virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:19 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../uscongressattacksair_050615211515

Its not something new to airlines (I think El Al has this sort of technology) but to pass a bill that makes it a requirement seems to me that maybe a few politicians want to make life hard for Airbus? I wonder what the threshold is for planes to install the system in terms of passengers - 600? 700?

If this is something that will be implemented, then it wouldnt suprise me if manufacturers design planes to hold lower numbers of passengers in the future.


virgin744
 
bigb
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:29 pm

It is only gonna be a Device that is installed and the bottom of the fuselarge at the Tail end of the Aircraft. Its supose to release come kind of Freq or signal to mess a missle heat sensors/systems up that is coming after the aircraft. Hard to explain, but I seen reports in the past about this because of the threat of heat seeking missles being launch from the ground at departing and arriving traffic at the airports.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:30 pm

That is absolutely ridiculous! I thought I'd heard it all until I read that article.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
sq212
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:38 pm

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 2):

I wonder what airlines would say if to include B747s?

Cheers
 
virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:47 pm

Raytheon has just introduced a new system using beams and microwaves that would be installed at airports to counter any such threat in the vicinity of an airport. They are currently in Paris showing it off, but this system if introduced would additionally require the A380 to have anti-missile technology in the plane as well


virgin744
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:11 pm

Ha Ha Ha

Is he talking about a certification requirement? Well that wont worry any pax operator, (cargo aircraft presumabley will not be such a tempting target), no US based pax airline has ordered it!

If he is talking about requiring it for aircraft of any nationality needing it to fly to the US, well I wonder how he will react when all EU countries require all Boeing aircraft to be preceeded by a man carring a red flag as they cross into EU airspace!!!  Smile

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:19 pm

Seriously - who voted for this John Mica idiot ? Why doesn't he just up and say "I hate France, I hate Airbus, I want to make life hell for both !" - it would be slightly MORE subtle than this lame-ass bill.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Toulouse
Posts: 2193
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 4:30 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:24 pm

What a LOAD OF BLOODY IDIOTIC RUBBISH...
Long live Aer Lingus!
 
zeekiel
Posts: 398
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:59 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:13 pm

This guy must have some serious issues.

On an A380. Why not a 767 or 757? Why not a 346 or a 310? Or a 747ADV?

The comment "irresistable terrorist target" just reeks of ignorance and lack of knowledge. There is no statistical evidence and no proof the above statement is true.

It is true that the A380 is a symbol of civil aviation progress and technological supremacy (don't let this turn into a Airbus vs Boeing thread. Please!).

But, it is an aeroplane just like thousands that are also flying.

For surface to air missiles in the United States. That should be a federal government problem to try and keep them out. Stop the problem at the root and not at the tip.

Cheers

Zeekiel
Bring back the New Zealand Air Combat Force
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:27 pm

Quoting Virgin744 (Thread starter):
I wonder what the threshold is for planes to install the system in terms of passengers - 600? 700

See the average for the 747Adv and you will have your answer i suspect.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:27 pm

Once more again some idiotic nationalistic politicans show pure jealousy and try to hit the product of one of the EU's most important exporters. Why don't they also include B747s in the bill? Where's the line? 400 people? 500 people? Terrorists don't need an A380 to cause a disaster. They should either include all kinds of commercial jets in the bill or forget that brain fart idea...  talktothehand 


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:28 pm

Sad thing is he's wrong anyway - a MANPAD would have less of an effect on an A380 than say, a 757. More target, more redundencies etc - you couldnt bring down an A300 with one - what chance have you got with a plane twice the size?
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:44 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 9):
See the average for the 747Adv and you will have your answer i suspect.



That's what I was thinking too. Can you imagine it if a reporter were to ask John Mica what he expects the threshold to be before a plane is required to have it installed?
"Ahhem, whatever the max pax load of a 747adv is"  Wink


virgin744
 
col
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 8:30 pm

Welcome to American Politics. The Crazies are in town again. At 9-11 they were American Airlines, flying 757/767's killing all those poor people. Someone needs to explain this to our lacking in knowledge friend.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:51 pm

"'When you launch a new aircraft that can carry the population of a small village it must require -- at a minimum -- a missile defense system as standard operating equipment,' states the text of the bill, presented by Republican lawmaker from Florida, John Mica who heads the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. <-- from the article in the link.

Hmm... a Republican from Florida... just like Governor Jeb Bush. Just stating a point, not starting any political BS. Read into it as you will.

(EDIT to add quotation marks for the quote)

[Edited 2005-06-16 15:08:14]
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:53 pm

This is absolutely ridiculous. Yet another way of "fair competition".
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17053
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:12 pm

Quoting Zeekiel (Reply 8):
For surface to air missiles in the United States. That should be a federal government problem to try and keep them out. Stop the problem at the root and not at the tip.

There should indeed, but it's sorta hard to implement. If nothing else, a couple of whizkids could probably build one in their garage. If you're not trying to shoot down an F-16, it's not exactly rocket science. Heatseekers are at least 60 years old after all.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:39 pm

This guy is either putting a value on the lives of people who aren't travelling on A380's or he is pulling this idiotic tripe as a way of obstructing it! Anyway you look at this is stupid, and I am really beyond this kind of political garbage!
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:51 pm

Quoting Udo (Reply 10):
Once more again some idiotic nationalistic politicans show pure jealousy and try to hit the product of one of the EU's most important exporters



Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 6):
Seriously - who voted for this John Mica idiot ?

Did you guys vote for those "idiots" (or maybe I should use "weasels"  Wink) Chirac and Schroeder and all of the loonies in the French National Assembly and the Bundestag? Maybe you did and maybe you didn't, and maybe I voted for Mica and for Bush, but do you really need to put such childish remarks into this discussion?

As for the bill, it has been introduced, that is all. However, Mica is the subcommittee Chairman with jurisdiction over aviation in the United States. He has been an aggressive proponent of defensive systems, so this is nothing new. He, like any other politician, is using the current "excitement" and "newness" of the A-380 to attract attention to an issue he believes is important.

If you had read a bit more than a wire story press release (and this community is notorious for nit picking every little journalistic factual error in press releases), then you would have learned that the proposed legislation would require the use of MANPADS two years after the FAA has certified the systems airworthy and safe and that Mica is proposing that as this will undoubtedly be the largest commercial airplane, that the roll out of these systems (if ever approved) should start with the largest airplanes. Yeah, maybe he is also getting a bit of a dig in at Airbus, but I would not be so quick to judge his underlying motives and belief in the importance of protecting commercial aviation from these threats.

Also, I am sure that if this bill were to proceed, Airbus's lobbyists will be all over it to ensure that large Boeing aircraft are covered as well, and for that matter, all interested parties (manufacturers, customers, contractors, etc) would be lobbying to have someone else pay for it.

Quoting Zeekiel (Reply 8):
For surface to air missiles in the United States. That should be a federal government problem to try and keep them out. Stop the problem at the root and not at the tip.

As for this comment, Mica sponsored legislation that passed the House last year that if enacted would among other things seek to reduce the number of weapons that are out there. So I would say that he is taking a pretty broad approach to the issue. Again, rather than just responding to a wire story off of yahoo, why don't you guys look into it a bit more.
 
trident2e
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 3:38 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:54 pm

This won't happen because if it did the EU would require Boeing to do the same on the 787. Americans are running scared at the success of the A380 and are doing what they do best - blustering.
 
KennyK
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:08 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:55 pm

Well no US airline is going to buy the A380 anyway and no American in their right mind is going to fly on an inferior European aircraft flown by none US airlines so what's the problem?

If anything such a system should go on the 777 and 787 and perhaps 747Adv that are going to US airlines, they're far more likely to be threatened.

Or, being naive, is this another dig at Airbus, no, I must be mistaken  eyebrow 
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:05 pm

It is all total crapola. If this so-called "system" was that effective then it would already be aboard ALL fighter aircraft. For goodness sakes, one normally has to pull mega-G's to avoid contact with modern tracking missiles.

It's simple, a lumbering airliner can NEVER avoid even a low-tech tracking system. Electronic countermeasures may be able to "scramble" the brains of an incoming missile if it is far enough away, but within a nm or two that huge object belching heat will be hit, without question.

Can we say "waste of money"?
 
longhaulheavy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 1:52 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:18 pm

Every government tries to get digs at the other. It's called a non-tariff barrier, and the hopes are to make another nation's goods more expensive or to exclude them altogether.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the spat 5 or 6 years ago when the EU Commission promulgated guidelines limiting the bypass ratio of new engines, greatly favoring the ratios on European engines, even though such ratios didn't directly correlate to noise or environmental standards.

Whine, whine. The EU does it too.

[Edited 2005-06-16 16:19:35]
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:32 pm

Quoting Longhaulheavy (Reply 22):
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the spat 5 or 6 years ago when the EU Commission promulgated guidelines limiting the bypass ratio of new engines, greatly favoring the ratios on European engines, even though such ratios didn't directly correlate to noise or environmental standards.

I thought about it, but was trying to pull the discussion back to a rational discussion on missile threats...it is a very good point though and one of the NTB's that preceeded the ongoing dispute over subsidies.
 
AMSSpotter
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:36 pm

For some "totally unknown" reason, certain people have somehow determined that the Boeing 747 (and it is a beautiful aircraft) has set "the maximum" in many ways. Whether it's about it's dimensions, the amount of people it can carry, it's MTOW or the amount of time it requires to (de)board the aircraft: 747 = MAXIMUM in many, many ways.
Everything that exceeds the magic "maximum" just causes too many problems. That's why anti-missile technology only needs to be implemented on the A380 and not on any other aircraft.
Ridiculous but, in this case, probably just CORRUPT.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:37 pm

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 18):
He has been an aggressive proponent of defensive systems, so this is nothing new. He, like any other politician, is using the current "excitement" and "newness" of the A-380 to attract attention to an issue he believes is important.

The issue is only "important" because it generates fear in the minds of US voters - fear that the Republicans just love to pander to. If missiles are such a threat, presumably they have been ever since man-portable systems became available, and yet very few civilian aircraft have ever been shot down, in fact a great many of them were in Angola (some of which by Stinger missiles supplied by the US to UNITA). It can happen, but this has always been the case, and only now the US wants to put anti-missile systems onto A380's ? Yeah, sure...
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:38 pm

Quoting Trident2e (Reply 19):
Americans are running scared at the success of the A380 and are doing what they do best - blustering.

Running scared? That's freakin' hillarious. Let me know when "technical integration problems delaying delivery" equate to success. Far as I can tell, the 380 looks more like an MD-11 than a success story right now.

[Edited 2005-06-16 16:40:12]
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:52 pm

Quoting Danny (Reply 15):
This is absolutely ridiculous. Yet another way of "fair competition".

It is so ridiculous it probably won't pass.....I hope....I'm not sure if this is an anti-Airbus thing or just another attempt to scare the crap out of the American public.
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:55 pm

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 18):
Did you guys vote for those "idiots" (or maybe I should use "weasels" Wink) Chirac and Schroeder and all of the loonies in the French National Assembly and the Bundestag?

If you talk to me, then the answer is "no".

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 18):
Maybe you did and maybe you didn't, and maybe I voted for Mica and for Bush, but do you really need to put such childish remarks into this discussion?

If an American politician points his finger at possible threats for the A380 while totally ignoring the some 800-900 flying B747s then it stinks. Simple as that. It's my opinion, so what's the problem?  Confused

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 18):
Yeah, maybe he is also getting a bit of a dig in at Airbus, but I would not be so quick to judge his underlying motives and belief in the importance of protecting commercial aviation from these threats.

Sure, theoretically everything's possible.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 26):
Far as I can tell, the 380 looks more like an MD-11 than a success story right now.

Yeah, with all these different 550-seating competitors around...  Yeah sure


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:07 am

Before everyone says this is ridiculous let me pose the following question:

If European regulators can ban certain aircraft from their skies for noise compliance issues, why shouldn't the US have the same authority relative to anti-missile defense systems?
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:26 am

Quoting Udo (Reply 28):
If an American politician points his finger at possible threats for the A380 while totally ignoring the some 800-900 flying B747s then it stinks. Simple as that. It's my opinion, so what's the problem?

If you had bothered to look into it a bit more than just responding to the silly wire story and if you had more than a simplistic view of politicians, then you would realize that:

1) This is just one more in a series of efforts the Congressman has advanced to make commercial aviation more secure; and

2) that as far as anyone can determine, he has not proposed limiting it to the A-380, but rather he is proposing that when the time comes that systems have been certified, that they should be placed in the largest aircraft first.

Again, maybe it is a little jab at Airbus, and maybe it isn't, but they haven't even posted the actual language for the legislation yet, so we don't know exactly what he intends to do, but based on his previous efforts, I don't think that you could say he is ignoring 747's or any other aircraft or that he is advancing this issue solely to target Airbus.

Now reasonable people may disagree about whether these systems are feasible, are worth the costs, and whether the government or the manufacturers should be paying for it, so let's not let this drift into a A-B war or just a wholesale, uneducated bashing of elected officials....
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:36 am

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 30):
1) This is just one more in a series of efforts the Congressman has advanced to make commercial aviation more secure;

This is an effort to give Boeing competitive advantage. Nothing more. I hope this never happens in the country claiming to have free economy.
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:39 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 25):
The issue is only "important" because it generates fear in the minds of US voters - fear that the Republicans just love to pander to.

I don't think that you can accuse the Republicans of pandering to fear any more than you can accuse any other politician around the world of pandering to well founded as well as unfounded fears.

On this issue, I am sure that you will also see Democrats backing this effort.

Outside of this issue, politicians around the world use fear of the known and the unknown to advance all sorts of causes, from social security, to immigration, to global warming, to European integration.

As for your comments about Stingers, if you spent five minutes checking on what other things this representative has done, you would have seen that legislation he pushed last year (with Democrats, by the way) urged the Administration to take additional steps to address issues such as this.

http://www.house.gov/transportation/press/press2004/release100.html
 
Greyhound
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:37 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:44 am

Quoting Udo (Reply 28):
If an American politician points his finger at possible threats for the A380 while totally ignoring the some 800-900 flying B747s then it stinks. Simple as that. It's my opinion, so what's the problem?

I think I share your opinion Udo, even if not exactly. How expensive would it be to install this system on each aircraft? As long as the price isin't astronomical, why not require the jamming system on something other than JUST the A380? Even if you don't take out 500-600 passengers all at once, taking out a 737 over a densely populated area can be just as dangerous.
29th, Let's Go!
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:49 am

Quoting Greyhound (Reply 33):
I think I share your opinion Udo, even if not exactly. How expensive would it be to install this system on each aircraft? As long as the price isin't astronomical, why not require the jamming system on something other than JUST the A380?

It's not the price that's the issue, it's the principle - this is a total surrender. Next it'll be fighter escorts, or duct-taping each passenger to their seat with a plastic bag over their head, or individual locked cells for each passenger. How can this guy pander to these irrational and pointless fears like this ? As a public official he should know better. This is not a Ralph Nader-style consumer crusade for seat belts, this is much more sinister.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:50 am

Quoting Danny (Reply 31):
This is an effort to give Boeing competitive advantage. Nothing more. I hope this never happens in the country claiming to have free economy.

Not sure about your logic hear Danny on how this would give Boeing a competitive advantage...if we get to a point to where these systems can be deployed, then more planes than just A-380's are going to have these systems.
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:55 am

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 35):
Quoting Danny (Reply 31):
This is an effort to give Boeing competitive advantage. Nothing more. I hope this never happens in the country claiming to have free economy.

Not sure about your logic hear Danny on how this would give Boeing a competitive advantage

It is pretty obvious. If only A380 would be required to have very costly anti-missile system that 747 would suddenly become more cost effective.
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:58 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 34):
it's the principle - this is a total surrender. Next it'll be fighter escorts, or duct-taping each passenger to their seat with a plastic bag over their head, or individual locked cells for each passenger. How can this guy pander to these irrational and pointless fears like this ?

Talk about irrational fears, you have quite an active imagination here tying a simple proposal to make commercial aviation more secure by using and possibly mandating technology designed to mitigate a missile attack to some larger fear you have of government run amok.
 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:58 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 26):
Far as I can tell, the 380 looks more like an MD-11 than a success story right now.

Ummm, can we leave the better aircraft out of this?  Big grin
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:01 am

Quoting Thucydides (Reply 37):
Talk about irrational fears, you have quite an active imagination here tying a simple proposal to make commercial aviation more secure by using and possibly mandating technology designed to mitigate a missile attack to some larger fear you have of government run amok.

Listen to yourself. "Mitigate a missile attack". Why not technology to mitigate a meteor/space junk strike, or an alien invasion ? They're just as likely to happen ! This is insane, and the scary part is, you don't seem to notice how insane it is.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Greyhound
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:37 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:08 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 34):
Next it'll be fighter escorts, or duct-taping each passenger to their seat with a plastic bag over their head, or individual locked cells for each passenger. How can this guy pander to these irrational and pointless fears like this ? As a public official he should know better. This is not a Ralph Nader-style consumer crusade for seat belts, this is much more sinister.

Let me run for cover real quick before the government comes and gets me. I don't see any problem in installing anti-missile systems on airplanes (other than just the A380). It's not interfering with any personal liberties like your sinister plastic bag and individual locked cell theory is. So what's the problem? It's easy to run from any potential safeguard lately. All you have to do is spout off something about the government catering to everyone's fears or they're trying to scare everyone themselves. And if a plane gets shot down over U.S. soil in a crowded residential area by a heat seeking missile, what then? If they think an anti missile system would help... I wouldn't mind. So, if it's something much more sinister than a seat belt crusade, what is it then?
29th, Let's Go!
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:09 am

The Stinger (the best shoulder mounted missile system atm) has a maximum ceiling of 12500ft, with a range of 15700ft. Surely, with those sort of limitations on man portable systems, the only time an aircraft would be vulnerable would be on landing or takeoff.

If thats the case, then wouldnt it be better to use ground based systems on approach paths and ascent paths to mitigate this threat for ALL aircraft - after all, its not often you see large aircraft such as the 747 or A380 at or below 12500ft when in passenger operation. Making the defence measures ground based will allow for a wider protection spectrum for many more aircraft, including older models which wont be covered under legislation such as this anyway (they will be grandfathered in).

If they are looking to protect against non man portable systems, such as vehicle based systems, then I suspect they have greater issues to be dealing with......
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:15 am

Again Danny, where is the competitive advantage? The proposed legislation, even if enacted based solely on what we have read in press releases and wire stories, is a big "IF" because the FAA would still need to deem it safe and effective, and even then, it would be two years to take effect, and finally, as others have pointed out European regulators would likely slap a similar requirement on US manufactured aircraft...If we get to a point where this technology is effective and feasible, then it will become as standard on aircraft as collision avoidance systems and black boxes.

As for cost, much of the current research is already being funded by the U.S. government anyways...
 
Thucydides
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:18 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:22 am

RichardPrice -

Good points!
 
Ned Kelly
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 8:14 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:27 am

If these anti missile devices are fitted to the A380 (or any plane for that matter), won't these planes then become the hijackers favorite target? How would you then shoot them down if they are hijacked!
 
Greyhound
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:37 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:30 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 41):
If thats the case, then wouldnt it be better to use ground based systems on approach paths and ascent paths to mitigate this threat for ALL aircraft - after all, its not often you see large aircraft such as the 747 or A380 at or below 12500ft when in passenger operation. Making the defence measures ground based will allow for a wider protection spectrum for many more aircraft, including older models which wont be covered under legislation such as this anyway (they will be grandfathered in).

Good point. I didn't think of this one. A good alternative if noone wants something on aircraft. All you have to do is convince Congress now. Good luck on that..  Smile
29th, Let's Go!
 
daedaeg
Posts: 627
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 1:54 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:36 am

I think before everyone gets overly defensive, one must understand that there is an ongoing debate in congress over anti-missile defense systems on all aircraft. The big question that's lingering is who's going to pay for all this. The congressman probably singled out the A380 because it is now the largest civil aviation aircraft and would most likely get the most momentum for convincing the rest of congress to pass such a bill. I doubt this has little to do with jealousy on the part of the congressman, paranoia perhaps.
Everyday you're alive is a good day.
 
GoAllegheny
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2000 4:48 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:10 am

Democrats in the House and Senate have introduced broader legislation -- the Commercial Airline Missile Defense Act -- that would require all turboject airliners to install anti-missile defense systems over time.

Considering that Alcoa recently signed a $2 billion contract with EADs through 2011 or so, and that other US companies also benefit, I seriously doubt that Mica did this as a political favor to Boeing. Of course, Boeing is one of his major campaign contributors . . .

As to ground-based systems, how is it practical to install such systems in all of the areas where airliners fly under 12,500 feet? In the Chicago area around ORD and MDW, that probably would cover hundreds of square miles, not to mention the threat from missiles launched from boats on Lake Michigan.
 
Aither
Posts: 990
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:21 am

... and all this debate during the Paris Air Show... A coincidence no doubt !


Did someone talked about fair competition ?
Never trust the obvious
 
sparkingwave
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 1:01 pm

RE: US Bill Seeks Anti-missile Technology On A380

Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:34 am

Anti-missile defense systems are a good idea. The Airbus A380 is a good start, but these systems should be required to be deployed on all aircraft, period. And it should have been done much sooner.

I can't believe you people out there trying to twist this issue into some American government conspiracy against Airbus. What rubbish! I actually feel more paranoid of those who would place national pride and profit first over the safety and welfare of airplane passengers.

Have all of you forgotten that jumbo jets have been attacked and destroyed by missiles before? Korean Air Flight 007 Boeing 747 with 260+ passengers was shot out of the sky by a missile from a Soviet jet fighter back in 1983. All of the crew and passengers died. I'll bet those pilots who desperately tried in vain to keep the plane aloft wouldn't have minded one bit having had an antimissile defense system equipped to protect them in the first place.

And the same sentiment goes for the Iran Air Airbus A300 that was shot down by the USS Vincennes. What about all those people who died? Antimissile systems could have protected them too.

And don't forget the near miss at Kenya Airport. Those shoulder-fired missiles missed those jets that time, but do you think that El Al is going to take any chances again? Just ask them what they think about protecting their planes!

In light of these tragedies it is NOT paranoid thinking to install antimissile systems. I know I would breathe a little easier if the next plane I was flying on was equipped with them.

- Just my 2,000,000  twocents .

Sparkingwave
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!