Missiles deployed for London Olympics

[light and variable]

More alarming than the operation itself, is the lack of uproar from the airline community. For :mad: sake, where is the control?

[Capt. Inop]

Missiles deployed by who? Link would be fine.

Btw when did you last experience uproar from the airline community about anything?

[light and variable]

Yes, I recognise that we are species notorious for just accepting all kinds of trash in our daily lives. But SAMs on the localiser? Don´t push me friend!!

UK to keep missiles near homes to protect Games | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/uk-oly-britain-idUSLNE86202K20120703)

[vinayak]

@Capt. Inop- hahaha!

I actually gave that one a good 10 minutes. Never!

[Ed-UK]

Have a look at: Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Defence Policy and Business | Ground-based air defence systems to protect Olympic sites (http://bit.ly/Mu7wio)

and: BBC News - London 2012: Olympic missiles sites confirmed (http://bbc.in/Mu7Yx1)

According to the MOD website The systems will be in place by mid-July

So not deployed yet....

[golfyankeesierra]

where is the control?
As opposed to uncontrolled?

I really hope that the RAF (or army or whatever) is in control of them at anytime, not only during the Olympics.
I think that wherever you fly there is always a chance of a missile pointing toward the sky somewhere.
Now they're only a bit more "visible" (euphemism?).

[Load Toad]

Barrage balloons. That's what's needed. Just dumb ass posturing to put SAM's in / around a city. Utterly ridiculous.

[sevenstrokeroll]

Isn't if funny that the capitols of the world that regularly (not for the olympics) have Surface to Air missiles are almost all in non democratic countries?

Many years ago, most cities in the USA had NIKE missile batteries to shoot down incoming bombers.

the last was dismantled the year I graduated high school.

I'm glad the British are putting in missile defense systems for this big deal known as the olympics.

And, as much as I don't want a plane I am flying to be shot down by a SAM, IF I was going to die by the hand of a hijacker with my plane hitting a building and then killing thousands of others...well then I would want the British military to save those innocents on the ground...what is the difference to me, dying either way isn't alot of fun, but taking thousands of innocents is not the way to go.

[Basil]

All been said - non event - don't fill the pages of the paperazzi who lurk here.

[Ed-UK]

It's not like this is the first time missiles have been deployed to protect the Olympics, see: Greece deploys Patriot missiles to safeguard Olympics - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://bit.ly/P4YHf8) from 2004, which also references deployments for the 1996 Atlanta summer Olympics and the 2002 Salt Lake City winter Games...

[Load Toad]

what is the difference to me, dying either way isn't alot of fun, but taking thousands of innocents is not the way to go.

And where exactly do you think you & the 'plane would fall when you'd been shot down?

[sevenstrokeroll]

dear load toad

I would think my plane would come down and do SOME damage, BUT NOT AS MUCH AS CRASHING IT INTO A MAJOR BUILDING OR OLYMPIC VENUE.

didn't the RAF stop a german bomber from hitting buckingham castle...I'm sure that plane fell somewhere.

does SHEESH have a better replacement?

[Hardbutt]

EGLL. All approaches from the west (max tailwind permitting), immediate turn out on takeoff may make sense.

[RatherBeFlying]

One truly hopes the missile batteries are very securely guarded. It would not do if the wrong boys overwhelmed a battery crew and fired a few off:eek:

[sitigeltfel]

Make sure there are Chinese pax on every flight. That will stop any nonsense ;)

[light and variable]

Looks like your average East Londoner has more courage than us shiny boys flying round above.

Tower residents fight missile plan - Yahoo! News UK (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/tower-residents-fight-missile-plan-110452867.html)

[onyxcrowle]

Wouldn't shooting down an airliner cause significant damage anyway ? It seems a stretch to think that by the time it was determined that said aircraft was a threat that it could be stopped on time . Either way it's going to be shot down from not much more than 3000 feet so either way it's bad news.

[davidjohnson6]

Have you considered the theory of deterrence ? Shortly after the shooting stopped in Bosnia in the 1990s; NATO regularly held demonstrations of their firepower, taking care to invite the political leaders of all major groups. The idea was to show the locals that if they began shooting again, that NATO could squish them very quickly. The result was that the people of former Yugoslavia realised that smuggling in a few more guns before restarting the fighting was not going to work and everyone got on with trying to create peace instead.

To be an effective message any threat must be credible and demonstrably backed by force.
By very publicly showing surface to air missiles on national TV, the military are trying to tell terrorist groups that hijacking a plane and crashing it into Stratford a la 9-11 is NOT GOING TO WORK.

If someone were to be flying over the London area in a way that looked questionable is it not likely that an RAF jet would take a look first before missiles are fired ?