Portable air-defense devices could be devastating to U.S.
Bob Scheid
Issue date: 9/11/07 Section: Aeronautica
- Page 1 of 1
A recent study, funded in part by the Department of Homeland Security, suggests that attacks using man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) could be more devastating to the U.S. travel industry than even September 11, Space.com reported last week.
MANPADS, shoulder-mounted anti-air missiles like the Stinger, could be used against airliners with potentially greater ease than hijacking, since terrorists would not have to board the plane in order to destroy it. It further complicates the job of Transit Security Administration and other law enforcement officials by not only requiring the screening of passengers, but also a wide area around airports and flightpaths.
The study was headed by James Moore, chair of the Daniel J. Epstein Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University of Southern California. Using economic data from the September 11 attacks and simulating one or more MANPADS attacks against airliners in America, they predicted a seven-day shutdown of the U.S. air transport system, compared to the four days after the attacks in 2001.
The initial shutdown would not have the biggest economic impact, however. The industry took nearly five years to stop losing money, only becoming profitable again in 2006. During that period after September 11, airlines lost more than $43 billion, according to some estimates. Another attack could lose between $214 and $420 billion in losses, assuming cargo traffic resumed immediately after the seven day shutdown but the passenger market recovered at about the same rate as after September 11.
The estimate is likely conservative, though. The figures above are only direct costs to the airline industry, and do not take into account the services that supply airlines, for example. Another factor is the unpredictability of recovery of the passenger market after another major event.
In addition, the report included some options for investment before another attack which might reduce the danger or damage from such attacks. These include a plan to place missile countermeasure systems on all U.S. aircraft that might cost $100 billion. If the chance of another terrorist attack is as high as one chance in four, this option might be financially viable.
"It is possible for events to happen that are even more expensive [than the 2001 attacks]," said Moore. "The entire exercise was intended to focus on, what costs do we avoid, and what do we have to lay out?"
MANPADS, shoulder-mounted anti-air missiles like the Stinger, could be used against airliners with potentially greater ease than hijacking, since terrorists would not have to board the plane in order to destroy it. It further complicates the job of Transit Security Administration and other law enforcement officials by not only requiring the screening of passengers, but also a wide area around airports and flightpaths.
The study was headed by James Moore, chair of the Daniel J. Epstein Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University of Southern California. Using economic data from the September 11 attacks and simulating one or more MANPADS attacks against airliners in America, they predicted a seven-day shutdown of the U.S. air transport system, compared to the four days after the attacks in 2001.
The initial shutdown would not have the biggest economic impact, however. The industry took nearly five years to stop losing money, only becoming profitable again in 2006. During that period after September 11, airlines lost more than $43 billion, according to some estimates. Another attack could lose between $214 and $420 billion in losses, assuming cargo traffic resumed immediately after the seven day shutdown but the passenger market recovered at about the same rate as after September 11.
The estimate is likely conservative, though. The figures above are only direct costs to the airline industry, and do not take into account the services that supply airlines, for example. Another factor is the unpredictability of recovery of the passenger market after another major event.
In addition, the report included some options for investment before another attack which might reduce the danger or damage from such attacks. These include a plan to place missile countermeasure systems on all U.S. aircraft that might cost $100 billion. If the chance of another terrorist attack is as high as one chance in four, this option might be financially viable.
"It is possible for events to happen that are even more expensive [than the 2001 attacks]," said Moore. "The entire exercise was intended to focus on, what costs do we avoid, and what do we have to lay out?"
Be the first to comment on this story