Sen. Clinton asks for shoulder-fired missile defense

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Mr. Anderson, Dec 3, 2002.

  1. Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #1
  2. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #2
    Re: Sen. Clinton asks for shoulder-fired missile defense

    It is really scary........ I can't remember where I heard it, but there's talk of fitting planes with anti-missle flares to counter act the missle threat!!
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Location:
    Northeast U.S.
    #3
    If it didn't hit the plane then...

    Where did that shoulder-fired missile that missed the Israeli charter jet land? I don't know how far they fly.
     
  4. macrumors 68030

    cr2sh

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    downtown
    #4
    I've never flown, but on December 27th I'm leaving for London and I'm quite nervous about it. With the recent events in mind, I'm now 98% sure that my plane is going down. Alas, I cannot live in fear, so I must go... but that's not the point.

    The point is, where did these ass-clowns get shoulder-fired missiles? America has a lot of ****ing problems, but our biggest is that fact that we neither acknowledge our mistakes or learn from them.
     
  5. macrumors 68030

    cr2sh

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    downtown
    #5
    Re: If it didn't hit the plane then...

    They're good for about 2miles, I'm pretty sure. I think 5000' accurately.
     
  6. thread starter Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #6
    Don't worry, enjoy the flight, it will be fine.

    As for where they got these missles, well, they're actually anti-tank missles, so its point and shoot, nothing fancy. With all the wars going on in Africa, weapons aren't that difficult to get if you have enough money. The Stinger missles are the good ones that are heat seekers - which they don't have.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    #7
    No guidance in them as far as I know. That's why they shot off 2 rockets and missed both times. Plus they are idiots, they don't have the training and they more asks of terror they commit, the fewer of them are left. They keep killing themselves, soon, no more idiots left.

    A US plane to London would almost be impossible for them to try and pull off. No worries, enjoy the sleep.
     
  8. thread starter Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #8
  9. macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #9
    from what i heard, they're not guided per se, but they are heat seeking...

    SA-51M or something like that... is what i saw with some expert on them on tv... they seek the heat. and so planes can toss flares to divert them, or can use an infrared signal to "blind" them... which i guess is more efficient but more expensive.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2002
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    #10
    Heat seeking

    They are indeed heat seeking, and once fired on a locked-in thermal signature if the missile misses it's target it is designed to self destruct within 14 seconds.
     
  11. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #11
    I've heard estimates of it costing $200m per plane for retrofiting. That doesn't include installation & loss of use. The question is who will pay for it, don't think the airlines are planning to do this. As usual its the taxpayer that foots the bill, you and me. It sounds like Hillary want to get the credit, a sad thought, will do anything to further her career. :(
     
  12. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #12
    Corporate fliers are now commonly using private jets, offers safety.

    Israel now has become a target of Al Qaeda!
     
  13. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    some God forsaken place
    #13
    All the more reason for me to get my private pilot license. No terrorist is going to bother with a tiny Cessna.
     
  14. thread starter Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #14
    Again, no link - without that this number is ludicrous, $200,000,000?!? The planes themselves don't cost that much! Well almost, a brand new Boeing 777 can go for around $250,000,000 - more or less depending on how many you buy.

    D
     
  15. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #15
  16. thread starter Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #16
    A system like that might go for 200k, but not 200m. That's just way too much and no one would pay for it or fly on an airline that would have raise its fairs that much more just to pay for the extra safety.

    It is sad that its come to this. :(

    D
     
  17. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #17
    Poll from Netscape:

    Would you pay higher airline fares for protection against missiles?
    _
    Yes, I'll pay for safety
    32%_
    _
    No, that's what the Homeland Security Department is for
    68%_

    They don't realize that means they will pay via taxes, either way we pay!
    Its not the Airlines or the governement that will pay the cost.
     
  18. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #18
  19. macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #19
    Democrats assess the health of the country by the number of people that depend on government to survive. Republicans assess the heatlh of the country by the number of Americans that are self suficient.

    Public safety is legitimate for the goverment!
     

Share This Page