AP: Jet with anti-missile system leaves LAX

[tuvor]

LOS ANGELES - An MD-10 cargo jet equipped with Northrop Grumman's Guardian anti-missile system took off from Los Angeles International Airport on a commercial flight Tuesday, the company said.

The FedEx flight marked the start of operational testing and evaluation of the laser system designed to defend against shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles during takeoffs and landings.

Adapted from military technology, Guardian is designed to detect a missile launch and then direct a laser to the seeker system on the head of the missile and disrupt its guidance signals. The laser is not visible and is eye-safe, the company said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070117/ap_on_hi_te/airliner_anti_missile

[uppityperson]

1. so will this be an automatic thing or will someone have to do it?

FedEx, million each? Will be interesting to see what becomes of it.

[benEzra]

23. Once turned on, the system is automatic...

sensors look for missile exhaust plumes, find the missle, and shine an infrared laser at it, sort of like shining a really bright flashlight into somebody's eyes. The infrared glare keeps the missile from being able to "see" the airplane's heat signature, and it can't chase down and hit what it can't see.

[madrchsod]

2. you can shoot down just about any airplane

with a legal 50calbier rifle. lethal range-2000 yards



sale is not permitted in california legal in all the rest of the states

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=87
Gun Guys » When it Comes to .50 Caliber Terror, Bigger is Badder

[jody]

4. You have no idea about the limitation of a 50 caliber rifle. If they were so bad, then

ground troops both Allied and Axis would have cleared the skies of close air support in WWII.

In Vietnam, the North Vietnamese with 20mm and much larger machine guns would have devastated U.S. aircraft.

IMO none of those things happened and that proves you're 50 caliber rifle tales are grossly exaggerated

[alfredo]

7. the .50 Cal is one hell of a weapon, especially when it

is teamed up with a P38

[jody]

10. Agreed but not very effective as a single shot rifle against aircraft. n/t

[alfredo]

11. Barring "lucky" shots.

Shooting a .50 Cal gives one that Wow response.

I was named the squad leader for a 60mm. I'd never shot one, neither had anyone else with me. I was a morse intercept operator. My weapon was a telegraphers mill. A couple days after my appointment we were informed that 3,000 soldiers were marching on our site. At the most we had 60 people. They sent us up on the roof. My position was defending the front gate. I remember thinking, "I'm dead." I had one box of ammo and a comrade that was catatonic with fear. He probably saw the same in me.

Nothing happened. Most likely it was a drill, but they didn't tell us it was a drill. A small scale insurgency was operating in the region, so that helped sell the alert to us.

[ileus]

13. Or even in the 3 shot bolt action

[benEzra]

15. I'm afraid you've been had...

you can shoot down just about any airplane with a legal 50calbier rifle. lethal range-2000 yards

I'm afraid you've been had by the ban-more-guns lobby (which gunguys.org is a paid organ of). But hear me out.

When shooting at any moving target with any firearm, you don't aim at where the target IS, but at where the target WILL BE when the bullet arrives.

If you look up the ballistics of the .50 BMG (see table below), you'll find that the bullet takes 4.2 seconds to fly 2000 yards. Even an airliner flying SLOW (175 kt) is traveling around 290 feet per second, or 1218 feet in 4.2 seconds. In other words, you have to aim at a point in the empty sky a QUARTER MILE IN FRONT OF THE AIRPLANE in order to even have a chance of hitting it. Using a typical long-range target scope, you wouldn't even be able to see the plane; you'd be shooting at empty sky. Close your eyes and use the Force, Luke. And at that distance, the bullet is falling 20 feet for every 100 yards of forward travel, so if you guess the range wrong by even 200 yards, you'll have a clean miss above/below, even if you magically guessed the azimuth correctly.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that you ARE Luke Skywalker or Harry Potter, and can use the Force or your magic wand to actively guide the bullet to where the plane will be 4.2 seconds later. At that distance, the bullet has slowed to the speed of a musket ball from a 1700's-era muzzleloader. You wouldn't hurt the plane, other than putting a half-inch hole in the skin that probably wouldn't even be noticed until a future maintenance inspection. The thump of impact might, or might not, be audible over engine noise--even if you had the Luke Skywalker/Harry Potter ability to make the hit in the first place.

Don't take my word for it. Here are the exterior ballistics of the .50 BMG round, which are similar to those of a hunting rifle except for somewhat better velocity retention at range:

Trajectory Output
Input Data
Manufacturer:......Barnes.......Description:....0.510 dia. 647 gr. X Boattail
Muzzle Velocity:...2800.0 ft/s Chronograph Distance: 10.0 ft

Sight Height:........3.00 in.......Sight Offset:....0.00 in
Zero Height:.........0.00 in.......Zero Offset:.....0.00 in
Azimuth:.............0.00 MOA......Elevation:.......0.00 MOA
LOS Angle:...........0.0 deg.......Cant Angle:......0.0 deg
Wind Speed:.........10.0 mph.......Wind Angle:.....90.0 deg
Temperature:........59.0°F.........Pressure:.......29.92 in Hg
Relative Humidity:...0.0%..........Altitude:........0 ft
Vital Zone Radius:..96.0in.........Std. Atmosphere at Altitude:..No
Corrected Pressure:..Yes...........Target Relative Drops:..Yes
Zero at Max. Point Blank Range:...No

Calculated Parameters
Elevation:.............118.06 MOA..........Azimuth:..............0.00 MOA
Atmospheric Density:...0.07647 lbs/ft³.....Speed of Sound:.....1116.5 ft/s
Maximum PBR:...........1121 yds............Maximum PBR Zero:....967 yds
Range at Max Height:....537 yds............Energy at PBR:....2636.9 ft•lbs
Sectional Density:....0.355 lbs/in²


Calculated Table
Range...Drop....Drop...Windage.Windage.....Velocity.....Energy....Time Lead
(yds)...(in)....(moa)...(in)....(moa)...(ft/s)..(Mach).(ft•lbs)....(seconds)
0........-3.0....***....0.0......***....2805.3...2.513..11304.1.....0.000
100.....118.4...113.0...0.6.....0.5.....2648.2...2.372..10073.5.....0.110
200.....234.8...112.1...2.3.....1.1.....2496.5...2.236...8952.4.....0.227
300.....345.6...110.0...5.2.....1.7.....2349.9...2.105...7931.6.....0.351
400.....450.1...107.5...9.6.....2.3.....2208.1...1.978...7003.4.....0.483
500.....547.5...104.6...15.5....3.0.....2071.2...1.855...6161.8.....0.623
600.....636.8...101.3...23.0....3.7.....1939.3...1.737...5402.2.....0.773
700.....716.8...97.8....32.3....4.4.....1812.9...1.624...4720.7.....0.933
800.....786.2...93.8....43.6....5.2.....1692.3...1.516...4113.6.....1.104
900.....843.4...89.5....57.1....6.1.....1578.3...1.414...3577.9.....1.288
1000....886.7...84.7....73.0....7.0.....1471.6...1.318...3110.4.....1.485
1100....913.9...79.3....91.3....7.9.....1373.1...1.230...2708.3.....1.696
1200....922.6...73.4....112.2...8.9.....1284.1...1.150...2368.5.....1.922
1300....910.2...66.9....135.9...10.0....1205.6...1.080...2087.8.....2.163
1400....874.0...59.6....162.1...11.1....1138.8...1.020...1862.8.....2.419
1500....810.9...51.6....190.9...12.2....1083.5...0.970...1686.3.....2.689
1600....718.3...42.9....221.9...13.2....1038.0...0.930...1547.7.....2.973
1700....593.3...33.3....254.9...14.3....999.9....0.896...1436.0.....3.267
1800....433.6...23.0....289.9...15.4....967.0....0.866...1343.2.....3.573
1900....236.6...11.9....326.6...16.4....938.0....0.840...1263.9.....3.889
2000....-0.0....-0.0....365.0...17.4....912.0....0.817...1194.6.....4.214

17 Jan 2007 11:45:39, JBM http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm


Now, if you had a .50 caliber machinegun on a pedestal mount (tightly restricted by Federal law, but let's imagine), and unlimited quantities of tracer ammunition so you could just walk the stream into the target (like the old .50 AA guns on WW2 battleships), maybe you'd get a hit. But not with a target rifle. If you want to hit something moving at more than a crawl--say, a plane--with a single shot, you need a projectile that can steer itself to the target. A missile, that can actually "see" the plane and chase it down, not a half-inch unguided bullet.

[rinsd]

18. Yes I saw them shoot down a helicopter with one in SWAT

And that link couldn't use more scare tactics if it tried.

"The terra-ists are gonna get us!"

[ContraBass Black]

21. ...If it's hovering in place a few feet overhead and you know exactly

where to hit it.

[PSPS]

3. HAHA. "Eye safe." Yeah, sure.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

5. Tell flight 800's victims this is a safe system

:hide:

[benEzra]

16. Flight 800 didn't have one.

Who knows exactly what happened, but it's possible that if the plane DID have a missile countermeasures system on board, it might not have blown up, if a missile was indeed the cause...

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. what happens if the FEDEX plane is hijacked?

can anyone shoot it down?

[kimsterdemster]

8. good ? n/t.

[ShockediSay]

9. & what happens when the guy w/ his finger on the button

pushes & it just plain doesn't work??

Take it back to the store for a refund?
I don't think so

[SayWhatYo]

19. I'll do you one better...

What happens if aliens come down and take all the passengers?

[One_Life_To_Give]

12. Probably an AMRAM would be effective

A radar guided missle such as the US AMRAM, etc. should not be effected by this laser. Creating a overload on the thermal imaging seeker doesn't require much power. Stopping a missile that does not rely on the thermal imaging system to track it's target requires a whole lot more power.

[Gators_Rule]

14. Yes and No

Correct that a radar guided missle would not be effected by a laser system, however it doesn't require a large amount of radiated power to throw a radar guided missle off course. You do not have to overcome the power of the radar site, only overcome the amount of reflected radar signal from your own aircraft.

[benEzra]

17. Yes. Fighters have 20mm cannons, and radar-guided missiles...

either of which wouldn't be affected by the infrared-seeker-spoofing system on the airliner.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

20. what happens if.......

the terrorists have radar-guided missiles or cannons.

[benEzra]

22. AFAIK, all shoulder-fired missiles are infrared-guided...

radar-guided surface-to-air missiles are generally much more complex systems, and most require a ground-based radar (separate from the launcher) to illuminate the target; the missile homes in on the reflection. One of those would be far more difficult to smuggle into the country, would take a while to set up, and would be quite obvious.

Shoulder-fired, infrared-guided missile systems (FM-92 Stinger and Warsaw Pact SAM-7 (Strela-2)):


You can see how small they are--the Stinger is smaller and easier to hide than some civilian target rifles, and allows a single, relatively unskilled individual to bring down a large aircraft. This is what the infrared laser countermeasures systems are designed to nullify.


Radar-guided surface-to-air missile system (MIM-23 Hawk, an older U.S. system)--left, loading the launch trailer (in background); right, guidance radar:



You can see the difference involved in size and logistics. The shoulder-launched infrared system could be smuggled into the country disguised as a routine cocaine shipment, and could be launched from a small boat or a pickup truck under an airport departure flight path that then slips away. Some people think that TWA Flight 800 was brought down this way, with a missile launched from a boat; it's at least a feasible method of attack. The radar-guided system, on the other hand, would be VERY obvious when the terrorists spend half a day setting up the radars and generators and launch trailer, not to mention the greater difficulty smuggling it in.


As far as terrorists with 20mm or 30mm cannons, I was speaking of the kind carried on fighter aircraft. AFAIK, no terrorist organization (even AQ) has the resources to obtain, maintain, and fly fighter aircraft. If you are thinking of a ground-based, radar-aimed system like the old Skysweeper (below), they'd have the same problems as with the radar-guided system--smuggling it in, setting it up, powering it, and staying undetected long enough to use it.



If terrorists had the capability to smuggle stuff that big into the U.S. and haul it around undetected, they could cause a lot more mayhem shelling cities and chemical plants with 105mm howitzers (artillery). I suppose it could happen, but you'd think if they had that level of capability, they'd have done it.