Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ Technology Sold to Singapore

Haaretz has recently reported that Israeli companies have sold Singapore missile defense shield technology, the ‘Iron Dome’. Haaretz reported that ‘Intelligence Online’ reported that Rafael Advanced Defense Systems had received financing for development of the Iron Dome technology in return for receiving several Iron Dome systems to deploy in Singapore. It reportedly cost $250 million to develop.

Israel and Singapore have long standing military links after Singapore asked Israel for help in developing its army after the IDF model, which was done, in the 1960’s.

As a result, Singapore has made many purchases of military equipment and technology from Israeli companies, including Hermes 450 drones from Elbit Systems, Barak surface to air missiles from IAI, naval drones from Rafael, fighter jet upgrading by an unnamed company.

Haaretz announced in January, 2010, that Iron Dome had been successfully tested and that one system was deployed. The article speculated about when additional systems would be purchased and estimated that 20 systems would required at a cost of $50 million each, or $1 billion.

There was speculation however that the Iron Dome project was developed entirely for Singapore, rather than as an offshoot of an Israeli defense project. Apparently much cheaper missile defense technology is available from an American company, the Vulcan Phalanx/Centurion cannon system supplied by Raytheon.

Was this is an issue because Israeli government financial resources were used in the development of the product, which was ultimately unneeded by the IDF? Only one system has been purchased, and there is no budget for buying more.

Or it may just be an illustration of how the IDF, government,  and the Israeli arms companies work together, often in secrecy, to maximise Israeli arms sales.


, , , , , , , , ,

  1. #1 by Daniel on June 5, 2010 - 21:48

    I read the article from Haaretz where he recommended using either the Centurion or the Skyguard and already posted a reply there, but I’d reitterate it here, the Centurion and Nautalis/Skyguard are not very viable units as anti-missile defence, the Centurion only has a 4km “effective range” as opposed to the rumoured 20km of the Iron Dome. This means that more units must be deployed to cover the same area as well as the inability to intercept rounds going “over” to hit other areas behind the system. As for the Natilus, a laser sounds nice and all, but it is still experimental technology, much more experimental than a missile whose concept is simple action/reaction with a big wad of explosives in front. So all in all, not suprised that the other two were not selected.

    Though to be really honest, Í suspect the original poster was more anti-government than anti-Iron Dome, the missile was just an excues to score points against them, hence the weak arguments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: