Next we'll be putting anti-missile equipment on our Pipers and Cessna's

[dublinpilot]

From Yahoo news:

Yahoo news (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/030905/140/e7lw5.html)

Anti-Missile Defences For BA Planes?
British Airways is considering installing anti-missile technology on its planes.The UK's biggest carrier has revealed that it is in talks with airline manufacturers about the feasibility of the anti-terrorist measure.However, the airline said it was still "early days" for the project and there remained much to be done.

A BA spokesman said: "We are currently talking to manufacturers to understand the feasibility of deploying anti-missile systems on civilian aircraft.

"Where there is a terrorist risk, we believe the most effective preventative is for the relevant authority to identify any likely launch site near airports."

Meanwhile, British Airways has announced it is to resume flights to Saudi Arabia.

The flights were suspended on August 13 after a cache of anti-aircraft missiles after a truckload of smuggled surface-to-air missiles were seized by police in the kingdom.

There have been a spate of warnings about specific terrorist attacks on British planes abroad.

All UK flights to Kenya were suspended in mid-May because of a terrorist threat, with the ban being completely lifted only this week.

[LowNSlow]

Why don't they have a chat with the boys in El Al, they've had this kind of stuff for decades. Sky Marshals as well so one is led to believe.

[witchdoctor]

What sort of anti-missile equipment is fitted to Sky Marshalls?:ooh:

Makes the mind boggle!;)

[LowNSlow]

The usual kit: eg rear mounted toxic waste dispenser, BO dispensers fit to the arm / shoulder interface etc etc :uhoh: :uhoh:

[SteveR]

......and Cessna's


fitting anti-missile equipment to our Cessna's what?

(this is a, probably futile, attempt to get people to use apostrophes correctly)

[handyandyuk]

Ok... so lets think semi seriously about this a sec..... just what would an airline have to counter and how?

On the ground... probably something like and RPG 7.... unguided so infra red or radar homing detection is pointless. Even if it were, would the kit be switched on on the ground where this attack would be most likely? I think not.

So assume we're talking systems active from take off to touchdown...

Average terrorist... we're looking at something relatively cheap, uncomplicated and probably 1 man operated...

IR homing...flares.... granted I don't know the exact numbers and temperatures but I'd guess you'd have an interesting setup to effectively dispense flares to 'hide' the heat signature of a nice juicy big, more than likely US 747, 767 or 777. Damned good fireworks for a Herc.... I'd love to see what's needed on something bigger.

Radar homing... ok... ECM packs aren't that big... but they are damned expensive and not too many governments would be happy about giving a civilian organisation open access to such technology... even older, outdated kit.
Chaff... about the best hope but given the speed of an airliner, would it be out of frag range but the time any missile popped?

Optically guided... more likely given the lower technology required and lower degree of training required. Flares... useless.... chaff... equally useless..... ECM... refer to above..... physical avoidance.... I've seen a Vulcan thrown about... and airliners have survived all manner of engine failure dives, explosive decompression and the like.... but is it really realistic to expect your average ATPL to attempt a corkscrew with 200+ punters in back?? I'm thinking no again.

So all things considered... for a private company.... even a national airline to be openly talking about anti missile defence to a large extent can only be trying to put potential attackers off the idea. Far easier and more effective to fire a heavy machine gun at something that size as it takes off or approaches.

At last.... a subject I know well :D

[Keef]

... you mean apostrophe's, I assume? :8