Iraqi Drones May Target U.S. Cities

FoxNews ^ | Feb. 24, 2003 | FoxNews

[FairOpinion]

WASHINGTON

[stimpyone]

IF It's anthrax. But what if it's nerve gas, mustard gas, not to mention smallpox, which wouldn't even be detected for several days, until people are starting to show up in hospitals. By that time they also infected thousands of others.

All of which are extremely difficult to store, manage, and maintain. I'd bet that there would be accidental contamination of the terrorists long before they'd be able to unleash thier weapons. Frankly, I just think that the threat of a bio/chem attack on the U.S. is completely overblown.

Chem/Bio weapons aren't necessary to cause wide-spread panic or damage. We've seen what can happen with a small fire in a night-club, or a bottle of gas on a train, or even box cutters.

We lose 100,000 people per year in this country to medical mistakes - I'll spend a lot more time and energy double-checking my doctor's recommendations instead of worrying about attacks from drones.

[stimpyone]

But what if it's nerve gas, mustard gas, not to mention smallpox, which wouldn't even be detected for several days, until people are starting to show up in hospitals. By that time they also infected thousands of others.

Smallpox? From a drone? There are far more effective means for a small pox attack - just infect about 10 people and send them to wander around major international airports.

[angkor]

The sky is falling!

[Res Nullius]

" PULL....!!!"

[spodefly]

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/14/features-ciotti.php

[Starrgaizr]

Why not simply a Cessna 182 with GPS-slaved autopilot set to fly to downtown Chicago at an altitude of, say, 1000 feet MSL, so it hits something and spills its cargo? The drone thing is silly anyway, when you realize that they found 20 human drones willing to fly into buildings. Besides, this article reflects sheer stupidity about the function of air traffic control. Ok, so the plane shows up on radar squawking VFR at low altitude. Even if it penetrates Bravo airspace around big cities -- not necessarily going to happen -- what do they think happens next? A squadron of F-15s tears towards Chicago after a Cessna? Not hardly. Never make it in time anyway.

If WMDs get into this country, they can be used in a million ways. This one seems rather unlike Islamic terrorists to use. Why trust a drone, when you can dump it off the balcony at a basketball game or movie? The biggest plane threat continues to be airlines with fanatic pilots. Saudia Arabia Air, EgyptAir and the rest still fly here. Nope. WMDs are too easy to spread without aircraft.

This is meant to scare people into supporting the war. If that's what it takes, fine.

[Starrgaizr]

Flight training includes practice emergency landings in fields. Also, low altitude maneuvers simulating entering landing patterns, maintaining position in a circle over a point, etc. It is poor form to linger too long in one spot, scaring people or cows. That is what you likely saw.

[Thud]

When in danger
or in doubt,
run in circles,
scream and shout!

The Liberal Credo

[FairOpinion]

"The mantra of "close the borders" is nearly as nauseating as "it's about sex" used to be.

There simply is no way to "close" the borders, or to secure them to the point where nothing, or no one gets through."

------
I don't know why aren't the columnists talking about this. So far I only heard two people say this: you and I.

People, even many conservative, think that there is a magic way to "close the borders" and that it will solve all our problems.

[JustPiper]

So Fred do we now need to start manufacturing SAM's here?

[12B]

Well I reckon the Predator is a danged sight better than anything those guys can muster. And when I think back to how many times we had to go drag one of those multi-million dollar, computer-guided, software-upgraded, wonder-gliders out of the bushes somewhere because it missed the runway by a country mile, or because a big gust of wind flipped it over, or because some Balkan plinker nailed it with his AK, well, I'll just have to say I'm not all that worried about the Iraqis attacking us with UAVs.

It would be easier for them to just buy SUVs (new or used) and go around running over people. It would be cheaper and would kill a hell of a lot more of us. Of course I don't really know if they're in touch with the K.I.S.S. concept.

[Starrgaizr]

Check this out: Israel making drone the size of a credit card

Visa -- Everywhere You Want To Be

[dark_lord]

Even easier - those radio controlled hobbyist planes. Add a single soda can sized container with soda straw sized dispenser, fill with ricin or anthrax, duct tape to fuselage, take off from a parking lot by a beach and fly a single run down the beach at about 50 feet spraying away.

Result - couple thousand infected or afflicted people. Cost - nada. After the one run, they fly the plane out over the lake (if the Great Lakes) or the ocean, jump in the car and drive away. How long did it take to catch the DC sniper? Anyone doing this will probably be able to do it successfully and get away with it to boot. They could do this in a couple dozen cities simultaneously and fade into the woodwork. As soon as they drive away they are gone (dump the radio controller in the parking lot.) If they get pulled over - they are clean. Cops let them go. How many white vans pulled over in DC?

[Poohbah]

Also, UAVs are fairly difficult to knock out unless you have a very dedicated effort. I'm not certain, but I believe the best weapon system against a UAV is an attack helicopter.

Partly true. You need a concerted air defense effort like the one we had immediately after 9/11.

However, in an era of look-down-shoot-down radar, the best UAV platform is probably an F-14 carrying AIM-54 Phoenix missiles; next best is any 'teen series fighter (F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18) loaded with AMRAAMs.

In an air defense emergency, the rule of thumb would be quite simple: if it flies, yet does not obey orders to land IMMEDIATELY, it dies.

Attack helicopters cannot cover the distances involved very rapidly, and they don't carry longer-ranged radar-guided weapons.

[hchutch]

I just don't buy this UAV story. Unless they had riugged some rocket motors to launch a L-39 froma merchie, I just don't see them as having the capability to do that.

OTOH, a business jet like the Gulfstream or that long-range one from Bombardier would be a nice option...

[livius]

The Palestinians launched one of these over Israeli territory just last week. It wasn't loaded with anything and was obviously a practice run.

Strangely enough, it blew up when the Hamas members ran out to pick it up. Five of them were killed, and the plane was destroyed, but you can see from this that the idea (and the technology) is out there in the world of Islamic/Saddamic mass psychosis.

[SLB]

Most UAV's are almost impossible to detect from the ground. If they are powered by battery instead of gasoline they are almost noiseless. They will be painted on the underside to blend in with the sky, a light blue or grey. Their radar cross section is so small they will be lost in ground clutter such as birds and trees. For a trained observer to spot one is more luck than skill usually they just happen to glance in the right place at the right time. The payload these little rascals can carry is amazing. I have worked some programs with them and for a recon platform they are one of the most versatile we have. As a platform for delivering some type of bio or chem agent they probably have no equal. Chemical would be the most likely, but one never knows.