to intercept and destroy lower-flying aircraft, anti-ship missiles, as well as short-range rockets and drones.

Israel Air Force

Fighter aircraft and attack helicopters are another less talked-about air defence capability of the Israeli Air Force, along with the surveillance and command-and-control assets operated by it. The Israeli fighter jet fleet of F-15, F-16, and F-35 fighters have the capability to intercept and destroy cruise missiles and drones.

Israel had in 2021 shot down at least two Iranian drones that, it says, were heading toward Israeli territory.

This was the first time that F-35s operated by any nation were confirmed to have destroyed airborne threats, which showed how Israel has expanded the use of these fighters.

The post IRAN-ISRAEL-Israel’s Air Defence System appeared first on IMR.

It all started with Israel’s attack on Iran’s consulate in Syria on 1 April. Iran retaliated with a massive 320 drone-cum-missile barrage on 13 April, which left the world stunned with its scope and scale. There were fears of a massive war in the Middle East that could torpedo the global economy. For the time being, this threat has abated and the world can breathe a sigh of relief, but for how long remains to be seen.

Missile Power vs Air power

There is a wider professional military debate that has been ongoing since the start of the war in Ukraine. What is the inter-se emphasis that armed forces should place on missile/ drone power vs manned air power? This is a seminal question of allocation of resources that must now be seriously addressed. After Gulf War I & II, where Iraq had used Scud missiles to hit back at USA’s far superior airpower, China had drawn its lessons. Today, it has the largest Rocket Force in the world, which India, Taiwan, Japan and Philippines, etc, must all worry about.

The Israelis have traditionally placed very heavy emphasis on airpower and that has been the key to their technological-military superiority in the region. They could hit any country or non-state actor anywhere in the Middle East without any chance of effective response. Not anymore. We are witnessing a military paradigm shift in the region. Missiles and drones have caused a dramatic escalation of stakes. Even the Russian Air Force, though vastly superior to the Ukrainian Air Force in qualitative and quantitative terms, has been fairly restrained in its operations due to the sheer density of the air defences. Most of its attacks have been stand-off attacks with cruise missiles fired from own side of the border. It is only now that Russian Air Force has become more active over the tactical battle area with its Glide Toss Bombs (FAB- 2000 and 3000).

Density of AD Coverage: Israel vs Ukraine

There is also the aspect of force to space ratio. Israel is a small country with just 27,000 sq kms of area to defend. Ukraine is over 6,07,000 sq kms. Flight times from Russia for drones and missiles are far shorter. They are much longer in the case of Israel and so warning/ reaction times are far greater. Hence, military professionals in India must closely watch these ongoing missile wars and prepare accordingly. We will have to drastically enhance our drone and missile power, both in quantitative and qualitative terms. We will have to re-examine our allocation of resources to manned vs unmanned attack platforms. Air defenses are increasingly becoming more lethal. Missile-cum-drone wars are, therefore, the future. The Chinese have a head start in this respect and we have reason to be concerned. That is why, the recent Israel-Iran missile war has serious and pertinent lessons for us and we must examine these in depth. Israeli armed forces are very innovative and we must study the counter-measures they evolve. So let us now analyze the recent Iran-Israel conflict for immediate lessons learnt.

1 April Israeli Strike

On 1 April, Israel’s F-35 jets struck the Iranian consulate in Syria. Technically, under the Vienna Convention, that was sovereign Iranian territory. From their intelligence gathering facility in the Golan Heights, they had been tracking Iranian IRGC commanders on the way to Damascus for a conference. It is noteworthy that they did not attack them outside the consulate, but struck while they were in conference within the building. Some 11 Iranians, including three top commanders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were killed. These included Gen Hossein Salami, top commander of IRGC, and two other Brigadier Generals. There was speculation that the Israeli strike was deliberately designed to provoke Iran into a rash action that would justify Israeli retaliation of far greater intensity at its nascent nuclear capability. If that was the plan, it had apparently worked.

Israeli Miscalculation?

However, subsequent events do not bear out this deliberate provocation narrative. Rather, it now seems that Israel miscalculated. It had assumed that Iran would not react to the consulate strike but evidentially, it was quite mistaken. The recent resignation of the Israel’s Military Intelligence (Aman) chief on 22 April seems to confirm this. Though his resignation letter refers to the failure to predict/ forestall the 7 October strike, the timing of the resignation seems to suggest that the Iran strike was also a possible causative factor. Apparently, the intelligence chief had said Iran would not respond to an attack on its consulate. The timing of his resignation seems to confirm this major miscalculation thesis.

There was a great outrage and angst in Iran. Embassy is sovereign space and it was a direct affront to its sovereignty. Iran now considers itself a strong military power, courtesy its large arsenal of drones, cruise and over 3,000 missiles of various types.

Did Israel warn the US of this attack? It now emerges that this was done just minutes before the strike. In fact, it has been reported that US defense secretary Austin Lloyd called up the Israeli defense minister to complain that lack of adequate warning could have put US installations in Middle East at risk. US and Iran, meanwhile, stepped up backchannel negotiations to ensure that there would be no major flare up and escalation due to Iran’s impending retaliation. But Iran was adamant that it would have to react because its sovereign territory had been hit.

US Dissuasion Efforts

The US now made significant efforts to dissuade Iran from any major escalatory step. It made all efforts to make Iran recalculate and limit its response. In fact, it sent in its massive carrier battle group of the Eisenhower to the Mediterranean. General Korella, Chief of US Central Command, personally went to Israel to coordinate defensive actions to face such a missile attack. The simple fact is that Iran refused to be deterred or cowed down with these menacing preparations. It was desperate to demonstrate that it had the will and resolve to respond in a way that would underline its significant military power. Yet, it took deliberate steps at the same time that would limit the success of its own missile strike. Its aim was to make a strong statement of will and intent and underline its capacity to do deterrent damage, without crossing a threshold that would invite a devastating US-Israeli response.

Iran’s Missile Strike

Iran took 13 days to respond to the consulate provocation. When it did, Iran surprised the United States, Israel and the world with the scale and intensity of its response. This was a significant missile operation and deserves to be studied in detail for pertinent lessons. Unmanned missiles are rapidly overtaking manned air strikes as the weapon system of choice the world over. The Ukraine War bears ample testimony to this trend. The Iranian attack came in three distinct waves:-

•             First Wave. The slower moving Shahid drones, (speed 185 kmph) were launched late at night on 13 April 2024. They were launched from multiple directions from Iran, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. These would take about 4 to 5 hours to reach Israeli airspace. US satellites picked up this swarm of drones and alerted Israel and the world. President Joe Biden rushed back to the White House to huddle with his National Security Council (NSC) staff and monitor the operations in real time. Some 200 US, British and French fighters were scrambled to shoot down these drones before they entered Israeli airspace. US naval assets in the Mediterranean and Red Sea provided the sensor data to monitor and shoot down this drone swarm. The Shahid drones were based on GPS guidance. The Israelis simply shut off GPS guidance over Israel to spoof these drones. It is noteworthy that all Shahid drones purchased by Russia and used so extensively in Ukraine, have been retrofitted with GLONASS Russian navigational system, precisely for this reason. The drone swarms seemed headed for Golan Heights, Dimona nuclear facility and Southern Israel, as per initial estimates.

•             The Second Wave. A second wave of some 30 Paveh cruise subsonic cruise missiles with a flight time of 1 to 2 hours were launched by Iran. These had speeds varying between 500 to 600, kmph and a range of some 1000-1500 kms. These had much heavier warheads. Reportedly, some did get through. They were timed to arrive along with the drones. These were designed to strike Israeli AD locating and fire control radars and weapon systems. It is reported that they did hit two Iron Dome launchers and possibly a SAM battery. These have not been confirmed by Israel.

•             Third Wave. This third wave was the most lethal. It comprised of 120 Sahab Medium Range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) of 1500 km range. Their flight time to Israel was just 15 minutes. The Iranians claimed that the drones were largely inexpensive decoys designed to fool and overwhelm the Israeli defences. Most of the drones were based on GPS guidance systems. The Israelis simply switched off GPS guidance over their territory and the Americans spoofed the GPS guidance systems over Iraq and Syria. The Israeli’s layered air defences now came into action. These included Arrow 2 and 3 ABM systems along with Thaad, Patriots, David Sling, MR SAMs and Iron Dome tactical systems. These achieved a formidable 97 to 98 percent kill rate. This is not surprising, as even Ukraine has claimed kill rates varying from 70 to 90 percent using combination of S-300 surface-to-air missiles, Patriots and Stingers.

Analysis of Strike

One fact that has been lost sight of in the hoopla over the near total kill rate of Israeli air defences is that despite their formidable nature, many Iranian ballistic missiles did get through and hit their targets. These targets, especially the Nevatim Air Base were hit. This is Israel’s major air force base in southern Israel. It is claimed that F-35 and/or F-15E fighter jets from the base had carried out the air strike on the Iranian consulate in Syria on 1 April.

Nevatim Air Base is one of the most heavily defended locations on planet Earth. It has an X-band ANTP-Y-2 Over-the-Horizon (OTH) radar. This base is linked with the US Anti-Ballastic Missile (ABM) defense architecture with its HQ at Colorado. This in turn is linked to the US early warning satellite network that can pick up missile launches from anywhere around the globe. It is also linked to the US computational and communication systems as also the shooters.

A technical analysis indicates that these ballistic missiles had a booster rocket that propelled the warheads separately. Anti-ballistic missile systems then targeted the body of the missile permitting the explosives to get through. These also released decoys to fool the Iron Dome system. Iran claims that many of these ballistic surface-to-surface missiles (SSMs) got through. Video recordings do show seven major impacts and blast explosions. It is apparent that some more were perhaps able to penetrate Israel’s formidable air defence system. This is a very significant development.

Overall Drones/Missiles Fired by Iran

Admiral Daniel Hagare, Israel’s official military spokesman stated that Iran had fired a total of 320 drones/missiles. These included 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles and 120 surface-to-surface missiles. This was a formidable strike with huge number of drone swarms to overwhelm the Israeli air defence system and act as decoys. The amazing fact is Iran’s SSM missiles were able to penetrate this formidable and very dense AD cover at all three military targets attacked. It is speculated that Iran’s first wave of drones were designed to make Israel light up its detection and fire control radars. The second wave of cruise missiles then targeted these air defence batteries. It was stated that they were able to destroy two Iron Dome launchers. The third wave of ballistic missiles had separating booster propelled warheads and decoys that enabled the warheads to get through the Israeli air defences.

Iran’s Main Targets

Let us now examine the impact at each of the three bases targeted by Iran.

Iran confined its counter-attacks to three primary military targets that had been involved in the attack on its consulate. A target analysis is essential. The three targets were:-

•             Nevatim Air Base. This is Israel’s major Air force base in southern Israel. Iran claims that F-35 jets from this air base had struck the Iranian Consulate in Damascus. It is one of the most heavily defended places on planet Earth, as mentioned earlier. It has the best layered AD system in the world with Arrow 2 & 3 ABMs, Thadd ABMs, Patriots, David Sling and Iron Dome. Despite this formidable air defence, the shock was that 5 out of 7 Iranian ballistic missiles got through to this most heavily defended target in the world. Two of the war heads hit the runway and caused huge craters. The others hit storage facilities. If some eight such war heads had hit the runway, the air base would have been out of commission for some time. The real surprise was that despite 72 hours warning to the densest air defence target on planet Earth, these missiles (five of them) had managed to hit the primary target. It was part of deterrence signaling by Iran. Yet the Iranians had done it skilfully by giving adequate warning and virtue signaling of their intent not to escalate any further. They deliberately curtailed the amount of physical damage to prevent escalation. There were reports in the media that 72 hours prior to the Iran missile strike, Director CIA Willam Burns had met senior Iranian officials in a third country to work out a kind of deal to prevent escalation spinning out of control.

•             The Ramon Air Base. This is also the most heavily protected place on the planet with dense and layered air defences like at the Nevatim Air Base. Even here, some Iranian missiles were able to get through, leading to shock and concern in both US and Israel.

•             The 8200 Signal Intelligence Collection Unit. This unit in the Golan Heights also has an X-band ANTP-Y2 OTH radar and elaborate signal intelligence equipment jointly manned by Israel and CIA operatives. Once again, this is closely networked with the American anti-ballistic missile defence architecture with its array of satellites, sensors on US Aegis class destroyers and heavily defended by layered air defence systems.

The post IRAN-ISRAEL – An Analysis of Iran’s Strike appeared first on IMR.

Key to repelling rockets on the Israeli side is the Iron Dome, a missile defence system that has become a cornerstone of the country’s security since its initial deployment in 2011.

In the months since the Hamas attack and Israel’s retaliatory military ground offensive, the Iron Dome has once again been tested with an attack by Iran on Saturday and Sunday (April 13 and 14).

Around 300 drones, ballistic and cruise missiles were launched by Tehran following a suspected Israeli strike on a Iranian consulate in Syria. Most of these were intercepted by the Iron Dome.

The system is the pivotal lower tier of a triad of systems in Israel’s air defense system.

The “David’s Sling” system covers the middle layer, while the “Arrow” missile system protects Israel from long-range projectiles.

How does the Iron Dome work?

The Iron Dome is a mobile defense system developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries developed, produced and fielded in 2011 to respond to the security threat posed by the bombings of rockets and projectiles shot into Israel, many of which landed in heavily populated areas.

The Iron Dome functions by detecting, analyzing and intercepting varieties of targets such as mortars, rockets, and artillery. It has all-weather capabilities and is able to function night or day and in all conditions, including fog, rain, dust storms and low clouds. It is able to launch a variety of interceptor missiles.

Israel is protected by 10 Iron Dome batteries, functioning to protect the country’s infrastructure and citizens. Each battery is able to defend up to 60 square miles. They are strategically placed around Israel’s cities in order to intercept projectiles headed towards these populated areas. Implementing artificial intelligence technology, the “Dome” system is able to discriminate whether the incoming threats will land in a populated or in an uninhabited area, ignoring them in the latter case, consequently reducing the cost of operation and keeping unnecessary defensive launches to a minimum. However, if the Dome determines that the rocket is projected to land in an inhabited area, the interceptor is fired towards the rocket.

The Iron Dome functions by detecting, analyzing and intercepting varieties of targets such as mortars, rockets, and artillery. It has allweather capabilities and is able to function night or day and in all conditions, including fog, rain, dust storms and low clouds. It is able to launch a variety of interceptor missiles.

A radar steers the missile until the target is acquired with an infrared sensor. The interceptor must be quickly maneuverable because it must intercept rudimentary rockets that are little more than a pipe with fins welded onto it, which makes them liable to follow unpredictable courses. It can be assumed that the launchers of the rockets know as little as the Israelis as to where the rockets would end up landing.

Israeli authorities have claimed that the military technology boasts a 90 per cent success rate at intercepting enemy rockets.

Each Iron Dome battery has three components. The first is a radar that detects incoming rockets. Then there is the Tamir interceptor missile that is launched to intercept the incoming rocket in the air.

Finally, there is a command and control centre which contains the software that creates and sends the message from the radar to the interceptor missile.

The system is designed to intercept rockets with a range of between 4 km and 70 km.

How effective is the Iron Dome?

Iron Dome has proved to be particularly effective over the years.

Bombings into Israel intensified during the 2006 Second Lebanon War when Hezbollah? fired approximately 4,000 rockets from bases in the south of Lebanon. From Gaza to the South, an estimated 8,000 projectiles were launched between 2000 and 2008, mostly by Hamas??. To counter these threats, the Defense Ministry, in February 2007, decided on the development of the Dome to function as a mobile air defense system for Israel. After its period of development and testing, the system was declared operational and fielded in March 2011.

The Israeli government has said is that the effectiveness of Iron Dome is very high. The Iron Dome only intercepts or destroys rockets which are considered to threaten civilian urban areas. If a rocket is sent from Gaza to an unpopulated area in Israel, Iron Dome will not be activated.

READ MORE: Gaza Conflict and the Role of Iron Dome

Biut the Iron Dome system has not deterred Hamas or other Palestinian militant groups from launching rocket attacks targeting Israeli territory. The Iron Dome may be effective operationally, but strategically it does not really deter the Palestinian organisations.

The IDF (Israel Defense Force) claims an 85% – 90% success rate for the “Iron Dome” in intercepting incoming projectiles. Operational in March 2011, to date the Iron Dome has successfully destroyed approximately 1,500 rockets. The destruction of these incoming rockets has saved Israeli lives offering physical protection and shielding property and other assets. In addition, for the Israelis it serves as a psychological safeguard and comfort for the Israeli people.

Regarding the Dome as an asset for Israel’s National Security Strategy, while standing as an undeniable asset, has had mixed results regarding its four major pillars of Deterrence, Early, Active Defense and Decisive Victory as well as some unintended challenges.

How is the Iron Dome financed?

Keeping the Iron Dome operational comes at a high price. Just one of the interceptor Tamir missiles is estimated to cost around $50,000.

Originally Iron Dome funding was undertaken by Israel, but because of the high cost of the system, the country has had to rely on its long-time ally, the United States.

A report from the US Congressional Research Service states that the US has contributed nearly $3 billion to Iron Dome batteries, interceptors, co-production costs, and general maintenance.

Fears of Escalation

In the early days of the current conflict, the sheer number of rockets that Hamas fired towards Israel, estimated to be between 2,200 and upwards of 3,000 (though Hamas claims to have fired 5,000), seemed to succeed in overwhelming the system. Perhaps the biggest concern with respect to Iron Dome’s capability to continue protecting Israeli territory, is the prospect of a regional escalation in the current conflict.

Hezbollah has a much bigger firepower capability than than Hamas. It has hundreds of thousands of rockets. So Hezbollah could very quickly overwhelm Iron Dome.

Future Use

In addition, while the “Dome” suffices for now, it cannot be expected to continue this way forever. Despite the system’s effectiveness, it is just a matter of time before the militants develop tactics or acquire the technology to overcome it.

As technologies develop and are implemented in operations, counter techniques can shift and new tactics can be developed, which is what the militias are only bound to do. Moreover, with the heavy funding available to the militias from their wealthy allies, acquiring more advanced technologies becomes more probable. This is a significant disadvantage for Israel. In order to preserve their upper hand, constant innovation and adaptation is a necessity. Despite these drawbacks, however, in all the positive aspects that the system offers clearly outweighs the negative. The Iron Dome stands undeniably as a critical and outstanding military asset to Israel’s National Security, even while Israel works to address and mitigate some of the unforeseen challenges related to the system.

The post IRAN-ISRAEL-Iron Dome Operational Performance appeared first on IMR.