airliner missile defense: grounded due to costs

A train accident/suicide in Glendale, CA had more death than any "terrorist incident" since 9-11-01.
Infinitely more than rocketry.
Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...
Our congressmen! They fly on commercial airlines and they believe they are not expendable. Of course the taxpayers really pay their way.
Alan
Reply to
Alan Jones
Yep. Any terrorist group with even the slightest amount of imagination could do the same thing. I'd bet money that right now some Al Qaeda scumbag is giving considering the possibilities. Maybe do 50 or 100 of them simultaneously all over the country for maximum disruption and publicity.
l
Reply to
raydunakin
It was impressive with one SUV taking out two trains. Sort or like killing two birds with one stone, with a stone that should not have been able to kill even one bird. They may have to rethink rail safety and security.
Alan
Reply to
Alan Jones
David Weinshenker wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net:
I believe most of the anti-MANPADS defenses are ones that do not launch anything at the incoming missile,but attempt to blind or spoof them,using lasers or Xenon arc lamps. Northrop-Grumman has such a system.
The flare types of defenses are not being considered because they can start fires on the ground,and newer MANPADS ignore them.
Reply to
Jim Yanik
Ah, that does sound rather less dangerous (and more likely to be compatible with the maintenance environment) than the flares and chaff-bombs I think I was imagining.
-dave w
Reply to
David Weinshenker
I worked on a laser-based system over twenty years ago for Loral. There was a great photo of the system in use where a missile was spoofed completely around a chopper and kept on going. The thing I find surprising is that twenty-plus years later it hasn't been 'improved' enough to be commercially cost-effective.
David Erbas-White
Reply to
David Erbas-White
Next we'll have Al Qaeda suicide drivers buying up SUVs...
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
Or just stealing them, thus allowing the drivers to abandon them on the tracks without a traceable link to the driver. No need for suicide.
=9C
Reply to
raydunakin
David Erbas-White wrote in news:RzvKd.1207$Jt.973@fed1read02:
Define "commercially cost-effective".
One commercial jet crash due to a MANPADS and the economy is going to tank big time.
Reply to
Jim Yanik
Just a little side-observation...
Sometimes, it's not difficult to see the link that the BATFE draws between us and terrorists. I mean - any agent monitoring this particular discussion will see us talking about giving the monsters ideas, and very quickly come to that conclusion. :-)
Reply to
Len Lekx
Hmmm... so our "duty on the home front in the war on terrorism" is not to anticipate potential vulnerabilities (in hopes that identifying them might enable them to be secured), but to sit in quiet fear and "try not to give them any ideas"?
-dave w
Reply to
David Weinshenker
David Weinshenker wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net:
Also,BATFE can see what is proposed,maybe catch something they missed,and begin their own studies and counter plans. I suspect those with the greatest resources(US) has the edge and the lead.
Reply to
Jim Yanik

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.