Iron Beam - A revolution, but not a flawless one

The operational success of the Iron Beam laser defense system in shooting down drones has Defense Minister Katz beaming and former Defense Minister Liberman celebrating.

But is it truly a perfect solution against the threats Israel faces from drones and different kinds of rockets and missiles?

Channel 14 reporter published this analysis of the system today (Wednesday) on X, explaining what Iron Beam can and can't do in terms of stopping different kinds of missiles in quality or quantity:

"The achievement of dozens of operational interceptions using a laser system is unprecedented in the world and represents a very significant step in the right direction.

"The interceptions are groundbreaking, the system less so: the Chinese have a similar system with a power of about 30 kilowatts, which according to some reports has also been sold to Saudi Arabia; and the Americans have a 50-kilowatt system — but with limited deployment. However, the Israeli system is, as mentioned, the first to prove itself under real combat conditions.

"It is no coincidence that the system, at this stage, intercepted UAVs and not rockets or mortars — it is likely currently suitable only for intercepting relatively slow targets.

"The system is also not a magic solution for intercepting UAVs, as the main problem — the ability to detect and track them — still remains. However, there is no doubt it contributes to solving this problem, even if not fully.

"Israel must be careful not to develop technologies suited to the previous war. A 30-kilowatt system can intercept UAVs, while the "Iron Beam" system, which will operate with just over 100 kilowatts, is suited for threats such as short-range rockets, mortars, and likely also anti-tank missiles. The greatest remaining threat after the blows delivered by the IDF to Hamas and Hezbollah is ballistic missiles, which require the development of a laser with approximately 1,000 kilowatts of power, or at least several hundred kilowatts.

"Laser based systems have a limitation in dealing with heavy barrages: each interception takes about five seconds — roughly two seconds to acquire the target and another 2–3 seconds to heat it until it explodes. In addition, they are limited under low cloud cover, which “breaks” the beam.

"On the other hand, the cost of interception with a laser is negligible compared to kinetic interception (using missiles), and it significantly mitigates the severe problem of interceptor shortages and their extremely high production costs.

"The next stage, in addition to a 1,000-kilowatt laser that can intercept ballistic missiles, should be an airborne system. Just a few such systems could cover the entire territory of the country, and they are also unaffected by cloud cover (since they operate above the clouds)."