An Inside Look At Flight Guard

In the aftermath of 9/11, with commercial aircraft still in the crosshairs of terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, Israel’s El Al Airlines has begun testing a new on-board system designed to protect its planes from the threat of shoulder-fired missiles. Meanwhile, the United States has yet to complete the first stage of a feasibility study for its own anti-missile system for commercial aircraft.

"Flight Guard," developed by ELTA Systems Ltd., a subsidiary of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI), is designed to detect incoming missiles, and in such cases, it releases a flare to divert the heat-seeking missile away from the targeted aircraft.

Reports earlier this year said that El Al had begun installing Flight Guard on a very small number of its passenger jets, after the anti-missile system successfully passed the development stage. The government budgeted 6 million shekels ($1.3 million) for El Al’s first purchases; at an estimated cost of several hundred-thousand dollars per system, it is believed that Flight Guard was being installed on two planes at this stage.

El Al refuses to discuss the Flight Guard system, as the airline does not comment on its security arrangements, which are considered among the most stringent and comprehensive used by commercial airlines today.

In November 2002, an Israeli charter jet in Kenya narrowly escaped a shoulder-held missile fired by militants linked to Al-Qaeda. It was in the wake of this near miss that the Israeli government took steps to protect its commercial aircraft from such missiles, also known as man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).

"We don't have to wait until, God forbid, something happens," says Arik Ben-Ari, acting director-general of Israel's Civil Aviation Administration.

Ben-Ari said that despite the system’s high cost, the Israeli government "decided that it was important enough to spend the money to defend planes from shoulder-fired missiles."

But Flight Guard has several hurdles to overcome before the technology, already used for years in the military arena, is ready for widespread use on commercial aircraft. One such obstacle is that current Federal Aviation Administration regulations forbid foreign aircraft equipped with such an anti-missile system from landing at American airports, due to safety concerns.

One fear is that the flares could damage the plane itself or nearby aircraft. Ben-Ari says that these issues were "being dealt with and checked according to the highest standards in international airports."

Such obstacles were discussed when Israeli Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman met his American counterpart, Norman Mineta, in Washington in late April. Shaike Rosenfeld, a spokesman in the Israeli Transportation Ministry, says that the two held "positive" conversations covering "everything having to do with air travel security." However there was no indication if and when the US would allow El Al planes equipped with Flight Guard to land at American airports, but the two officials agreed to continue discussions on the issue.

According to IAI, up to two weeks are needed to equip a plane with Flight Guard, which includes front, side and aft antennas and advanced miniaturized Pulse-Doppler radar installed inside the cargo bay, which scans 360 degrees around the plane, and flare dispensers attached to the underbelly. When the system detects a missile, special mini-flares adapted for civil aviation use are released and ignite a few meters from the plane, burning out after three seconds with no residuals, but long enough to attract the attention of a heat-seeking missile away from the aircraft. IAI says that the flare trajectory while burning is within 150 meters behind the plane and 100 feet below it, safely away from any other aircraft and high above the ground. Pilots are informed by indicators in the cockpit when a flare has been released, and they also have access to an on/off switch to disable the system.

IAI claims that Flight Guard provides protection in all missile-firing scenarios, including multiple launches, and in all weather conditions. It says that the system has an ultra-low false alarm rate, 99 percent probability of missile detection, no unprotected zones ("dead zones") and uses a minimum of aircraft resources. After testing is completed on El Al aircraft, it will be clearer whether Flight Guard meets these standards.

Another potential obstacle is the cost. While the price of the system is substantial, the greater cost is in the upkeep. US Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, Dr. Penrose "Parney" Albright, who is familiar with Flight Guard, says that military planes equipped with such anti-missile systems undergo much more extensive and routine maintenance than commercial aircraft.

"It’s like a race car and your family Buick," he explains. "The race car comes in for a pit stop and the crew takes care of it. But the family car only gets an oil change after 5,000 miles."

Albright says "huge costs" will be required to train crews at airports around the country for upkeep of an anti-missile system. "Acquisition costs are only a small piece," he says, adding that in the US no decision has been made on who will foot the bill to equip aircraft with such a system.

Albright says that El Al has an advantage in this regard because it has such a small fleet and Israel has only one major airport, Ben Gurion International Airport. Applying such a system to the US poses many more challenges because the major airlines have many more planes, and crews at numerous airports around the country would have to be trained to handle an anti-missile system.

But while Israel is already in the testing phase, the US is studying the feasibility of anti-missile systems for non-military purposes. In January, the Department of Homeland Security announced that teams led by BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman and United Airlines were awarded $2 million contracts over six months to develop a plan and test prototypes to determine whether a viable technology exists to be used to protect commercial aircraft from the threat of MANPADS.

In March, Northrop Grumman proposed a ground-based laser system to defend commercial aircraft from shoulder-fired missiles, but the Department of Homeland Security rejected the idea as "ineffective," says Albright.

Albright explains that there are two phases to the current study: By the end of the first phase, which lasts six months, each contractor is expected to produce a preliminary design, demonstrate the ability to operate and maintain the system, and to decide whether to go ahead with a prototype. By the conclusion of the 18-month second phase, which would come at the end of 2005, the prototype will have been tested and be in a position for use.

Albright says the system will need to secure over 100 square nautical miles around an airport to protect planes from MANPADS, with some areas more vulnerable to attack than others.

"There’s no specific intelligence of an immediate threat to our commercial aircraft, but we should recognize it as a threat; we’d be remiss if we didn’t address it," says Albright.

While analysts have doubts that the American agencies responsible for the security of civilian aircraft are capable of developing a system to protect planes from missile-attacks, they are optimistic about Israel’s chances.

Andrew Thomas, a professor of international business at the University of Akron and author of Aviation Insecurity, thinks Flight Guard "is a great idea for a commercial airline like El Al. Israelis have a great understanding of training, assessment and basic security principles. The US agencies charged with protecting aircraft in the aftermath of 9/11 lack this understanding."

Aviation security analyst David Forbes, of BoydForbes, Inc., in Evergreen (CO), says that experience fighting terror has made the Israelis "more analytical about what you can achieve and what you can expect" when developing such technologies, while Americans lack this experience.

(ANN expresses its sincere thanks to Clark Hoover at The Media Line)

FMI: www.iai.co.il