Originally Posted by
The Wawa Zone
would it not be SOP to alert active or inactive RMAF AD radar ?
It should be but does not follow that it is. As argued by Glueball it does not follow that an active radar unit is actually operating with an operational watch staring intently at the screens.
As pointed out, the track was of non-threatening nature and going the 'wrong way' for the lost aircraft.
The inactive radar units would probably be at no higher alert than 2 hours and that presupposed a highly motivated unit and it would be wrong to compare a highly advanced, and vulnerable, air defence system on a high alert posture with Malaysia or Thailand where there is no significant threat. As for driving airliners in to buildings; is that a realistic threat for a Muslim country to consider?
Bono said If we are looking at a situation that national air defense radars are there to mainly scare and not do the job the taxpayers paid millions for, then it makes it a risky proposition.
No, I would argue that the majority of developing world 'air defence systems' are vanity forces and not first rate units such as you would expect in countries that face a significant threat.
Now, entire world (including some very bad people) are aware that if a giant B777 can get lost without a trace over south east Asia,
and you are surprised?
as the Indian guy in the article said "nothing much happens at night" which made me sit up.
Smugglers, yes, military threat, no as not many forces have a 24 hour capability.
The radars need to be constantly monitored by at least a pair of eyes and incursions by aircraft flying incognito need to be checked out.
Can't argue with that, but it presupposes the political will to maintain a highly effective and fully operational 24 hour air policing operation.