The Jericho missile - how is it compared to other missiles? - Page 2 - Science and Technology - HWzone Forums
adplus-dvertising
Skip to content
  • Create an account
  • About Us

    Hello Guest!

     
    Please note - in order to participate in our community, comment and open new discussions, you must join as a registered member.

    Our members enjoy many advantages, including the ability to participate in discussions, enjoy raffles and promotions for members of the site, and receive our weekly content directly by email.

    Do not like being harassed by email? You can register for the site but do not submit your registration to the weekly email updates.

The Jericho missile - how is it compared to other missiles?


q1234

Recommended Posts

  • תגובות 97
  • Opens on
  • Last comment

Prominent participants in the discussion

Prominent participants in the discussion

The 2 is quite accurate, but there are better ones (even our enemies).

Popeye 2 is a new Israeli cruise missile that is even better than the American Tomahawk.

The 2 Arrow missile is the best anti-missile missile in the world (unique Israeli development), but it is far from perfect.

The 4 tank is the best tank in the world, but there are compact anti-tank missiles that are activated by infantry that are also effective against the active armor of the 4, and these missiles are also in the hands of terrorist organizations.

Halabi was the best airplane in the world at the time, but the US stopped financing its development because it was better than its planes.

The combat doctrine of the Egyptian army is based entirely on Western combat doctrine, similar to Israel, and they have a larger and stronger army than Israel.

The Syrians have a warhead with a warhead splitting into a dummy head, and the 2 arrow is adapted to detect the real warhead.

The only option is to launch an Arrow missile against each warhead, and in fact a 2- 2 missiles against each enemy missile to increase the chances of hitting the target.

The Iranians also have a number of advanced strategic long-range cruise missiles from which the Arrow missile has no answer.

Q1234, you are planning a war against the US The answer to your question is negative: The Arrow missile is ineffective against the American-made missiles with the splitting warhead.

Currently, the ultimate weapon in the possession of the Iranians is the fact that Olmert is headed by a government , Which would ensure the torpedoing of any Israeli attack against the Iranians.

Link to content
Share on other sites

The combat doctrine of the Egyptian army is based entirely on Western combat doctrine, similar to Israel, and they have a larger and stronger army than Israel.

Are you serious ? You say that if there is now a war with Egypt, will they win? (Let's assume we do not have nuclear weapons.)

According to what I have seen, we have many advantages: 5 Python, Lightning, FxNUMX and much more advanced electronic systems as well as excellent pilot pilots, which I understand are doing much more training than anyone else.

You also forget the advanced submarines we have (dolphins) which are perhaps our most expensive procurement.

An anti-aircraft missile ("Gil") that, according to what I understood, was considered one league above all.

Currently, the ultimate weapon in the possession of the Iranians is the fact that Olmert is headed by a government , Which would ensure the torpedoing of any Israeli attack against the Iranians.

Sad how true that is. : - \

Popeye 2 is a new Israeli cruise missile that is even better than the American Tomahawk.

Popeye is air-to-ground and tomahawk land-to-land for short term?

In your opinion, if the country was very rich, would we see an answer to b2 and f22?

Link to content
Share on other sites

Currently, the ultimate weapon in the possession of the Iranians is the fact that Olmert is headed by a government , Which would ensure the torpedoing of any Israeli attack against the Iranians.

Come on, be serious. Ehud Olmert is well aware of the Iranian threat and its ramifications. The reasons why there will be or will not be an Israeli attack on Iran will be net operational. on this subject Take no risk, this is one of the few issues on which there is almost complete consensus. If You will not be attacked just because you prefer America to do it for us. While Israel can only attack Iran with a limited attack on the United States, it is possible to carry out a massive and massive attack on Iran when it destroys not only its nuclear facilities, but also many other infrastructures, and it will also be able to react with the greatest intensity to an Iranian response to an attack on it Without considering our nuclear option of course).

To say that Ehud Olmert will torpedo any Israeli attack against the Iranians, BORG with all due respect (and there is respect ;)) That's really nonsense.

In connection with the doctrine of warfare in Egypt. According to what I understand, beyond the advantages we have on the Egyptians like our air force, atomic bombs and so on, the doctrine of combat Different from their own in that the IDF during war will try to move the war as quickly as possible deep into enemy territory and try all the time to penetrate as much as possible without interruption in the form of incessant onslaught when Egypt relies on a much more cumbersome and slow combat doctrine and it will take them much more time to invade a certain area .

Link to content
Share on other sites

The difference between Egypt and Israel that some of the Egyptians are Arabs and Arabs never knew how to use the tools in a worthy way (see proof of the existence of After several wars in which the Arabs had a significant numerical and technological advantage)

The world's most expensive missile is Russian-9, which is capable of eliminating half of the US in one fell swoop from the other end of the world. His nickname is "Satan" or something like that ... Aa, and because it's a ballistic missile that goes to Mach 12 about when it enters the atmosphere, it's almost impossible to stop it, not even by the arrow ...

The advantage of a cruise missile is that it dropped a plane below the minimum detection altitude of the radar, which creates a problem in its identification ... when the detonator splits its signal becomes much smaller than the whole missile and it is difficult not to be confused with just a big bird ...

The Russian method of warfare is based on a massive bombardment of artillery and assault. I wish Israel had a few (valid enough 2; D) Stationary artillery as there are to the Russians ... guns range of several tens of kilometers, 250 mm (maybe 240 ... do not remember exactly ...) ...... boom : smile1:

Popeye is a cruise missile? I was sure they were in the Hellfire class ... air-ground "normal" ...

Link to content
Share on other sites

Are you serious ? Are you saying that if there is now a war with Egypt, will they win? (Let's assume we do not have nuclear.)

If the Egyptians open a war against us now and go all the way, they will catch the IDF with their pants down.

Popeye is air-to-ground and tomahawk land-to-land for short term?

Popeye 2 is a cruise missile that can be launched from aircraft, ships, submarines and ground.

By the way, the US bought us popeye missiles for US military use.

In your opinion, if the country was very rich, would we see an answer to b2 and f22?

What do you mean?

Come on, be serious. Ehud Olmert is well aware of the Iranian threat and its ramifications.

Read my signature. : cool2:

If You will not be attacked just because you prefer America to do it for us.

We prefer the United States to do the dirty work for us, and the US is waiting for us to attack. While everyone is waiting for the other to work, the Iranians are building atomic bombs. : s07:

To say that Ehud Olmert will torpedo any Israeli attack against the Iranians, BORG with all due respect (and there is respect ;)) That's really nonsense.

It's not nonsense, it's sad! : '(

In connection with the doctrine of warfare in Egypt. According to what I understand, beyond the advantages we have on the Egyptians like our air force, atomic bombs and so on, the doctrine of combat Different from their own in that the IDF during war will try to move the war as quickly as possible deep into enemy territory and try all the time to penetrate as much as possible without interruption in the form of incessant onslaught when Egypt relies on a much more cumbersome and slow combat doctrine and it will take them much more time to invade a certain area .

That's how it was in the Yom Kippur War. Since then, the situation has changed. : -X

Link to content
Share on other sites

I can not give too much information but there are enough Arrow missiles to send at one time than Iran or virtually any country in the Middle East can send at one time

By the way I can assure you that you can sleep well at night ;)

Link to content
Share on other sites

The difference between Egypt and Israel that some of the Egyptians are Arabs and Arabs never knew how to use the tools in a worthy way (see proof of the existence of After several wars in which the Arabs had a significant numerical and technological advantage)

Ig - Forget the racism and error in what you said (There was a very nice article in the blazer by a historian who says that in the War of Independence very quickly Achieved numerical advantage), your attitude is dumb. Never, but never underestimate your opponent. Again nothing good can come of it.

Proof - US in Iraq.

And if all the respect for Egypt, one bomb in a certain dam, and half of Egypt, I would not worry about that side ...

Link to content
Share on other sites

I do not underestimate them - I know reality: they have numerical advantage, a similar tactic and poor performance - you can invest less resources to win a battle than the resources invested by the enemy, and that turns resources to other battles.

And what exactly is racist about what I wrote in that statement? It's a fact! Until 73 the Arabs had a huge technological advantage over us, and numerical advantage, and somehow somehow we won 4 wars (if I'm not mistaken in calculating ...) until then. Their tanks were burned like matches and the planes fell like flies, even though they were more advanced than staying in Israel. How many Arab pilots were shot down for Israeli pilots? How many tanks were destroyed (and not by closures or other anti-tank missiles ... only by tanks)?

And in the Second Lebanon War, the advantage was achieved because Jordan and Egypt (or I get confused about something else ... I do not have the strength to do an exact search ...) withdrew from the fighting after they conquered a few areas that were enough for them ... More . Stan is not exactly the same as the guns that the Arabs had ... not to mention that the Arabs were an armored corps and Israel did not ...

And all this has nothing to do with Jericho ... So something for the connection: Ahla the Jericho gun ... It's a shame that for some reason the Shin Bet and the other security organizations prefer the Glock ...

Link to content
Share on other sites

A little security, so I will not reveal the location.

I have those under the house and in the area.

A few weeks ago there were at least 40 black army trucks (or armored corps) at night, with a few Ammar and various military vehicles, no , And I still have no idea why they were here.

There are sometimes doubts here.

Link to content
Share on other sites

Define based on scientific evidence? In the meantime, all the evidence about the person claims that he did not develop from a certain species, more precisely any missing "link" found or lived in parallel with Homo sapiens or was not directly related to him in any form.

What is this related to the discussion ??? : kopfpatsch:

Link to content
Share on other sites

I do not underestimate them - I know reality: they have numerical advantage, a similar tactic and poor performance - you can invest less resources to win a battle than the resources invested by the enemy, and that turns resources to other battles.

And what exactly is racist about what I wrote in that statement? It's a fact! Until 73 the Arabs had a huge technological advantage over us, and numerical advantage, and somehow somehow we won 4 wars (if I'm not mistaken in calculating ...) until then. Their tanks were burned like matches and the planes fell like flies, even though they were more advanced than staying in Israel. How many Arab pilots were shot down for Israeli pilots? How many tanks were destroyed (and not by closures or other anti-tank missiles ... only by tanks)?

And in the Second Lebanon War, the advantage was achieved because Jordan and Egypt (or I get confused about something else ... I do not have the strength to do an exact search ...) withdrew from the fighting after they conquered a few areas that were enough for them ... More . Stan is not exactly the same as the guns that the Arabs had ... not to mention that the Arabs were an armored corps and Israel did not ...

And all this has nothing to do with Jericho ... So something for the connection: Ahla the Jericho gun ... It's a shame that for some reason the Shin Bet and the other security organizations prefer the Glock ...

So this is not a numerical advantage and not a technological advantage (only at the beginning of the War of Independence) simply in Israel like to develop this myth.

Again this is according to the Blazer article.

Link to content
Share on other sites

ארכיון

This discussion has been archived and new comments can not be added.


  • Latest news

  • Buzz-Zone: Everything hot on the net

  • Popular now

×
  • Create new ...

At the top of the news:

new on the site