Worst-case terrorist scenario
Oct 21, 2007 | 2:50 pm
#121
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Oct 21, 2007 | 3:08 pm
#122
Original Poster
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, SkyMiles, USAir, Singapore, BA
Posts: 602
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Except that most of that thread thoroughly debunked the nonsense that consumer personal electronic devices pose any risk whatsoever to aircraft control and navigation systems.
If I don't have definitive evidence, I term the risk unknown, and urge caution.
If you don't have definitive evidence, you term the risk nonsense and ridiculous, and urge complacency.
I say there might be a problem, and you say there isn't.
Interesting.
Except that most of that thread thoroughly debunked the nonsense that consumer personal electronic devices pose any risk whatsoever to aircraft control and navigation systems.
If you don't have definitive evidence, you term the risk nonsense and ridiculous, and urge complacency.
I say there might be a problem, and you say there isn't.
Interesting.
Oct 21, 2007 | 3:31 pm
#123
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by FWAAA
Except that most of that thread thoroughly debunked the nonsense that consumer personal electronic devices pose any risk whatsoever to aircraft control and navigation systems.
If I don't have definitive evidence, I term the risk unknown, and urge caution.
If you don't have definitive evidence, you term the risk nonsense and ridiculous, and urge complacency.
I say there might be a problem, and you say there isn't.
Interesting.
Except that most of that thread thoroughly debunked the nonsense that consumer personal electronic devices pose any risk whatsoever to aircraft control and navigation systems.
If I don't have definitive evidence, I term the risk unknown, and urge caution.
If you don't have definitive evidence, you term the risk nonsense and ridiculous, and urge complacency.
I say there might be a problem, and you say there isn't.
Interesting.
By the way, there's an unknown risk involving invaders from outer space beaming (a la Star Trek) into the cockpit to take over the plane. Better urge caution, at least following your line of reasoning.
Back to this:
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Any other comic book worthy "worst (sic) case scenario"?
Oct 21, 2007 | 3:45 pm
#124
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Wrong, what I said is still terrorism.
Terrorism committed to point the finger at someone else is one of many such examples.
Terrorism committed to accomplish political objectives doesn't always require finger pointing or claiming responsibility either. Another such example.
Terrorism committed to point the finger at someone else is one of many such examples.
Terrorism committed to accomplish political objectives doesn't always require finger pointing or claiming responsibility either. Another such example.
Originally Posted by World Conflict Quarterly
The FBI defines terrorism as
the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Oct 21, 2007 | 3:46 pm
#125
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Oct 21, 2007 | 3:59 pm
#126
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Seems that others disagree http://www.globalterrorism101.com/UTDefinition.html
Pretty difficult to intimidate or coerce by committing these acts anonymously, but I guess you're the expert here.
Pretty difficult to intimidate or coerce by committing these acts anonymously, but I guess you're the expert here.
Originally Posted by American Heritage Dictionary
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Oct 21, 2007 | 4:03 pm
#127
Original Poster
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, SkyMiles, USAir, Singapore, BA
Posts: 602
As I said long ago, there is anecdotal evidence that stray EMI messes up instruments. And there is systematic evidence suggesting that it could be a problem. Not that it is a problem, mind you. But not that it can't possibly be one, either.
Add to that the well-documented tendency of large-scale software systems to respond to untested combinations of stimuli in unexpected ways, and you have a recipe for chaos.
I think it would be prudent to carry a means of detecting and locating sources of RF emission on airliners. You are free to disagree, but it really doesn't bolster your argument to denigrate the opinions of others.
Oct 21, 2007 | 4:07 pm
#128
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Some here need a lesson in expected outcomes and risk management. This kind of so called "worst case terrorist scenario" misses the boat entirely.
Oct 21, 2007 | 4:39 pm
#130
Original Poster
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, SkyMiles, USAir, Singapore, BA
Posts: 602
Oct 21, 2007 | 4:48 pm
#131
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Oh yes it did work as alanR portrayed at least with regard to Chechen extremist outfits and even other area separatist units. They took a big hit after that from amongst their own "home area".
Last edited by GUWonder; Oct 21, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Oct 21, 2007 | 4:53 pm
#132
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
I didn't say that you hold your point of view out of ignorance, but the point of view expressed certainly seems to factor out expected outcomes and risk management in such a way that would justify spending money to prepare for an invasion from Mars tomorrow.
Oct 21, 2007 | 5:02 pm
#133
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
If you go over the links in this thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=619038 you will find any quantity of both anecdotal and systematic evidence that electronic devices can interfere with aircraft control and navigation systems.
Now suppose you are a terrorist cell intent upon bringing down a few dozen U.S.-flag airliners (as in the Manila plot) and you know that broadband RF noise of sufficient power could do it. Remember - these people are fanatical, not stupid.
Could you disguise your device as a laptop or GameBoy and walk right onto a plane with it? Or build a timer into it and secrete it in a checked bag or cargo shipment?
Now suppose you are a terrorist cell intent upon bringing down a few dozen U.S.-flag airliners (as in the Manila plot) and you know that broadband RF noise of sufficient power could do it. Remember - these people are fanatical, not stupid.
Could you disguise your device as a laptop or GameBoy and walk right onto a plane with it? Or build a timer into it and secrete it in a checked bag or cargo shipment?
And yes, I am an expert in those matters. Really.
Oct 21, 2007 | 5:32 pm
#134
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
