Is seems to be. Looks like the interceptors know something is there but they can't accurately pinpoint towards it.
If Israelis interceptors are being depleted at a faster rate than Iranian ballistic missiles from the combination of operational launches and hostile fire, then there's
significant value for Trump to
delay US intervention in favor of Israel against Iran.
The more dire things get for Israel, the more incentives the Israel Lobby will throw at Trump, and Trump isn't stupid or naive about such things. So waiting until the "last minute" to intervene could in fact maximize returns for Trump!
Maybe he can even ask them to facilitate a third term?!
I think a big source of pain for the Iranians is probably Israeli drones. Different from Jets, these drones have more endurance but they are very vulnerable to shoulder launchers . Shoot them down would alleviated the "needle in a haystack strategy" for Iranian launchers.
Drones are by definition expendable or at least in general relatively more expendable than their crewed counterparts.
Downing IAF drones at scale will reduce sortie rates, perhaps even in visible ways, but it is at the end of the day a half measure, especially with US intervention looking imminent.
Wont carriers be possible hypers0nic projectile targets tho if "too close"?
That's actually not an unreasonable consideration in view of what the Houthis reportedly achieved in the Red Sea.
According to
, Houthi ASBMs came closer than generally reported and expected to striking a number of vessels in the Red Sea:
For instance: Tavvishi (June 8, hit by single ASBM); Captain Paris (June 16, two within 100m); MSC Sarah V (June 24, first and only shot within 50m); Delonix (June 28, three within 200m); Bentley 1 (July 1, four under 100m ending with a hit); Groton (August 3, four within 50m, including one hit); and Groton again (August 30, two within 100m). Maritime Spotlight data.
This is
on top of an
amended admission that a Houthi ASBM landed within 200m of an USN CVN:
By some accounts, an ASBM or other missile arrived at a very shallow trajectory, with minimal warning, without a chance for interception, and splashing down around 200 meters from the Eisenhower. Details gathered from interviews with Yemen-focused U.S. and U.K. intelligence officers for this study. Names of interviewees, and dates and places of interviews withheld at interviewees’ request. The Houthis propagandized the carrier’s departure. See “America’s withdrawal from the Red Sea confirms the fall of the myth of Washington’s great power,” Sabant – Saba Agency, May 1, 2024.
Yes, in case you were wondering, this paper was indeed
amended to reject supposed efforts to "propagandize" what was written. Obviously someone was unhappy that such an admission impeached the USN's assumed infallibility (against just about everyone except the PLAN, and maybe the Russian submarine force), which is in itself an endorsement of the Houthi's Iran derived ASBM capability.
Or they simply cannot compute a course to intercept?
Not a physicist or computer scientist, but isn't kinematic limitations more probable here than software failures or sensor shortcomings, especially at the terminal stage where there's less time to adjust course in response to a target's evasive maneuvers?