Re: And What if Manhattan IS Nuked?

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Tue Aug 20 2002 - 20:43:26 MDT


On Tue, 20 Aug 2002 Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:

> If preventative messures are in order, one could start with a plane that is
> harder to hi-jack. One that will immediately program the controls to its
> destination, once a cabin breach is detected and confimed. This isn't
> nanotech either, but I am sure it would be mighty expensive, [snip]

Actually, at least the modern Boeing planes are supposed to be able
to land themselves. I don't believe it would be hard to modify
the software for the ground to take control if it discovered
a plane was severely off course and didn't respond to ground
communications. (The FAA apparently did know a number of the
planes used during 911 were in serious trouble.)

You have a couple of problems -- what happens if it drops out
of radio contact (flying low). (One could have the plane have enough
intelligence to take over the controls and return to a higher
altitude). I think the plane that crashed in PA had significantly
exceeded its flight margins (flying at very high speed very close
to the ground) -- that should trigger an automatic response on
the part of the plane to correct the situation. These aren't
"rocket science" type improvements.

I think the real fear is that ground control could be taken
over by terrorists. Bruce Willis had a film with a related
plot, though I don't remember the name right now. That
movie would have been even worse if the terrorists could
take control of the planes and start steering them into the
ground.

Robert



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:18 MST