Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Missile defense is NP-complete

smu160.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 446 posts

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#331

Post by breppp »

anonymous_user9 wrote: post #230
breppp wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's certainly what Iranian propaganda is saying, as if everybody is censoring their great successes. Fact is there is no meaningful reduction in Israeli attacks, while Iranian launching ability had greatly suffered. So these air bases are probably not being hit. Apart from it in the era of OSINT satellite imagery, it is no issue to publicize such damage, I don't know of any such imagery Regarding the gulf, there t…

> Apart from it in the era of OSINT satellite imagery, it is no issue to publicize such damage, I don't know of any such imagery Not sure about other providers, but Planet Labs has applied a 14-day delay to satellite images of the middle east. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/satellite...

There are chinese and russian satellite imagery, but we can also wait two weeks for western sources

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#332

Post by breppp »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #271
breppp wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we are arguing the same thing. I am arguing that even without any air defense, Iran would have difficulty hitting its targets in Israel with ballistic missiles due to low accuracy. When adding interception rates they have a real problem in attacking strategic facilities, air bases is a good example, which would be much more important than desalination plants. You can then see that they shifted to comple…

Shahed drones have a maximum range of 25000 km [bbc_1]. The distance from e.g. Isfahan to Tel-Aviv is ~1592 km [google]. Shaheds can reach Israrel from Iran. As to them all being intercepted, in the 12-day war that seemed to be the plan, i.e. force Israel to waste interceptors on cheap drones [bbc_2]. That seems to have changed in the current conflict. _______________ [bbc_1] With a maximum range of 2,500km it could…

> As to them all being intercepted, in the 12-day war that seemed to be the plan

That's doubtful, these are different interceptors than the ballistic missile interceptors (AA missiles). That doesn't make sense as a strategy if they cannot hit any targets

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#333

Post by GeorgeWBasic »

jsw97 wrote: post #8

The author explains that this problem is actually adversarial, in the sense that the attacker gets to observe defenses and allocate warheads and decoys accordingly. Thinking of our current circumstances, this suggests another cost of war: our offensive capabilities, as well as our defensive capabilities become more observable. Our adversaries are studying our strengths and weaknesses in Iran, and they will have a muc…

"Our adversaries" are in the US government, or is this not crystal clear by now?

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#334

Post by kochikame »

rendang wrote: post #290
elzbardico wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every country that has a opposition diaspora says the same stuff you're saying here. For what is worth, you could be from a family of Savak secret police members. And frankly that's not how it looks to me.

Every country's diaspora claims their country is ruled by Shia Muslims?

No, he or she is saying that even Americans who have moved overseas could be heard to complain about the "fascist" authoritarians in power in the US now. They would sound functionally identical to an Iranian emigrant talking about Iran; only the details would differ

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#335

Post by WalterBright »

jounker wrote: post #330
WalterBright wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During WW2, the British used Spitfires to shoot down V1s. The V1s, pushed by a simple pulse jet, I presume are much faster than the drones. So some WW2 aircraft could be re-armed and used to shoot them down cheaply. The British also employed a belt of radar-guided flak guns to shoot them down. I don't hear any comparisons with the V1s, so my idea must be stupid, but I'm not seeing the flaw in it.

A v1 was 30 feet long with a 20 foot wing span, and had no evasive capabilities.

Do the drones being launched by Iran have evasive capabilities?

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#336

Post by afdbcreid »

dlisboa wrote: post #55
myrmidon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absolutely true, but there is a strong counterpoint: You also learn the limits of your own systems and how to operate them most effectively yourself (and better than adversaries can, too). Just to pick a recent example: Russian air defense in the early stages of the Ukraine war was dismal (more specifically: defense against big, slow drones like Bayraktar), despite having sufficient AA capability "on paper"--…

There is an assumption here that the value in improving defenses is the same as improving offensive weapons. That is not the case in the assymetry that drones provide and Russia is the first example. Russia has not been able to improve AA capabilities to the point where it's "safe", for any definition of the word, neither has Israel. Israel and Gulf states often tout over 90% interception rate yet it's really at the…

There are two reasons this logic is incorrect.

1. It's not Iran's mercy, but deterrence. If Iran was to target critical infrastructure constantly, Israel and the U.S. would bomb its much more easily. Both sides currently avoid doing that for the same reason.

2. Targeting the same places again and again will mean they cannot target other places, like cities, where even a miss has greater impact. So the economy of munitions make them prefer to not do that.

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#337

Post by blitzar »

lumost wrote: post #226
dlisboa wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an assumption here that the value in improving defenses is the same as improving offensive weapons. That is not the case in the assymetry that drones provide and Russia is the first example. Russia has not been able to improve AA capabilities to the point where it's "safe", for any definition of the word, neither has Israel. Israel and Gulf states often tout over 90% interception rate yet it's really at the…

I don't see how drones don't make all conflicts into WW1. 100 Billion dollars buys about 3.3 million Shaheds assuming the manufacturing is not made more efficient. There are many questions on whether its possible to spend 100 billion dollars on Shaheds, or launch all of them. But this is more than enough to destroy any logistics and transportation infrastructure necessary for a ground invasion. There are many many co…

> stored military equipment that has a long shelf life

Given the pace of advance and changes in strategy, high production capacity is probably more beneficial than inventory.

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#338

Post by littlestymaar »

energy123 wrote: post #63
owenmarshall wrote: post #16

Two more sobering axes to introduce: cost and manufacturing capability. Numbers are hard to find for obvious security reasons, but using the numbers most optimistic to the defender[0] suggests an adversary using a Fatah type hypersonic is spending 1/3rd the cost of an Arrow interceptor, and is launching missiles that are produced at a much faster rate. Interception is deeply asymmetric in favor of the attacker. [0] h…

The best missile defense is offsense: degrading the launchers, stockpiles and defense industrial base, with cheap stand-in munitions after SEAD, leveraging air and intelligence superiority. Expensive interceptors are only a stop-gap that buys you time for the offensive degradation. Expensive stand-off munitions, likewise, are a short-term stopgap until SEAD is complete.

And that's why nuclear deterrence is so key: the enemy can never be sure to destroy everything before being hit once.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine really reminded everyone that nuclear deterrence is a nice thing to have for you security, and I suspect the Israelo-American attack on Iran is going to be the nail in the coffin of nonproliferation.

I expect countries like Brazil, Japan, South Korea or even Taiwan or Vietnam to have the bomb within ten years at this point.

And given the current war and the dramatic consequences ahead, I now think that the world would have in fact been safer had the Mullah's regime actually got the bomb instead of playing the “under the threshold deterrence” game.

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#339

Post by seer »

yosefk wrote: post #311
dlisboa wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an assumption here that the value in improving defenses is the same as improving offensive weapons. That is not the case in the assymetry that drones provide and Russia is the first example. Russia has not been able to improve AA capabilities to the point where it's "safe", for any definition of the word, neither has Israel. Israel and Gulf states often tout over 90% interception rate yet it's really at the…

What produces this Iranian "mercy" at a time when Iran is extensively bombed, if not a combination of defensive and offensive capabilities providing escalation dominance?

MAD

If they strike desalination plants, Israel/us can do the same … really mass casualty event could follow.

And they might, at some point the Iranian gov might feel desperate enough to be like “fuck it, we have nothing to lose” … Dubai could end up with a lot more graves.

Almost all of their water comes from these plants, and humans can’t survive without water for more than 3 days …

There are reserves/stores sure, but how long will they last, and which part of the population do they cover? In a week you could have thousands of civilians dead on both sides.

So MAD keeps things in check.

I think this is whaly Iran has invested so much into rockets - they are very ineffective at providing decisive military victory by themselves, but without them, Iran will be at Israel’s mercy, and they have proven to not possess that in great amounts lately

Re: Missile defense is NP-complete

#340

Post by konart »

hedora wrote: post #167
energy123 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's heavily dependent on geography. Iran is geographically "lucky" it's positioned near the Strait of Hormuz and near the oil facilities of multiple Gulf states, allowing it to exert extreme asymmetric pressure through a small amount of drones etc. Most states can't replicate that luck. Good luck to South Africa if they ever decide to wage a similar war. Strategic depth also largely nullifies the role of one-way att…

Russia is already shipping containers full of Iranian drones to the Ukrainian front. It doesn't take much imagination to see how geographic location is going to matter less and less as technology improves.

Russia haven't used iranian produces drone n two years now.
Post reply on HN