Here Slate has a little write up talking about how we should look forward to more missile attacks on jumbo jets around airports. There are some good points brought up in this article. I am curious what the chances are that we will see more people trying to shoot down jumbo jets with SAMs in the future?
You think the terrorists are incapable of coming up with their own methods of horror? That they cruise message boards looking for evil ideas? You have a low opinion of their diabolical intelligence.
As for the OP, yes, I think now it’s been done once, it’ll happen again. And I don’t think there’s a lot we can do.
A friend of mine flew into Kabul airport in the late '80s (cheapest flight to Delhi from London was on Afghan Air), and as they came in to land, the passenger plane was surrounded by 4 helicopter gunships that dropped flares to divert any heat-seeking missiles away from the plane (the passengers weren’t warned that this was going to happen!). However, I really can’t see every international airport being able to do anything like this.
Information isn’t neutral, Squink. I understand this is a hot emotional issue. My “warning”, as you so cutely put it, had to do with calling someone “irresponsible”, when their intention was, literally, to avoid responsiblity. I chose not to pursue it (as the moderators gave me the option) to the Pit.
More to the point are jjimm’s comments. When the US government was scrambling for ways to avoid threats, they called a number of science fiction writers to a conference. To ask them what “out of the envelope” attacks might be made on the United States. Those writers won’t say much about what happened, except that they were satisfied with the government’s approach.
The issue isn’t that the terrorists couldn’t come up with these ideas on their own, but that the more assistance they are given – whether by science ficiton writers or experts who happen to belong to the SDBM – the easier their task will be.
jjimm, you underestimate your contributions, or overestimate them. I do understand your feelings, tho.
I think I’d be seen by the world-at-large as a more than average creative person. If I was confronted with an unusual problem, I’d use every resource. Including, if I may say, this board.
Can we expect more missle attacks? Yes, of course. To a terrorist, they have to be very appealing.
(In fact, the Kenya incident was not the first attempt to down a plane with a shoulder-mount SAM - there was an earlier attempt in Saudi Arabia not too long ago, but not as publicized)
How to stop them? Huh - the “helicoptors dropping flares” approach was not one I would have thought of … wonder how effective it really was?
I suppose we could declare a 20 mile wide buffer zone around airports where no one is allowed… but that this cause some major difficulties, given the proximity of airports to cities and such.
There ARE measures that can be installed on the airplane itself (for all we know, they were installed on the Isreali plane, which might account for why it wasn’t hit - the Isrealis sure wouldn’t 'fess up to that, as it would decrease the effectiveness of the counter-measures). Probably not 100% effective, but if such attacks become more frequent they might be worth installing, despite the expense and need for continued maintenance.
Broomstick, do you know anything about what you are talking about?
What is a Stinger missle? Who can buy it? Who already owns it? What kind of planes can it shoot down? What would a 20 mile exclusion zone accomplish? Is that beyond the Stinger’s range?
I know what she’s talking about. This is the Stinger. It can and has been stolen and left in Afghanistan. I can shoot down any plane within range that can be seen with the naked eye or night vision equipment. The range of the missile is (publically) 8km, or 5 miles. The max altitude is 3km, or less than two miles. A 20 miles exclusion zone would ensure the aircraft are out of the engagement envelope.
It’s dumb to challenge someone like that when you yourself are ignorant of the facts.
From “The Dictionary of Modern War” which I read from cover-to-cover in 1999. “Stinger … Specifications … Range envelope 660-16,400 ft. … Ceiling 15,750 ft…”
My point, graciously avoided by you, is that the FUCKING TERRORISTS don’t need to know what it is, or anything about it.
Before we quit, is there anything else you’d like to add that would be of use to religious crazies who are trying to kill innocent men, women and children around the world?
In an earlier thread, it was mentioned that a skilled pilot who didn’t panic might be able to recover from the loss of part of a wing (there was an incident a couple decades ago in California where a pilot brought in a plane with a wing afire) unless it was right on takeoff. Probably landing is not a great time to suddenly lose lift either. So the 20 mile exclusion zone would be what would be required to get enough altitude to keep control.
But very few airports are in places where that is feasible. Back to Mirabel? (An airport about 35 miles from Montreal that has been largely abandoned because it is so hard to get to.)
P.S., Unk, if you’d bothered to read the thread, you’d realize that I brought up the concept that the Stinger might be a weapon of choice. “She” or whoever was talking through her hat.
Get a grip partly_warmer. At least argue consistently. Don’t tell people not to provide info, then provide it yourself.
And, although you’ve said not to underestimate the terrorists, your premise seems to be that terrorists really are stupid, unlike the Dopers (of which you are one).
They know. They have the missiles, they have the manuals, they have access to the same website I linked, and better ones, I’m sure. They have probably cracked the Google code by now.
My point is clear, a 20 mile exclusion would work to stop shoulder fired missiles from hitting civilian airliners, and you were questioning the vaidity of that idea.
I spent three years in an active duty Marine Corps Stinger Battalion, and one and a half years in a Reserve Stinger Battery. Not just read a book. Nothing I have said is classified.
I contend the 20 miles exclusion zone will work with any shoulder fired surface to air missile. Not just the Stinger. In fact, I know that. I read the thread. What she said is valid.
Furthermore, do you think a terrorist in possession of a missile would fail to research its capabilities in publicly available documentation? Or would they perhaps just amble over to the SDMB to see if there’s any information kicking around? And if you’re so uptight about not giving them any information, why would you even bring it up by name?
You appear to be the person underestimating terrorists. Just because they’re murderous scum doesn’t make them unintelligent.