US clears sale of latest Patriot missile system to India

Wasnt there another missile which fell into Sea, near Oil Refineries in Southern Kuwait….? I was there in Kuwait..saw tens of Fire Brigades rushing towards refineries…there were shockwaves..I felt them..everyone in the region did..oh and I’m still in Kuwait.

The cruise missle attack from Al Faw was a suprise , No one expected it to come and no one was prepared for it ( it was a desperate measure though by the Iraqi ) , Secondly the PAC-3 is highly optimised for BM interception , Also has a unique Hit-To-Kill warhead for the same purpose .

The PAC-3 has a good record in Operation Iraqi Freedom , with IIRC more than 30 odd SRBM interception to its credit , And Its the only ATBM tested in real war in complex environment.

No one should doubts the effeciency( few faults withstanding ) of the system , The IAF only apprehension is if it can be bought in sufficient numbers ,affordability is the issue The IAF does not want to go for piece meal approach , But wants to but system in sufficient numbers , The A-2500 turns out to be cheaper plus the Russian have offered TOT and Licenced production for the same.

Ideally the IAF would have preffered Arrow and PAC-3 system , But perhaps getting few PAC-3 is the first step in getting approval for the Arrows.

Official source said that the Seersucker missiles were launched from Al Faw peninsula, this should settle the argument about where it came from. Seersuckers are big, but they aren’t impossible to hide.

To intercept cruise missiles, you basically need a good long range radar and 360 degree coverage weapon, the later is especially important for forward deployed assets. PAC-3 only claims to have a “limited” capability against CM in the first place, and unlike MEADS, PAC-3 coverage isn’t 360 degrees.

I could also talk about Exocet or other antiship missile’s hit records, that doesn’t mean cruise missile defense is impossible. So why should we treat Sea Dart’s interception as a prove-it-all? Ship defense is just like the name, you only need to defend the ship itself. Past success of antiship missile interception doesn’t mean the land defense is the same or easy.

Now your just argueing for the sake of argueing… well your choice your right, why dont you get your head of state to start a fight with the inept US

And all of you keep arguing because you just can’t admit that the Patriot doesn’t live up to the hype and that comes at the expense of making US soldiers look inept! Why don’t you support the troops and go to Iraq since you’ve insulted them!

Erm no, they even mentioned that the missile was a anti ship missile and it was fired by some one close by to avoid the patriot missile system.. look at the information on the missile above.. this news was on 3 seperate channels all saying similar thing that the only way the Iraqis could go through the defence was by using low flying missiles fired from close proximity!

yeah it was still fired from couple dozen miles and as i said before its cruising altitude is around 300 or so meters. When did 300 meters become classified as low flying? sea dart had no problem shooting it down during gulf war I and israeli gunboats shot couple down with their main guns back during the 72 war.

Where did the Iraqis fire it from? The closest point from Iraq to Kuwait City was through the Persian Gulf over the water at least 50 miles. What, the navy or AWACS didn’t see the the boat big enough to launch the Seersucker from? Or did they roll a launcher and a big missile on top of it across the border the long way, past through US forces, up to Kuwait City and fired it without being seen or captured.

All your excuses make the US military sound more and more inept.

Now your just argueing for the sake of argueing… well your choice your right, why dont you get your head of state to start a fight with the inept US

Ballistic missile defense and cruise missile defense have common aspects, but ultimately they are different problems.

Seersucker experience shows that it is difficult to detect a cruise missile with forward deployed assets, even when the CM is not very sophisticated. However, this doesn’t mean PAC-3 is useless against Ballistic missiles, especially the short range ones. It’s not useful to cite a general cruise missile detection problem as a specific flaw of PAC-3.

Finally, Seersucker is an antiship missile modified and used in land attack role, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is launched from ships.

Erm no, they even mentioned that the missile was a anti ship missile and it was fired by some one close by to avoid the patriot missile system.. look at the information on the missile above.. this news was on 3 seperate channels all saying similar thing that the only way the Iraqis could go through the defence was by using low flying missiles fired from close proximity!

Where did the Iraqis fire it from? The closest point from Iraq to Kuwait City was through the Persian Gulf over the water at least 50 miles. What, the navy or AWACS didn’t see the the boat big enough to launch the Seersucker from? Or did they roll a launcher and a big missile on top of it across the border the long way, past through US forces, up to Kuwait City and fired it without being seen or captured.

All your excuses make the US military sound more and more inept.

matt, seersucker/silkworm cruising altitude is around >500 meters only in terminal phase does it fly low around 20 meters (only the improved variant which i doubt iraq). Besides I bet the iraqis made it have high cruising altitude and disabled its terminal phase to enhance its range/payload.

Erm no, they even mentioned that the missile was a anti ship missile and it was fired by some one close by to avoid the patriot missile system.. look at the information on the missile above.. this news was on 3 seperate channels all saying similar thing that the only way the Iraqis could go through the defence was by using low flying missiles fired from close proximity!

pac III is just waste of money for india.
but i affraid us is try to trade of with india for the seat of UN.
india to go for advance russian missile.
fund some of them for joint development.

love that! You’re looking for excuses that only mean the Patriot has major flaws.

Who am I to look for excuses..or Do i look like a darn salesman to U..

Your argument wasn’t supported.

And yurs was :rolleyes:

U didnt proviede an iota of evidence..it was only till Jons did that u started jumping up and down 😀

That quote said it wasn’t,

Yes it did..but thats all it said.

Seersucker snuck past the Patriot, AWACs and the US Navy without being seen.

As per my READING abilities this was what was said…

The missile was probably not picked up by U.S. sensors because of its low flight path,

where does it even mention the scope of the sensors or what all was in that area…

see thats what i like…evidence in support of some claim..good job jons

I love that! You’re looking for excuses that only mean the Patriot has major flaws.

Your argument wasn’t supported. You said someone had to have tracked it. That quote said it wasn’t, meaning the Seersucker snuck past the Patriot, AWACs and the US Navy without being seen.

see thats what i like…evidence in support of some claim..good job jons

The Iraqi missile that struck near the Marines’ Camp Commando was identified as a CSSC-3 Seersucker cruise missile, which flies a few hundred feet above the ground and has a range of about 60 miles. The missile was probably not picked up by U.S. sensors because of its low flight path, military officials said.

link

The fact is a Seersucker got past American defenses without any alarms being sounded, meaning no one saw it, and it hit Kuwat without a shot being fired to knock it down.

again that is a claim without any evidence to proove it actually happened..Get me a link or a news clip which said that the US was unable to detect the seersucker..

There are many bugs with the system but no one is actually admitting to the problems of patriot system…
The system looks good on paper but too many perks whwn it actually operates.
BTW the seersucker isn’t a modern piece of equipement in the first place and seeing hown the system is ineffective against a dated weapon makes you wonder about its effectiveness against any newer weapons out there …

Can’t see low-flying missiles… Can’t see high-flying missiles… So many holes in American defenses. One has to wonder why anyone would want to buy the Patriot.

matt, seersucker/silkworm cruising altitude is around >500 meters only in terminal phase does it fly low around 20 meters (only the improved variant which i doubt iraq). Besides I bet the iraqis made it have high cruising altitude and disabled its terminal phase to enhance its range/payload.

Fact beats speculation any day. The fact is a Seersucker got past American defenses without any alarms being sounded, meaning no one saw it, and it hit Kuwat without a shot being fired to knock it down.

OFcourse no one saw it, seersucker is a low level ocean skimming missile!

and how exactly was that.

and so it should be if there is a good enough reason..when they tested it and there were so many glitches with it (tlkn bout the pac-3 not other pac-2 missiles) they raised so much he l l over it didnt they???? why didnt they try to hide it then…every GAO report highlited (advertised ) it..!! senate hearing pretaining to that included it..u could watch c-span and see it for yurself if u had the stamina to tolerate boring TV…

quite embarrising if u know exactly what happened which i beleive u are gonna enlighten us by telling.!

the pentagon or the DOD aint but the GAO sure would…heck they even do that with systems that work just fine..like the f-15 and f/a-22 etc etc

Fact beats speculation any day. The fact is a Seersucker got past American defenses without any alarms being sounded, meaning no one saw it, and it hit Kuwat without a shot being fired to knock it down.

Embarrassing is having child like answers and a infantile reaction of denial when the facts of the truth are in front of you. The Seersucker didn’t get shot down. That’s called a failure anywhere. Why don’t you just say all the US soldiers operating the Patriot batteries were asleep. That has more credibility than your childish excuses.