title: Spetsnaz

text: The elite units of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are controlled, for the most part, by the military-intelligence GRU (Spetsnaz GRU) under the General Staff. They were heavily involved in secret operations and training pro-Russian forces in the civil war in Chechnya during the 1990s and 2000s. In 2010, as a result of the 2008 Russian military reform, GRU special forces came under the control of the Russian Ground Forces, being "directly subordinated to commanders of combined strategic commands." However, in 2013, these spetsnaz forces were placed back under the GRU. The Russian Airborne Troops (VDV, a separate branch of the Soviet and Russian Armed Forces) includes the 45th Guards Spetsnaz Brigade. In 2009, a Directorate of Special Operations was established that reported directly to the General Staff not the GRU to establish the Special Operations Forces which in 2013 became the Special Operations Forces Command. Most Russian military special forces units are known by their type of formation (company, battalion or brigade) and a number, like other Soviet or Russian military units. Two exceptions were the ethnic Chechen Special Battalions "Vostok" and "Zapad" (East and West) that existed during the 2000s. Below is a 2012 list of special purpose units in the Russian Armed Forces:


title: Spetsnaz

text: The FSB Spetsnaz maintain a training base near the village of Averkyevo. There is a "killing house" providing training similar to the SAS close to Moscow.


title: Spetsnaz

text: Russian special forces wear different berets depending on the branch of the armed forces they belong to. These include:


title: Spetsnaz

text: Following units belong to their specific military branches, but come under GRU operational control during wartime operations.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The Russian Navy also fields dedicated maritime sabotage and counter-sabotage diver units. These units also include combat swimmers, trained to conduct underwater combat, mining and clearance diving. The task is to protect ships and other fleet assets from enemy underwater special forces. The term "combat swimmers" is correct term in relation to the staff of the OSNB PDSS. Every PDSS unit has approximately 50–60 combat swimmers. There are PDSS units in all major Naval Bases.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The Centre of Special Operations of the FSB TsSN FSB, "центр специального назначения ФСБ") is officially tasked with combating terrorism and protecting the constitutional order of the Russian Federation. The TsSN FSB consists of estimated 4,000 operators in at least 5 operative divisions:


title: Spetsnaz

text: TsSN FSB headquarters is a large complex of buildings and training areas, with dozens of hectares of land and scores of training facilities. The average training period for a TsSN officer is about five years.


title: Spetsnaz

text: Spetsgruppa 'A' (Alpha Group) is the premier counter-terrorism unit of the FSB. Consisting of about 720 personnel, of which about 250–300 are trained for assault operations and the rest are support personnel. These are dispersed in five operational detachments, including one permanent detachment in the Chechen Republic. Other units are stationed in Moscow, Krasnodar, Yekaterinburg and Khabarovsk. All Alpha operators undergo airborne, mountain and counter-sabotage dive training. Alpha has operated in other countries, most notably Operation Storm-333 on a mission to overthrow and kill Afghan president Hafizullah Amin).


title: Spetsnaz

text: Spetsgruppa "V", abbreviation of the Directorate в (Russian Cyrillic for V), also known as "Vega" in period 1993–1995, was formed in 1981, continues the lineage of two elite Cold War-era KGB special units—Cascade (Kaskad) and Zenith (Zenit). Its modern function is the protection of strategic installations, such as factories and transportation centers. With its Alpha counterparts, it is heavily used in the North Caucasus. Vympel has four operative units in Moscow, with branch offices in nearly every city containing a nuclear power plant.


title: Spetsnaz

text: Spetsgruppa "S", abbreviation of the Directorate C (Russian Cyrillic for S), also known as Smerch, but also known as the Special Operations Executive (SOE), is a relatively new unit formed in July 1999. Officers from Smerch are frequently involved with the capture and transfer of various bandit and criminal leaders who help aid disruption in the North Caucasus and throughout Russia. Operations include both direct action against bandit holdouts in Southern Russia as well as high-profile arrests in more densely populated cities and guarding government officials. Because of its initials, this group is casually referred to as "Smerch". With the Centre of Special Operations and its elite units, many FSB special forces units operate at the regional level. These detachments are usually known as ROSN or ROSO (Regional Department of Special Designation), such as Saint Petersburg's "Grad" (Hail) or Murmansk's "Kasatka" (Orca).


title: Spetsnaz

text: The SVR RF, formerly the First Chief Directorate of the KGB of the USSR, has its own top secret elite special force within the Operations Department of Directorate Z known as (Заслон) (meaning Screen, Barrier or Shield) about which extremely little is known. Formerly in PGU KGB SSSR called Vympel (e.g. French counterpart; Action Division).


title: Spetsnaz

text: However, mere existence of such group within SVR is denied by Russian authorities. Nevertheless, there were some rumors that such group does indeed exist and is assigned to execute very specific special operations abroad primarily for protection of Russian embassy personnel and internal investigations. It is believed that the group is deep undercover and consists of approximately 300–500 highly experienced operatives speaking several languages and having extensive record of operations while serving in other secret units of the Russian military.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The special missions units of the National Guard of Russia (consolidated and replaced the forces of the MVD Internal Troops, SOBR, OMON) includes a number of Russian Internal Troops (VV, successor to the Soviet Internal Troops) paramilitary units to combat internal threats to the government, such as insurgencies and mutinies. These units usually have a unique name and official OSN (previously known as OSNAZ or "osobovo naznacheniya" meaning "special purpose") number, and some are part the ODON (also known as Dzerzhinsky Division). OBrON (Independent Special Designation Brigade) VV special groups ("spetsgruppa") were deployed to Chechnya.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The following is a list of National Guard OSNs ("отряд специального назначения", otryad spetsial'novo naznacheniya or "special purpose detachment") in 2012:


title: Spetsnaz

text: Furthermore, the Internal Troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR/Russia, also had numerous naval detachments that conducted maritime operations. These include:


title: Spetsnaz

text: These detachments today form the National Guard Naval Service Corps and report to the National Guard HQ.


title: Spetsnaz

text: In addition, the MVD has Politsiya (formerly Militsiya) police special forces stationed in nearly every Russian city. Most of Russia's special-police officers belong to OMON units, which are primarily used as riot police and not considered an elite force—unlike the SOBR (known as the OMSN from 2002 to 2011) rapid-response units consisting of experienced, better-trained and -equipped officers. The Chechen Republic has unique and highly autonomous special police formations, supervised by Ramzan Kadyrov and formed from the Kadyrovtsy, including the (Akhmad or Akhmat) Kadyrov Regiment ("Kadyrov's "spetsnaz"").


title: Spetsnaz

text: Like many other post-Soviet states, Ukraine inherited its spetsnaz units from the remnants of the Soviet armed forces, GRU and KGB units. Ukraine now maintains its own spetsnaz structure under the control of the Ministry of Interior, and under the Ministry of Defence, while the Security Service of Ukraine maintains its own spetsnaz force, the Alpha group. The term "Alpha" is also used by many other post Soviet states such as Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan as these units are based on the Soviet Union's Alpha Group. Ukraine's Berkut special police force gained mainstream attention during the 2014 Revolution of Dignity as it was alleged to have been used by the government to quell the uprising. However, this is disputed as many officers were also wounded and killed in the action.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The video game, "Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege" features five spetsnaz operators named Glaz, Fuze, Kapkan, Tachanka, and Finka. In another Tom Clancy's game, Endwar, Spetsnaz Guard Brigades is the name of the élite branch of the Russian army.


title: Spetsnaz

text: The spetsnaz have also been referenced and featured multiple times in the video game series "Call of Duty" including the two most recent entries in the series, "" and "". Spetsnaz are also featured in multiple entries in the ARMA series.


title: Spetsnaz

text: Two gangsters in the Guy Ritchie film "RocknRolla" have a 'scar competition' in which they show healed wounds (and describe how they occurred) from injuries they incurred whilst on several spetsnaz operations.


title: Iron Dome

text: Iron Dome () is a mobile all-weather air defense system developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries. The system is designed to intercept and destroy short-range rockets and artillery shells fired from distances of to away and whose trajectory would take them to an Israeli populated area. From 2011 to 2021, the United States contributed a total of US$1.6 billion to the Iron Dome defense system, with another US$1 billion approved by the US Congress in 2022.


title: Iron Dome

text: Iron Dome was declared operational and initially deployed on 27 March 2011 near Beersheba. On 7 April 2011, the system successfully intercepted a rocket launched from Gaza for the first time. On 10 March 2012, "The Jerusalem Post" reported that the system shot down 90% of rockets launched from Gaza that would have landed in populated areas. In late 2012 Israel said that it hoped to increase the range of Iron Dome's interceptions, from a maximum of to and make it more versatile so that it could intercept rockets coming from two directions simultaneously.


title: Iron Dome

text: In November 2012, official statements indicated that it had intercepted over 400 rockets. By late October 2014, the Iron Dome systems had intercepted over 1,200 rockets.


title: Iron Dome

text: In addition to their land-based deployment, it was reported in 2017 that Iron Dome batteries would in future be deployed at sea on Sa'ar 6-class corvettes, to protect off-shore gas platforms in conjunction with Israel's Barak 8 missile system.


title: Iron Dome

text: Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, fired rockets into northern Israeli population centers in the 1990s, posing a security challenge for the Israel Defense Forces. Israel had floated the idea of its own short-range antimissile system, but U.S. defense officials cautioned that it would be "doomed to fail".


title: Iron Dome

text: In 2004, the idea for Iron Dome gained momentum with the installation of Brig. Gen. Daniel Gold as the head of the research and development bureau of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Gold was a strong backer of the antimissile project, even skirting army contracting regulations to secure financing. He also helped persuade key politicians to support the project.


title: Iron Dome

text: During the 2006 Second Lebanon War, approximately 4,000 Hezbollah-fired rockets (the great majority of which were short-range Katyusha rockets) landed in northern Israel, including on Haifa, the country's third largest city. The rocket barrage killed 44 Israeli civilians and caused some 250,000 Israeli citizens to evacuate and relocate to other parts of Israel while an estimated 1 million Israelis were confined in or near bomb shelters during the conflict.


title: Iron Dome

text: To the south, more than 8,000 projectiles (estimated at 4,000 rockets and 4,000 mortar bombs) were fired indiscriminately into Israel from Gaza between 2000 and 2008, principally by Hamas. Almost all of the rockets fired were Qassams launched by 122 mm Grad launchers smuggled into the Gaza Strip, giving longer range than other launch methods. Nearly a million Israelis living in the south were within rocket range, posing a serious security threat to the country and its citizens.


title: Iron Dome

text: In February 2007, Defense Minister Amir Peretz selected Iron Dome as Israel's defense against this short-range rocket threat. Since then, the $210 million system has been developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems working jointly with the IDF.


title: Iron Dome

text: In May 2021 it was estimated that Palestinian militant groups had an arsenal of about 30,000 rockets and mortar bombs in Gaza, potential targets, when fired, for Iron Dome. Range varies widely, and guidance systems are lacking, but accuracy has improved over the years. There are estimates of the numbers and types of rockets, and their range and payload.


title: Iron Dome

text: Project leader Colonel S. and his team in the Administration for the Development of Weapons and Technological Infrastructure ("Maf'at") needed an appropriate name for the system. According to Colonel S., "The first name I thought of was 'Anti-Qassam', but when the project started to move forward I realized it was problematic... I sat down with my wife, and together we thought of suitable names. She suggested the name 'Tamir' (Hebrew acronym for טיל מיירט, "Til Meyaret", 'interceptor missile') for the missile, and for the system itself we thought of 'Golden Dome'. The following Sunday, 'Tamir' was immediately approved, but there was a problem with 'Golden Dome'—it could be perceived as ostentatious. So it was changed to 'Iron Dome'."


title: Iron Dome

text: The system is designed to counter short-range rockets and 155 mm artillery shells with a range of up to 70 kilometers. According to its manufacturer, Iron Dome will operate day and night, under adverse weather conditions, and can respond to multiple threats simultaneously.


title: Iron Dome

text: The system's radar is referred to as EL/M-2084. It detects the rocket's launch and tracks its trajectory. The BMC calculates the impact point according to the reported data, and uses this information to determine whether the target constitutes a threat to a designated area. Only when that threat is determined, an interceptor missile is fired to destroy the incoming rocket before it reaches the predicted impact area.


title: Iron Dome

text: The typical air defense missile battery consists of a radar unit, missile control unit, and several launchers, all located at the same site.


title: Iron Dome

text: Conversely, Iron Dome is built to deploy in a scattered pattern. Each launcher, containing 20 interceptors, is independently deployed and operated remotely via a secure wireless connection. Reportedly, each Iron Dome battery is capable of protecting an urban area of approximately 150 square kilometers.


title: Iron Dome

text: The initial funding and development of the Iron Dome system was provided and undertaken by Israel. This allowed for the deployment of the first two Iron Dome systems. Subsequently, funding for additional Iron Dome systems — along with repeated funding for the supply of the interception missiles — has been provided by the United States. From 2011 to 2021, the US contributed a total of US$1.6 billion to the Iron Dome defense system, with another US$ 1 billion approved by the US Congress in 2022.


title: Iron Dome

text: Funding for the production and deployment of these additional Iron Dome batteries and interceptor missiles was approved by the United States Congress, after being requested by President Obama in 2010. In May 2010, the White House announced that U.S. President Barack Obama would seek $205 million from U.S. Congress in his 2011 budget, to spur the production and deployment of additional Iron Dome batteries. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor stated, "The president recognizes the threat missiles and rockets fired by Hamas and Hezbollah pose to Israelis, and has therefore decided to seek funding from Congress to support the production of Israel's short range rocket defense system called Iron Dome." This would be the first direct U.S. investment in the project. Such financial assistance could expedite the completion of the defensive system, which has long been delayed by budgetary shortfalls. A few days later, on 20 May 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the funding in a 410–4 vote. The bill, the United States–Israel Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act (H.R. 5327), was sponsored by Representative Glenn C. Nye of Virginia. This money was expected to be included in the 2011 budget. Once the money was received in 2011, it still took a further 18 months before the additional batteries were delivered to the air force.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 9 May 2011, "Haaretz" published that Defense Ministry director general Maj. Gen. (res.) Udi Shani said that Israel plans to invest nearly $1 billion in the coming years for the development and production of Iron Dome batteries. "We are no longer approaching this in terms of initial operational capabilities but are defining the final target for absorbing the systems, in terms of schedule and funds. We are talking about [having] 10–15 Iron Dome batteries. We will invest nearly $1 billion on this. This is the goal, in addition to the $205 million that the U.S. government has authorized," Shani said.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 4 April 2012, Reuters reported that a senior Israeli official, during a briefing to a small group of journalists on condition of anonymity, predicted an increased interception range of up to 250 km, as well as more flexible aiming of Iron Dome units, thus lowering the number of batteries needed for full deployment in Israel. That would help Israel to cope with the prospect of reduced funding from the United States, while a "new round" of talks about missile-defense funding would be completed in two to three months, he anticipated. While praising American largess, the official said US planners have asked Israel to "point out honestly where the upper limit is in terms of what can be implemented" with the Iron Dome. He said the US is "deep in (fiscal) challenges itself", so it does not want to "give money for the sake of it".


title: Iron Dome

text: In exchange for the second tranche of deployment funding, the United States asked Israel for access to, and a stake in, elements of the system's technology.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 17 May 2012, when Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak met with U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the Pentagon issued a statement from the Secretary saying in part, "I was pleased to inform Minister Barak that the President supports Israel's Iron Dome system and directed me to fill the $70 million in assistance for Iron Dome that Minister Barak indicated to me Israel needs this fiscal year."


title: Iron Dome

text: On 18 May 2012, the United States House of Representatives passed the Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 4310, with $680 million for Iron Dome in Section 227. The report accompanying the bill, 112–479, also calls for technology sharing as well as co-production of Iron Dome in the United States in light of the nearly $900 million invested in the system since 2011.


title: Iron Dome

text: Section 227, Iron Dome Short-range Rocket Defense Program, would authorize $680.0 million for the Iron Dome system in fiscal years 2012–15 in PE 63913C for procurement of additional batteries and interceptors, and for operations and sustainment expenses. This section would also require the Director, Missile Defense Agency to establish within MDA a program office for cooperative missile defense efforts on the Iron Dome system to ensure long-term cooperation on this program.


title: Iron Dome

text: The committee is aware that National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111-383) included $205.0 million for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system for the State of Israel. The committee notes that the Iron Dome system has proven very effective at defeating threat rockets launched at protected targets. The committee also notes that if the full $680.0 million is used on the program, the total U.S. taxpayer investment in this system will amount to nearly $900.0 million since fiscal year 2011, yet the United States has no rights to the technology involved. The committee believes the Director should ensure, prior to disbursing the authorized $680 million for Iron Dome, that the United States has appropriate rights to this technology for United States defense purposes, subject to an agreement with the Israeli Missile Defense Organization, and in a manner consistent with prior U.S.–Israeli missile defense cooperation on the Arrow and David's Sling suite of systems. The committee also believes that the Director should explore any opportunity to enter into co-production of the Iron Dome system with Israel, in light of the significant U.S. investment in this system.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 4 June 2012, the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee included $210 million for Iron Dome, in its version of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2013, S.3254. The bill has been reported out of committee and is waiting to be assigned a date for consideration by the full Senate.


title: Iron Dome

text: Sec. 237, Availability of Funds for Iron Dome Short Range Rocket Defense Program, said that of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2013 by section 201 for research, development, test, and evaluation, defense-wide, and available for the Missile Defense Agency, $210,000,000 may be provided to the Government of Israel for the Iron Dome short-range rocket defense program as specified in the funding table in section 4201.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 17 January 2014, President Barack Obama signed the fiscal year 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act. The bill provides $235 million for Israel to procure the Iron Dome system. The Israeli government has also agreed to spend more than half the funds the United States provides for the Iron Dome system in the United States. Funds going to U.S. contractors will increase to 30 percent in 2014 and 55 percent in 2015 from 3 percent previously, according to a U.S. Missile Defense Agency report to Congress.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 1 August 2014, Congress approved a measure to deliver an additional $225 million in aid to Israel, with the aim of replenishing funds for the Iron Dome system in the midst of the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Following the signing of bill, for which "the Senate and House of Representatives as well as Republicans and Democrats set[ting] aside differences to advance Israel's emergency request," the White House stated that "The United States has been clear since the start of this conflict that no country can abide rocket attacks against its civilians" and that it "supports Israel's right to defend itself against such attacks." Senate Report 113-211 from the U.S. Government Publishing Office, which accompanied text H.R. 4870, recommended an increase in funding for the program for FY2015. The report calculates "U.S. investment in Iron Dome production since fiscal year 2011" to be over $1 billion.


title: Iron Dome

text: Until the 2021 war in Gaza, the US had contributed a total of US$1.6 billion to the Iron Dome defense system. After the end of the 2021 conflict, Israel asked the US for another US$ 1 billion for replenishing the Iron Dome batteries, which was approved by the US Congress in 2022.


title: Iron Dome

text: With the United States on track to greatly increase funding for Iron Dome, there have been calls for technology transfer and co-production of Iron Dome in the United States. Just as the US and Israel share co-production of the Arrow III missile system, with Boeing manufacturing 40–50 percent of the production content, there has been support in the U.S. Congress, media and think tanks in favor of co-production. The U.S. House of Representatives included report language in its FY-2013 Defense Authorization Act supporting Iron Dome with $680 million but also instructing that the Director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, "should explore any opportunity to enter into co-production of the Iron Dome system with Israel, in light of the significant U.S. investment in this system." There were media reports that the Pentagon was requesting similar language in the Senate Defense Authorization Act as well as the respective House and Senate defense appropriations bills for 2013. Adding Iron Dome to the list of high-tech military programs built jointly by both nations would help further strengthen ties between Israel and the United States.


title: Iron Dome

text: In July 2014 it was announced that Raytheon would be the major U.S. partner in co-production of major components for the Iron Dome's Tamir intercepting missile. The U.S. firm will supply components through various subcontractors. Rafael and Raytheon had teamed to offer the Iron Dome launcher and Tamir interceptor, known as SkyHunter in the U.S., to the U.S. Army as part of its Indirect Fires Protection Capability (IFPC) system, but Dynetics was instead chosen offering a launcher based on the Multi-Mission Launcher firing the AIM-9X Sidewinder.


title: Iron Dome

text: Maf'at, decided to start the program that would include the system's research and a demonstration of the intercepting system. In 2007, Israel commissioned the development of Iron Dome, choosing Israeli contractor Rafael over the American giant Lockheed Martin. Israeli company mPrest Systems was put in charge of programming the core of Iron Dome's battle management system. Iron Dome went from the drawing board to combat readiness within less than four years, a remarkably short period of time for a weapons system designed from scratch, according to military experts.


title: Iron Dome

text: According to the leading developers of Iron Dome, due to schedule and low-cost settings constraints, some of the missile components have been taken from a toy car sold by Toys "R" Us.


title: Iron Dome

text: During the first stage of Iron Dome's operational duty, the Israeli Air Force included many soldiers from Sderot, citing high motivation among the city's pre-army youth to be part of the project. The 947th "Marksmen" Stinger Battalion of the Israeli Air Defense Network was chosen as the first unit to become familiar with and operate Iron Dome.


title: Iron Dome

text: Although Iron Dome has proven its effectiveness against rocket attacks, Defense Ministry officials are concerned it will not be able to handle more massive arsenals possessed by Hezbollah in Lebanon should a conflict arise. Although in Operation Protective Edge it had a 90 percent hit rate against only rockets determined to be headed for populated areas, 735 intercepts were made at a cost of $70,000–100,000 per interceptor; with an estimated 100,000 rockets possessed by Hezbollah, Iron Dome systems could be fiscally and physically overwhelmed by dozens of incoming salvos. In 2014 Directed-energy weapons were being investigated as a complement to Iron Dome, with lower system cost and lower cost per shot. Solid-state lasers worldwide have power levels ranging from 10–40 kW; to destroy a rocket safely from away, several low-power beams could coordinate and converge on one spot to burn through its outer shell and destroy it. Because laser beams become distorted and ineffective in foggy or heavy cloud conditions, any laser weapon would need to be complemented by Iron Dome.


title: Iron Dome

text: In 1996, the Israelis developed the Nautilus prototype and later deployed it in Kiryat Shmona, Israel's northernmost city along the Lebanese border. It used a collection of components from other systems and succeeded in keeping a beam on the same point for two continuous seconds using an early prototype of the Green Pine radar. Nautilus succeeded in its goal to prove the concept was feasible, but it was never deployed operationally, as the government believed that sending in ground troops to stop rocket fire at source was more cost-effective.


title: Iron Dome

text: At the 2014 Singapore Air Show, Rafael unveiled its Iron Beam laser air-defense system. Iron Beam is a directed-energy weapon made to complement the Iron Dome system by using a high-energy laser to destroy rockets, mortar bombs, and other airborne threats. Development of the system began some time after the joint United States and Israel Nautilus laser development program ended.


title: Iron Dome

text: In December 2014, former Israeli Air Force chief and head of Boeing Israel David Ivry showed interest in the American Laser Weapon System (LaWS). Earlier that month, the U.S. Navy had revealed that the LaWS had been mounted on the and locked onto and destroyed designated targets with near-instantaneous lethality, with each laser shot costing less than $1.


title: Iron Dome

text: In February 2022, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett announced that a ground-based laser system would begin deployment within a year, first as a trial and then operationally. The system will first be deployed to the south of the country to areas most under threat from rockets fired from the Gaza Strip; the ultimate goal is for Israel to be surrounded by a "laser wall" to protect from rockets, missiles, and UAVs. While lasers are cheaper to fire per shot, they can be impacted by weather, have a slow rate of fire, and have less range. Therefore they will be used in conjunction with Iron Dome in situations where they can reduce overall interception costs. A procurement contract for the Iron Beam system was signed the next month, however the schedule for fielding was revealed to be delayed for several years.


title: Iron Dome

text: In October 2014, Rafael unveiled a naval version of the Iron Dome called C-Dome. It is designed to protect vessels in blue and littoral waters from ballistic trajectory and direct attack weapons fired in saturation attacks. C-Dome includes a 10-round canister loaded with vertically-launched Tamir interceptors for 360-degree coverage, a feature not supported by the land-based Iron Dome system; the ship's own surveillance radar is used to negate the need for a dedicated fire control radar. The system has a small footprint to enable installation on small ships like offshore patrol vessels, corvettes, and even stationary oil rigs. Though in the very early stages of concept development, Rafael estimated that it could take less than a year to build a prototype C-Dome system. Preliminary discussions with potential users have already been launched. The C-Dome will be used on the Israeli Navy's Sa'ar 6-class corvettes. On 18 May 2016 Col. Ariel Shir, head of Israeli Naval operation systems announced that the system had successfully intercepted and destroyed a salvo of short range missiles while deployed on a naval vessel at sea. On 27 November 2017, the Israeli military declared initial operational capability for the C-Dome, completing more than 18 months of integration and design work.


title: Iron Dome

text: The Iron Dome has been pitched to the IDF as a more cost-effective anti-aircraft system to intercept unmanned aerial vehicles. Some estimates of the cost of a Tamir interceptor are around $100,000, but it is still 95 percent cheaper than using a MIM-104 Patriot, the primary Israeli interceptor, costing $2–3 million. Although the Patriot has broader coverage, the low cost of UAVs and operational scenarios they would be encountered in would make Iron Dome equally effective against them. No material upgrades would be needed to optimize the system for drone-killing missions, as this role and capability has been publicized from its inception.


title: Iron Dome

text: In July 2015, Rafael released video footage of Iron Dome interceptors destroying several low and high-flying UAVs in a test. Although some targets were destroyed by proximity-operated warheads, in others the interceptor achieved a kinetic hit. The company says the system is capable of destroying armed UAVs before they can get close enough to release their munitions, and most medium-altitude reconnaissance UAVs before they are close enough to survey an area.


title: Iron Dome

text: In June 2016, it was revealed that the Iron Dome had been tested to successfully intercept salvos of artillery shells, which are typically difficult to destroy because of the need to penetrate the thickness of their metal casings to get to the warhead, and "multiple" air-to-ground precision guided munitions (PGMs) similar to the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM).


title: Iron Dome

text: The Iron Dome system began operating in early 2011, initially deployed at air force bases in southern Israel. It was designated to be set up in other areas, such as the town of Sderot, during significant escalations along the Gaza border.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 27 March 2011, "Al Jazeera English" reported that Iron Dome has been deployed for the first time. Brigadier-General Doron Gavish, commander of Israel's air defense corps, said Iron Dome had passed a series of tests and reached its "evaluation phase" in the field. It was stationed near Beersheba, following two rocket attacks on the area that month.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 7 April 2011, after deployment as an "operational experiment" on 3 April, the Iron Dome system in the area of Ashkelon successfully intercepted a Grad rocket fired at the city, the first time a short-range rocket fired from Gaza had been intercepted. According to reports from the area, the interception could be seen in Israeli towns near northern Gaza. Immediately afterwards an IAF aircraft successfully attacked the squad that had fired the rocket. Later that day the IDF stressed that the system, though operational, was still under evaluation. On 8 April the system successfully intercepted another four rockets.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 12 April, the IDF announced it would accelerate the introduction of a third Iron Dome battery. According to "Haaretz", IDF officials indicated that the security establishment intended to ensure that the third battery would become available in six months, instead of the expected 18 months. According to the new plan, launchers from existing systems would be combined with other components that had already been manufactured to speed up the battery's production. In that way, the first operational Iron Dome battalion would come into being within six months, with batteries that could be deployed in the south or in other arenas.


title: Iron Dome

text: Also according to "Haaretz", the IDF was to finalize its long-term Iron Dome acquisition program—nicknamed "Halamish"—within a few months (from April 2011), which would indicate the final number of systems to be introduced into the military. Israel Air Force officials estimated the number of Iron Dome systems needed to cover threatened areas as thirteen. According to Meir Elran, a scholar at the Institute of National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, Israel would need a total of 20 batteries to provide adequate defense for its borders with Gaza and Lebanon. Such a deployment would require financial assistance from the United States, but he said that even in the original limited form, officially designated a trial period, the system was important.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 5 August 2011, the IDF redeployed the Iron Dome system near Ashkelon following days of heightened rocket fire from Gaza into Israel. The deployment came a day after Ashkelon mayor Benny Vaknin sent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak a letter asking them to redeploy the system.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 18 August 2011, four rockets were fired from Gaza at Ashkelon. The system determined that two were a threat and intercepted them, ignoring the other two which were directed at non-populated areas. No injuries or damage were reported. Defense officials said that Iron Dome would be re-deployed in Beersheba.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 20 August 2011, while engaging with a volley of seven rockets fired almost simultaneously at Be'er Sheva from Gaza, one was not intercepted by the defense system, exploding in a residential area and killing one person. Brig. Gen. Doron Gavish, commander of the IAF's Air Defense Corps, said on the following day that "we said in advance that this wasn't a hermetic system," adding that the air defense units were learning on the fly and improving the performance of Iron Dome while operating it. "This is the first system of its kind anywhere in the world; it is in its first operational test; and we've already intercepted a large number of rockets targeting Israeli communities, saving many civilian lives," Gavish said.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 21 August 2011, "Ynetnews" reported that the success of the Iron Dome system against Gazan rocket fire had southern city mayors battling over the right to be the next to have it deployed in their area. The IDF stressed that "no system can offer airtight protection" and that the system positioned in Ashkelon was incapable of extending its defense to Ashdod, but this did not stop the mayors from pressuring the Defense Ministry and the IDF to position Iron Dome batteries within their city limits. Ashdod, Ofakim, Netivot, Beersheba, and Ashkelon have all pursued the system, but the IDF had only two batteries available.


title: Iron Dome

text: On the same day, "The Jerusalem Post" reported that Defense Minister Ehud Barak announced that a third Iron Dome battery would be installed in the region "within weeks", and estimated that nine more batteries would be positioned within the next two years. In attacks shortly before, the Iron Dome system had successfully intercepted about 85% of the rockets identified as threats to populated areas by the Battle Management Control (BMC) system launched at Israel from Gaza.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 23 August 2011, "Globes" reported that Rafael would invest tens of millions of shekels in the following months to open a second production line for the Iron Dome's Tamir interceptor missiles. Future operational needs, as well as the plan to build two more Iron Dome batteries by the end of the year, necessitated the increase of missile production.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 31 August 2011, the IAF deployed a third Iron Dome battery outside Ashdod. Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who had said earlier in the week that it would take 10 days until the battery was deployed near Ashdod, praised the IDF and the IAF Air Defense Division for beating the deadline and beginning the deployment before the opening of the school year.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 1 December 2011, Brig. Gen. Gavish said that a fourth battery of the system would be deployed in the "coming months". He spoke to "The Jerusalem Post" ahead of the Air Defense Division's largest-ever draft of soldiers needed to fill the ranks of its increasing number of units and battalions. "The numbers will continue to grow and another battery will become operational in the beginning of the year," he said. On 8 December, "outstanding" officer Capt. Roytal Ozen began to command the battery's unit in preparation for its deployment, the first woman to be in charge of the system.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 6 December 2011, Matan Vilnai, the Israeli Minister of Home Front Defense, said that the Defense Ministry was considering a permanent deployment of an Iron Dome battery in the Haifa Port to protect the oil refineries there against future Hezbollah rocket attacks. "The continued work of the oil refineries is critical for the Israeli economy during a time of war," he said. During the Second Lebanon War in 2006, a number of Katyusha rockets struck Haifa but did not hit the refineries. Officials were concerned that a direct hit on one of the refineries could cause numerous casualties as a result of leakage of dangerous chemical substances. The port was also the site of a chemical terminal that included containers of ammonia and ethylene gas.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 30 December 2011, "The Jerusalem Post" reported that a performance analysis it had obtained shows that Iron Dome was successful in downing rockets from Gaza 75% of the times it fired. It said two interceptors are usually fired at each rocket. In April 2011, for example, the system succeeded in intercepting eight of 10 rockets. Following the October violence, the IDF conducted an inquiry into the Iron Dome's performance and discovered that a radar failure caused some of the interceptors to miss their targets, a problem since corrected. An officer told the "Post" that "seventy-five percent is impressive, but we would still like to see it perform better."


title: Iron Dome

text: On 22 August 2011, "Haaretz" reported that according to Israeli security sources, Palestinian militants changed their rocket-launching tactics in an attempt to evade the two Iron Dome batteries deployed in southern Israel. The new tactics included aiming more frequently at areas beyond the Iron Dome protection range. After the Palestinian launch teams realized that the systems deployed in the previous two weeks around Ashkelon and Be'er Sheva provided near-perfect protection from rockets, they began firing more frequently at Ashdod and Ofakim. When they did aim at Beersheba on 21 August, they did not fire one or two rockets, as in the past, but rather a volley of seven rockets almost simultaneously. Iron Dome intercepted five of them successfully, but one penetrated the defense system, exploding in a residential area and killing a man.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 8 August 2011, the Israeli High Court of Justice rejected a petition asking that the government be ordered to deploy the system in Gaza border communities. In rejecting the petition, Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch and Justices Salim Joubran and Uzi Fogelman ruled that in balancing all relevant considerations including budgets, changing security realities and operational matters, the government's decision not to deploy the Iron Dome in the area was reasonable. The panel of justices also said that the court had no reason to intervene in operational decisions regarding where to deploy the Iron Dome system. "We believe the [government] will make the necessary decisions in accordance with the time and place requirements," they said.


title: Iron Dome

text: In its petition, the Eshkol Regional Council argued that the government should be ordered to deploy the Iron Dome to protect communities between 4.5 and 7 kilometers from Gaza from rocket fire. Government-funded rocket-roof protection is in place for homes in communities within 4.5 km of Gaza, but not for structures further from the border.


title: Iron Dome

text: The state said that the High Court should not intervene in the "military decision" regarding how and where to deploy the anti-rocket system. It also argued that if the court were to order it to deploy Iron Dome in a specific area, budgetary limitations would result in other communities not receiving protection, particularly as the range of Palestinian rockets had grown in recent years and therefore it was not possible to deploy Iron Dome to protect every community.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 26 December 2011, an accident occurred during a maintenance drill involving one of the systems. While loading missiles into a launcher vehicle from a bunker at the Air Defense Network's school near kibbutz Mashabei Sadeh in the Negev, two soldiers caused twenty Tamir interceptors to fall from a height of four meters near soldiers and officers without detonating, causing no injury, but making them unserviceable. "Ynetnews" reported that the soldiers were never in danger because the interceptor missiles are equipped with a security mechanism that prevents premature explosions. The IDF Spokesperson's Unit said that the Air Force commander, Maj. Gen. Ido Nehushtan, appointed a committee to examine the accident and ordered an immediate stop to all Air Defense Network maintenance work until a preliminary investigation was concluded. It also said that during the following week actions would be taken to "improve skills and safety awareness". A security official told "Reshet Bet" that the failure was twofold in that the soldiers and their commander deviated from severely strict safety protocols, and 20 costly interceptors were lost. "Walla!" website reported that the soldiers made a mistake in loading the missiles and they fell backwards. The website calculated the damage at US$1 million (at $50,000 per missile). The missiles were transferred back to Rafael to determine whether they could be repaired.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 1 January 2012, those soldiers were sentenced to punishment by the school's commanding officer following an inquiry into their conduct regarding the incident. The lieutenant in charge of the loading crew was given 21 days in "mahbosh", while the sergeant in charge of the technician crew was given 14 days.


title: Iron Dome

text: After the IDF killing of Zohair al-Qaisi, the secretary general of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza on 9 March 2012, more than 300 rockets were fired on Israel. Some 177 fell on Israeli territory. The Iron Dome system had successfully intercepted at least 56 rockets (directed at population centers) in 71 attempts.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 11 July 2012, "Ynetnews" reported that on that day the Iron Dome system was deployed in the greater Eilat area as a part of an IDF survey meant to test it in various areas across Israel. The IDF published on its website that the Iron Dome battery will be temporarily stationed there as part of an effort to test and prepare different sites across the country for the possibility of permanently stationing there additional batteries. "Since the system continues to grow and improve, it is important to test potential sites," said a commander from the Air Defense Formation. "After stationing Iron Dome batteries in numerous regions in southern Israel, including Ashkelon, Ashdod, Netivot and Gush Dan—it is time to test the southernmost region in the country, Eilat." "Haaretz" reported that an official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the interceptors were set up on 9 July. Three weeks beforehand, two Katyhusha rockets were fired into southern Israel, and according to "The Jerusalem Post" the IDF believes that they originated from the Sinai. According to the report, IDF assessments are that they were either fired by a Palestinian rocket cell from Gaza—affiliated either with Hamas or Islamic Jihad—or by Bedouin freelancers who work for them. The launches followed an earlier one in April 2012, when at least one Katyusha rocket was fired from the Sinai to Eilat. "Ynetnews" reported that according to a military source, following these rocket attacks, the IDF decided not to take any chances and calibrated the system to the region's topography, before finally deploying it. The system's deployment was coordinated with local communities and the City of Eilat, to prevent public panic.


title: Iron Dome

text: According to the Israeli Air Force, during operation "Pillar of Defense" (14–21 November 2012) Iron Dome made 421 interceptions. On 17 November, after two rockets targeted Tel Aviv during the operation, a battery was deployed in the area. Within hours, a third rocket was intercepted by the system. This fifth battery had not been scheduled to come into service until early 2013.


title: Iron Dome

text: The system was employed during operation "Protective Edge", intercepting rockets launched from Gaza towards southern, central and northern parts of Israel. As of August 2014, ten Iron Dome batteries had been deployed throughout Israel. During the 50 days of the conflict 4,594 rockets and mortars were fired at Israeli targets; Iron Dome systems intercepted 735 projectiles that it determined were threatening, achieving an intercept success rate of 90 percent. Only 70 rockets fired at Israel from Gaza failed to be intercepted. One civilian was killed and three others and nine servicemen were wounded by mortar bombs, but they were not in areas protected by Iron Dome. Only 25 percent of rockets fired were determined to be threatening due to the low accuracy and unstable trajectory of the poor-quality rockets fired. Six systems had been deployed prior to hostilities, and three more were rushed into service for a total of nine batteries used during the conflict; a tenth system was delivered, but not deployed due to a shortage of staff.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 10 May 2018, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran allegedly launched 20 rockets from Syria toward Israel in retaliation for recent Israeli airstrikes against IRGC facilities. According to an IDF spokesperson, 16 of the rockets fell short of the Israeli border, and Iron Dome intercepted the other four. Israel reported no casualties or damage.


title: Iron Dome

text: The Iron Dome system intercepted 100 rockets that were launched from the Gaza Strip in mid-November 2018.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 21 January 2019, the IDF released footage online of a Syrian Arab Army rocket attack on the Golan Heights being intercepted by Iron Dome. The video was shot by skiers at Mount Hermon ski resort; Israeli authorities announced that the resort was closed until further notice. The attack was in response to Israel's launching of nine rockets at SAA targets in western Damascus.


title: Iron Dome

text: During the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis, over 4,300 rockets were fired at Israel by Hamas from Gaza from 11 to 21 May. In the first 24 hours of the conflict 470 rockets were fired, a much higher rate than had been attained in previous conflicts. Of the rockets, 17% were long-range attacks on Tel Aviv, again more than previously. About 680 of the rockets fired during hostilities fell short and landed in Gaza; the Iron Dome system intercepted about 90% of the rockets heading to populated areas within Israel. During the operation Iron Dome shot down a bomb-laden drone.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 15 May 2021, Israel destroyed the twelve-storey Jala tower building, which housed the Gaza offices of Associated Press (AP) and Al Jazeera, with an air strike, giving one hour's notice for evacuation. Israel said that Hamas was carrying out signals intelligence (SIGINT), electronic signals intelligence (ELINT), and electronic warfare (EW) operations, including the development of an electronic system to jam the Iron Dome, from within the building.


title: Iron Dome

text: In 2017 it was reported that Israel was planning to deploy Iron Dome batteries at sea to protect off-shore gas platforms, working in conjunction with Israel's Barak 8 missile system. Two Iron Dome batteries were to be deployed on each of the Israeli Navy's Sa'ar 6-class corvettes, which are in charge of guarding the natural gas platforms off Israel's coast and its shipping lanes.


title: Iron Dome

text: During a military exercise in February 2022, an advanced model of the Iron Dome installed on the Sa'ar-6 corvettes was able to shot down rockets, drones and cruise missiles at sea.


title: Iron Dome

text: Some Iron Dome systems have been exported. A weakness for most potential markets is that each Iron Dome system protects no more than ; this is effective in a small country like Israel, but not for larger states. Even in Israel, the batteries have to be moved around according to perceived risk of attack. Singapore, a sovereign island city-state, is reported to have purchased the Iron Dome, and the US Army has bought two batteries to protect overseas bases.


title: Iron Dome

text: Singapore is believed to have at least one battery, but the government never commented on its existence. Singapore was reported to be the main albeit secret funder of the R&D behind the Iron Dome project. Two Iron Dome radars EL/M-2084 were used in a Singapore military exercise in Thailand in 2016, but was first pubicly displayed two years later in the Singapore Airshow 2018, without the launcher nor the battle command unit.


title: Iron Dome

text: Following the system's deployment in April 2011, Iron Dome was used to successfully intercept Katyusha rockets fired by Palestinian militants. In August that year, Iron Dome intercepted 20 missiles and rockets fired into Israel. However, in one instance the system destroyed four rockets fired at the city of Beersheba but failed to stop a fifth, which killed one man and injured several others.


title: Iron Dome

text: In November 2012, during Operation Pillar of Defense, the Iron Dome's effectiveness was estimated by Israeli officials at between 75 and 95 percent. According to Israeli officials, of the approximately 1,000 missiles and rockets fired into Israel by Hamas from the beginning of Operation Pillar of Defense up to 17 November 2012, Iron Dome identified two-thirds as not posing a threat and intercepted 90 percent of the remaining 300. During this period the only Israeli casualties were three individuals killed in missile attacks after a malfunction of the Iron Dome system.


title: Iron Dome

text: In comparison with other air defense systems, the effectiveness rate of Iron Dome is very high. Defense consultant Steven Zaloga stated that Iron Dome's destruction of 90 percent of missiles it targeted is "an extremely high level", above that usually expected for air defense systems. "Slate" reported that the effectiveness rate is "unprecedented" in comparison with earlier systems such as the Patriot missile defence system.


title: Iron Dome

text: Defense reporter Mark Thompson wrote that, the "lack of Israeli casualties suggests Iron Dome is the most-effective, most-tested missile shield the world has ever seen."


title: Iron Dome

text: During Operation Protective Edge Iron Dome's interceptors were claimed to have struck down 87–90% of their targets, totaling 735 successful interceptions.


title: Iron Dome

text: In the 2006 war with Hezbollah, prior to Iron Dome's development, during 34 days of fighting, 4,000 rockets landed and 53 Israelis were killed. However, in the 2014 war with Gaza, the 50-day conflict and 3,360 rockets resulted in just two rocket-related deaths. In 2006, about 30,000 insurance claims for rocket-related damage were filed while in 2014, there were just 2,400.


title: Iron Dome

text: On 25 March 2019 a J-80 rocket fired from Gaza hit a house in Mishmeret, Israel. According to Hamas the J-80 travels on a nonlinear path and cannot be intercepted by Iron Dome.


title: Iron Dome

text: In 2010, before the system was declared operational, Iron Dome was criticized by Reuven Pedatzur, a military analyst, former fighter pilot and professor of political science at Tel Aviv University for costing too much compared to the cost of a Qassam rocket (fired by Palestinian forces), so that launching very large numbers of Qassams could essentially attack Israel's financial means. Rafael responded that the cost issue was exaggerated since Iron Dome intercepts only rockets determined to constitute a threat, and that the lives saved and the strategic impact are worth the cost.


title: Iron Dome

text: The estimated cost of each Tamir interceptor missile was cited in 2014 as from US$20,000 to 50,000; a 2020 analysis estimated a total cost of $100,000 to $150,000 for each interception. In contrast, a crudely manufactured Qassam rocket costs around $800 and the Hamas Grad rocket costs only several thousand dollars.


title: Iron Dome

text: Other anti-rocket systems, such as the Nautilus laser defense system, were argued to be more effective. From 1995 to 2005, the United States and Israel jointly developed Nautilus but scrapped the system after concluding it was not feasible, having spent $600 million. The US Navy continued R&D on the system. American defense company Northrop Grumman proposed developing a more advanced prototype of Nautilus, Skyguard.


title: Iron Dome

text: Skyguard would use laser beams to intercept rockets, with each beam discharge costing an estimated $1,000–$2,000. With an investment of $180 million, Northrop Grumman claimed it could possibly deploy the system within 18 months. Israeli defense officials rejected the proposal, citing the extended timeline and additional costs.


title: Iron Dome

text: In a 2012 op-ed in "Haaretz", Jamie Levin suggested that the success of the Iron Dome system was likely to increase demands to field additional systems across Israel. Budget shortfalls meant that Israel would be forced to weigh spending on missile defenses against other expenditures. Such funds, he argued, would probably come from programs intended to help the most vulnerable sectors of society, such as social welfare.


title: Iron Dome

text: Iron Dome can potentially be overcome by swarms of many missiles that exceed its capability to intercept them, and by sheer numbers of attacking missiles during a campaign if not enough interceptors are available to counter them. Also, the cost of each interception is high, while attacking rockets can be relatively inexpensive. These are among the reasons encouraging the development of the Iron Beam energy weapon to complement Iron Dome, which is cheap to fire, has unlimited "ammunition", and is effective at short range. Iron Dome is also significantly less effective against very short-distance saturation strikes. Hamas is aware of these vulnerabilities. In addition to having very large numbers of rockets and using saturation strikes, they consistently fire rockets at low trajectories to make them harder to intercept.


title: Iron Dome

text: According to Ronen Bergman, in 2012, during Operation Pillar of Defense, Israel agreed to an early cease-fire "for a reason that has remained a closely guarded secret: The Iron Dome anti-missile defense system... had run out of ammunition." Bergman says that as a result of the experience, Israel had tried to prepare larger stocks of interceptors for future rounds of fighting.


title: Iron Dome

text: During the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis, Israel said that Hamas had been developing an electronic system to jam Iron Dome; Israeli aircraft destroyed a building said to have been used for this purpose. The Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov has explained the flaws in Iron Dome, if deployed to Ukraine: "We all know the example of Israel, which protects the sky quite well. We all know the name Iron Dome, but even it does not give 100% protection. In fact, I’ve been to Israel and talked to their manufacturers and state enterprises. Iron Dome was built [for protection] against slow, low-altitude, low-impact missiles that were basically made in garages. Iron Dome does not protect against cruise and ballistic missiles."


title: Iron Dome

text: Prior to its deployment, the Iron Dome was criticized as ineffective in countering the Qassam threat for the southern city of Sderot, given the short distance—840m, half a mile, from the closest point in Sderot to Gaza—and flight time between the much-attacked city and the rocket launching pads in the Gaza Strip. Israeli defense officials insisted in 2008 that with recent improvements to Iron Dome, the system was fully able to intercept Qassams.


title: Iron Dome

text: An unpublished 2013 report by Theodore Postol, Mordechai Shefer and Richard Lloyd, argued that the official effectiveness figures for Iron Dome during Operation Pillar of Defense were incorrect. Although Postol had earlier lauded Iron Dome's effectiveness, after studying YouTube videos of the warhead interceptions as well as police reports and other data, he argued that "Iron Dome's intercept rate, defined as destruction of the rocket's warhead was relatively low, perhaps as low as 5%, but could well be lower." Postol reached this conclusion mainly from an analysis of non-official footage of interceptions taken by civilians and published on YouTube.


title: Iron Dome

text: The Israeli Institute of National Security Studies published a detailed rebuttal to Postol's claims, labeling it "dubious research without access to credible data". The rebuttal stated:


title: Iron Dome

text: Uzi Rubin writes: "So how did Postol reach such a radical conclusion? He made a series of assumptions on Iron Dome performance, most of them very wrong, and examined public domain video clips shot from smartphones and media cameras that showed the wind-sheared smoke trails of Iron Dome interceptors, but in which the engaged rockets remained invisible. From this half-blind sky picture, he guessed interception geometries that, when matched with his own gross underestimation of Iron Dome performance, yielded an intuitive estimate of a 5 percent to 10 percent success rate... Postol's estimates are simply wrong."


title: Iron Dome

text: Postol additionally used the amount of claims filed by the Property Tax Authority and the number of Israeli Police Reports (taken from the Israeli Police website) relating to rockets to support his argument. In relation to Postol's argument based on the number of reports the Israeli Police received, Israeli Institute of National Security Studies wrote: "However, Israel Police reports on calls from citizens, and these include reports on falling fragments, rocket parts, and duds."


title: Iron Dome

text: Research published in 2018 analyzed the numbers of deaths, injuries, and property damage claims per rocket fired for four conflicts. These were the Second Lebanon War of 2006, Operation Cast Lead in 2008–2009, Operation Pillar of Defense in 2012, and Operation Protective Edge in 2014. By comparing the loss rates per rocket of the latter two operations (which had Iron Dome batteries) to the first two (which did not), it estimated the interceptor batteries' overall effectiveness at reducing Israeli losses from rockets.


title: Iron Dome

text: Those estimates suggest Iron Dome intercepted 59 to 75 percent of all threatening rockets during Protective Edge. "Threatening" means the rockets struck populated areas or were intercepted beforehand. The interceptions likely prevented $42 to $86 million in property damage, three to six deaths, and 120 to 250 injuries. Since those percentages include rockets anywhere in Israel, the high interception rates claimed for only the areas that batteries were defending seem plausible.


title: Iron Dome

text: By contrast, Iron Dome apparently intercepted less than 32 percent of threatening rockets during Pillar of Defense, perhaps much less, preventing at most two deaths, 110 injuries and US$7 million in damage. The research also implies the number of rocket hits on populated areas was understated. Conversely, the number of threatening rockets seems overstated. The effective interception rate for Pillar of Defense therefore may have been markedly less than reported.


title: Iron Dome

text: The study further estimated that improvements in Israeli civil defenses, such as warning sirens and hardened shelters, were at least as good as Iron Dome at reducing civilian deaths and injuries from rockets.


title: Iron Dome

text: These results partly support critics (like Theodore Postol) of Iron Dome's effectiveness during Pillar of Defense. However, they also partly support proponents (like Uzi Rubin) of the system's effectiveness during Protective Edge.


title: Iron Dome

text: Yoav Fromer, writing in "The Washington Post", thanked Iron Dome for the lack of fatalities and the relatively low casualty rate among Israeli civilians, and said that the technology appears to provide "both a physical and a psychological solace that enables Israelis to go about their business." However, in his view, over time, Iron Dome may do the Israeli public more harm than good because despite the fact it is a "tactical miracle" it may help create a serious strategic problem to Israelis' long-term security because, by temporarily minimizing the dangers posed by rocket attacks, it distracts Israelis from seeking a broader regional political solution that could finally make systems such as Iron Dome unnecessary. In Fromer's view, the Israeli government is "not exactly brimming with creative ideas to reignite the peace process with the Palestinians. And with Iron Dome, why would it? As long as the Israeli public believes it is safe, for now, under the soothing embrace of technology, it will not demand that its political leaders wage diplomacy to end violence that mandated Iron Dome in the first place. Since Iron Dome has transformed a grim reality into a rather bearable ordeal, Israelis have lost the sense of urgency and outrage that might have pushed their government" to make necessary concessions in exchange for peace. In Fromer's view, Israelis risk confusing the short-term military advantage provided by Iron Dome with the long term need for an original and comprehensive diplomatic solution.


title: Iron Dome

text: Amir Peretz, the 2006–2007 Israeli Defense Minister who pushed through the implementation of Iron Dome, told "The Washington Post" that the system is no more than a stopgap measure, and that "In the end, the only thing that will bring true quiet is a diplomatic solution."


title: Moai

text: Moai or moʻai ( ; ; ) are monolithic human figures carved by the Rapa Nui people on Rapa Nui in eastern Polynesia between the years 1250 and 1500. Nearly half are still at Rano Raraku, the main moai quarry, but hundreds were transported from there and set on stone platforms called ahu around the island's perimeter. Almost all moai have overly large heads, which comprise three-eighths the size of the whole statue - which has no legs. The moai are chiefly the living faces ("aringa ora") of deified ancestors ("aringa ora ata tepuna"). The statues still gazed inland across their clan lands when Europeans first visited the island in 1722, but all of them had fallen by the latter part of the 19th century. The moai were toppled in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, possibly as a result of European contact or internecine tribal wars.


title: Moai

text: The production and transportation of the more than 900 statues is considered a remarkable creative and physical feat. The tallest moai erected, called "Paro", was almost high and weighed 82 tonnes (80.7 tons). The heaviest moai erected was a shorter but squatter moai at Ahu Tongariki, weighing 86 tonnes (84.6 tons). One unfinished sculpture, if completed, would have been approximately tall, with a weight of about 145–165 tons.


title: Moai

text: The moai are monolithic statues, and their minimalist style reflects forms found throughout Polynesia. Moai are carved from volcanic tuff (solidified ash). The human figures would be outlined in the rock wall first, then chipped away until only the image was left. The over-large heads (a three-to-five ratio between the head and the trunk, a sculptural trait consistent with the Polynesian belief in the sanctity of the chiefly head) have heavy brows and elongated noses with a distinctive fish-hook-shaped curl of the nostrils. The lips protrude in a thin pout. Like the nose, the ears are elongated and oblong in form. The jaw lines stand out against the truncated neck. The torsos are heavy, and, sometimes, the clavicles are subtly outlined in stone. The arms are carved in bas relief and rest against the body in various positions, hands and long slender fingers resting along the crests of the hips, meeting at the hami (loincloth), with the thumbs sometimes pointing towards the navel. Generally, the anatomical features of the backs are not detailed, but sometimes bear a ring and girdle motif on the buttocks and lower back. Except for one kneeling moai, the statues do not have clearly visible legs.


title: Moai

text: Though moai are whole-body statues, they are often referred to as "Easter Island heads" in some popular literature. This is partly because of the disproportionate size of most moai heads, and partly because many of the iconic images for the island showing upright moai are the statues on the slopes of Rano Raraku, many of which are buried to their shoulders. Some of the "heads" at Rano Raraku have been excavated and their bodies seen, and observed to have markings that had been protected from erosion by their burial.


title: Moai

text: The average height of the moai is about , with the average width at the base around . These massive creations usually weigh around 12.5 tonnes (13.8 tons) each.


title: Moai

text: All but 53 of the more than 900 moai known to date were carved from tuff (a compressed volcanic ash) from Rano Raraku, where 394 moai in varying states of completion are still visible today. There are also 13 moai carved from basalt, 22 from trachyte and 17 from fragile red scoria. At the end of carving, the builders would rub the statue with pumice.


title: Moai

text: Easter Island statues are known for their large, broad noses and big chins, along with rectangle-shaped ears and deep eye slits. Their bodies are normally squatting, with their arms resting in different positions and are without legs. The majority of the ahu are found along the coast and face inland towards the community. There are some inland ahu such as Ahu Akivi. These moai face the community but given the small size of the island, also appear to face the coast.


title: Moai

text: In 1979, Sergio Rapu Haoa and a team of archaeologists discovered that the hemispherical or deep elliptical eye sockets were designed to hold coral eyes with either black obsidian or red scoria pupils. The discovery was made by collecting and reassembling broken fragments of white coral that were found at the various sites. Subsequently, previously uncategorized finds in the Easter Island museum were re-examined and recategorized as eye fragments. It is thought that the moai with carved eye sockets were probably allocated to the ahu and ceremonial sites, suggesting that a selective Rapa Nui hierarchy was attributed to the moai design until its demise with the advent of the religion revolving around the tangata manu.


title: Moai

text: Many archaeologists suggest that "[the] statues were thus symbols of authority and power, both religious and political. But they were not only symbols. To the people who erected and used them, they were actual repositories of sacred spirit. Carved stone and wooden objects in ancient Polynesian religions, when properly fashioned and ritually prepared, were believed to be charged by a magical spiritual essence called mana."


title: Moai

text: Archaeologists believe that the statues were a representation of the ancient Polynesians' ancestors. The moai statues face away from the ocean and towards the villages as if to watch over the people. The exception is the seven Ahu Akivi which face out to sea to help travelers find the island. There is a legend that says there were seven men who waited for their king to arrive. A study in 2019 concluded that ancient people believed that quarrying of the moai might be related to improving soil fertility and thereby critical food supplies.


title: Moai

text: The more recent moai had "pukao" on their heads, which represent the topknot of the chieftains. According to local tradition, the mana was preserved in the hair. The pukao were carved out of red scoria, a very light rock from a quarry at Puna Pau. Red itself is considered a sacred color in Polynesia. The added pukao suggest a further status to the moai.


title: Moai

text: When first carved, the surface of the moai was polished smooth by rubbing with pumice. However, the easily worked tuff from which most moai were carved is easily eroded, such that the best place to see the surface detail is on the few moai carved from basalt or in photographs and other archaeological records of moai surfaces protected by burials.


title: Moai

text: Those moai that are less eroded typically have designs carved on their backs and posteriors. The Routledge expedition of 1914 established a cultural link between these designs and the island's traditional tattooing, which had been repressed by missionaries a half-century earlier. Until modern DNA analysis of the islanders and their ancestors, this was key scientific evidence that the moai had been carved by the Rapa Nui and not by a separate group from South America.


title: Moai

text: At least some of the moai were painted. One moai in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art was decorated with a reddish pigment. "Hoa Hakananai'a" was decorated with maroon and white paint until 1868, when it was removed from the island. It is now housed in the British Museum, London, but demands have been made for its return to Rapa Nui.


title: Moai

text: The statues were carved by the Polynesian colonizers of the island, mostly between 1250 and 1500. In addition to representing deceased ancestors, the moai, once they were erected on ahu, may also have been regarded as the embodiment of powerful living or former chiefs and important lineage status symbols. Each moai presented a status: "The larger the statue placed upon an ahu, the more mana the chief who commissioned it had." The competition for grandest statue was ever prevalent in the culture of the Easter Islanders. The proof stems from the varying sizes of moai.


title: Moai

text: Completed statues were moved to ahu mostly on the coast, then erected, sometimes with pukao, red stone cylinders, on their heads. Moai must have been extremely expensive to craft and transport; not only would the actual carving of each statue require effort and resources, but the finished product was then hauled to its final location and erected.


title: Moai

text: The quarries in Rano Raraku appear to have been abandoned abruptly, with a litter of stone tools and many completed moai outside the quarry awaiting transport and almost as many incomplete statues still "in situ" as were installed on ahu. In the nineteenth century, this led to conjecture that the island was the remnant of a sunken continent and that most completed moai were under the sea. That idea has long been debunked, and now it is understood that:


title: Moai

text: It is not known exactly which group in the communities were responsible for carving statues. Oral traditions suggest that the moai were carved either by a distinguished class of professional carvers who were comparable in status to high-ranking members of other Polynesian craft guilds, or, alternatively, by members of each clan. The oral histories show that the Rano Raraku quarry was subdivided into different territories for each clan.


title: Moai

text: Since the island was largely treeless by the time the Europeans first visited, the movement of the statues was a mystery for a long time; pollen analysis has now established that the island was almost totally forested until . The tree pollen disappeared from the record by 1650.


title: Moai

text: It is not known exactly how the moai were moved across the island. Earlier researchers assumed that the process almost certainly required human energy, ropes, and possibly wooden sledges (sleds) and/or rollers, as well as leveled tracks across the island (the Easter Island roads). Another theory suggests that the moai were placed on top of logs and were rolled to their destinations. If that theory is correct it would take 50–150 people to move the moai. The most recent study demonstrates from the evidence in the archaeological record that the statues were harnessed with ropes from two sides and made to "walk" by tilting them from side to side while pulling forward. They would also use a chant, whilst 'walking' the moai. Coordination and cohesion were essential, so they developed a chant in which the rhythm helped them pull at the precise moment necessary.


title: Moai

text: Oral histories recount how various people used divine power to command the statues to walk. The earliest accounts say a king named Tuu Ku Ihu moved them with the help of the god Makemake, while later stories tell of a woman who lived alone on the mountain ordering them about at her will. Scholars currently support the theory that the main method was that the moai were "walked" upright (some assume by a rocking process), as laying it prone on a sledge (the method used by the Easter Islanders to move stone in the 1860s) would have required an estimated 1500 people to move the largest moai that had been successfully erected. In 1998, Jo Anne Van Tilburg suggested fewer than half that number could do it by placing the sledge on lubricated rollers. In 1999, she supervised an experiment to move a nine-tonne moai. A replica was loaded on a sledge built in the shape of an "A" frame that was placed on rollers and 60 people pulled on several ropes in two attempts to tow the moai. The first attempt failed when the rollers jammed up. The second attempt succeeded when tracks were embedded in the ground. This was on flat ground and used eucalyptus wood rather than the native palm trees.


title: Moai

text: In 1986, Pavel Pavel, Thor Heyerdahl and the Kon-Tiki Museum experimented with a five-tonne moai and a nine-tonne moai. With a rope around the head of the statue and another around the base, using eight workers for the smaller statue and 16 for the larger, they "walked" the moai forward by swiveling and rocking it from side to side; however, the experiment was ended early due to damage to the statue bases from chipping. Despite the early end to the experiment, Thor Heyerdahl estimated that this method for a 20-tonne statue over Easter Island terrain would allow per day. Other scholars concluded that it was probably not the way the moai were moved due to the reported damage to the base caused by the "shuffling" motion.


title: Moai

text: Around the same time, archaeologist Charles Love experimented with a 10-tonne replica. His first experiment found rocking the statue to walk it was too unstable over more than a few hundred yards. He then found that placing the statue upright on two sled runners atop log rollers, 25 men were able to move the statue in two minutes. In 2003, further research indicated this method could explain supposedly regularly spaced post holes (his research on this claim has not yet been published) where the statues were moved over rough ground. He suggested the holes contained upright posts on either side of the path so that as the statue passed between them, they were used as cantilevers for poles to help push the statue up a slope without the requirement of extra people pulling on the ropes and similarly to slow it on the downward slope. The poles could also act as a brake when needed.


title: Moai

text: Based on detailed studies of the statues found along prehistoric roads, archaeologists Terry Hunt and Carl Lipo have shown that the pattern of breakage, form and position of statues is consistent with an "upright" hypothesis for transportation. Hunt and Lipo argue that when the statues were carved at a quarry, the sculptors left their bases wide and curved along the front edge. They showed that statues along the road have a center of mass that causes the statue to lean forward. As the statue tilts forward, it rocks sideways along its curved front edge and takes a "step." Large flakes are seen broken off of the sides of the bases. They argue that once the statue was "walked" down the road and installed in the landscape, the wide and curved base was carved down. All of this evidence points to an upright transportation practice.


title: Moai

text: Recent experimental recreations have proven that it is fully possible that the moai were literally walked from their quarries to their final positions by ingenious use of ropes. Teams of workers would have worked to rock the moai back and forth, creating the walking motion and holding the moai upright. If correct, it can be inferred that the fallen road moai were the result of the teams of balancers being unable to keep the statue upright, and it was presumably not possible to lift the statues again once knocked over. However, the debate continues.


title: Moai

text: Originally, Easter Islanders had a paramount chief or single leader. Through the years the power levels veered from sole chiefs to a warrior class known as matatoʻa. The therianthropic figure of a half bird and half-man was the symbol of the matatoʻa; the distinct character connected the sacred site of Orongo. The new cult prompted battles of tribes over worship of ancestry. Creating the moai was one way the islanders would honor their ancestors; during the height of the birdman cult there is evidence which suggests that the construction of moai stopped.


title: Moai

text: "One of the most fascinating sights at Orongo are the hundreds of petroglyphs carved with birdman and Makemake images. Carved into solid basalt, they have resisted ages of harsh weather. It has been suggested that the images represent birdman competition winners. Over 480 birdman petroglyphs have been found on the island, mostly around Orongo." Orongo, the site of the cult's festivities, was a dangerous landscape which consisted of a "narrow ridge between a drop into the ocean on one side and a deep crater on the other". Considered the sacred spot of Orongo, Mata Ngarau was the location where birdman priests prayed and chanted for a successful egg hunt. "The purpose of the birdman contest was to obtain the first egg of the season from the offshore islet Motu Nui. Contestants descended the sheer cliffs of Orongo and swam to Motu Nui where they awaited the coming of the birds. Having procured an egg, the contestant swam back and presented it to his sponsor, who then was declared birdman for that year, an important status position."


title: Moai

text: These figures are much smaller than the better-known stone moai. They are made of wood and have a small, slender aspect, giving them a sad appearance. These figures are believed to have been made after the civilization on Rapa Nui began to collapse, which is why they seem to have a more emaciated appearance to them.


title: Moai

text: At some point after the 1722 Jacob Roggeveen arrival, all of the moai that had been erected on ahu were toppled, with the last standing statues reported in 1838 by Abel Aubert du Petit-Thouars, and no upright statues by 1868, apart from the partially buried ones on the outer slopes of Rano Raraku.


title: Moai

text: Oral histories include one account of a clan pushing down a single moai in the night, but others refer to the "earth shaking", and there are indications that at least some of them fell down due to earthquakes. Some of the moai toppled forward such that their faces were hidden, and often fell in such a way that their necks broke; others fell off of the back of their platforms. Today, about 50 moai have been re-erected on their ahus or at museums elsewhere.


title: Moai

text: The Rapa Nui people were then devastated by the slave trade that began at the island in 1862. Within a year, the individuals that remained on the island were sick, injured, and lacking leadership. The survivors of the slave raids had new company from landing missionaries. Over time, the remaining populace converted to Christianity. Slowly, Native Easter Islanders began to be assimilated, as their tattoos and body paint were banned by the new Christian proscriptions, after which they were then subjected to removal from a portion of their native lands and made to reside on a much smaller portion of the island, while the rest was used for farming by the Peruvians.


title: Moai

text: Ten or more moai have been removed from Easter Island and transported to locations around the world, including the ones today displayed at the Louvre Museum in Paris and the British Museum in London.


title: Moai

text: Several other locations displays replicas (casts) of moai, including the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County; the Auckland Museum; the American Museum of Natural History; and the campus of the American University.


title: Moai

text: From 1955 to 1978, an American archaeologist, William Mulloy, undertook extensive investigation of the production, transportation and erection of Easter Island's monumental statuary. Mulloy's Rapa Nui projects include the investigation of the Akivi-Vaiteka Complex and the physical restoration of Ahu Akivi (1960); the investigation and restoration of Ahu Ko Te Riku and Ahu Vai Uri and the Tahai Ceremonial Complex (1970); the investigation and restoration of two "ahu" at Hanga Kio'e (1972); the investigation and restoration of the ceremonial village at Orongo (1974) and numerous other archaeological surveys throughout the island.


title: Moai

text: The Rapa Nui National Park and the moai were included in the 1972 UN convention concerning the protection of the world's cultural and natural heritage and consequently on the 1995 list of UNESCO World Heritage Sites.


title: Moai

text: The moai have been mapped by a number of groups over the years, including efforts by Father Sebastian Englert and Chilean researchers. The EISP (Easter Island Statue Project) conducted research and documentation on many of the moai on Rapa Nui and the artifacts held in museums overseas. The purpose of the project is to understand the figures' original use, context, and meaning, with the results being provided to the Rapa Nui families and the island's public agencies that are responsible for conservation and preservation of the moai. Other studies include work by Britton Shepardson and Terry L. Hunt and Carl P. Lipo.


title: Moai

text: In 2008, a Finnish tourist chipped a piece off the ear of one moai. The tourist was fined $17,000 in damages and was banned from the island for three years.


title: Moai

text: In 2020, an unoccupied truck rolled into a moai, destroying the statue and causing 'incalculable damage'.


title: Moai

text: In 2022, an unknown number of moai in Rano Raraku were damaged by a wildfire that covered an area of around 150 to 250 acres. The Mayor of Rapa Nui Pedro Edmunds Paoa stated the fire was started intentionally. Other authorities believe the damage to some of the affected statues is "irreparable".


title: Moai

text: In 2010, moai was included as a "moyai" emoji (🗿) in Unicode version 6.0 under the code point codice_1 as "Japanese stone statue like Moai on Easter Island".


title: Moai

text: The official Unicode name for the emoji is spelt "moyai" as the emoji actually depicts the near Shibuya Station in Tokyo.


title: Moai

text: The Moyai Statue was a gift from the people of Nii-jima (an island from Tokyo but administratively part of the city) inspired by Easter Island moai.


title: Moai

text: As the Unicode adopted proprietary emoji initially used by Japanese mobile carriers in the 1990s, inconsistent drawings were adopted for this emoji by various companies with proprietary emoji images, depicting either a moai or the Moyai Statue. The Google and Microsoft emoji initially resembled the Moyai Statue in Tokyo, however the emoji were later revised to resemble moai.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Soorarai Pottru () is a 2020 Indian Tamil-language drama film that was written and directed by Sudha Kongara, and produced by Suriya, Jyothika and Guneet Monga. Kongara and Shalini Usha Nair wrote the screenplay; Aalif Surti and Ganeshaa provided additional screenplay; and Vijay Kumar and P. Virumandi, wrote the dialogue. The film stars Suriya, Aparna Balamurali and Paresh Rawal; and Mohan Babu, Urvashi and Karunas appear in supporting roles.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: The film was inspired by events from the life of G. R. Gopinath, founder of Indian low-cost airline Simplifly Deccan, as described in his memoir "Simply Fly: A Deccan Odyssey". The project was announced in mid-2018 under the working title "Suriya 38" and the official title was announced in April 2019. Principal photography began the same month and ended that September, and filming took place in Madurai, Chennai, and Chandigarh. G. V. Prakash Kumar composed the film's music while Niketh Bommireddy was the cinematographer and Sathish Suriya edited the film.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: The theatrical release of the film was affected by post-production delays and the COVID-19 pandemic; it was released digitally through Amazon Prime Video on 12 November 2020, the eve of the Diwali festival, and simultaneously its dubbed versions in Malayalam and Kannada were released under the same title, and a Telugu dub was released as "Aakasam Nee Haddu Raa" (). A Hindi-dubbed version titled "Udaan" () was released on 4 April 2021.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: "Soorarai Pottru" received critical acclaim, with praise for the film's major technical aspects and appreciation for the writing, Suriya's performance and Kongara's direction. It was selected as one of ten Indian films to be screened in the category Best Foreign Film at the 78th Golden Globe Awards. The film also entered the Panorama Section of the Shanghai International Film Festival. It won five awards at the 68th National Film Awards: Best Feature Film, Best Actor (Suriya), Best Actress (Aparna), Best Screenplay (Kongara and Nair) and Best Background Score (Prakash Kumar). In November 2022, a Hindi remake, again directed by Kongara and produced by Suriya, was in production with Rawal reprising his role.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Nedumaaran Rajangam, nicknamed "Maara", is a former Indian Air Force captain who dreams of starting a low-cost carrier airline. He idolises Paresh Goswami, the owner of Jaz Airlines. One day, Maara is visited by Sundari, who is nicknamed Bommi, whose family is looking for a groom for her. Maara is impressed by Bommi's nature and agrees to marry her. He tells her he grew up as a rebellious boy and had a difficult relationship with his father. Maara joined the Air Force where he excelled but was often reprimanded by his superior, M. Naidu due to his rebellious nature. When his father was on his deathbed, Maara tried to book a flight home but he did not have enough money. He asks many people to help him out financially, to no avail. By the time he raised enough funds, his father had died. This launched his ambition to start a low-cost carrier. Bommi, however, feels Maara would not give her much attention post-marriage and rejects him.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Maara visits Naidu to ask for the ex-serviceman loan so he can start his airline but Naidu refuses. With no other option, Maara travels on the same flight as Paresh. He proposes they work together and start a low-cost carrier. Paresh, however, believes the poor should not travel with the rich and humiliates Maara. Prakash Babu, the head of a venture capital firm overhears Maara's conversation with Paresh and asks him to explain his business plan to the firm's board. Meanwhile, Maara and Bommi start meeting each other frequently and eventually get married. He plans to lease Boeing aircraft from PlaneAm, who have agreed to lease them at low prices. After his funds get sanctioned, Maara tries to meet Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) officials to acquire the license but they disregard him. Maara meets the President of India and requests his help in getting the license.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Irked by his progress, Paresh uses his power to pass a law that requires Boeing to submit its airline blueprints to fly in Indian airspace. PlaneAm cancels the lease and demands a penalty fee. Maara requests Prakash to loan him money to pay the penalty but he refuses. Prakash reveals he was working with Paresh, with whom he conspired to bring Maara down, and that Jaz Airlines has acquired the aircraft instead. Infuriated, Maara storms into Paresh's office but is tackled by the guards. He becomes short-tempered and often quarrels with Bommi but later apologises. He realises he can fly smaller aircraft and strikes a deal with a Turboprop aircraft manufacturer. Paresh, fearing Maara may affect his business, decides to take matters into his own hands. Meanwhile, Maara's entire village help him by donating as much money as they can. He plans to commence flight operations from airstrips that have been abandoned since the major airports came under Paresh's control. He names his airline Deccan Air, and sells tickets at railway stations and petrol pumps. Retired Air Force pilots are hired to fly the aircraft and Bommi is placed in charge of in-flight catering.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: On the day of the delivery of the aircraft, Paresh uses his influence to restrict the flight's landing at Chennai, forcing the flight to crash-land at Tambaram Air Force Station due to lack of fuel. Naidu summons Maara to explain the emergency landing and lets him off with a fine. The airline's maiden flight catches fire and is forced to abort its take-off. It is revealed Paresh had bribed the captain to sabotage the flight. The captain admits his mistakes in front of the inquiry. Vimal Balaiyya, a prominent businessman, offers to buy Deccan Air but Maara refuses, citing differences in their vision. Paresh starts a smear campaign against Deccan Air in the hopes of ending Maara's dreams but Maara assures everyone his flights are safe and cost-effective. On the day of the start of operations, however, no passengers check in for one flight. Maara is about to give up when he is informed a technical error resulted in no tickets for that particular flight being booked, whereas all other flights are fully booked. With tears of happiness in his eyes, Maara watches the other flights touch down. Paresh later calls Maara and offers to work with him but Maara rejects the offer, saying "farmers have flown and will continue to fly", and that Paresh "does not own the sky". Paresh accepts defeat as Deccan Air becomes a success.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: In a mid-credits scene, the Civil Aviation Minister of India summons Paresh to Delhi, reprimands him for sabotaging Deccan Air's inaugural flight and threatens to shut down Jaz Airlines. In a restroom, Paresh has an anxiety attack and tries to take his pill but it falls to the floor. A janitor picks the pill up for Paresh, inducing in him a sense of respect for lower-income groups.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: In late 2009, Sudha Kongara conceptualised a film based on "Simply Fly: A Deccan Odyssey" by Simplifly Deccan founder-and-entrepreneur G. R. Gopinath when she assisted Mani Ratnam during the production of "Raavanan" (2010). Kongara did extensive research for the script for more than ten years, while also working on the direction of "Drohi" (2010), and "Irudhi Suttru" and its Telugu remake "Guru" (2017). During the audio launch of "Irudhi Suttru", Sudha met Suriya, who attended the event as a guest and narrated one line of the script. Suriya decided to start working on the film after his acting commitments in "24" and "Si3" while Sudha started working on "Guru".


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: After completing "Guru", Sudha again met Suriya in his residence in February 2017 to hand over the half-completed script. Suriya was impressed by the narration and story, and agreed to appear in and produce the project. Suriya wanted no-one to interfere in the film's budget or to change any sequence. He was also concerned about the film's quality and believed producing the project could let him handle the supervision. Because the proposed budget was considerably higher than expected, Suriya approached producer Guneet Monga to substantially fund the film under the Sikhya Entertainment banner, which was known for producing critically acclaimed films such as "The Lunchbox" (2013), "Masaan" (2015) and the Academy Award-winning documentary film "Period. End of Sentence." (2018). The company agreed to fund the project, which became its first South Indian film. The film was officially announced in April 2018 with the tentative title "Suriya 38".


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Pre-production work on the film began in June 2018, and filming was speculated to start in November but was postponed because of delays in pre-production. G. V. Prakash Kumar was selected to work on the film's music; Kumar worked with director Sudha and actor Suriya for the first time. The film's technical crew were cinematographer Niketh Bommireddy, and Sathish Suriya, who edited the director's "Irudhi Suttru" and "Guru" and was production designer on Jacki. Sudha confirmed the film is not a biopic of Gopinath but was inspired by events in his life. Kongara made changes to the script and screenplay to suit the film's real-life events. On 13 April 2019, the title was revealed with a poster release as "Soorarai Pottru".


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Suriya played the role of Nedumaaran Rajangam (Maara), an ambitious man from Madurai; the character is loosely based on G. R. Gopinath. Sudha hired two or three assistant directors and writers from Madurai, to speak in Madurai dialect. Suriya said his character "is prone to anger ... Even in anger, he is able to think of why certain people are coming from a different perspective. He knows how to behave with his wife, his friends and others". Sudha fixed these elements before filming to make the performance look consistent. He also did few physical transformations; For scenes of the character as a young man, Suriya had lost almost to gain physique for the role; he also underwent a strict dietary regime by eating cucumbers.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: The film has 96 characters because the story tracks the protagonist's life from birth and many characters have importance despite their limited screen time. Aparna Balamurali was signed to play the female lead, working with Suriya for the first time. Her character Sundari was modelled on Gopinath's wife Bhargavi. Balamurali also learnt the Madurai dialect for the film. In June 2019, Telugu actor Mohan Babu was signed to play a senior officer named Bhakthavatsalam Naidu. He immediately accepted the role when approached, and dubbed in his own voice. "Soorarai Pottru" is also the acting debut of Arjunan's son Ilan and daughter Iyal.


title: Soorarai Pottru

text: Bollywood actor Paresh Rawal was cast as the antagonist Paresh Goswami, making his Tamil debut. The character is based on Naresh Goyal, CEO of Jet Airways. Dan Dhanoa appeared in a short role as Vimal Balaiyya, which was inspired by Indian businessman Vijay Mallya. Sheik Maideen, who had a close resemblance to former president of India A. P. J. Abdul Kalam and was popularly known as "Udumalai Kalam", played the character inspired by Kalam; Maideen's voice was dubbed by Naveen Muralidhar. R. Madhavan gave the narration for the film.