AA and Anti Missile System

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
American plans to conduct tests on anti-missile system
By TREBOR BANSTETTER
Star-Telegram staff writer

American Airlines will be testing an anti-missile system on some passenger flights next year, the latest phase in efforts to develop technology to protect airliners from terrorist attacks.

The tests will be performed on behalf of the British defense firm BAE Systems, which won a contract with the Department of Homeland Security to produce the anti-missile technology. Since the 9-11 attacks, many security experts have worried that terrorists could use inexpensive shoulder-fired missiles to shoot down commercial jets.

Officials with BAE and American stressed that the passenger flights won't be testing the anti-missile capabilities of the system. Instead, they will study how the technology affects maintenance, fuel consumption, and other factors during a regular flight.

"Of course, we're not going to be firing any missile at any aircraft," said Burt Keirstead, BAE's director of commercial-aircraft programs. "This is solely for testing the suitability of the equipment."

Fort Worth-based American has been working with BAE on the anti-missile equipment since 2004. Last year, the airline provided a plane and two pilots for a test of the system at Alliance Airport in Fort Worth.

In the latest phase, the equipment will be installed on a small number of Boeing 767-200s that fly transcontinental routes, American spokesman John Hotard said. The planes will fly from New York to Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Despite the airline's assistance, American officials say they don't believe that anti-missile technology should be the first line of defense against attacks.

"We think greater intelligence to root out terrorism, plus perhaps some type of airport perimeter system to keep them from firing at airplanes in the first place, is the best method," Hotard said. "That said, we do want to know how [the BAE] system would work, so we're happy to help them collect data on it."

Military aircraft have used anti-missile technology for years, but the systems are still under review for passenger aircraft. One major concern is making technology that's affordable, as the industry grapples with high fuel prices and worries about slowing demand for travel.

The government said that the system should cost, at most, $1 million an airplane to install. But Keirstead said BAE's technology should be much cheaper, and estimated that it would cost about $500,000 an airplane.

Still, for American, the price tag could be significant. The airline has 655 planes in its fleet, which would mean nearly $328 million to equip every aircraft. And the systems could generate additional costs, such as higher fuel and maintenance expenses.

"Our main focus is on keeping the costs down," Keirstead said.

Shares of AMR Corp., American's parent (ticker: AMR), closed at $16.55 in trading Friday, down 30 cents.
[email protected]
 
In the latest phase, the equipment will be installed on a small number of Boeing 767-200s that fly transcontinental routes, American spokesman John Hotard said. The planes will fly from New York to Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Anythoughts as to why not test this anti-missle system using the B767-300er or the B777 since these widebody aircraft are the workhorses of AA's international fleet? The only reason that I could think of is that the 767-200 would not leave the USA and hence no chance (at least not yet) of anybody outside the USA having a sneak peek at this system. Obviously this sort of anti-missle defense system isn't new per say, since military aircraft use it, but I wonder how many modifications are made / need to be made for commercial aircraft? Anybody have any insight into this? Could you slap the exact same anti-missle defense system on a B767 that a Hercules C-130 has? Any ideas as to what the major, if any modifications would need to be made?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
Anythoughts as to why not test this anti-missle system using the B767-300er or the B777 since these widebody aircraft are the workhorses of AA's international fleet? The only reason that I could think of is that the 767-200 would not leave the USA and hence no chance (at least not yet) of anybody outside the USA having a sneak peek at this system. Obviously this sort of anti-missle defense system isn't new per say, since military aircraft use it, but I wonder how many modifications are made / need to be made for commercial aircraft? Anybody have any insight into this? Could you slap the exact same anti-missle defense system on a B767 that a Hercules C-130 has? Any ideas as to what the major, if any modifications would need to be made?


Possibly the reason is it can be easier to dedicate the 767-200 and take it out of service for the installation and testing. The 767-300 and 777 are more difficult to replace as they can adversely affect the international operation. When a 767-300 or777 go out of service, they have a major impact on international flights. I know at JFK, when a 767-300 goes out of service, there usually isnt another 767-300 to replace it.
 
I'd LOVE to know, what kind of system the JEWS(EL-AL) have on their A/C !

(And you've got to know, that they have "it", and(justifiably so), for how long) ??
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #5
I'd LOVE to know, what kind of system the JEWS(EL-AL) have on their A/C !

(And you've got to know, that they have "it", and(justifiably so), for how long) ??


NH/BB's: How are you buddy?

I believe they do have a system now after a missile was fired at one their jets a few years ago..
Also remember their pilots were armed along long time ago.
 
NH/BB's: How are you buddy?

I believe they do have a system now after a missile was fired at one their jets a few years ago..
Also remember their pilots were armed along long time ago.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hopeful,

YO,......."whats up" ??

Have good holidays my friend !!

NH/BB's


ps,

I can't WAIT to hear all the "BOO-HOOing" at JFK, once the FEDS forcefully cut the BIG AIRPORT back to safe levels.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #7
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hopeful,

YO,......."whats up" ??

Have good holidays my friend !!

NH/BB's


ps,

I can't WAIT to hear all the "BOO-HOOing" at JFK, once the FEDS forcefully cut the BIG AIRPORT back to safe levels.




NH/BB's:
Happy Holidays to you, too....

Yes it will be interesting because Jet Blue and Delta each have more flights in and out of JFK.
I'm curious to see what NY's favorite airline Jet Blue has to give up...
Virgin USA is already complaining that they may be restricted due to FED action. Too bad if their timing was wrong.
 
NH/BB's:
Happy Holidays to you, too....

Yes it will be interesting because Jet Blue and Delta each have more flights in and out of JFK.
I'm curious to see what NY's favorite airline Jet Blue has to give up...
Virgin USA is already complaining that they may be restricted due to FED action. Too bad if their timing was wrong.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To (sir Richard) Branson, I would say........"Chin up old bean,...EVEN Muhammed ALI lost a (RARE) fight" !!!................(You'll get over it)

LH buying 1/5th of B6, NO surprise, and in the loooong run covers B6's A$$.

DL, now thats another story....I guess they will have to pull some of those exotic trips like JFK to OUTER MONGOLIA :shock:

As for AA, we still can make some of those A/E flights, sacrificial lambs !
 
I've heard El-Al has aerosolized cannisters of pigs blood onboard for their FA's to use against terrorists. Once tarnished with pork products, a true Muslim cannot enter Paradise... not that they would.
 
<_< ------ I wonder how history would have played out if TWA's Flt.#800 would have had this system, way back when?------ Just a little trivia: On that tragic day, Flt.800 was late leaving the gate. There was another 747 late also. TWA's Flt.800 took it's slot.------- What 747 was that?----- EL AL!!! :shock:
 
It would have forced the conspiracy theorists to try and blame something else for what was still most likely the result of a fuel tank explosion?...
 
NH/BB's: How are you buddy?

I believe they do have a system now after a missile was fired at one their jets a few years ago..
Also remember their pilots were armed along long time ago.

Arkia Israeli Airlines had two SA-7's fired at it during climbout in Kenya in 2002. Fortanetly the SA-7 is not known for it's effectiveness and they both missed.
 
<_< ------ I wonder how history would have played out if TWA's Flt.#800 would have had this system, way back when?------ Just a little trivia: On that tragic day, Flt.800 was late leaving the gate. There was another 747 late also. TWA's Flt.800 took it's slot.------- What 747 was that?----- EL AL!!! :shock:

Probably the same thing since it wasn't hit by a SAM.
 
It would have forced the conspiracy theorists to try and blame something else for what was still most likely the result of a fuel tank explosion?...
<_< -----Eric, I'm sure you have your opinion on what happened to Flt.800. And there is nothing I can say, at this late date, to change it, but take it from one of many who personally worked on that aircraft. The center fuel tank did explode, but what caused it, I have no doubt in my mind!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top