Article

2008-03-17 Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Hamas salvoes spur Israeli rocket defense rethink

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2008-03-17 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11127 views ] Top
File under: Hamas

#1 I'd just buy the Phalanx. Those things seem to rock, and they're available now. What's the drawback?

Posted by Scooter McGruder 2008-03-17 00:11|| 2008-03-17 00:11|| Front Page Top

#2 The one drawback of the Phalanx is that some politico might have to admit there is an existing system available at reasonable cost and that they might be responsible for the dead & injured due to their neglect.

Posted by tipover 2008-03-17 01:18|| 2008-03-17 01:18|| Front Page Top

#3 The drawback of Phalanx is the machine gun rounds fall to earth somewhere.

Although some would consider that a feature.

Posted by phil_b 2008-03-17 02:01|| 2008-03-17 02:01|| Front Page Top

#4 A feature indeed, phil_b. Although how the damage from incoming bullets could be differentiated from the damage of up-going gun sex bullets is beyond me.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-03-17 07:56|| 2008-03-17 07:56|| Front Page Top

#5 Depeleted uranium, TW. All the Paleos would sprout additional rocket-launching and seething appendeges from the 'radiation'.

In quotes, because it is, after all, depleted.

Posted by Bobby 2008-03-17 08:11|| 2008-03-17 08:11|| Front Page Top

#6 The anti-rocket 20mm shells are on a timed fused. They explode into pieces too small to cause damage on the ground. I would prefer white phosphorous with contact detonation fuses.

Posted by ed 2008-03-17 08:33|| 2008-03-17 08:33|| Front Page Top

#7 Heh, we have TW talking about gun-sex ;-)

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2008-03-17 11:09|| 2008-03-17 11:09|| Front Page Top

#8 But, but, but...I thought there was a truce.

Posted by Abu Uluque (aka Ebbang Uluque6305) 2008-03-17 12:24|| 2008-03-17 12:24|| Front Page Top

#9 Phalanx is idiotic. That thing has a range of 1-2km for incoming missiles. Which means the chance to hit a rocket .5-1km offset are low. For guns there are much better systems.

Posted by Eohippus Hupomock2152 2008-03-17 14:07|| 2008-03-17 14:07|| Front Page Top

#10 Eohippus: The Qassam1 had a range of 3km, the current Qassam3 has a range of up to 10km -- from what I've read that's the ideal range for a Phalanx.

Posted by Scooter McGruder 2008-03-17 16:26|| 2008-03-17 16:26|| Front Page Top

#11 The basic problem with any CIWS is that it may not work perfectly. At some point, Hamas is going to get "lucky" and hit a bunch of people - like say a school in session. At that point, I think, Israeli rage will overcome any squeamishness the current government has. Hamas's celebration will be short lived. As will be many Palestinians.

Posted by Rambler in California">Rambler in California 2008-03-17 17:16|| 2008-03-17 17:16|| Front Page Top

#12 Just turn off power water and imports.
done.

Posted by 3dc 2008-03-17 21:28|| 2008-03-17 21:28|| Front Page Top

23:57 trailing wife
23:52 3dc
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:39 JosephMendiola
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:19 www
22:57 trailing wife
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:44 trailing wife
22:41 Glenmore
22:38 trailing wife
22:36 JosephMendiola
22:36 KBK
22:33 Barbara Skolaut
22:32 Barbara Skolaut
22:28 Glenmore
22:23 trailing wife
22:23 Glenmore
22:09 JosephMendiola
22:06 DMFD
21:56 Pappy
21:55 DMFD
21:52 Cyber Sarge
21:52 Eliot Spitzer