News from Gaza Part 2

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by S.A.M., Nov 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    Cleary you don't understand what I said:
    I think Israel should end the occupation in gaza strip, get out of there and dismantle all jewish settlements

    And btw, I never saw you condemning shooting civilian targets when the targets are Israeli
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    I do believe Olmert is leading up to a renewed occupation of Gaza, based on the nonsense he is spouting.

    Palestinians did not go to Israel, Israel came to the Palestinians, if you choose to participate in an occupation, you know the risks that come with it.

    Why put yourself in that position?

    Should the Germans complain if the Jews fight back?
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    I do not know the details of the frequency filters that avoid ground clutter. They must be dynamic and complex as CIWS is tracking its own bullets as they fly out (lower than source return frequency) as well as the target.

    When the target is at elevated angle there is no significant ground clutter to worry about. In my last reply about crossing targets, I should have mentioned that for practice the target is normally crossing target. I.e. the target is attached to a long cable trailing from a towing plane. This would be very similar to a Gaza rocket target in that the return frequency would be nearly the same for both as the distance between CIWS is changing slowly and at some point probably, in both cases, is the same as the sent frequency.

    The accuracy of a system, like CIWS which tracks both the target and its bullets stream to converge the two is amazing. It is not rare for the CIWS to chew up the end to the tow cable after it has so shredded the target that the RCS of the cable is bigger. Once in practice a CIWS shot down the tow plane also as the pilots were not out of range in time. They got out un-injured. I assume that CIWS was still chewing off the plane's tail when they ejected.

    Buffalo's concern* about many simultaneous rockets is a problem for CIWS. In an earlier post about a week or so ago I did a crude analysis which concluded that one CIWS could take care of 10 slow Gaza rocket targets even if they were simultaneously launched, but then CIWS could not wait until the first to be killed was almost stationary at peak altitude. It had to start on the first when 5000 meters away (actually a little more as the analysis assumed the flout to intercept took five seconds and the one second "burst" (with 30 times slower fire rate than Naval use) of 100 bullets had about 10 meters separation between each bullet. The next kill had only a 4.5 second flout to intercept and the last few were close enough that only 2 seconds were used on each. I assumed that three of the target were not killed with the first one second burst, and were re-engaged later. (I.e. CIWS shoot for a total of 13 seconds 1300 bullets to kill 10 simultaneously launched Gaza rockets. Two CIWS working together (fire coordinated) could take care of 20 simultaneous rockets, WHICH BY CHANCE WERE HEADED FOR THE DEFENDED AREA. (CIWS knows their trajectory, where they will fall, and soft ware "lockout zones" could just let most falls harmlessly in the desert outside of the defended area. - thus with the huge dispersion of these crude, unguided rockets, two CIWS should be able to defend against about 50 simultaneously launched Gaza pockets.)* They are such an easy target for a system that kills (usually) a Mach2+ sea skimmer flying in only 10 feet above the wave tops where ground return must be filtered out. There is no ground return from an elevated target, like the Gaza rocket.
    ------------------
    *Post 455, however, I think that the next technical advance to expect in “improved Gaza rockets” is some guidance. GPS systems are cheap. Many “dumb” bombs have been made into “smart bombs” with the addition of a small nose attachment which has tiny fins. The Gaza rockets fall much more slowly than a dense bomb so the fins would need to be a little larger. They could cheaply more double the effectiveness of the current Gaza rockets with a little guidance added. The Chinese had “Gaza rocket” technology more than 2500 years ago. These terrorists are very primitive, but a Buffalo notes, some of their friends are not.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2009
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
  8. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    You still refuse to condemn targeting civilians deliberately (when these civilians are Israelis) and you say that the Israelis act like the nazis. Don't you see how absurd it is when you say this?
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  9. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    But you still know that under any possible scenario, even those that they were not designed for, they will give a 99.99% Pd.
    As I said earlier, You showed my ignorance. And as sam has suggested, please, give your help to the palestinians, the life in Israel will be safer
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    I feel sorry for them, the way I would for anyone whose kid was shot while he was moving into someone else's home with them. But I'd question the judgement of the invader over the judgement of the owner. After all, don't Jews celebrate the use of terror to get rid of invading infidels? Its called Hanukah, I believe.
     
  11. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    I take it that you mean that Jews believe that they do not have to conform to rules of behaviour that apply to other people who did not suffer the Holocaust.
    This might apply to some Jews, but treating every person of the Jewish faith as if they all thought exactly the same is as daft as thinking that all Christians think the same, or all Muslims.

    Granted, we don't seem to have Jews posting here who aren't rabid Zionists, but there are a lot of Jews opposed to this slaughter.
    I say Jews posting here, but of course some of the most radical Zionists are fundamentalist Christians, so we may not be getting a real Jewish viewpoint at all.

    Israel has just announced a unilateral cease fire by the way.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  12. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    You still refuse to condemn targeting civilians deliberately (when these civilians are Israelis)
     
  13. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Yeah, like the one in the OP. Self hating Jews, they are called.



    Of course they did. This keeps them from making concessions to the Palestinians, like lifting the crippling seige, which was the reason they were lobbing rockets. So first they were starving and lobbing rockets, now they may starve quietly, or else. Win win.

    You cannot target someone deliberately with a weapon that cannot be directed. Israel claims not to do so even with weapons that shoot on a dime.
     
  14. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    No, That's not true.
    If you fired a gun in a crowd, even if you did not aim it at anyone you would be charged with murder if someone was killed.
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    But if you aim a missile at a house to kill one man and also kill his four wives and eleven children, thats not deliberate?

    I's say with 6000 rockets and 4 deaths in 2008 they are less dangerous than the average highway.
     
  16. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    So you say that they should not cease fire?

    Well, their kassams never felt in gaza because thet are deliberately targeting
    the Israelis towns where there are civilians.
    And you still refuse to condemn them for deliberately targeting civilians.
    But I think that you are right those who are deliberately targeting civilians worth no more than the nazis and those that support targeting deliberately of civilians are as guilty as them.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Actually I believe the rockets killed 4 Gazans and 4 Israelis in 2008. I believe the Israelis killed at least 8? of their own troops in this war, in friendly fire incidents. You see how silly this is?

    If they had lifted the blockade before this massacre, Hamas would have extended the ceasefire.

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1228728273026

    So they are clearly not interested in lifting it
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  18. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    I am waiting for an answer:Yes or No, are you condemning the deliberately targeting of civilians?
     
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Sure, if and when they are deliberately targeted.
     
  20. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    They could have waited for Obama to take Office.
    But the negotiations would have taken months,and made them look weak.

    They haven't got months.
    This is all about the upcoming election.
     
  21. 1100f Banned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    807
    hamas is deliberately targeting civilians, do you condemn hamas for this?
     
  22. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    To SAM:
    Not intended as "advice" but the footnote to post 770 does tell one obvious way the Gaza terrorists could (with a little help from Iran etc) at least double the effectiveness of the Gaza rockets. (A small nose mounted guidance package, like used to convert “dumb” bombs into “smart” bombs.)

    To Buffalo:
    The HE*, tungsten (or depleted uranium) bullets are mainly needed against targets with warheads inside steel packages. I do not know but think that is not the case with the current Gaza rockets. Thus, in post a week or so ago, I suggested the possibility of just using steel bullets to cut the cost of the less than 100 bullets (on average) needed to kill a current version of the Gaza rockets.

    On your question: What about the excess projectiles that do not hit the incoming target?

    The sitting of the CIWS would be near the defended area but on the Gaza side. I do not know, but expect that even if one holds fire until the rocket is at peak altitude that most of the bullets would make it to near the border with Gaza.** If not too many incoming, one could wait for rocket to go ballistic (fuel exhausted) before shooting but do so when it does. Then almost all the bullets would fall on the general sector from which they were launched. A few might injure some innocent Palestinians, but as they are just falling with terminal velocity, I think it would be a very rare bullet that killed one. Even if it did, this is clearly "collateral damage" associated with self defense, not like bombing a UN or NGO food storage warehouse.
    One also must appreciate that this is not a "wall of lead" rappidly thrown up for a radial inbound cruise missile to fly into. The fire rate, in a brief burst is reduced by at least a factor of 30 from naval use so less than 100 bullets are used per target killed. Hell, in one of their stupid demonstrations the Hamas forces fire more than that skyward in a crowded street! The density of humans outside of the defended area near the Gaza border is very very low compared to the crowds in the street when Hamas idiots are firing skyward.

    Personally I do not like to be in crowd watching the 4th of July fireworks. There is always some idiot with his little supply of private fireworks, and occasionally someone does get hurt. Thus, I can share your concern with where the bullets fall, but I think at least 1000 rockets would be shot down prior to one bullet even falling on a goat.
    ----------
    *If CIWS fires HE bullets, that is news to me. - Seems almost impossible in that size bullet, with the CIWS initial acceleration, but then I thought a nuclear artillery shells were impossible too.

    ** Recall that my defensive plan has minefield strip along that entire border (about 50 meters wide, as I recall my own plan) and the fence posts have listen devices to detect tunneling under it.) Some of these mines could be set off by falling bullets or the microphone amplifiers / data transmitters damaged.

    On the Israeli side of the mine field there is the “killer dog strip.” - Defense in depth again, against the “LL” (“Lucky Leakers”) that made it thru the mine field alive. I would not be surprised if the repair / replacement cost exceeded the cost of the bullets fired even though it would be rare that a falling bullet set off a mine, hit a mike’s solar powered amplifier or killed a dog. (The mike itself is deep in the ground below the fence post. If it is worth the cost of doing so, these amplifiers could be steel shielded from falling bullets.)

    Initially, years ago, I had suggested that the mine field be occasionally patrolled to look for foot prints and check*** the acoustic monitors etc in a strip near the Gaza side fence about two meters wide, which was free of mines. Perhaps the armed drones could send video data back each day? – Everything in the end comes down to what is the most cost effective way to protect almost ALL Israelis – not let some be killed by the terrorist annually, unless the government policy needs some justification for the current High Kill Ratio retaliation, instead of true defense of Israel.
    *** I had suggested compressed air jack hammers hit the ground at each fence post or between them monthly.

    Israel has the resources and technical capacity to protect its citizens, if it chooses to do so, instead of retaliate for their deaths.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2009
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    No, this is maybe about not being able to sustain the blockade after Obama comes in. And ensuring that the Gaza economy and psyche is damaged before the opportunity is missed.

    The Palestinians were, God forbid, getting nearly independent on the tunnel economy

    Now successfully reversed:

    Gaza economy grinds to a standstill

    If they actually become self sustaining, they might start asking questions, like about the offshore Gaza gas that Israel is planning to steal

    War and Natural Gas: The Israeli Invasion and Gaza's Offshore Gas Fields

    Doubt they'll have too much time now to devote to that.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page