MANPADS. Why?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MANPADS. Why?
I can appreciate that MANPADS would have been very useful in the Cold War context of a massive conventional war. But surely there comes a point at which their military usefulness is outweighed by the immense coup that just one missile could deliver to a terrorist, rogue state or criminal group.
Around forty civilian aircraft have been hit over the last few decades. In some cases with dreadful loss of life, in others this was narrowly averted by exceptional airmanship. Admittedly most of these involved former Soviet or Chinese made missiles but why are we still making them?
Around forty civilian aircraft have been hit over the last few decades. In some cases with dreadful loss of life, in others this was narrowly averted by exceptional airmanship. Admittedly most of these involved former Soviet or Chinese made missiles but why are we still making them?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
And, when AQ decides to buy a Cessna, it might be useful to hit it before it does something suicidal.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,963
Received 2,859 Likes
on
1,226 Posts
Also stopping production wouldn't do anything in the short term, it's a bit like locking the gate after the horse has bolted. They are already out there.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
why are we still making them?
I read the other day, the 3 most lucrative industries in world are
3). Automobiles
2). Cocaine
1). Arms dealing.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't dispute they have a use, A squared the question is whether they're potential more useful to our enemies. Nutloose that's a valid point; there must have been hundreds "liberated" in Libya alone. But it's also a cop out in that they do have a shelf-life and we can hardly expect others to restrict them if we won't.
Gosh but I love these kinds of discussions.
The "We" thing is superfluous.
It is "They" that matter.
"They" will build them...."They" will give them to Terrorists. Then They will use them against Civilian Airliners.
What "We" do re building the things has f@ck all to do with what "They" do.
If one believes those who wish to lead us to believe Tens of Thousands of the things went missing as a result of the West's tumbling of Qadaffi....then perhaps that should be the focus of the OP's concerns and not the MANPAD's we build, store, safeguard and control.
It is those we don't store, safeguard, and control that are the threat.
The "We" thing is superfluous.
It is "They" that matter.
"They" will build them...."They" will give them to Terrorists. Then They will use them against Civilian Airliners.
What "We" do re building the things has f@ck all to do with what "They" do.
If one believes those who wish to lead us to believe Tens of Thousands of the things went missing as a result of the West's tumbling of Qadaffi....then perhaps that should be the focus of the OP's concerns and not the MANPAD's we build, store, safeguard and control.
It is those we don't store, safeguard, and control that are the threat.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS, agreed, up to a point but "we" lose stuff too; a pallet of TOW missiles got left on a beach never to be seen again. A pile of star streak missiles was pictured lying unattended in a car park during Olympics. We handed stingers to folk we now consider terrorists. Many British Army weapons found their way into IRA hands during the troubles and the Syrian ones being put to "valuable use" may yet bite us hard!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,963
Received 2,859 Likes
on
1,226 Posts
We handed stingers to folk we now consider terrorists
We handed stingers to folk we now consider terrorists.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I thought Stingers had a battery time life and as much
as the US wants to recover unused one's, they are worried
about them being used.
as the US wants to recover unused one's, they are worried
about them being used.
Roland,
Well put!
Nutloose,
Wishful thinking I fear - hence why the CIA sponsored the Stinger 'buy back' programme.
MANPADs have proven relatively robust, and can last for years in poor conditions.
Back to the original question - have a look at Israeli A4 losses in the Yom Kippur War (over 50...) and several were attributed to the layered Soviet style embedded AD systems moving with Arab armoured formations - SA6, ZSU23/4 and SA7. The latter was such an issue the Israelis extended the jet pipe on the A4 to attempt to detonate the (relatively) small warhead away from vital systems and hope the A4 would survive.
Well put!
Nutloose,
Wishful thinking I fear - hence why the CIA sponsored the Stinger 'buy back' programme.
MANPADs have proven relatively robust, and can last for years in poor conditions.
Back to the original question - have a look at Israeli A4 losses in the Yom Kippur War (over 50...) and several were attributed to the layered Soviet style embedded AD systems moving with Arab armoured formations - SA6, ZSU23/4 and SA7. The latter was such an issue the Israelis extended the jet pipe on the A4 to attempt to detonate the (relatively) small warhead away from vital systems and hope the A4 would survive.
There may be some confusion when you say 'battery life'. Once activated, the battery only provides electrical power for spool up and cooling for a relatively short period - and it's a one use only; if you lose the tgt you need a new battery before attempting to engage again. Battery 'shelf life' is actually pretty good, dependant on how they're stored.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gosh but I love these kinds of discussions.
The "We" thing is superfluous.
It is "They" that matter.
"They" will build them...."They" will give them to Terrorists. Then They will use them against Civilian Airliners.
What "We" do re building the things has f@ck all to do with what "They" do.
If one believes those who wish to lead us to believe Tens of Thousands of the things went missing as a result of the West's tumbling of Qadaffi....then perhaps that should be the focus of the OP's concerns and not the MANPAD's we build, store, safeguard and control.
It is those we don't store, safeguard, and control that are the threat.
The "We" thing is superfluous.
It is "They" that matter.
"They" will build them...."They" will give them to Terrorists. Then They will use them against Civilian Airliners.
What "We" do re building the things has f@ck all to do with what "They" do.
If one believes those who wish to lead us to believe Tens of Thousands of the things went missing as a result of the West's tumbling of Qadaffi....then perhaps that should be the focus of the OP's concerns and not the MANPAD's we build, store, safeguard and control.
It is those we don't store, safeguard, and control that are the threat.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Poor Bloody Infantry around the world want something they can fire against aircraft - they just don't believe that their airforce will be there 100% of the time and be 100% effective
If they don't get it they'll blaze away with whatever guns they have anyway
MANPADS are a cheap method of making life more uncertain to ground-attack aircraft and so they do have an effect
Trying to uninvent them is just impossible
If they don't get it they'll blaze away with whatever guns they have anyway
MANPADS are a cheap method of making life more uncertain to ground-attack aircraft and so they do have an effect
Trying to uninvent them is just impossible