Anti-Missile System to Be Tested On Some American Airlines Jets

This is a good idea. That way if terrorists hijack a plane we won't be able to shoot it down.

That's a really crazy idea.

What protection will others in the firing line have, against being crisped, when hit by a stray beam.

I'm talking about people on the ground, folks.

Kind Regards....

Perhaps you would like to purchase one of my patented "stray laser beam deflection shields?" They are stylish, portable, require no energy/power. And they protect user from UV, H2O, acid rain, global warming, and light hail.

It is made from "space age Nylon"

I have them in 3 colors!

What would Ron Paul say?

Hello C_Rummel3

Does the covering nylon of your "stray laser beam deflection shields" have a reflective surface on the upper side?

If so, perhaps I should be among the first to invest.

Kind Regards....

can that also be reversible?

If you hold it upside where it acts as a parabola and reflects it to the focus and send it back where it came from.

My only worry is if they stop selling terrorists air to air missiles.

In favour of air to aircraft missiles.....

The grapevine rumour has it that the "Star Wars" laser cannons are going to get some further use, after all.

If you look carefully at the videos of the planes crashing into the twin towers on 9/11, you can clearly see that these aircraft were of military origin.

On one military plane, (they had no passenger windows), you can see the 30 foot long "pod" underneath the fuselage, and 11 feet before the nose of the plane arrives at the building exterior, a bright flash in the exact spot so the building side is vaporised to allow the nose of the plane entry.

This would be an impressive laser cannon in action.

What would Ron Paul say?

Kind Regards....

Never mind the missiles, I'm now more worried about terrorists taken over control of the planes onboard computer!

Check this out!

this could be a far worse scenario.

If I were Nostra whats his name I would predict that by the time the technology is tested MANPAD technology and the arms market enabled by the industrialized nations will have evolved to an extent that the defensive systems are obsolete long before those defensive systems are effectively deployed.

I would further predict that the next generation of MANPADS will use dual mode seekers with both passive IR and frequency hopping active RF.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the IR mode could be field programmable to sense and track the specific IR signature of the aircraft (engine) and that the RF section of the seeker will contain both the illumination energy source and the ability to shut down and track passively if it detects target generated jamming. Combining these two technologies with average positioning software will make MANPAD attack scenarios look like shooting elephants in a spot light.

To the industrialized nations I would say; there is only one effective defense against MANPAD technology. Quit selling this stuff. Military Transfer may represent the third or fourth largest world export product, but there are hidden costs not factored into the cost of doing business for the producer and marketer. Costs paid largely by the innocent.

Gavilan

I would say that the testing is just a little showboating by the current Administration. After all, the designers of this anti-missile technology know exactly the technology that they're countering, because they invented it and then marketed it all over the World...

Come on, people! We're talking the "Stinger Missile!" We gave then out like candy to anyone that was against the Soviet Union. Now, there's a distinct possibility that they will be used on us.

so we are orchestrating our own demise in a viscous circle.

History is prone to repetition, is it not?

yes, it shows that even when we hear we should learn from it so it not repeated, it is.

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Give a man a gun, and he may shoot you.

As one of the many voices of reason, here is a question.

- How many missiles have been fired at passenger planes, and of those were any actually hit?

Anyone know of any.......ever? Seems logical doesn't it to shoot a plane down outside the airport with an easily portable missile launcher or concealed AA gun. Why has it not been done before (its not like there isn't a plentiful supply of these available near where American planes take off and land, including in America). Perhaps they should have bothered to actually do some research.

Well at least it's better than the original plan after 9/11 to update all American planes with military-style heat seeker defense systems at a cost of quite a few billion dollars.

I say lets put the money where it will do the most good shall we, education and healthcare (I say education first as I believe we need it more than healthcare, and there is a definite run on effect).

Who's with me !!

I believe there was an attempt on one in Kenya in 2002, although I could be wrong, and it was unsuccessfully. I would like to know, if it happened, how close it came.

"Anyone know of any.......ever? "

http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/new_information_on_somali_manp_1.php

There will probably be more. This issue isn't the threat. The issue is the effectiveness of the defensive measures when compared to "other" means. The event linked above was a result of a SA-18, a more modern version of the many less effective now dispersed throughout the world. I find it a bit ironic that the attacked airplane and the attacking missile were manufactured in the same country.

When the pigs in the larder are screaming - "There are barbarians at the gates!!" - their motives might not be wholly attributed to security of the state.

Gavilan

That's why I originally called it "showboating." Another term - slight of hand. "Look over here, so you won't be looking at all the stuff I don't want you to look at."

And, of course, he's not all that bad, the Führer loves his dogs! How can a man that loves dogs be all that ba... No! Not at Poland!!! LOOK AT THE DOGS!