{"id":36388,"date":"2020-11-09T01:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-11-09T01:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2020\/11\/09\/israels-missile-defense-chief-on-weapons-collaboration-with-the-us\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T22:55:02","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T22:55:02","slug":"israels-missile-defense-chief-on-weapons-collaboration-with-the-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/interviews\/2020\/11\/09\/israels-missile-defense-chief-on-weapons-collaboration-with-the-us\/","title":{"rendered":"Israel\u2019s missile defense chief on weapons collaboration with the US"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Correction: The original version of this interview quoted Patel as saying the Iron Dome test was conducted \u201cwithout any Israelis really coming to the states.\u201d He actually said \u201cwithout any radars really coming to the states.\u201d The story below has been amended. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

WASHINGTON \u2014 The United States officially took possession of its first Iron Dome missile defense battery in September, a milestone in the relationship between the U.S. Missile Defense Agency and Israel\u2019s Missile Defense Organization. It\u2019s just one example of cooperation between the two organizations, which co-developed the Arrow and David\u2019s Sling<\/a> systems; while the Iron Dome system<\/a> was developed by Israel, the U.S. government helped finance production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now the two agencies are looking to future collaboration, said Moshe Patel, the head of the MDO. In an October interview with Defense News, he discussed directed energy, how to make cheaper interceptors and what the new peace accords in the region mean for his organization. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The U.S. Army received its first Iron Dome battery at the end of September, and the second battery is to arrive by the end of the year. What is Israel\u2019s role in handing off the second battery?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I can tell you that the Iron Dome we are delivering to the U.S. Army is very similar to the Israeli Iron Dome. There were some requests from the Army to make some changes for them with regard to communication, with regard to the trailers, using the Oshkosh-[designed trailers]. We\u2019re using something a little bit different \u2014 by the way, we love Oshkosh; the Iron Dome looks much sexier in the Oshkosh vehicles compared to what we have. My boss after the delivery ceremony said to me: \u201cListen, let\u2019s try to change our trucks also to the future.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As we speak, there are some training courses are being conducted in Israel. With the U.S. Army present in Israel, they are being trained. They\u2019re also going to be trained back in the states as well. And of course we\u2019re going to use our Raytheon partners to continue with the training and the support that is needed when those batteries will be deployed. Even if it was not the original request from the U.S. Army that Raytheon would be involved, we decided that it would be beneficial for both sides, it would be really helpful that they will be part of this activity. And more than that, the way we are producing our Iron Dome batteries is like 50-50 in terms of the cost between Rafael and Raytheon; this is exactly how it was done with the U.S. Army batteries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Army is working on a <\/b>shoot-off of various systems<\/b><\/a> next year, which will include Iron Dome. How are you preparing?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We call it the \u201cenduring phase.\u201d It will be a contest. [I believe that] Raytheon will be the prime contractor, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems will be the sub in this case. We are planning to conduct a demonstration with our components. Again, when we are talking about this enduring phase, we are no longer talking about a batteries concept. All of our systems are fully interoperable, which means we can adapt Iron Dome interceptors, Iron Dome parts of batteries, and make them part of whatever the U.S. Army will decide. For example, they\u2019re going to use the IBCS [Integrated Battle Command System], so they\u2019re going to have the ability to connect those Iron Dome launchers and the interceptors to the IBCS.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By the way, the Marines are showing very high interest<\/a> for buying the Iron Dome. When we showed them, when we conducted a demonstration, it was done with the Marines. So I think that we are giving flexibility to the Army or the Marines Corps. The decision is to use the full battery, or some of its components.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
An Iron Dome system launches a missile. (Courtesy of Rafael).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Co-developing weapons with the U.S. can be challenging because of classification. Has that been an issue?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, but we have overcome through the years a lot of barriers with regard to classification. Just to give you an example: When we conducted the Arrow flight test in Alaska<\/a>, nobody could imagine that we would be connected directly to your AN\/TPY-2 radar and conduct this flight test without any radars really coming to the states. It didn\u2019t happen in one day. It took us some time to build our interoperability capability and to be able to receive classified information and the right data in order to do this kind of cooperation, and we get a lot from that. We get a lot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But again, [the U.S. is] our best partner [in terms of] sharing information and data with regard to intelligence, with regard to operational activity and of course technology. For sure we will have a much more deeper sharing information [relationship] in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Talk about how important you view capacity and using multiple low-cost interceptors, versus the idea of smaller numbers of more exquisite interceptors.<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When talking about affordable interceptors, all the time we look at the cost of the damage. And when we evaluate the cost of the damage in Israel, it is, of course, human life, houses, infrastructure, but also the fact that we gave with our system the capability of government to take a breath, and before retaliating, do whatever is needed to make all the calculations. In the past, when we didn\u2019t have those systems, we needed to retaliate fast, [and] you know, war could be started much easier.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are thinking about new ideas to try to make the cost much more affordable. If you have better capabilities with your ground system and take out from your interceptors \u2014 what makes an interceptor expensive? It is the engine, the booster, and of course the electro-optic seeker or the radio frequency seeker \u2014 whatever is onboard. So with regard to the booster, maybe you can lower the prices. If you invest more on your ground systems, maybe you can lower the price of your interceptor by taking out the expensive seekers that you have onboard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is something that we\u2019re looking for \u2014 options for the future. But again, what we\u2019re using as Iron Dome now is the most affordable system that we have.<\/p>\n\n\n\t