Article

2008-01-06 Home Front: WoT

Anti-missile system to be tested on passenger planes

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by gorb 2008-01-06 06:23|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 FWIW, Spook86 thinks this is a worthwhile move

Posted by lotp 2008-01-06 10:02|| 2008-01-06 10:02|| Front Page Top

#2 Big risk allocation and insurance liability issues here.

There comes a point at which the amount of money being spent is far in excess of the benefit derived. Is there any evidence there is a credible threat from MNAPADS? And to be credible, you've got to explain why they haven't been used yet but they will be soon. Another DHS TSA boondoggle in my opinion.

They will find a way to hit us again if they can. We're just too vulnerable in too many ways. You can't prevent them all without turning the country into a police state. And we've already done that with air travel. I've got to admit that I'm surprised the American people have put up with the needless sacrifice of their liberties in airports for as long as they have.

Time to stop living in fear and respond to provocations effectively, not fears ineffectively. As long as we're willing to slaughter 20,000 people a year and do nothing to stop drunk drivers, I can see efforts to potentially save 200 people at the cost of billions as nothing but conspicuous consumption.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-01-06 10:49|| 2008-01-06 10:49|| Front Page Top

#3 Solution, don't fly. (I don't, ever) let the airlines go bankrupt if they don't/won't change.
When the government looks at footing the entire bill, this shit stops abruptly.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2008-01-06 16:33|| 2008-01-06 16:33|| Front Page Top

#4 Is there any evidence there is a credible threat from MNAPADS?

They have been used in Africa by Islamicists against Israeli flights and at least one attempt in Kenya to use them against US flights has been disrupted that I know of.

We've seen several small cells in the NYC area attempt to purchase or smuggle them into the area.

FWIW.

Posted by lotp 2008-01-06 16:42|| 2008-01-06 16:42|| Front Page Top

#5 Not worth enough to get me to want to spend billions against all the other needs. I'd rather get infantry~~men~~ persons a modern rifle.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-01-06 18:54|| 2008-01-06 18:54|| Front Page Top

#6 Talk to your congresscritters ... they're the ones pressuring DHS to require these systems.

Posted by lotp 2008-01-06 19:15|| 2008-01-06 19:15|| Front Page Top

#7 Besides, which, Nimble, afaict, you could get a distinct improvement on the standard infantry rifle for the infantrymen (say, a piston driven system shooting a 6.5mm bullet) for just about the same cost-per-unit as the M-4 they're purchasing now. A different bore barrel/chamber won't cost any more, the piston won't cost appreciably more, and all the optical doodads (which are what lets the rifle remain competitive in spite of its age) are going to all be the same. (And unless you use some custom setup like the xm-8, they're going to be interchangable/reusable, just take them off the old rifle and put them on the new one).

There may be reasons for sticking with the m-4, but as far as I can tell, cost isn't one of them.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-01-06 20:13|| 2008-01-06 20:13|| Front Page Top

23:52 twobyfour
23:41 Redneck Jim
23:16 Redneck Jim
23:09 Glung McGurque2454
23:06 JosephMendiola
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:57 JosephMendiola
22:55 Whomong Guelph4611
22:48 Whomong Guelph4611
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:40 Mark Z
22:37 JosephMendiola
22:31 Zhang Fei
22:28 JosephMendiola
22:26 Zhang Fei
22:20 Zhang Fei
22:14 rjschwarz
22:14 JosephMendiola
22:11 DMFD
22:09 JosephMendiola
22:07 mhw
21:54 JosephMendiola
21:40 DMFD
21:36 DMFD