Skip to comments.Can commercial airlines do enough to protect passengers from missile attacks?
Posted on 07/20/2014 2:39:56 PM PDT by Kaslin
Every airline passenger is familiar with the security routine: take your shoes off, laptop goes in the plastic bin, remove all metal items from your pockets and place any liquids in a separate plastic bag and walk through that metal detector.
But the familiar precautions aimed at protecting airliners from possible bombs or weapons do nothing to ward off an incoming missile that can blow the jetliner out of the sky. The Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shot down last week has focused attention on protecting planes from potential missile strikes, which, it turns out, have taken down more than one dozen airliners in aviation history.
One answer could be "Sky Shield," a new Israeli-manufactured system that officials say successfully protected a test El Al Airlines Boeing 737 in live-fire missile tests.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
See how that works out.
#1 should be “don’t fly over a war zone” That would take care of much of the risk.
Right now, I’m more concerned with hordes of the great unwashed carrying TB, scabies, lice, measles, etc. sitting around me. That, and a Muslim with a shoe bomb that got through security while the TSA was doing a cavity search on an 80-year-old nun.
I think that system is based on IR - think flares as a defense.
Flares don’t help with radar systems like this last one.
Can I ask a stupid question? Are we now seeing rogue soldiers from Russia, or terrorists, getting their hands on rocket launchers??? It stuns me that that this could happen, either by accident, or intentionally.
Sorry to ramble, but I’m sure Bin Laden and his boys would have loved to have had a missile launcher. I’m sure every terror organization and rogue nation would love to have these and have nukes as well.
They could greatly reduce the chance by not flying through the middle of a war zone.
They would need military grade or better countermeasures which add weight, reduce available space, reduce range, and reduce carrying capacity.
And even with the best jammers and countermeasures science and tech could possibly provide, planes will still get hit.
European airlines are doing that now and American Airlines have avoided flying over war zones for quite a while according to news reports I have heard
“They could try not flying over war zones.”
Yea, I was thinking the same. Everyone is so worked up over blaming Putin they forget this was an ACTIVE WAR ZONE with planes being shot out of the sky. If the plane didn’t fly through there, it would have landed safely. If Putin didn’t exist...maybe it would have landed safely (or maybe one side or the other would have shot it down some other way).
It’s just generally a good idea to stay clear of ACTIVE WAR ZONES, and I suspect the policy will change for the better...just too bad these people had to pay with their lives.
How about—Do not fly over a war zone! How about you let everyone know you are NOT a combatant? Wars are always risky for travelers—always have been.
“One answer could be “Sky Shield,” a new Israeli-manufactured system that officials say successfully protected a test El Al Airlines Boeing 737 in live-fire missile tests.”
GREAT - the Israelis do live-fire tests on passenger planes. I don’t care how much confidence you have in a system, you don’t put people at that kind of risk. This explains what’s going on in Gaza.
(my imitation of an Israel-hater)
“(my imitation of an Israel-hater)”
Yikes-—for a minute I thought you were serious.
LOL, I actually did pause for a second reading it because it initially sounded like a test with passengers on board.
Although the article points out that this technology does not work against radar directed missiles, they are trying to convince the public that if we just give the government a little more money, we can be safe from the type of attack that brought down the Malaysian airliners.
Commercial airliners are vulnerable to all air defense weapons systems and they cannot be protected against them all. Avoidance of conflict zones will become essential, raising operating costs and disrupting flight schedules. The days of safe and reliable civilian air travel may be coming to an end. Ignoring world conflicts and pretending that they have nothing to do with us has a number of serious consequences.
Yeah, don’t fly in war zones.
#1 should be dont fly over a war zone That would take care of much of the risk. ~ Pining_4_TX
They could greatly reduce the chance by not flying through the middle of a war zone. ~ bgill
European airlines are doing that now and American Airlines have avoided flying over war zones for quite a while according to news reports I have heard ~ Kaslin
They could try not flying over war zones. Yea, I was thinking the same. ~ BobL
How aboutDo not fly over a war zone! ~ Forward the Light Brigade
Avoidance of conflict zones will become essential, ~ centurion316
Yeah, dont fly in war zones. ~ Timber Rattler
When terrorists have access to SAMs what part of the sky is not an active combat zone?
Right now terrorists only have access to MANPADS which are not a threat to overflights. The Russians Army are thugs, but are way beyond terrorists. However, when that changes, my comment about the end of commercial air travel will apply in many parts of the world.
Just wait until they drop one here. There is more than children coming across our open unsecured borders. There are many shoulder fired missiles unaccountable.
We know they have the desire, the means and money, and the necessary hate of us. So all that can be missing is a workable plan.
Shoulder fired missiles at close range (takeoff or landing) have few countermeasures.
Those weapons have proliferated greatly in the last 5 years.
With our southern border in disarray, those weapons may be flowing over in large numbers.
Remember what 9/11 did to our airline industry and economy?
Now imagine a dozen airliners shot down at the same time while taking off or landing. 3000 dead, no defense possible, our airspace shut down and our economy destroyed.
You mean that other 90% of the invaders?
These jerks knew exactly what they were shooting.
Judge for yourself...
See post #19, and judge for yourself...
Folks from Montoursville, PA might add Long Island to the list of places to avoid as well. Just sayin’...
TWA 800 wasn’t over a “war zone”.
When was the last time that happened?
Talk about a 9/10 mentality! I’m disappointed in you.
A lot of this country’s security excesses like the Patriot Act and TSA have come from bureaucrats in DC conference rooms dreaming up ways in which we *might* be attacked, which have never come to pass. So call me extremely skeptical whenever I see new panic and proposed security measures from clueless government hacks these days.
So you agree that there is no need to control the border?
No, I didn’t say that.
It would be cheaper than losing another Boeing 777 and years of lawsuits and payouts.