“Patriots do work. You don’t have credibility if you don’t see how you got this wrong.”
__________________________
TRT World
NEWS MAGAZINE
The Patriot Missile is a myth
ADAM BENSAID 7 FEB 2019
The American public and the rest of the world have been sold the myth that the Patriot missile system is effective, and top of it’s tier. Here’s where this was proven wrong.
“The US army has announced its intent to procure a limited number of Iron Dome weapon systems,” said Colonel Patrick Seiber, spokesman for Army Futures Command, on February 6, 2019.
The choice to acquire the Israeli missile defence system marks a significant shift from US reliance and the global emphasis on the effectiveness of the Patriot Missile System of the same class.
Research and development of Israel’s Iron Dome missile defence system were partly funded by a $429 million US investment.
Missile defence remains a contentious issue in the 21st Century. While global powers develop state-of-the-art missile systems to counter stealth aircraft on battlefields shaped by raging electronic and cyber warfare, their track records for shooting down missiles leaves much to be desired.
For the United States, this is especially problematic given that the Patriot missile system is at the forefront of NATO defense strategy. More critically, the US announced punitive sanctions on Turkey for opting to procure the S-400 missile defence system over the Patriot missile system after being repeatedly denied procurement rights. The US changed its stance on not selling the Patriot missile system to Turkey, after it had already inked a $2.5 billion agreement with Russia for two S-400 batteries in April 2017.
Israel’s Iron Dome has allegedly shot down more than 1,200 projectiles since going operational in 2011, catching the attention of some countries including Saudi Arabia, and more recently the United States.
The system is unique in that not only does it feature a reliable rate of interception, but it can tell if the incoming projectile is going to miss a target, saving a $100,000 interceptor from being fired altogether.
But given that the United States is already the owner of cutting-edge missile defence systems for its forces - also widely used by most of its NATO allies - the decision to acquire the Iron Dome System to “fill a short-term need” is questionable.
Why the Patriot Missile doesn’t work
The US 2019 Missile Defense Review cited the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missile defence system’s “proven combat record”.
US officials inflated its success during Operation Desert Storm significantly, however, surrounding the missile system with a mythical reputation for effectiveness.
During the 1991 Gulf War, the American public was informed that the Patriot missile had a near-perfect record, intercepting a total of 45 out of 47 Scud missiles.
This estimate was later revised down by the US army to about 50 percent. Even then, it noted “higher” confidence in only about 25 percent of the cases.
A Congressional Research Service employee commented that if the US army had consistently and accurately applied its assessment method, the number would be far lower. Reportedly, this number was one Scud missile shot down.
Following a House Committee on Government Operations investigation, not enough evidence was found to conclude that there had been any interceptions at all.
There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War,” the investigations concluded.
“There are some doubts about even these engagements,” it added.
The report, which called for declassifying more information on the Patriot missile and an independent evaluation of the missile defence programme, was crushed under a lobbying campaign by the US army and Raytheon, leaving only a summary publically available.
Seeking options
More recently, however, Saudi Arabia put its Patriot defences to the test and found them severely lacking, with outright failures.
In repeated missile strikes from Houthi rebels using unsophisticated ballistic missiles, the Patriot missile failed, at times spectacularly.
Despite Saudi Arabia claiming a high success rate for the missile system, it discussed obtaining advanced S-400 missile defences from Russia following the Patriot failures.
A diplomatic source also claimed in mid-September that Saudi Arabia had purchased the Israeli Iron Dome defence system to defend itself against Houthi rebel missile attacks.
Saudi Arabia isn’t alone in pursuing better options for the sake of national security. NATO allies such as Turkey also entered into discussions to bolster their missile defences by acquiring the Russian missile system, causing significant friction with the US, triggering a trade war and leading to threats that F-35 stealth fighter deliveries to Turkey would be cut off altogether.
Incoming, Incoming
During late March 2018, Yemeni Houthi rebels launched seven ballistic missiles towards Saudi Arabia, which were intercepted, according to the Saudi Press Agency.
The National, an English-language news outlet from the United Arab Emirates, reported that “one person died and two others were injured” by shrapnel over Riyadh.
But Jeffrey Lewis, the director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, said on Twitter that in video footage of the missiles, it appeared that one defence system had ‘failed catastrophically’, while another ‘pulled a U-turn’ and exploded in Riyadh.”
This was not reported by Saudi news agencies, which continued to claim that all incoming missiles were shot down.
Lewis believes that it was “entirely possible” that it was the defence system failure, instead of the incoming missiles themselves, that caused casualties or injuries.
This raises critical questions not just about Saudi Arabia’s use of the missiles, but of the United States, which sold Saudi Arabia — and its elected public — a false representation of the missile defence system.
A closer look
More recently, experts at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies closely studied two different missile attacks on Saudi Arabia from both November and December 2017.
In both cases, they found it highly unlikely that the missiles were intercepted, despite official statements.
In their study, they examined where resulting debris, including the missile airframe and warhead, fell and where the interceptors were located.
In the two cases, a clear pattern was visible. The Patriot missile itself falls in Riyadh, while the incoming missile separates, passes defences and lands near its target.
One such missile warhead landed within a few hundred metres of a terminal at Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport. The second warhead, fired weeks later, nearly destroyed a car dealership.
In both cases, the report concluded that in spite of official Saudi claims, neither missile was shot down and that Saudi Arabia may not have even tried to shoot down the first missile in November.
With little evidence that Saudi Arabia shot down any missiles fired by the Houthi rebels during the Yemen conflict, and the United States’ own failed experience with Patriot missiles during the first Gulf war, a more serious question is posed: who is to say that the Patriot system even works?
While the US army’s statement announcing the acquisition of the Israeli Iron Dome missile defence system clarified that it would be a short-term solution while the US reviews its options, by purchasing an Israeli system and overlooking a US system with a questionable past, the US may be admitting to the failings of its own missile defence.
Source: TRT World
adam.bensaid
AUTHOR
Adam Bensaid @AdamABensaid
Adam Bensaid is a Senior Producer at TRT World.
Patriot Missiles are set up to defend certain areas and/or specific defense sites. The missiles are not [usually] set up to shoot down all incoming missiles. Thus, some incoming missiles are not targets.
Early Patriot Missile Systems could suffer some programming errors. One error was specific, because of an old processing unit; and tracking of inbound missiles might eventually error:
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~smp/COMP205/LECTURES/ERROR/lec23/node4.html
Yet, the greater error (back then - 1990’s) was, that Patriot Systems rely upon “combined arms” information flows - meaning coordination of various weapons systems that are supposed to be keeping each other updated with the latest threat info.
Without such coordination of info, some mix of automatic-plus-human decision making, could result in a miss.
AFAIK
Meanwhile, a Patriot Missile System on the ground in Ukraine, is likely to need a lot of protection. Putin may “naturally” require destruction of the system site, using whatever Putin demands for that destruction.
On the merits, the Turkish argument offered against the Patriot is grossly ignorant in that Israel's Iron Dome is not equivalent to the Patriot. Iron Dome is a terminal defense system against small rockets, principally launched from Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria. Against longer range missiles, Israel has several other systems and is looking to deploy a new model based on the Patriot.
As for the record of Patriot systems defending the Saudis, antimissile defense protocols are to the effect that not all incoming missiles are worth shooting down, only those projected to hit where they would do harm. This spares interceptors when attacking missiles are so badly aimed as to not present a threat. Knowing the true score, the Saudis and other Arab states continue to seek more Patriot systems.
Most of all, logically, if Patriot is so bad, then why is Putin so upset about it being sent to Ukraine? In truth, Patriot missiles and radars stationed in Ukraine would help not just Ukraine but would also help block Russian missiles and bombers from menacing NATO's eastern flank. Take that, Vlad, you idiot loser.