[Who dat?]

"There are a number of issues to be resolved, including whether the current technology in use on military aircraft can be adapted to be used on civilian aircraft," the spokesman added.

Yeah. Anyway, my uncle flew fighters in Viet Nam. He said they had all sorts of anti-missile crap on board. He claimed the first thing they’d do is start shutting off a bunch of the alarms and buzzers and stuff because they were annoying.

He indicated that they knew in general where the SAM sites were anyway, so they had an idea of where the trouble would be.

Then again, that was a while back. I suppose they’ve improved things since. He seemed to believe that the only time the SAM-alerting stuff wouldn’t go off would be if they actually targeted you. Otherwise, it’d go off for no reason.

El Al (C.EAI), the Israeli airline, is believed to have anti-missile technology on its passenger aircraft.

It’s fascinating that people get a hard-on for whatever El Al has. The last time I looked, El Al had a fleet of about 30 planes. That’s it. In comparison, I’d bet FedEx flies more flights in/out of Oakland in a single day than El Al flies in a week – maybe in a month. Comparing El Al to any American airline is sort of silly, IMO. But whatever.

[Tallguy]

Yeah. Anyway, my uncle flew fighters in Viet Nam. He said they had all sorts of anti-missile crap on board. He claimed the first thing they’d do is start shutting off a bunch of the alarms and buzzers and stuff because they were annoying.

He indicated that they knew in general where the SAM sites were anyway, so they had an idea of where the trouble would be.

Your uncle was flying against SAM-2 batteries. These were FIXED sites. The article is talking about MANPADS -- Man Portable Air Defence Systems. These are fired from the shoulder like a bazooka.

Bad News: A shooter can sneak close to an airport to take a shot at an aircraft on Take-Off/Landing.

Good News: The warhead on these missiles is too small (in general) to takedown a really large jet aircraft. Engines are tough enough to keep running for a short time, probably long enough to land; and there is no "explosive decompression" at low altitude (these missiles are only capable against low flying aircraft)

Bottom line: With all their limitationis, MANPADS are only effective against helicopters or single engine ground attack jets.

So from a purely cost-benefit analysis, anti-missile systems aboard commercial aircraft are a waste of money. OTOH, you can't say this because you will be lynched in the Media.