Israeli, Romanian Defense Contractors Sign Cooperation Deal for Iron Dome

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Israeli, Romanian defense contractors sign cooperation deal for Iron Dome By Stuart Winer Times of Israel, 17 May 2018 Rafael joins up with Romaero to produce air defense and anti-tanks systems with an eye to providing Romania’s army with weaponry Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems signed a cooperation agreement with the Romanian’s Romaero to produce air defense and other weapons systems the two companies hope to offer to the Romanian armed forces. The deal, signed in Bucharest, will include development of the sea-borne version of the Iron Dome short-range missile defense system, as well as Samson remote control weapons systems, and Spike tactical missiles, Rafael said in a statement Thursday. Rafael director general Yoav Har-Even inked the agreement with Remus Vulpescu, director general Romaero, at the lack Sea Defense & Aerospace 2018 exhibition in Bucharest. Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition By email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up “The new cooperation will provide a solution to the operational needs of the Romanian army in upcoming procurement plans that were already approved by the Romanian government,” Rafael said. The statement did not give an estimate for how much the cooperation might be worth to the companies. Israeli soldiers stand guard next to an Iron Dome defense system in central Israel on November 14, 2017. (AFP/Jack GueZ) In April 40 US lawmakers signed a letter urging appropriators to consider purchasing Iron Dome, which Israel has used to intercept missiles fired from the Gaza Strip and from Syria, for US Army use. Adoption of Iron Dome by the US Army would mean increasing the support for sustaining the missile defense system, developed by Rafael and Israel Aerospace Industries, which Israel regards as critical in protecting its communities near its southern border with the Gaza Strip and its northern border with Lebanon. In February Israel Aerospace Industries, which manufactures radar for the Iron Dome system, said it has sold 100 units of the radar to nine countries for a total of about $2 billion. Times of Israel staff and agencies contributed to this report. .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

The Israel Defense Forces, 1948-2017
The Israel Defense Forces, 1948-2017 Kenneth S. Brower Mideast Security and Policy Studies No. 150 THE BEGIN-SADAT CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY Mideast Security and Policy Studies No. 150 The Israel Defense Forces, 1948-2017 Kenneth S. Brower The Israel Defense Forces, 1948-2017 Kenneth S. Brower © The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies Bar-Ilan University Ramat Gan 5290002 Israel Tel. 972-3-5318959 Fax. 972-3-5359195 [email protected] www.besacenter.org ISSN 0793-1042 May 2018 Cover image: Soldier from the elite Rimon Battalion participates in an all-night exercise in the Jordan Valley, photo by Staff Sergeant Alexi Rosenfeld, IDF Spokesperson’s Unit The Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies is an independent, non-partisan think tank conducting policy-relevant research on Middle Eastern and global strategic affairs, particularly as they relate to the national security and foreign policy of Israel and regional peace and stability. It is named in memory of Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, whose efforts in pursuing peace laid the cornerstone for conflict resolution in the Middle East. Mideast Security and Policy Studies serve as a forum for publication or re-publication of research conducted by BESA associates. Publication of a work by BESA signifies that it is deemed worthy of public consideration but does not imply endorsement of the author’s views or conclusions. Colloquia on Strategy and Diplomacy summarize the papers delivered at conferences and seminars held by the Center for the academic, military, official and general publics.
[Show full text]
Youtube Report Draft V4
MONDAY, JULY 16 YouTube & News A new kind of visual journalism FOR FUTHER INFORMATION: Tom Rosenstiel, Director, Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism Amy Mitchell, Deputy Director, Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (202) 419-3650 1515 L St, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 www.journalism.org YouTube & News: A New Kind of Visual Journalism Introduction On March 11, 2011, an earthquake registering 9.0 on the Richter scale struck the coast of northeastern Japan, triggering a tsunami that would kill more than 18,000 people and leave an estimated $180 billion in damage. The news media worldwide provided extensive coverage of the disaster and its aftermath, but millions of people also turned to the web to learn about the event on the video sharing website YouTube. 1 In the seven days following the disaster (March 11-18), the 20 most viewed news-related videos on YouTube all focused on the tragedy—and were viewed more than 96 million times. What people saw in these videos also represented a new kind of visual journalism. Most of that footage was recorded by citizen eyewitnesses who found themselves caught in the tragedy. Some of that video was posted by the citizens themselves. Most of this citizen-footage, however, was posted by news organizations incorporating user-generated content into their news offerings. The most watched video of all was shot by what appeared to be fixed closed-circuit surveillance camera at the Sendai airport. Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DSSssHxm4Y The disaster in Japan was hardly a unique case.
[Show full text]
Air Base Defense Rethinking Army and Air Force Roles and Functions for More Information on This Publication, Visit
C O R P O R A T I O N ALAN J. VICK, SEAN M. ZEIGLER, JULIA BRACKUP, JOHN SPEED MEYERS Air Base Defense Rethinking Army and Air Force Roles and Functions For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR4368 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0500-5 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface The growing cruise and ballistic missile threat to U.S. Air Force bases in Europe has led Headquarters U.S.
[Show full text]
Lead Inspector General for Operation Inherent Resolve
OPERATION INHERENT RESOLVE LEAD INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS JULY 1, 2020–SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 ABOUT THIS REPORT A 2013 amendment to the Inspector General Act established the Lead Inspector General (Lead IG) framework for oversight of overseas contingency operations and requires that the Lead IG submit quarterly reports to Congress on each active operation. The Chair of the Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency designated the DoD Inspector General (IG) as the Lead IG for Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR). The DoS IG is the Associate IG for the operation. The USAID IG participates in oversight of the operation. The Offices of Inspector General (OIG) of the DoD, the DoS, and USAID are referred to in this report as the Lead IG agencies. Other partner agencies also contribute to oversight of OIR. The Lead IG agencies collectively carry out the Lead IG statutory responsibilities to: • Develop a joint strategic plan to conduct comprehensive oversight of the operation. • Ensure independent and effective oversight of programs and operations of the U.S. Government in support of the operation through either joint or individual audits, inspections, investigations, and evaluations. • Report quarterly to Congress and the public on the operation and on activities of the Lead IG agencies. METHODOLOGY To produce this quarterly report, the Lead IG agencies submit requests for information to the DoD, the DoS, USAID, and other Federal agencies about OIR and related programs. The Lead IG agencies also gather data and information from other sources, including official documents, congressional testimony, policy research organizations, press conferences, think tanks, and media reports.
[Show full text]
Sequencing SARS-Cov-2 in Slovakia: an Unofficial Genomic Surveillance Report
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.13.21260431; this version posted July 18, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license . Sequencing SARS-CoV-2 in Slovakia: An Unoﬃcial Genomic Surveillance Report Broňa Brejová1, Viktória Hodorová2, Kristína Boršová3;2, Viktória Čabanová3, Tomáš Szemes4;5, Matej Mišík6, Boris Klempa3, Jozef Nosek2, Tomáš Vinař1 1 Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia 2 Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia 3 Biomedical Research Center of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia 4 Comenius University Science Park, Bratislava, Slovakia 5 Geneton Ltd., Ilkovičova 8, Bratislava, Slovakia 6 Institute of Health Analyses, Ministry of Health, Slovakia Abstract We present an unoﬃcial SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance report from Slovakia based on approx- imately 3500 samples sequenced between March 2020 and May 2021. Early samples show multiple independent imports of SARS-CoV-2 from other countries. In Fall 2020, three virus variants (B.1.160, B.1.1.170, B.1.258) dominated as the number of cases increased. In November 2020, B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant was introduced in Slovakia and quickly became the most prevalent variant in the country (> 75% of new cases by early February 2021 and > 95% in mid-March). 1 Introduction Genome sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus continually changes over time. The mutations eventually result in the emergence of new variants including those with higher infectivity, the ability to evade the immune system response, and causing milder or more severe clinical manifestations.
[Show full text]
Worldwide Equipment Guide Volume 2: Air and Air Defense Systems
Dec Worldwide Equipment Guide 2016 Worldwide Equipment Guide Volume 2: Air and Air Defense Systems TRADOC G-2 ACE–Threats Integration Ft. Leavenworth, KS Distribution Statement: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 1 UNCLASSIFIED Worldwide Equipment Guide Opposing Force: Worldwide Equipment Guide Chapters Volume 2 Volume 2 Air and Air Defense Systems Volume 2 Signature Letter Volume 2 TOC and Introduction Volume 2 Tier Tables – Fixed Wing, Rotary Wing, UAVs, Air Defense Chapter 1 Fixed Wing Aviation Chapter 2 Rotary Wing Aviation Chapter 3 UAVs Chapter 4 Aviation Countermeasures, Upgrades, Emerging Technology Chapter 5 Unconventional and SPF Arial Systems Chapter 6 Theatre Missiles Chapter 7 Air Defense Systems 2 UNCLASSIFIED Worldwide Equipment Guide Units of Measure The following example symbols and abbreviations are used in this guide. Unit of Measure Parameter (°) degrees (of slope/gradient, elevation, traverse, etc.) GHz gigahertz—frequency (GHz = 1 billion hertz) hp horsepower (kWx1.341 = hp) Hz hertz—unit of frequency kg kilogram(s) (2.2 lb.) kg/cm2 kg per square centimeter—pressure km kilometer(s) km/h km per hour kt knot—speed. 1 kt = 1 nautical mile (nm) per hr. kW kilowatt(s) (1 kW = 1,000 watts) liters liters—liquid measurement (1 gal. = 3.785 liters) m meter(s)—if over 1 meter use meters; if under use mm m3 cubic meter(s) m3/hr cubic meters per hour—earth moving capacity m/hr meters per hour—operating speed (earth moving) MHz megahertz—frequency (MHz = 1 million hertz) mach mach + (factor) —aircraft velocity (average 1062 km/h) mil milliradian, radial measure (360° = 6400 mils, 6000 Russian) min minute(s) mm millimeter(s) m/s meters per second—velocity mt metric ton(s) (mt = 1,000 kg) nm nautical mile = 6076 ft (1.152 miles or 1.86 km) rd/min rounds per minute—rate of fire RHAe rolled homogeneous armor (equivalent) shp shaft horsepower—helicopter engines (kWx1.341 = shp) µm micron/micrometer—wavelength for lasers, etc.
[Show full text]
Israeli-Syrian Air and SAM Strength Analysis Working Estimates of Force Numbers and Location
1800 K Street, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006 Phone: 1.202.775.3270 Fax: 1.202.775.3199 Web: www.csis.org/burke/reports Israeli-Syrian Air and SAM Strength Analysis Working Estimates of Force Numbers and Location Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Abdullah Toukan Senior Associate 10 November, 2008 Introduction This analysis is a rough working paper with estimates drawn from a range of source The quality of the systems shown and the way in which they are operationally used and support is far more important than aircraft or missile strength. The following main fighting components are considered: The Air Defense, Strike and Air-to-Air Operational Capabilities. The study initially analyses these two components , then applies them to the two armed forces to show the operational superiority of one side versus the other. Comments and additional material would be most welcome. 2 Central Factors in Threat Engagement Analysis: . C4I (Command Control Communications Computing and Intelligence) and the maximum Air Defense engagement force . The Operational Readiness of the forces resulting in the combat forces available as Full Mission Capable. See (Appendix 1) . The maximum usable Ground Launch Interceptor force and Combat Air Patrol operations. The total available combat aircraft at the start of a conflict is the: (Total Assets) – (Number of Aircraft not Operational Ready) In the Alert Phase of air operations, the combat ready assets are assigned to the Ground Launched Intercept and Combat Air Operations (CAP). 3 Maximum Ground Launched Interceptors . C4I delay time is assumed to be the time taken by the Early Warning Radars in detecting the Intruders, threat assessment and transmission of the data/ information to the various Air Defense sectors and airbases.
[Show full text]
SIPRI Yearbook 2004: Armaments, Disarmament and International
Appendix 12A. The volume of transfers of major conventional weapons: by recipients and suppliers, 1999–2003 BJÖRN HAGELIN, MARK BROMLEY and SIEMON T. WEZEMAN Table 12A.1. The recipients of major conventional weapons, 1999–2003 The list includes all countries/non-state actors with imports of major conventional weapons in the period 1999–2003. Ranking is according to the 1999–2003 aggregate imports. Figures are SIPRI trend-indicator values expressed in US $m. at constant (1990) prices. Figures may not add up because of the conventions of rounding. Rank order 1999– 1998– 2003 2002a Recipient 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1999–2003 1 1 China 1 539 1 822 3 049 2 842 2 548 11 800 2 3 India 1 043 580 908 1 691 3 621 7 843 3 6 Greece 556 682 697 517 1 957 4 409 4 4 Turkey 1 125 692 372 804 504 3 497 5 10 UK 98 834 1 202 567 555 3 256 6 8 Egypt 490 820 775 646 504 3 235 7 2 Taiwan 1 670 536 411 293 179 3 084 8 7 South Korea 1 162 719 375 300 299 3 855 9 12 Pakistan 788 135 391 600 611 2 525 10 5 Saudi Arabia 1 215 68 74 576 487 2 420 11 13 Australia 331 326 636 616 485 2 394 12 9 Israel 1 202 320 88 267 318 2 195 13 14 UAE 413 243 186 356 922 2 120 14 17 Algeria 459 372 523 228 513 2 095 15 11 Japan 1 028 197 206 154 210 1 795 16 18 Iran 242 294 410 371 323 1 640 17 15 Finland 797 513 10 31 125 1 476 18 19 Canada 47 424 466 351 94 1 382 19 27 USA 103 133 167 364 515 1 282 20 16 Singapore 219 548 167 227 121 1 282 21 26 Italy 8 236 355 323 348 1 270 22 25 Malaysia 787 40 26 110 242 1 205 23 20 Brazil 272 91 539 150 87 1 139 24 24 Spain 314 264 176 215
[Show full text]
Supplement Analysis
SUPPLEMENT ANALYSIS WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION NORTH AREA RIGHT-OF-WAY MAINTENANCE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DOE/EA-1539-SA-01 Final SIERRA NEVADA REGION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 114 Parkshore Drive Folsom, California 95630 April 2021 SUPPLEMENT ANALYSIS WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION NORTH AREA RIGHT-OF-WAY MAINTENANCE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DOE/EA-1539-SA-01 Final WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION SIERRA NEVADA REGION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 114 Parkshore Drive Folsom, California 95630 April 2021 SUPPLEMENT ANALYSIS Western Area Power Administration North Area Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program Environmental Assessment CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. i Chapter 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need for the North Area Program ........................................................ 1-1 1.3 Purpose and Need for the Supplement Analysis ....................................................... 1-2 Chapter 2. Review of Project Changes .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Changes in the Project Area and Project Activities .................................................. 2-1 Changes in Project Area .............................................................................
[Show full text]
RFP) N°: INTERNET VENDOR APL20044 /LM-MS-6000833467 L- of 04 Aug 2020
NSPA AGENCE OTAN DE SOUTIEN ET D'ACQUISITION NATO SUPPORT AND PROCUREMENT AGENCY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) N°: INTERNET VENDOR APL20044 /LM-MS-6000833467 L- of 04 Aug 2020 (Please refer to this number in all further correspondence) Contact Point Paula Leal Tel: +352-3063 7158 Fax: 3063 4300 - Offer Closing date: 20 Aug 2020 Vendor No: RFPWEB Offer Validity : 30 Oct 2020 Fax No : 30634300 1. Bidding Instructions 2. DRAFT Purchase Order 3. SOW 4. General Provisions (Services) 5. Termination for Convenience of NSPA 6. MISR 7. List of Services All faxed Quotations must be sent to the following number: +352 3063 4300 All offers sent by e-mail must be addressed to "[email protected]" Yours faithfully, Paula Leal Buyer APL20044 /LM-MS-6000833467 Page 1 of 1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED NSPA L-8302 CAPELLEN(Luxembourg) TEL:(+352)3063(+ext.) FAX:(+352)3063 4300 NSPA AGENCE OTAN DE SOUTIEN ET D'ACQUISITION NATO SUPPORT AND PROCUREMENT AGENCY List of Services Service Order N°: 40129803 Customer Document N°: Spike ILS Training Support Turn Around Time: 365 days 10 Spike ILS Training Support Line Service No Description Unit of Qty Issue 10 1187104 PU 1 MATERIAL Delivery of ILS package SOW Para 4.1 Annex 1 of the SOW contains the parts necesarry in the ILS package 20 1028832 PU 1 TRAINING Spike iCLU/LR2 operator course SOW Para 4.2.1.1 30 1028832 PU 1 TRAINING Spike LR2 IDT course SOW Para 4.2.1.2 40 1028832 PU 1 TRAINING Spike iCLU maintenance course SOW Para 4.2.1.3 50 1130218 PU 1 TRAINING DOCUMENTATION Training Documentation soft copy- Pdf or Microsoft
[Show full text]
Is the Euro Really a 'Teuro'?
Is the euro really a ‘teuro’? Effects of introducing the euro on prices of everyday non-tradables in Slovakia CEPS Working Document No. 339/November 2010 Miroslav Beblavý Abstract This paper looks at the Slovak experience with euro adoption from the point of view of perceived versus actual inflation and with a focus on a specific set of non-tradable prices. It examines whether Slovak consumers experienced or perceived (or both) an unusual price jump at the time of euro adoption and the possible explanations for such a phenomenon. Comparing the Slovak experience with the creation of the eurozone, and also with adoption of the single currency in Cyprus, Malta and Slovenia, we find that in terms of both reality and perceptions of general price movements every adoption is different. For Slovakia, euro adoption came at a time of disinflation, which consumers actually experienced, so there does not seem to be any overall perception that it is a ‘teuro’ (from teuer, meaning ‘expensive’ in German). We can nonetheless observe high inflation for non- tradables at both the macro and micro levels, linked not only to the Slovak strategy of nominal currency appreciation prior to eurozone entry but also to the changeover itself. CEPS Working Documents are intended to give an indication of work being conducted within CEPS research programmes and to stimulate reactions from other experts in the field. Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed are attributable only to the authors in a personal capacity and not to any institution with which they are associated. ISBN 978-94-6138-064-7 Available for free downloading from the CEPS website (http://www.ceps.eu) © Centre for European Policy Studies, 2010 Contents 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
Appendix 8C. Register of the Transfers and Licensed Production of Major Conventional Weapons, 2001
Appendix 8C. Register of the transfers and licensed production of major conventional weapons, 2001 BJÖRN HAGELIN, PIETER D. WEZEMAN, SIEMON T. WEZEMAN and NICHOLAS CHIPPERFIELD The register in table 8C.1 lists major weapons on order or under delivery, or for which the licence was bought and production was under way or completed during 2001. Sources and methods for the data collection are explained in appendix 8D. Entries in table 8C.1 are alphabetical, by recipient, supplier and licenser. ‘Year(s) of deliveries’ includes aggregates of all deliveries and licensed production since the beginning of the contract. ‘Deal worth’ values in the comments refer to real monetary values as reported in sources and not to SIPRI trend-indicator values. Conventions, abbreviations and acronyms are explained below the table. For cross reference, an index of recipients and licensees for each supplier can be found in table 8C.2. Table 8C.1. Register of transfers and licensed production of major conventional weapons, 2001, by recipients Recipient/ Year Year(s) No. supplier (S) No. Weapon Weapon of order/ of delivered/ or licenser (L) ordered designation description licence deliveries produced Comments Afghanistan/Northern Alliance S: Russia (10) Mi-17/Hip-H Helicopter 2000 2000–2001 (10) Probably second-hand; possibly financed by India (10) BM-21 MRL (2001) 2001 (10) Ex-Russian; aid (27) BMP-1 IFV (2001) 2001 (27) Ex-Russian; aid (26) BMP-2 IFV (2001) 2001 (26) Ex-Russian; aid (30) BTR-60PB APC (2001) 2001 (30) Ex-Russian; aid (20) T-55M Main battle tank (2001) 2001 (20) Ex-Russian; aid; no.
[Show full text]