Anti-missile systems on passenger planes??

[nambuzle]

I personally thought this was an amazingly clever idea!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TRAVEL/01/04/missile.tests/

This will reduce terrorism aimed at regular aircraft and stop anything happening to planes flying over hostile countries. If all planes were fitted to normal planes I think people would feel a lot safer, but one question.... why don't they put these on all military aircraft too????

 

[Todjaeger]

I personally thought this was an amazingly clever idea!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TRAVEL/01/04/missile.tests/

This will reduce terrorism aimed at regular aircraft and stop anything happening to planes flying over hostile countries. If all planes were fitted to normal planes I think people would feel a lot safer, but one question.... why don't they put these on all military aircraft too????

Keep in mind a few things...
1. These systems are in testing.
2. The maintenance and operating cycle of civilian aircraft is completely different from military aircraft
3. Civilian transports are operated as a business, therefore businesses would prefer not to spend more for an asset that is has to.
4. Re-read the sixth paragraph from the bottom again, these systems for civilian aircraft are being adapted from military systems.

-Cheers

 

[OPSSG]

IMHO, the article adopts an American mass media perspective - sounds cool but with no serious insight about threats and limitations applicable to this type of technology.

IIRC, the national airline of Israel has some sort of classified anti-MANPADS capability. There are also other countries with similar interest in this type of technology for their own respective national airlines.

The people who have or are developing systems of this sort are most likely not talking about it. Or at least not talking about it in a manner that is suitable for general media consumption.

 

[nambuzle]

Oh... sorry first thread just thought it was kinda interesting.

 

[Todjaeger]

Oh... sorry first thread just thought it was kinda interesting.

It is quite alright. The only real issue is that the information on the system(s), just like virtually all the other really gucci kit, it likely highly privledged/classified and therefore not something many of us will ever really know of.

IMHO, the article adopts an American mass media perspective - sounds cool but with no serious insight about threats and limitations applicable to this type of technology.

IIRC, the national airline of Israel has some sort of classified anti-MANPADS capability. There are also other countries with similar interest in this type of technology for their own respective national airlines.

The people who have or are developing systems of this sort are most likely not talking about it. Or at least not talking about it in a manner that is suitable for general media consumption.

For the first part, two thoughts come to mind. The first is that I would say you are dead on, the article was from American mass media... The second is more in the nature of a question. Why are you putting "American mass media" and the phrase "serious insight" into the same sentence?

Sorry, just my usual cheerful outlook on most defence reporting by regular media outlets. You know the type... an M113 is a tank, an AK-47 is an MG, a frigate is a battleship, and so on and so forth.

As for El Al (Israel's national carrier) IIRC in addition to some form of missile defence, I believe that at least some of their aircraft have received some form of reinforcement or armouring, the enable them withstand (better at least) a hit from a Manpad. Checking Haaretz.com a new system called Flight Guard is mentioned as having been developed. The was following an attempt to attack an Israeli charter jet came under attack in Kenya by missiles. Apparently the new system started being install ~2004, and appears to be flare based. Have not yet read all the available details on it yet.

-Cheers

 

[OPSSG]

For the first part, two thoughts come to mind. The first is that I would say you are dead on, the article was from American mass media... The second is more in the nature of a question. Why are you putting "American mass media" and the phrase "serious insight" into the same sentence?

American mass media is very sophisticated if they want to be. The problem is that sometimes they want to dumb down for their audience.

After all American mass media - is just that for the masses. Most TV programs are designed to be understood by 12 to 15 year old kids.

To some extend, American mass media have got to sell TV ad spots (the worse offender is 'Fox News', it should be called 'Fox Opinions'). If the mass media adopt a very strong geeky approach, less people will watch. The best of the 4th estate in America are in the TV news biz. For written press, the 4 British broad sheets offer better insight.

 

[OPSSG]

Oh... sorry first thread just thought it was kinda interesting.

Don't worry about it and don't mind me. I strongly encourage that you keep posting. It is a interesting topic, just that the report you cited told me very little.

Being the lazy bum that I am, I was hoping you (or anyone else) will find something more 'juicy' as it were.

I come here to learn too. BTW, don't let the 'blue colour' handle fool you. I know next to nothing... You can check out my other useless posts...nfloorl:

 

[OPSSG]

As for El Al (Israel's national carrier) IIRC in addition to some form of missile defence, I believe that at least some of their aircraft have received some form of reinforcement or armouring, the enable them withstand (better at least) a hit from a Manpad. Checking Haaretz.com a new system called Flight Guard is mentioned as having been developed. The was following an attempt to attack an Israeli charter jet came under attack in Kenya by missiles. Apparently the new system started being install ~2004, and appears to be flare based. Have not yet read all the available details on it yet.

You are right about the Gucci kit...

IMO, the flare based stuff is 1st generation (even then the components are essentially a RWR, MAWS & other sensors plus flare dispensers). IMHO, the effectiveness of the RWR, MAWS and the other sensors and their ability to confuse these new gen. manipads is limited by the 'threat library' installed and the flare dispensing sequence - and all the other standard stuff in military aircraft.

There's more. I just don't have unclassified sources for 2nd or 3rd generation stuff to contribute.

BTW I also know about Flight Guard and El Al. After all, besides the US, Singapore was one of Israel's biggest arms customers (India has now far surpassed us in purchase volume and value) and they helped set up the SAF.

 

[OPSSG]

Northrop Grumman's (NG) current generation commercial solution against the MANPADS threat is called the Guardian™, which includes the AN/AAQ-24(V) NEMESIS system and used in military applications. NG’s Guardian system adapts the company’s laser-based DIRCM military technology for commercial use and can be bolted onto a commercial airliner.

There is also an Associated Press report on this technology in March 2008. According to NG all the pilot has to do is turn Guardian on during the normal preflight (see FAQ). Guardian operates without further crew action during flight.

However, according to NG's website this is not the only solution that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is exploring, including ground-based system that could be located near airports to provide anti-missile protection for airliners and also using UAVs flying above U.S. airports at the 50,000-foot level to find and defeat shoulder-fired missiles launched at arriving and departing aircraft.

Again my post also provides no serious insight about threats and limitations applicable to this type of technology.

 

[wtsimpson7]

I don't think that this is such a good idea, because what if a terrorist or some bad-guy hijacks a passenger plane and then a fighter pilot who is ordered to shoot it down in order to save lives of people on the ground can't do it?

 

[Todjaeger]

I don't think that this is such a good idea, because what if a terrorist or some bad-guy hijacks a passenger plane and then a fighter pilot who is ordered to shoot it down in order to save lives of people on the ground can't do it?

While details are scarce (for hopefully obvious reasons...) the defensive aides for civil/commercial aircraft are intended to protest vs. MANPAD threats. These are predominantly small IR-seeker missiles, which can be defeated using flares, lasers, etc. I would not expect such a system to be of much utility vs. datalinked or radar-guided air to air missiles that are most commonly used by aircraft. It might be able to provide some defence vs. various IR-guided air to air missiles, particularly WVR like the AIM-9 and ASRAAM. OTOH, these missiles are larger than those fired from MANPADS like the Stinger, Mistral or Grail, so the defensive suites could very well be insufficient.

-Cheers

 

[Systems Adict]

OPSSG...

Seeing as I'm good at stating the obvious, have you had a look at this site ??

http://www.baesystems.com/EISProductSites/JetEye/JetEyeExperience/index.htm

It gives you a "Potted History", which may help your thirst for knowledge, that you can't be bothered looking for !

SA

 

[Systems Adict]

I don't think that this is such a good idea, because what if a terrorist or some bad-guy hijacks a passenger plane and then a fighter pilot who is ordered to shoot it down in order to save lives of people on the ground can't do it?

??? Shooting down doesn't just mean standing off a few miles away. An F-15 does have guns you know....

All it would take is for a pair of them to approach from above & behind, strafe the wings & goodnight aircraft !



Have you ever watched the movie Executive Decision ??



SA

:nutkick

 

[OPSSG]

@Todjaeger and Systems Adict,

Thanks for the replies and link. Really enjoyed reading them. I am now more informed. Thus I have moved from total ignorance to less than totally ignorant... nfloorl: BTW, I love it when SA states the obvious, it might not be so obvious to other layman like me...

@wtsimpson7, don't feel bad when I tell you that I also agree with the other guys.

 

[wtsimpson7]

??? Shooting down doesn't just mean standing off a few miles away. An F-15 does have guns you know....

All it would take is for a pair of them to approach from above & behind, strafe the wings & goodnight aircraft !



Have you ever watched the movie Executive Decision ??



SA

:nutkick

Yeah, kinda forgot about the 20mm option! Anyway, it's good to have some protection against personal portable infrared homing surface-to-air missiles, like the FIM-92 Stinger. Its just that once passenger planes reach levels where they are more like Air Force One than jetliners, then there's some controversy about it.

 

[Zzims]

Imho, this relatively erase the neutrality of commercial Airplanes. Therefore they are considerably marked as armed combatants.