[Preacherman]

From the Telegraph, London (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$RNAUHKCPCQV4VQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2003/08/13/wmiss13.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/08/13/ixnewstop.html):

Briton seized in US for selling Russian missile

By David Rennie in Washington
(Filed: 13/08/2003)

A Briton was arrested yesterday after he attempted to sell a surface-to-air missile to FBI agents he thought were terrorists.

The unnamed man, a middle-aged naturalised British citizen of Indian descent, was caught in a sting operation after a worldwide investigation involving British, Russian and American authorities.

A sealed indictment accused him of trying to smuggle a shoulder-launched, Russian-made missile into the United States by ship. Some reports suggested the weapon was an Igla missile, which has a range of 2.5 miles.

Officials distanced themselves from reports that the arrested man expressed the hope that his missile would be used to shoot down Air Force One, the Boeing 747 used by President George W Bush.

Although the man is likely to face terrorist related charges, initial indications were that he was a known arms smuggler not motivated by terrorist ideology. He is thought to have arrived in the US to collect payment from his clients.

He is reported to have bought the missile from corrupt officials working at its Russian manufacturers for £53,000 and to have been offered up to 50 more.

He had been tailed from Heathrow to New York in the past few days.

The sting was carried out in Newark, just across the Hudson from New York. Two other men were arrested in New York as part of the same investigation. One was an American citizen; the other was from a third nation.

The prospect of terrorists using shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles against an airliner has haunted governments and airlines worldwide.

Last November two Russian Sam-7 missiles narrowly missed a chartered Israeli airliner taking off from Mombasa in Kenya.

There were unconfirmed reports that the airliner was fitted with missile avoidance systems. The Israeli national airline, El-Al, is believed to be the only commercial airline to fit the advanced systems to its planes.

[pittspilot]

Scary stuff.

That little bird is an SA-18 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-18.htm)

Range of 5200 Meters or 3.23 Miles

Altitude of 3500 Meters or 11,500 feet.

600+ M/S or 1/3 mile per second speed, giving maximum time for perception and avoidance at maximum range of 10 sec's and change

Okay, on a standard STAR (Normal Jet Approach) picked randomly for LAX, the jets are told to expect 12,000 around Oceanside, and on another they are down at 11,000 around Paradise VOR, which is out in Riverside.

So any guy standing in any backyard with this missile under a flight track will have his pick of targets. They line up to land at LAX

Not sure how we stop this without keeping those things out of the country

[MicroBalrog]

Whoa, whoa, wait there.

These babies are built to kill fighter aircraft and choppers, and they sometimes fail at that. Do they have enough firepower for a 747?:)

[erikm]

Whoa, whoa, wait there.

These babies are built to kill fighter aircraft and choppers, and they sometimes fail at that. Do they have enough firepower for a 747?:)
Generally, no.

For one, these are built to take out helicopters and small aircraft (fighters). They don't have the payload to outright kill a big aircraft. For that you need bigger missiles, which tend to be vehicle mounted.

For another, this class of missiles are infra red homing and so head for (the hottest parts of) the engines. These days these are mostly in pods hanging from the wings and are widely separated from each other. So even if it hits, one missile will usually only wreck an engine and damage a wing. To hit the fuselage, you need a radar- or laserguided missile.

Damaged engines and wings are generally survivable and it's something pilots train for. For instance, a number of years ago an El Al 747 lost both engines on one wing in flight (they fell off and damaged the wing). Even so, the 747 managed to stay airborne quite a while before ultimately crashing while trying to land (it hit an apartment building :(). Even engine explosions on takeoff aren't abolutely fatal. Waterfowl ingestion does happen occasionally, after all.

So in short, firing an Igla (or Stinger) at a Jumbo is a bit like firing a rifle at a semi-truck's tires and expecting it to jackknife and crash. It can happen, but don't count on it.

[Night20]

IIRC Air Force One has various counter-measures installed for just this type of attack, yes?

[Leatherneck]

Very true. Such systems are available for airliners, but interest from the airlines has been decidedly poor. Large up-front investment required. :scrutiny:

TC
TFL Survivor

[MicroBalrog]

Leatherneck: Actually, El-Al and Taasiya Avirit are working on it.

[Leatherneck]

El-Al and Taasiya Avirit are working on it Why am I not surprised? People who take self-defense seriously .

TC
TFL Survivor

[Iain]

The prospect of terrorists using shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles against an airliner has haunted governments and airlines worldwide.
Last November two Russian Sam-7 missiles narrowly missed a chartered Israeli airliner taking off from Mombasa in Kenya.

This is the worrying thing though, perhaps our terrorist ''friends'' are buying multiple missiles through multiple smugglers to maximise their chances of getting at least a couple and using two or three missiles to take down one plane at significant point. Doubt that they would aim for Airforce One, but significant people travel on internal flights all the time in the US.

This was a big news story in the UK last night, cited as an example of American, British and others cooperation. Hope it continues.

[Lone_Gunman]

The missile doesn't have to even hit the plane to have its desired effect.

[MicroBalrog]

So who's right on this one, Lone_Gunman or erikm?

[Leatherneck]

IIRC. the SA-18 does not have a proximity fuze; so yes, it would have to contact the aircraft. An engine would be the most likely impact point, with several possibilities for collateral damage from frags or fire.

TC
TFL Survivor
edited to add this, courtesy of Federation of American Scientists:

The SA-18 GROUSE (Igla 9K38) is an improved variant in the the SA-7 & SA-14 series of manportable SAMs. As with the earlier SA-14, the SA-18 uses of a similar thermal battery/gas bottle, and the SA-18 has the same 2 kilogram high-explosive warhead fitted with a contact and grazing fuse. But the missile of entirely new design with substantially improved range and speed,. The new seeker and aerodynamic improvements extend its effective range, and its higher speed enables it to be used against faster targets. The SA-18 has a maximum range of 5200 meters and a maximum altitude of 3500 meters. The 9M39 missile SA-18 employs an IR guidance system using proportional convergence logic. The new seeker offers better protection against electro-optical jammers; the probability of kill against an unprotected fighter is estimated at 30-48%, and the use of IRCM jammers only degrades this to 24-30%.

The Igla-M [SA-N-10 ] is the naval version of the SA-18.

[Lone_Gunman]

Micro Balrog and Leatherneck...

I think you guys missed my point.

Any physical damage to the plane, even up to and including its complete destruction and death of all passengers aboard, would be only a small part of the intended effect of such an act.

The airline industry would suffer more loss than 9-11. People would be afraid to fly.

The terrorists would succeed at causing "terror" even if the missile completely misses.

People have pretty much decided now that hi-jackers won't be successful, because the passengers would rise up and keep them from taking the plane.

Not much way to defend against a fanatic on the ground with a missile though.

[MicroBalrog]

Not much way to defend against a fanatic on the ground with a missile though.


Kill FOPA-1986, make belly-turrets obligatory.


"Dear passengers, we were just attacked by an Islamic terrorist with an SA-7. On the right, you can see the 20mm tracers from our on-board Vulcan cannon go out towards the terrorist. On the left, you can see the Grand Canyon".:evil:

[SodaPop]

a middle-aged naturalised British citizen of Indian descent,

Is this some fancy way of saying the guy was a muslem from India?

[Augustwest]

Lone_Gunman is spot-on here.

Terrorism is about creating fear and disruption.

[Iain]

nice idea micro, not going to happen though, can you imagine pilots who have been queued for hours taking out their frustrations on the control tower as they come in to land. :D

Counter-measures are probably order of the day, but reading that site about the missile made me realise the whole thing is a military arms race (better countermeasure thus better missiles thus even better countermeasures) and can civilian airliners afford this race especially with the situation they are now in.

I agree with lonegunman, the very fact that a SA missile was fired at a civilian airliner would cause the same amount of panic (and probably company collapses) regardless of whether it hit or not. The difference would be that 300 people die on the plane, the tightening of security the damage done to the airline businesses and public confidence would be the same.

Here's hoping that 300 people don't die in those circumstances and so I would like to offer a hearty thanks to the British, American and Russina agents who dealt with this. One more illegal arms dealer dealt with, plenty more to go.

[Waitone]

Lone_Gunman is right. The missle would not have to hit or drop an airliner. A clean miss would send cable news into a firestorm of speculation.

Imagine the impact is a passenger had a video recorder operating when the missile zoomed past the window. Or perhaps someone on the ground caught the whole thing on tape. Endless video loops of a heat seeking missile closing in on an American aircraft. Passenger traffic would drop like a rock. Politicians would fluff up, preen, and propose all sorts of assinine solutions.

Meanwhile the airlines industry, hospitality, restaurant and car rentals would tank. I would put the hysteria effect to be right up there with a dirty bomb. Unifomed speculation will contribute to massive economic losses.

[Iain]

Sodapop - not all that many muslims in India. My guess is that this is just another opportunistic, morals in the gutter type looking to make some money.

Terrorists are always provided arms by people who are just looking to make money.

[MicroBalrog]

Terrorists are always provided arms by people who are just looking to make money.

Or political profit.

[greyhound]

not all that many muslims in India

IIRC, Islam is the second largest religion in India, especially in the north. Clashes between Muslims and Hindus were behind the splitting of India/Pakistan, as well as the trouble with Kashmir.

So I'd say there surely could be Islamic extremism in India; we sure know there is in Pakistan.

[erikm]

So who's right on this one, Lone_Gunman or erikm?
Lone_Gunman is right. The missle would not have to hit or drop an airliner. A clean miss would send cable news into a firestorm of speculation.
Actually, we're probably both right. I more or less deliberately concentrated on the 'technical' aspects of the fire-stinger-at-jumbo scenario and ignored the political and economic fallout that would result of an attempt, regardless of whether or not the Jumbo was damaged.

IMNSHO a lot of this 'war of terror' stuff you hear is either hot air, fearmongering or wolf calling (no, not you Standing Wolf). But I'm probably not the only THR member with this opinion.

Cheers,
ErikM :evil:

[SodaPop]

Sodapop - not all that many muslims in India.


Well, when I was 11yrs old I was standing outside a mosque in Hydrabad, India, when I picked up a newspaper that said, "American attacks Libya" and for the next few months my family had to pretend we were either Irish or Germans so we could fend off any hostilities.

There were also arrests made by the India government in the exact same cities I lived in. Osama Bin Laden also declared a Jihad against India 4yrs ago and has supported terrorist groups inside India. India has a tremendous problem with Terrorism.


I don't know if the middle-aged naturalised British citizen of Indian descent was a muslem of not. Just wondering if this is another PC story that ALL our muslem neighbors are our friends.


I'd still like to know what happened to that plane that went down in Long Island a few weeks after Sept 11th, just before (or was it after?) we busted the shoe bomber.

[Iain]

India is 14% muslim from what I read (a lot higher than I thought) 80% Hindu. I take that back.

Despite that, there is no reason to assume this guy was muslim, many arms dealers are just westerners, money makers, religion doesn't always enter in to it.

Soda - I would also say (have no idea how old you are) but India's demographic has changed somewhat since the separation into India and Pakistan.

[SodaPop]

India is 14% muslim from what I read (a lot higher than I thought) 80% Hindu. I take that back.

No problem.

Last figures I read said there were 180 Million Muslems in India. That's more than half the US population.

Despite that, there is no reason to assume this guy was muslim, many arms dealers are just westerners

When you trace where all of these terrorist organizations are getting their weapons from 99% of the time its coming from Russia.

Soda - I would also say (have no idea how old you are)

I'm 28yrs old and my parents were both Peace Corp volunteers in India in the 60's. My dad is a history Professor of Southeast Asian studies at University of Pennsylvania and West Chester University. He also runs an importing business straight out of Kashmir.

He took my whole family to in India in 1986.

It gave me a perspective.

[Leatherneck]

Micro Balrog and Leatherneck...
I think you guys missed my point. Yup. I sure did. But now that you've pointed it out, I agree with you. As a matter of fact, I can see airport "weapon exclusion zones" being established in a heartbeat following a missed attempt anywhere in the U.S. ALL weapons. :fire:

TC
TFL Survivor

[Erik]

"The missile doesn't have to even hit the plane to have its desired effect."

This needs to be repeated.

Missed target = damage.

Crippled target = enormous damage.

Downed target = catastrophic damage.

[DigitalWarrior]

Damn, Americans are cowards nowadays aren't we? If one out out 10,000 planes is fired at (and missed), the general perception would be that Airlines were falling out of the skies like rain drops.

BTW there are much better ways to terrorize this nation. Since we don't have an open-source defense plan, there is no way to warn or plan for them. Hell if I even reported one of the BAD vulnerabilities to a government branch, I'd be tossed into GitMo (cute nickname for something completely evil)

[Skunkabilly]

I'm not expert in air defense, but how does a system track a SAM launch that has a passive (IR is passive, right?) seeker?

Or do we just pop flares on final approach? :confused:

[Lone_Gunman]

Digital Warrior:

Remember 9-11?

Remember what the airlines went thru afterward?

[pittspilot]

I never said a clean kill, although civilian stuff is ill prepared for explosive damage.

Remember that a hit to the wing causes flap, hydraulic and structural damage, and also remember that the wing is full of fuel.

The loss of a single engine is not what bothers me, it's the collateral damage.

And yes, it would do untold economic damage due to the sheep.

[w4rma]

Aug. 13— Administration officials are leaving out key facts and exaggerating the significance of the alleged plot to smuggle a shoulder-launched missile into the United States, law enforcement officials told ABCNEWS. They say there's a lot less than meets the eye.
…
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/missile030813_sting.html

[Waitone]

I read the article. ABC just couldn't leave a good story laying out there without trying to discredit it.

Article implied it was a gov't setup.

Article said the perp wasn't a real arms dealer.

Article said the missile was not real, it was a mock up.

Article said the entire bust could not have taken place without the government. . . . . .huh?

Nasty, nasty article. It was a hit piece designed to cast a cloud over what reasonable people consider a good thing.

[MicroBalrog]

Yeah, FedGov never sets people up on arms charges, right?

[longeyes]

Attacks of this kind would do more than provoke fear and economic
collapse. They will likely spell the end of a heterogeneous American
culture and the beginning of serious ethnic and racial conflict in
this nation (already simmering). They will also inflame the domestic
hawks, a number of whom have beaten the drum for draconian counter-
measures since 9/11. So far our response has been surgical on the
military front and "interpol" on the police front. There are other
arrows in the quiver.

[Waitone]

Asymetric warfare is asymetric from 2 directions. Our technology permits us to take the high road in conducting war against 11th century goons and butchers. Scratch too deep and you pick out a deep dark all too human vein that is not concerned with things like morality and principal and "fighting fair" (whatever that means).

Am I saying we can get dark and ugly? Yep, morality is skin deep, humananity goes to the bone.

Will we get ugly? In a hearbeat if the provocation is sufficient.