战略与国际研究中心-Commercial-Aviation-and-MANPADS_4页_106kb

报告摘要

Commercial Aviation and MANPADS: Threat or Theory Summary

Core Content

This document, authored by James A. Lewis and published in January 2006, examines the potential threat that shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles (MANPADS) pose to commercial aviation. It provides a detailed analysis of the capabilities, limitations, and countermeasures related to these weapons, emphasizing the low probability of a successful attack on commercial aircraft.

Main Points

1. MANPADS Overview

MANPADS are portable, shoulder-launched missiles designed to target aircraft.
They are divided into two generations:
- First generation: Blowpipe (UK), Redeye (US), SA-7 (Russia), and their foreign copies (e.g., China's HN-5).
- Second generation: Stinger (US), SA-14/16/18 (Russia).
Second-generation MANPADS are faster, have greater range, and more advanced guidance systems.

2. Terrorist Access to MANPADS

Terrorist groups primarily possess first-generation MANPADS, such as SA-7 and early Stingers.
These weapons were supplied by superpowers to proxy forces during the Cold War.
Access to second-generation MANPADS is limited due to international efforts to restrict their availability.
Many MANPADS in the hands of terrorists are outdated, poorly maintained, and unreliable.

3. MANPADS Components and Operation

MANPADS consist of six key components: rocket motor, warhead, fuse, sensor, microelectronic guidance system, and battery.
They are 'fire-and-forget' systems, meaning once launched, they do not require further operator input.
Operators need training to effectively use the system; untrained users may miss the target.
Missiles use heat signatures to track aircraft, often targeting the hottest point (the engine).

4. Effectiveness Against Commercial Aircraft

MANPADS are most effective against small, single-engine aircraft.
Commercial jetliners are more resilient due to their size, multiple engines, and design.
The warhead is too small to cause structural damage, and engines are not integral to the fuselage.
Successful attacks on large commercial aircraft are rare, with only two recorded incidents (both in Africa).

5. Defensive Measures Against MANPADS

Jamming devices and flares are common countermeasures:
- Flares confuse the missile by emitting hotter signals.
- Jamming systems emit signals to disrupt the missile's guidance.
However, flares are not widely used on commercial aircraft due to safety and community concerns.
Jamming systems are costly and require continuous upgrades to remain effective.
Missile warning systems can alert pilots to an attack, allowing for evasive maneuvers.

6. Aircraft Vulnerabilities and Improvements

The area where the engine attaches to the wing is a critical vulnerability.
Changes in aircraft design, such as moving away from hydraulic controls and improving fuel tank safety, have reduced risks.
Pilots trained to handle catastrophic engine failure at low altitudes significantly increase survival chances.

Key Information

Historical Attacks: Only two successful MANPADS attacks on commercial jetliners have occurred since the 1970s.
Cost Considerations: Equipping all U.S. commercial aircraft with jamming systems would be extremely expensive (estimated at $10 billion+).
Countermeasure Effectiveness: While jamming and flares are effective, their use is limited on commercial aircraft.
Conclusion: The threat posed by MANPADS to commercial aviation is relatively low. The U.S. and other nations have made significant efforts to limit their availability, and existing countermeasures, combined with improved aircraft design and pilot training, are sufficient to mitigate the risk.

Recommendations

Focus on improving pilot training for engine failure and low-altitude emergencies.
Invest in research for more effective and affordable jamming systems.
Continue international efforts to restrict MANPADS proliferation.
Avoid mandatory jamming equipment installation on all commercial aircraft due to cost and practicality concerns.

展开完整摘要