[RunningWolf]

'Cept your wrong the Colts are going to win.

Non sequitur anyway.

The point is (and you can reject it if you wish, you can even call me names too. I hope when you do you also supply some good info for all to the topic of this thread). But the point is this is a known danger, and Boeing the FAA and the TSA are looking at various methods to reduce the risks to civilian aircraft.

Back to the article. Two AA pilots see something they describe as a missile track. During the same time there is radar data showng some unknown object in the vicinity of the aircraft. There are quantities of Russian-made MANPADS available. It is not impossible one could have been launched from a boat or small aircraft in Santa Monica Bay. There have been known close misses to civilian airliners with MANPADS. There have been known hits on civilian airliners with MANPADS.

On the face of it, this kind of MANPAD event on a civilian jet transport was/is much more probable than 9-11 ever was.

Wolf

[Pukin Dog]

Yeah, but those were AA pilots.

I mean, come on.

[Rokke]

"Two AA pilots see something they describe as a missile track. During the same time there is radar data showng some unknown object in the vicinity of the aircraft."

RW, both those statements are incorrect. I have seen nothing that states the pilots described "a missile track". And there is no radar data that shows "an unknown object." The only "radar" data I've seen is from the PASSUR system which can only show secondary data or occasionally a false "ghost image". Furthermore, you will need to explain why the pilots described what they saw as appearing halfway between their position and the coastline when the ghost image that some people want to believe is an actual object, is essentially superimposed on their aircraft.