Europeans have their head in the sand, again

**bruiser** · 03-01-2006, 12:59 PM

Can anyone explain this: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...221013,00.html

**40sondacurb** · 03-01-2006, 04:36 PM

That's pretty dumb, the only reason I can think of for them banning them is that they're afraid that if one gets hijacked it can avoid measures to take it down, but that's a pretty bad excuse considering Israel's commitment to security. They have sky Marshal's on every plane don't they?

**bruiser** · 03-01-2006, 05:26 PM

I suspect it would be easier to poke sand up a wildcat's *** with an ice pick, than it would be to hijack an El Al plane.

**ReeKorl** · 03-02-2006, 03:33 AM

There's a reason for that.

Sayeret Matkal is an Israeli Elite CT team that specialises in aircraft hijacks (skyjackings).

In 1976, its commandos, disguised as flight mechanics, famously stormed a grounded Air France plane and freed 103 Jewish hostages on an airfield in Entebbe, Uganda. there were actually three short films made about this event (Victory at Entebbe, Raid on Entebbe and Operation Thunderbolt - the former two being American productions, the latter being Israeli).

On July 22, 1968, terrorists hijacked an El Al airliner on its way from Israel to Rome. On November 26, 1968, two terrorists fired at an El Al airliner about to take off from Athens Airport - killing two. Israel retaliated by sending Sayeret Matkal into Beirut. They snuck into Beirut airport and blew up 30 jets.

You don't **** with the Israelis!

**freddyhard** · 03-02-2006, 03:38 AM

Quote:

it can avoid measures to take it down

i don't think it has anything to do with shooting down the aircraft. most air-to-air missles are radar guided, so flares won't distract them and if you get close enough to use heat seeking then you could switch to cannon.

i imagine it's when they are activited it could easily shoot 10 flares in different directions. fire hazard is the first thing that springs to mind.

yustr · 03-02-2006, 04:04 AM

Or how about this: What not arm them with air-ground missiles too? That way if they think they see a threat the pilots can take it out. Oh wait, we're talking what the military does not how civilians are allowed to function. Maybe these countries are objecting to placing military hardware on a commercial jet thereby crossing a line. What's next? Fully armed M1A1's for any Israeli who drives the streets of Paris or Roma?

**ReeKorl** · 03-02-2006, 04:07 AM

Many terrorist factions who have air capabilities still use the old AIM-9L (and in some cases the even older AIM-9D) heat seeking missile. Against those, it would be effective.

Also, it's primarily designed to combat shoulder- or fixed-firing-point-missiles. Many of these (aspecially the ones the terrorists can easily get their hands upon) are heat seeking.

I can only assume that if they really wanted to be safe, they'd use a chaff dispenser also, which mostly disperses the radar signals. However, I could see this being a problem at airports (ie if it went off they'd have no radar coverage of the whole airport - mid-air-coll city).

**mgoldb2** · 03-02-2006, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yustr

Or how about this: What not arm them with air-ground missiles too? That way if they think they see a threat the pilots can take it out. Oh wait, we're talking what the military does not how civilians are allowed to function. Maybe these countries are objecting to placing military hardware on a commercial jet thereby crossing a line. What's next? Fully armed M1A1's for any Israeli who drives the streets of Paris or Roma?

Give me a break are you seriously comparing a device that shoots flares out to prevent a missile from hitting it too air-ground missiles?

I willing to bet you any country that was use to getting people shooting at them with missile launchers would also be putting something similar on there planes.

This is 100% a defensive measure and does not allow for anything offensive. Any country that did not do something to prevent a threat that is common in there area is not doing there job protecting there citizens.

**40sondacurb** · 03-02-2006, 04:47 AM

You have to give Israel a little break on this one, they're still technically at war with several countries and terrorist groups and they need to protect their people. They've tried things the European's way and the results weren't so great :cough:Munich:cough:

The figure it's safer o take precautions rather than rely on the lax security of nations who think "terrorist will ever come here everyone loves us."

**bruiser** · 03-02-2006, 05:42 AM

The flares the anti-missile systems use are referred to as "dark flares". They do not emit the kind of heat like you get from a fire. It's in the infra-red spectrum. Invisible to the eye. They do not cause fires when they hit the earth. They are purely defensive.

**freddyhard** · 03-02-2006, 06:05 AM

Quote:

The flares the anti-missile systems use are referred to as "dark flares".

well then i don't see a problem. one thing about europe is the 'red tape'. it's got to the stage where is seems counter productive.

Quote:

You have to give Israel a little break on this one, they're still technically at war with several countries and terrorist groups and they need to protect their people.

i totally agree with you on that. they have to deal with the worst of the worst, not that there is much honour is terrorism.

bry623 · 03-02-2006, 10:21 AM

I didn't think chafe was a problem.

03-01-2006, 12:59 PM	#1 (permalink)
bruiser TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,648 OS: xp	Europeans have their head in the sand, again Can anyone explain this: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...221013,00.html

03-01-2006, 04:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
40sondacurb #64 & #36 BACKBONE Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,770 OS: xp	That's pretty dumb, the only reason I can think of for them banning them is that they're afraid that if one gets hijacked it can avoid measures to take it down, but that's a pretty bad excuse considering Israel's commitment to security. They have sky Marshal's on every plane don't they? __________________ Donate to keep the forum running "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully" -George W. Bush

03-02-2006, 03:33 AM	#4 (permalink)
ReeKorl Superhuman Computer Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: 6th Circle, The City of Dis, Hell Posts: 1,610 OS: WinXP Pro SP2 My System	There's a reason for that. Sayeret Matkal is an Israeli Elite CT team that specialises in aircraft hijacks (skyjackings). In 1976, its commandos, disguised as flight mechanics, famously stormed a grounded Air France plane and freed 103 Jewish hostages on an airfield in Entebbe, Uganda. there were actually three short films made about this event (Victory at Entebbe, Raid on Entebbe and Operation Thunderbolt - the former two being American productions, the latter being Israeli). On July 22, 1968, terrorists hijacked an El Al airliner on its way from Israel to Rome. On November 26, 1968, two terrorists fired at an El Al airliner about to take off from Athens Airport - killing two. Israel retaliated by sending Sayeret Matkal into Beirut. They snuck into Beirut airport and blew up 30 jets. You don't **** with the Israelis! __________________ "Sorry, the number you have dialled is imaginary. Please rotate dial by 90 degrees and try again."

03-02-2006, 04:04 AM	#6 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert Posts: 4,876 OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro My System	Or how about this: What not arm them with air-ground missiles too? That way if they think they see a threat the pilots can take it out. Oh wait, we're talking what the military does not how civilians are allowed to function. Maybe these countries are objecting to placing military hardware on a commercial jet thereby crossing a line. What's next? Fully armed M1A1's for any Israeli who drives the streets of Paris or Roma? __________________ I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry In Vino Veritas

03-02-2006, 04:07 AM	#7 (permalink)
ReeKorl Superhuman Computer Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: 6th Circle, The City of Dis, Hell Posts: 1,610 OS: WinXP Pro SP2 My System	Many terrorist factions who have air capabilities still use the old AIM-9L (and in some cases the even older AIM-9D) heat seeking missile. Against those, it would be effective. Also, it's primarily designed to combat shoulder- or fixed-firing-point-missiles. Many of these (aspecially the ones the terrorists can easily get their hands upon) are heat seeking. I can only assume that if they really wanted to be safe, they'd use a chaff dispenser also, which mostly disperses the radar signals. However, I could see this being a problem at airports (ie if it went off they'd have no radar coverage of the whole airport - mid-air-coll city). __________________ "Sorry, the number you have dialled is imaginary. Please rotate dial by 90 degrees and try again."

03-01-2006, 05:26 PM	#3 (permalink)
bruiser TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,648 OS: xp	I suspect it would be easier to poke sand up a wildcat's *** with an ice pick, than it would be to hijack an El Al plane.

03-02-2006, 04:47 AM	#9 (permalink)
40sondacurb #64 & #36 BACKBONE Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,770 OS: xp	You have to give Israel a little break on this one, they're still technically at war with several countries and terrorist groups and they need to protect their people. They've tried things the European's way and the results weren't so great :cough:Munich:cough: The figure it's safer o take precautions rather than rely on the lax security of nations who think "terrorist will ever come here everyone loves us." __________________ Donate to keep the forum running "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully" -George W. Bush

03-02-2006, 05:42 AM	#10 (permalink)
bruiser TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,648 OS: xp	The flares the anti-missile systems use are referred to as "dark flares". They do not emit the kind of heat like you get from a fire. It's in the infra-red spectrum. Invisible to the eye. They do not cause fires when they hit the earth. They are purely defensive.

03-02-2006, 10:21 AM	#12 (permalink)
bry623 Manager, The Conversation Pit/Analyst, Security Team Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: NW Territory circa 1787 Posts: 10,551 OS: winxp pro sp2	I didn't think chafe was a problem. __________________ When you fear Sarah, you attack her and try destroy her