Israel fears of Iran & it's acquisition of 5 S-300s

[Bonza]

Physicsman and Ibizan Hound, I applaud you for your nationalism and faith in your country (assume you are both Iranian), however, despite being no particular fan of the Israeli's or the way they operate, I believe you guys are seriously underestimating their capabilities and the skills of their armed forces.

Have you considered there may be other reasons why they have not launched strikes against Iran other than your hypothesis that they are 'scared' of you guys?

Sorry, why are you including Physicsman in this? Check the above posts, he's quite clearly articulating a point of view totally at odds with what Ibizan Hound is saying.

As far as the rest of the thread goes, discounting the Israeli military on the basis of some imagined "cowardice" is so laughable that it's pointless to continue the discussion.

 

[Feanor]

Israel is NOT supplying Georgia with any weapons, not after the conflict, and neither is US, not directly at least.

Actually the US has offered iirc 100 million USD in equipment. Israel you are right about. They had an agreement with Russia, and are no longer doing business with Georgia.

Iraq has already stated that they refuse such a thing. Plus, everyone in the region want their nations to grow ecobomically.
They aren't interested in aiding israel with engaging a mishap against Iran. That's why for israel it's either an "You will or won't" case. Israel doesn't have much to face Iran will as it is now. Iran's
current airdefence weapons are sophisticated enough to keep israel's aircraft where they currently are, which is in israel. I doubt israel's "wonder weapons" will showcase any grand performance against Iran in warfare. When they attempted to attack trucks carrying North Korean missiles in Syria, the IAF failed to damage Syria's radar/airdefence network. That's with Syria only having a FEW Pantsyrs. Cruise missiles from israel would be of no use destroying Iran's largely underground nucler sites. Israel considered using Jerichoes because they believe
the missile could evade Iran's airdefences and S-300s they may possess.

You're either trolling or severely misinformed. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and explain. During the incident in question, the Pantsyr systems were not active, they had just been delivered. In addition it's unclear what exactly the Israeli airforce was striking. And finally they struck their targets. Finally the Pantsyr is a SPAAG/SAM hybrid for point-air defense. It would have a rather hard time dealing with modern stand-off munitions. And would not be able to strike the aircraft.

Israel's airforce is more of a blooper today than anything. When they attempted to attack Syria's
stored missiles they fled as soon as radar detected them. Even then their fuel tanks fell off while they were in retreat. Knowing Iran's airdefence forces are FAR, FAR more advanced than Syria's is reason enough why israel is staying away. Especially when they would not be able to
escape Iran's long range SAMs such as S-200s, SA-6s and such. That's why Obama is trying to
convince israel of a more civil approach. There's no way israel would think of war against Iran UNLESS the USA has the frontline. No way at all.

Silly. The S-200 is ancient and obsolete. The SA-6 (i.e. the Kub) is even more so. They are virtually defenseless against modern HARMs, or modern stand-off munitions. In addition the Israeli airforce flies a number of late 4th gen, and 4.5th gen aircraft, whereas the Iranians operate a handful of ancient Tomcats, Fulcrums, and F-5s. The comparison is just silly. Even on the level of just equipment, Iran is a third world shit-hole next to the IAF. I won't even get into the differences in jamming, munitions, support, pilot flight hours, operating doctrine, etc.

 

[Marc 1]

Sorry, why are you including Physicsman in this? Check the above posts, he's quite clearly articulating a point of view totally at odds with what Ibizan Hound is saying.

Mainly based on Physicsman's last post, although I take your point on his earlier contributions - tarred with the wrong brush - apologies Physicsman.

I disagree that Israel could not lay explosives on the S 300's. Standoff weapons such as AGM 84E's or the first operational test of JSOW-ER could be proof that F16I's can. That way the F-16's can stay well outside the engagement envelope of the S-300. Saturate the defences and with a limited number of missles available, the S-300's would be flat out defending themselves let alone anywhere else.

 

[PhysicsMan]

Actually the US has offered iirc 100 million USD in equipment. Israel you are right about. They had an agreement with Russia, and are no longer doing business with Georgia.

As of now, it doesn't seem like US has sold any weapons yet. That piece of news about $100M purchase was an intelligence report from Russia, and I wouldn't put much into it - it could just be a publicity stunt or a another political game of some kind (Russia loves those). And even if the story is real I doubt the White House will go for any major weaponry sales that could derail the delicate relations with Russia. Most likely they will end up selling some stuff that improves infrastructure, maybe communications, but probably nothing that could threaten Russian forces directly.

 

[PhysicsMan]

Mainly based on Physicsman's last post, although I take your point on his earlier contributions - tarred with the wrong brush - apologies Physicsman.

I disagree that Israel could not lay explosives on the S 300's. Standoff weapons such as AGM 84E's or the first operational test of JSOW-ER could be proof that F16I's can. That way the F-16's can stay well outside the engagement envelope of the S-300. Saturate the defences and with a limited number of missles available, the S-300's would be flat out defending themselves let alone anywhere else.

No need to apologize, it's ok
How do you suppose F-16s will stay out of S-300 range and fire those missiles if their ranges are smaller than that of S-300?..

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

No need to apologize, it's ok
How do you suppose F-16s will stay out of S-300 range and fire those missiles if their ranges are smaller than that of S-300?..

1st of all its not F-16 vs. S-300, its an integrated SEAD package with EW support vs. a chunk of an ADS comprised of an S-300 TEL and its radars. Thus S-300 range > Harm range = S-300 win doesn’t actually represent reality. 2nd of all EW will reduce the S-300's range significantly, as will terrain masking. The biggest difference is that the S-300 battery will be in effect fighting alone against a whole system designed to geo-locate it, degrade its radar performance and inflict kinetic damage upon it. If the S-300 were part of a wider, integrated ADS it would be a different story. Not so in Iran. High performance but scarce systems like that will draw a disproportionate amount of attention from the IAF; it will be fixed, isolated and then attacked electromagnetically and kinetically.

Put simply a single piece of equipment alone does not give you real capability, as scary as S-300 sounds.

 

[Feanor]

Well they should be able to integrate the system with the Tors that they bought earlier, providing for some tactical defense. Second off, the system itself could remain cold, going hot only once the enemy has been confirmed inside the engagement envelope. This trick was used in Vietnam, in Egypt, and in Iraq with some success.

The Iranians aren't completely worthless, and undoubtedly overcoming the S-300 will require the Israeli's to jump through some hoops. However it's also obvious that if Israel is willing to commit the necessary assets, they will be able to do it.

 

[Marc 1]

No need to apologize, it's ok
How do you suppose F-16s will stay out of S-300 range and fire those missiles if their ranges are smaller than that of S-300?..

JSOW-ER quoted range up to 480km ( AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), S-300 range 200km (.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile))

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Well they should be able to integrate the system with the Tors that they bought earlier, providing for some tactical defense.

No I don’t think they could integrate them with the TOR M1's, not without a significant increase in comms sophistication. They could deploy the two systems together with the Tor's covering the S-300 battery, but I seriously doubt they could integrate sensors properly.

Second off, the system itself could remain cold, going hot only once the enemy has been confirmed inside the engagement envelope. This trick was used in Vietnam, in Egypt, and in Iraq with some success.

Three issues with that:

In a proper IADS the system could remain cold because targeting information could be relayed from other sensors. However the Iranians are a long way from this level of integration; the S-300's would be in effect fighting alone. Thus targeting information would have to be generated from the batteries radars.

The second issue I have with that is it prevents the S-300 from fulfilling its primary role, wide area air defence. It might succeed in ambushing a flight that is close enough, but it won’t have stopped the 4 or 5 other strike packages that have gone on to attack their targets. Additionally as soon as it illuminated the strike package it would be geo-located and attacked.

The third issue I have with this is that the S-300's radar is the most capable sensor the Iranians have. They are effectively blinding themselves in order to ambush a few IAF flights.

The Iranians aren't completely worthless, and undoubtedly overcoming the S-300 will require the Israeli's to jump through some hoops. However it's also obvious that if Israel is willing to commit the necessary assets, they will be able to do it.

I never said they were worthless. The point I was making is that simply buying a weapons system doesn’t give you real capability. You need to invest in supporting systems, integration, develop the operational doctrine, procedures and tactics and train your personnel before you can use your new toy in a useful way (typically this takes 10 years). Systems not platforms, that’s the point I was making.

 

[Todjaeger]

Well they should be able to integrate the system with the Tors that they bought earlier, providing for some tactical defense. Second off, the system itself could remain cold, going hot only once the enemy has been confirmed inside the engagement envelope. This trick was used in Vietnam, in Egypt, and in Iraq with some success.

The Iranians aren't completely worthless, and undoubtedly overcoming the S-300 will require the Israeli's to jump through some hoops. However it's also obvious that if Israel is willing to commit the necessary assets, they will be able to do it.

One other point to consider, is whether the 5 S-300s are/would be operational. Given some of the discussions before, it has been postulated that some/all the purchased systems would be dismantled so that Iran could attempt to reverse engineer them.

Something else to think about at least.

-Cheers

 

[PhysicsMan]

One other point to consider, is whether the 5 S-300s are/would be operational. Given some of the discussions before, it has been postulated that some/all the purchased systems would be dismantled so that Iran could attempt to reverse engineer them.

Something else to think about at least.

-Cheers

It's also interesting why the Iranians didn't approach their Chinese partners about their copy of S-300. On the surface it appears to be an easier way to acquire the technology or just field the systems without the political difficulties of dealing with Russia on this issue.

 

[PhysicsMan]

JSOW-ER quoted range up to 480km ( AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), S-300 range 200km (.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile))

Isn't this variant being developed for anti-ship missions, not SEAD?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Isn't this variant being developed for anti-ship missions, not SEAD?

With GPS/INS and terminal IIR seeker its more than capable of striking a TEL sized target. It is not an ARM though.

 

[Feanor]

The Greeks managed to integrate their S-300 and Tor M1 with little difficulty. Albeit it was Russian assistance that made it all work the way it was supposed to. But I see no reason why Iran wouldn't be able to get the same.

The question of how many are operational is indeed interesting. At least one would have to be kept operational, so that it's performace can be matched against whatever clones/copies they have. It would also have to serve as a reference point. Additionally the danger of airstrikes from Israel is very real. So I would think another 1-2 systems would be deployed operationally to cover critical nuclear facilities.

 

[Ibizan Hound]

Have you considered there may be other reasons why they have not launched strikes against Iran other than your hypothesis that they are 'scared' of you guys?

Judging the situation from a reasonable standpoint, the basis for israel's restraint ruffling Iran's feathers is due to the unbearable counter-effects that a strike against Iran would
result for israel. Try to look at it this way, Iran's only real contendable forces in the region are
currently at ease with Iran. Turkey, Russia and the United States of America. Turkey and Russia
could give Iran a tough time but they have the means to reach Iran. The USA wouldn't be a walk in the park either but even they desire no conflict against Iran. Ironically, israel whom have no real means of reaching, handicapping or foughting Iran is more eager than the other three to
war against Iran behind the USA whom refuses military "resolve."

The only way a nation as disadvantaged as israel would strike Iran would be if Iran was at war against a formidable nation such as the three named. Israel want Iran and Pakistan or USA to fight so that they can pull an attack off similiar to what they did in Osirak. Israel has only about 25 F-15Is out of 75 they wished for. 25 isn't enough to carry out the attack as most would be downed from being intercepted by the Airforce. Iran's old and new aircraft outnumber the number of israeli aircraft that CAN reach Iran. Plus, flying from israel to Iran is a long trip that would be revealed before they reach the targets in Iran. Not to mention there are over 100 suspected targets in Iran. What? 25 planes are suppose to just go from site to site destroying them with no interception?

Israel wants Iran attacked but they as we all know fear recieving a crushing response that would be applauded by all the world as what had happened after Hazbollah disciplined them in 2006. Iran is quite safe as long as the lobby in D.C. are ineffective at pursuading the USA to attack Iran based on israel lies. Iran has nothing to fear of israel. After all israel lack the capability themselves, the US who may be capable is reluctant to attack. Lebanon is a neighbor
whom israel had no logistical problems with reaching by air, yet they failed in every way. They were capable of flying raids over Lebanon day and night. They lack this airforce ability with Iran,
so what does israel have in place of this handicap? Nothing. Therefore, what is there to "fear"
of the fearful nation israel? Nothing at all. However, what does israel fear from Iran? BM attacks,
bombing raids via Syria and from new unmanned drones, cruise missile attacks from submarines, destroyers, destroyed airbases, oil refineries in Haifa, sewage treatment centers,
civilian airports and maybe even the "Wailing Wall."

There's much reason why israel should seek diplomacy.

 

[Preceptor]

Ibizan Hound, Warning issue. When posting, it is not acceptable to making baiting or inflammatory comments about other countries. Both the title of the thread and your contributions seem aimed to incite members from some nations/cultures, or to encourage other forum members to do the same. Do not continue to do so or a mandatory vacation will result, as will any other deviations from the forum rules.

At this time, the thread will remain locked.
-Preceptor