Poll: 'Stop The Olympic Missiles' and you...

[robot slipper]

A high-tech missile defense system on the roof? Hot uniformed men coming and going at all hours of the day? When can I move in???

On a serious note, even if there had been a Block of Flats Referendum about whether or not to have the missiles, would the government seriously have gone "Ok, so the majority of people in the block don't want the missiles, so we won't put them there."? I really doubt they would listen to the public, it's not their way of going about things. For one example, this is the government that wants to reform the national health service despite the fact that many professionals who work in that sector are completely against it.

 

[Petromir]

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

Muggings, Violence, Riots: Ooo, lets give them missiles too!
David Cameron is a fucking imbecile. Not because anyone their is smart enough to use them, because someone there is stupid enought to try to dick around with them. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

Clearly he has a few more *brain cells than you. This is a manned missile *system, It will have armed guards*... *Strangely *the Army guard these things *wherever they are. These weapon systems are field support weapons locally *operated. Hell*, the whole point* *that's causing most of the fuss is that *it's so *independant of systems that no matter how much radar and *radiojammings *are going on it will still take out the target. If there are no soldiers on it 24/7 then *there's no point in having it there.

Comedic effect mixed with a pinch of sarcasm, try picking it up next time, also improve your spelling and grammar if you want to call someone else stupid. The real problem is, any threat that may or may not occur at the olympics won't warrant the missile response. Each missile has a detonation radius of 150 miles or so, which means, circle of death that only serves to kill thousands of our own people and maybe the two or three people who caused the threat in the first place. And do you really believe that two or three armed guards is going to stop a fuckton of idiots and/or nutjobs trying to arse around with the missiles? This entire thing actually helps the people it's supposed to deter, a few hundred of them die detonating it, a few thousand civilians are killed in the resultant explosion. Yes it's unmanned, but you can still detonate a large explosive device by tampering with it. Ironically this is a safety protocol. It's insanely dangerous to put it there, because it will ultimatley just be used against us.

Sorry if i made a couple of Typos. I do however have a degreee in Engineering. The typos and grammer are made worse bybeeing dyslexic.


150 mile detonation radious? Thats impressive for a weapon of 4.3 mile range and a 2lb warhead. Nuclear weapons dont have detonation radii that big for much larger weapons. This weapon is designed to HIt the target before detonation (unusual for an AA missile). The other land based ssytem in use at the olympics has similar range and a payload in the same order of magnitude.

Two men with assault rifles on a tower like this are fairly safe from a riot, as theres only so many ways up to them.


Even if you detonatted the missiles stored on site (not that easy) the resulting explosion would be far from likely to knock down that building.

Terrosit incidents in the UK are not mob affairs, they are small cell affairs.

IF a large mob tried to gain access to the building an judges a threat then a helicopter could evac the missiles and soldiers in suprisingly short time.

Sorry, meant meter. My computer does this thing...A forget it, its been said know and I look like a twat.

But you still haven't pointed out the glaringly obvious factor that no situation can arise when firing these things is a good idea. It still kills a lot of civilians, no matter how you look at it.

If the missile is fired the consequense of fireing will outweigh that of not.

These missiles are here to prevent a 9/11 style attack. If they arent fired then the likey result is a jet liner hitting a stadium of 60 thoasand odd capacity, while its full. If it is the likely casualties woulnt be anything like that.

 

[Worgen]

snip

You clearly have no idea how command works, such an person will be reachiable in a minute or so, they will be someone on duty to make the call instantly when events are on.

There is the time it takes to contact someone, the time it takes to determine if you need to shoot down the plane, the time it takes for the missile to lock on, the time it takes the missile to travel and the time it takes the wreckage to impact.

Given that there are 5 air ports around london and it is unlikely that all would be shut down and chances are that at least one will have a runway that points straight to the stadium. A missile impacting a plane even over head the stadium would probably result in more loss of life than one hitting it.

Really the missiles make a better target for someone wanting to cause havoc then a plane would and the usual homemade bomb is a much more likely occurrence, if they were smart they would have just put the effort into more bomb sniffing dogs.

 

[SpectacularWebHead]

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

Muggings, Violence, Riots: Ooo, lets give them missiles too!
David Cameron is a fucking imbecile. Not because anyone their is smart enough to use them, because someone there is stupid enought to try to dick around with them. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

Clearly he has a few more *brain cells than you. This is a manned missile *system, It will have armed guards*... *Strangely *the Army guard these things *wherever they are. These weapon systems are field support weapons locally *operated. Hell*, the whole point* *that's causing most of the fuss is that *it's so *independant of systems that no matter how much radar and *radiojammings *are going on it will still take out the target. If there are no soldiers on it 24/7 then *there's no point in having it there.

Comedic effect mixed with a pinch of sarcasm, try picking it up next time, also improve your spelling and grammar if you want to call someone else stupid. The real problem is, any threat that may or may not occur at the olympics won't warrant the missile response. Each missile has a detonation radius of 150 miles or so, which means, circle of death that only serves to kill thousands of our own people and maybe the two or three people who caused the threat in the first place. And do you really believe that two or three armed guards is going to stop a fuckton of idiots and/or nutjobs trying to arse around with the missiles? This entire thing actually helps the people it's supposed to deter, a few hundred of them die detonating it, a few thousand civilians are killed in the resultant explosion. Yes it's unmanned, but you can still detonate a large explosive device by tampering with it. Ironically this is a safety protocol. It's insanely dangerous to put it there, because it will ultimatley just be used against us.

Sorry if i made a couple of Typos. I do however have a degreee in Engineering. The typos and grammer are made worse bybeeing dyslexic.


150 mile detonation radious? Thats impressive for a weapon of 4.3 mile range and a 2lb warhead. Nuclear weapons dont have detonation radii that big for much larger weapons. This weapon is designed to HIt the target before detonation (unusual for an AA missile). The other land based ssytem in use at the olympics has similar range and a payload in the same order of magnitude.

Two men with assault rifles on a tower like this are fairly safe from a riot, as theres only so many ways up to them.


Even if you detonatted the missiles stored on site (not that easy) the resulting explosion would be far from likely to knock down that building.

Terrosit incidents in the UK are not mob affairs, they are small cell affairs.

IF a large mob tried to gain access to the building an judges a threat then a helicopter could evac the missiles and soldiers in suprisingly short time.

Sorry, meant meter. My computer does this thing...A forget it, its been said know and I look like a twat.

But you still haven't pointed out the glaringly obvious factor that no situation can arise when firing these things is a good idea. It still kills a lot of civilians, no matter how you look at it.

If the missile is fired the consequense of fireing will outweigh that of not.

These missiles are here to prevent a 9/11 style attack. If they arent fired then the likey result is a jet liner hitting a stadium of 60 thoasand odd capacity, while its full. If it is the likely casualties woulnt be anything like that.

Yeeeeah...I doubt that. Do you live in england? Because if not our government is pretty much terrified of any form of terrorism, and it will massively misuse this. It's a bad idea, period. Even the guy in charge of the dispensing of the missiles says that it's a bad idea, he just got outvoted in parliament.

 

[Petromir]

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

Muggings, Violence, Riots: Ooo, lets give them missiles too!
David Cameron is a fucking imbecile. Not because anyone their is smart enough to use them, because someone there is stupid enought to try to dick around with them. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

Clearly he has a few more *brain cells than you. This is a manned missile *system, It will have armed guards*... *Strangely *the Army guard these things *wherever they are. These weapon systems are field support weapons locally *operated. Hell*, the whole point* *that's causing most of the fuss is that *it's so *independant of systems that no matter how much radar and *radiojammings *are going on it will still take out the target. If there are no soldiers on it 24/7 then *there's no point in having it there.

Comedic effect mixed with a pinch of sarcasm, try picking it up next time, also improve your spelling and grammar if you want to call someone else stupid. The real problem is, any threat that may or may not occur at the olympics won't warrant the missile response. Each missile has a detonation radius of 150 miles or so, which means, circle of death that only serves to kill thousands of our own people and maybe the two or three people who caused the threat in the first place. And do you really believe that two or three armed guards is going to stop a fuckton of idiots and/or nutjobs trying to arse around with the missiles? This entire thing actually helps the people it's supposed to deter, a few hundred of them die detonating it, a few thousand civilians are killed in the resultant explosion. Yes it's unmanned, but you can still detonate a large explosive device by tampering with it. Ironically this is a safety protocol. It's insanely dangerous to put it there, because it will ultimatley just be used against us.

Sorry if i made a couple of Typos. I do however have a degreee in Engineering. The typos and grammer are made worse bybeeing dyslexic.


150 mile detonation radious? Thats impressive for a weapon of 4.3 mile range and a 2lb warhead. Nuclear weapons dont have detonation radii that big for much larger weapons. This weapon is designed to HIt the target before detonation (unusual for an AA missile). The other land based ssytem in use at the olympics has similar range and a payload in the same order of magnitude.

Two men with assault rifles on a tower like this are fairly safe from a riot, as theres only so many ways up to them.


Even if you detonatted the missiles stored on site (not that easy) the resulting explosion would be far from likely to knock down that building.

Terrosit incidents in the UK are not mob affairs, they are small cell affairs.

IF a large mob tried to gain access to the building an judges a threat then a helicopter could evac the missiles and soldiers in suprisingly short time.

Sorry, meant meter. My computer does this thing...A forget it, its been said know and I look like a twat.

But you still haven't pointed out the glaringly obvious factor that no situation can arise when firing these things is a good idea. It still kills a lot of civilians, no matter how you look at it.

If the missile is fired the consequense of fireing will outweigh that of not.

These missiles are here to prevent a 9/11 style attack. If they arent fired then the likey result is a jet liner hitting a stadium of 60 thoasand odd capacity, while its full. If it is the likely casualties woulnt be anything like that.

Yeeeeah...I doubt that. Do you live in england? Because if not our government is pretty much terrified of any form of terrorism, and it will massively misuse this. It's a bad idea, period. Even the guy in charge of the dispensing of the missiles says that it's a bad idea, he just got outvoted in parliament.

Not Only Do I live in England, I live within range of at least one of these weapons.

While our goveremtn in recent years has tried to get some fairly over the top police powers, AA missiles are not a weapon of choice for population oppression. Go get your tinfoil hat.

 

[Petromir]

snip

You clearly have no idea how command works, such an person will be reachiable in a minute or so, they will be someone on duty to make the call instantly when events are on.

There is the time it takes to contact someone, the time it takes to determine if you need to shoot down the plane, the time it takes for the missile to lock on, the time it takes the missile to travel and the time it takes the wreckage to impact.

Given that there are 5 air ports around london and it is unlikely that all would be shut down and chances are that at least one will have a runway that points straight to the stadium. A missile impacting a plane even over head the stadium would probably result in more loss of life than one hitting it.

Really the missiles make a better target for someone wanting to cause havoc then a plane would and the usual homemade bomb is a much more likely occurrence, if they were smart they would have just put the effort into more bomb sniffing dogs.

Once again you have no clue about how this will work.

THe call will be intiated at the first signs of deviation from very strict flight plans, which will be set out to make sure suspicious activity will be noticed with pleanty of time. Only one of these airports is close enough to have a small flight time to the stadium, City and thats runway isnt pointed the right way.

The decsion is a quick one. An aircraft that close to a london airport on approach or takeoff is in open contact, and the approved flightplans will be theere to make it obvious.

Ailiners have come down in major cities before, none have caused anywhere near the number of casuatlies that a collision of an airliner with a stadium of 60k people. Airburts are only dangerous in explosives, an airliner braking up will likely limit its fatalities.

 

[Petromir]

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

Muggings, Violence, Riots: Ooo, lets give them missiles too!
David Cameron is a fucking imbecile. Not because anyone their is smart enough to use them, because someone there is stupid enought to try to dick around with them. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

Clearly he has a few more *brain cells than you. This is a manned missile *system, It will have armed guards*... *Strangely *the Army guard these things *wherever they are. These weapon systems are field support weapons locally *operated. Hell*, the whole point* *that's causing most of the fuss is that *it's so *independant of systems that no matter how much radar and *radiojammings *are going on it will still take out the target. If there are no soldiers on it 24/7 then *there's no point in having it there.

Comedic effect mixed with a pinch of sarcasm, try picking it up next time, also improve your spelling and grammar if you want to call someone else stupid. The real problem is, any threat that may or may not occur at the olympics won't warrant the missile response. Each missile has a detonation radius of 150 miles or so, which means, circle of death that only serves to kill thousands of our own people and maybe the two or three people who caused the threat in the first place. And do you really believe that two or three armed guards is going to stop a fuckton of idiots and/or nutjobs trying to arse around with the missiles? This entire thing actually helps the people it's supposed to deter, a few hundred of them die detonating it, a few thousand civilians are killed in the resultant explosion. Yes it's unmanned, but you can still detonate a large explosive device by tampering with it. Ironically this is a safety protocol. It's insanely dangerous to put it there, because it will ultimatley just be used against us.

Sorry if i made a couple of Typos. I do however have a degreee in Engineering. The typos and grammer are made worse bybeeing dyslexic.


150 mile detonation radious? Thats impressive for a weapon of 4.3 mile range and a 2lb warhead. Nuclear weapons dont have detonation radii that big for much larger weapons. This weapon is designed to HIt the target before detonation (unusual for an AA missile). The other land based ssytem in use at the olympics has similar range and a payload in the same order of magnitude.

Two men with assault rifles on a tower like this are fairly safe from a riot, as theres only so many ways up to them.


Even if you detonatted the missiles stored on site (not that easy) the resulting explosion would be far from likely to knock down that building.

Terrosit incidents in the UK are not mob affairs, they are small cell affairs.

IF a large mob tried to gain access to the building an judges a threat then a helicopter could evac the missiles and soldiers in suprisingly short time.

Sorry, meant meter. My computer does this thing...A forget it, its been said know and I look like a twat.

But you still haven't pointed out the glaringly obvious factor that no situation can arise when firing these things is a good idea. It still kills a lot of civilians, no matter how you look at it.

If the missile is fired the consequense of fireing will outweigh that of not.

These missiles are here to prevent a 9/11 style attack. If they arent fired then the likey result is a jet liner hitting a stadium of 60 thoasand odd capacity, while its full. If it is the likely casualties woulnt be anything like that.

Yeeeeah...I doubt that. Do you live in england? Because if not our government is pretty much terrified of any form of terrorism, and it will massively misuse this. It's a bad idea, period. Even the guy in charge of the dispensing of the missiles says that it's a bad idea, he just got outvoted in parliament.

Not Only Do I live in England, I live within range of at least one of these weapons.

While our goveremtn in recent years has tried to get some fairly over the top police powers, AA missiles are not a weapon of choice for population oppression. Go get your tinfoil hat.

You've taught me a valuable lesson today. You don't have to be american to be a gun toting moronic redneck. Thank you, for proving that intense blind stupidity is present everwhere.

Do explain that?

I think american's attitude to guns in general is stupid. I see no reason to own a weapon in the city, or intdeed for 99% of countryside dwellers as well.

I am against a routinly armed police (as i believe they tend to increase the likelyhood criminals will be armed), and dislike armed patrols of any kind on the streets.

Gun toting redneck I am far from.

I have educated myself properly in these weapon systems, the dangers they present,and beleive they are both the mist effective deffence and detterant to such a threat. I would prefer they werent nesseary but believe they arent.

I also know that as a way of creating oppresive levels of travel restrictions 5 missle sites in london are going to do fuck all.

There are loads of things the goverment are doing very badly in this (those stupid VIP travel lanes), and loads of stupid powers they've tried to give the police (the extentiosn to detention without trial time limits), but these missile are quite sensible, and less likely to casue death in london than a gas main going off.

The extra resources in deploying in these is not stopping any sniffer dogs being used. They are existing field units, the resources required to deploy them in the UK is barely more than having them sit in their barracks. Every sniffer dog not required elsewhere will be on the task. SAid sniffer dogs will provide much more distruption than these missiles will to the people living in the block they are stationed in.

 

[Da Orky Man]

I don't really have much of a problem with the missiles but they shouldn't be on top of people's flats. You can see why that would make people uneasy, I mean I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

That's... not very nice

The reason why they are on top of peoples flats is very simple, if they weren't they would hit buildings when launched. Its not very nice but the reality is that the only place where they can be effective is on top of peoples flats. No one likes to live next to sewage farm but without them we would be dying of Colora. The missiles are not going to be there permanently but just for 8 weeks

Yeah but people not wanting missiles on top of where they live isn't exactly whining is it? I wonder if you'd feel the same way if it was your flat?

Hell, I'd invite them to stick them on my house. It's not as if they're going to be realistically targeted by anything, and hopefully I'd be able to get a few close-up pictures of them. A pity I live in a small Welsh town in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Worgen]

snip

You clearly have no idea how command works, such an person will be reachiable in a minute or so, they will be someone on duty to make the call instantly when events are on.

There is the time it takes to contact someone, the time it takes to determine if you need to shoot down the plane, the time it takes for the missile to lock on, the time it takes the missile to travel and the time it takes the wreckage to impact.

Given that there are 5 air ports around london and it is unlikely that all would be shut down and chances are that at least one will have a runway that points straight to the stadium. A missile impacting a plane even over head the stadium would probably result in more loss of life than one hitting it.

Really the missiles make a better target for someone wanting to cause havoc then a plane would and the usual homemade bomb is a much more likely occurrence, if they were smart they would have just put the effort into more bomb sniffing dogs.

Once again you have no clue about how this will work.

THe call will be intiated at the first signs of deviation from very strict flight plans, which will be set out to make sure suspicious activity will be noticed with pleanty of time. Only one of these airports is close enough to have a small flight time to the stadium, City and thats runway isnt pointed the right way.

The decsion is a quick one. An aircraft that close to a london airport on approach or takeoff is in open contact, and the approved flightplans will be theere to make it obvious.

Ailiners have come down in major cities before, none have caused anywhere near the number of casuatlies that a collision of an airliner with a stadium of 60k people. Airburts are only dangerous in explosives, an airliner braking up will likely limit its fatalities.

You can't be sure that any deviation from a flight plan isn't from something mundane, could be an auto pilot over correcting, sudden updraft, pilot error. You shoot down an aircraft for any normal reason and there will be a shit storm of massive proportions since no only are the people on the plane dead but its wreckage is now falling on a major city.

The reason airliners coming down in cities usually don't do much damage is that not only are they aimed at the least residential areas but they are also just a plane, as opposed to lots of metal falling to the ground.

Plus having missiles around adds another possible target that wasn't there before and adds the posibility of someone stealing one, firing one, or them just being dummies to make people think twice before doing any plane related thing, which is what I expect them to be, dummies.

 

[Hoplon]

It won't be known long in advance... worst case scenario is a plane is hijacked from Heathrow or Gatwick... which are damn close to east London! Doesn't leave much time for reaction, and therefore the purpose of the launchers is a deterrance to anyone planning on hijacking an aircraft...

If a plane was hijacked and suicided the stadium imagine the shit the military would get for not shooting it down... I can imagine the Sun headline now: O'lympics attacked; Military had weapons but didn't deploy them...'

That's spurious logic, at that point they have flown over most of the city (since Gatwick and Heathrow are to the south west then some miles out side the M25) so juicer targets would have presented them selves, such as the west end shopping districts, parliament etc.

Once they are over the city it's a victory for them since it's going to cause a nightmare where ever they go down.

 

[Petromir]

snip

You clearly have no idea how command works, such an person will be reachiable in a minute or so, they will be someone on duty to make the call instantly when events are on.

There is the time it takes to contact someone, the time it takes to determine if you need to shoot down the plane, the time it takes for the missile to lock on, the time it takes the missile to travel and the time it takes the wreckage to impact.

Given that there are 5 air ports around london and it is unlikely that all would be shut down and chances are that at least one will have a runway that points straight to the stadium. A missile impacting a plane even over head the stadium would probably result in more loss of life than one hitting it.

Really the missiles make a better target for someone wanting to cause havoc then a plane would and the usual homemade bomb is a much more likely occurrence, if they were smart they would have just put the effort into more bomb sniffing dogs.

Once again you have no clue about how this will work.

THe call will be intiated at the first signs of deviation from very strict flight plans, which will be set out to make sure suspicious activity will be noticed with pleanty of time. Only one of these airports is close enough to have a small flight time to the stadium, City and thats runway isnt pointed the right way.

The decsion is a quick one. An aircraft that close to a london airport on approach or takeoff is in open contact, and the approved flightplans will be theere to make it obvious.

Ailiners have come down in major cities before, none have caused anywhere near the number of casuatlies that a collision of an airliner with a stadium of 60k people. Airburts are only dangerous in explosives, an airliner braking up will likely limit its fatalities.

You can't be sure that any deviation from a flight plan isn't from something mundane, could be an auto pilot over correcting, sudden updraft, pilot error. You shoot down an aircraft for any normal reason and there will be a shit storm of massive proportions since no only are the people on the plane dead but its wreckage is now falling on a major city.

The reason airliners coming down in cities usually don't do much damage is that not only are they aimed at the least residential areas but they are also just a plane, as opposed to lots of metal falling to the ground.

Plus having missiles around adds another possible target that wasn't there before and adds the posibility of someone stealing one, firing one, or them just being dummies to make people think twice before doing any plane related thing, which is what I expect them to be, dummies.

All of those errors are easy to determine. Any plane close enough to be a threat will be in contact with the control tower. And as I said the flight plans will be carefully planned to make sure any deviation needed to be considered a threat will be a major course deviation not explainable by those circustances.

Concorde hit a Hotel in Paris, after spreading debris over a fair portion of paris. Thats hardly a lowly populated area is it now?

Large objects hotting the ground tend to do far more serious damage than loads of small ones. Any airliner on a course to hit any olympic venue would be so low it wouldn't break up that much. It certainly wouldn't explode holywood style. The planes demise and flight path would keep the planes debries reasoably tight.

Terrorist atacks are designed to be that, and the threat increased by the missiles is less than thechance of the attack which is tiny. If a terrorist group really wanted missiles they'd need less resourses and put themselves at much less risk to buy one in some of the less stable areas of the world.

These weapons are there not because such an attack is considered likely, but because of the outcry that would happen if they didnt do anything and something DID happen. THey will be real (dummy weapons in the UK are a different colour, as are training missiles). The impact on Londoners lives of these missiles will be among the lowest of all the security measures.

 

[Worgen]

snip

You clearly have no idea how command works, such an person will be reachiable in a minute or so, they will be someone on duty to make the call instantly when events are on.

There is the time it takes to contact someone, the time it takes to determine if you need to shoot down the plane, the time it takes for the missile to lock on, the time it takes the missile to travel and the time it takes the wreckage to impact.

Given that there are 5 air ports around london and it is unlikely that all would be shut down and chances are that at least one will have a runway that points straight to the stadium. A missile impacting a plane even over head the stadium would probably result in more loss of life than one hitting it.

Really the missiles make a better target for someone wanting to cause havoc then a plane would and the usual homemade bomb is a much more likely occurrence, if they were smart they would have just put the effort into more bomb sniffing dogs.

Once again you have no clue about how this will work.

THe call will be intiated at the first signs of deviation from very strict flight plans, which will be set out to make sure suspicious activity will be noticed with pleanty of time. Only one of these airports is close enough to have a small flight time to the stadium, City and thats runway isnt pointed the right way.

The decsion is a quick one. An aircraft that close to a london airport on approach or takeoff is in open contact, and the approved flightplans will be theere to make it obvious.

Ailiners have come down in major cities before, none have caused anywhere near the number of casuatlies that a collision of an airliner with a stadium of 60k people. Airburts are only dangerous in explosives, an airliner braking up will likely limit its fatalities.

You can't be sure that any deviation from a flight plan isn't from something mundane, could be an auto pilot over correcting, sudden updraft, pilot error. You shoot down an aircraft for any normal reason and there will be a shit storm of massive proportions since no only are the people on the plane dead but its wreckage is now falling on a major city.

The reason airliners coming down in cities usually don't do much damage is that not only are they aimed at the least residential areas but they are also just a plane, as opposed to lots of metal falling to the ground.

Plus having missiles around adds another possible target that wasn't there before and adds the posibility of someone stealing one, firing one, or them just being dummies to make people think twice before doing any plane related thing, which is what I expect them to be, dummies.

All of those errors are easy to determine. Any plane close enough to be a threat will be in contact with the control tower. And as I said the flight plans will be carefully planned to make sure any deviation needed to be considered a threat will be a major course deviation not explainable by those circustances.

Concorde hit a Hotel in Paris, after spreading debris over a fair portion of paris. Thats hardly a lowly populated area is it now?

Large objects hotting the ground tend to do far more serious damage than loads of small ones. Any airliner on a course to hit any olympic venue would be so low it wouldn't break up that much. It certainly wouldn't explode holywood style. The planes demise and flight path would keep the planes debries reasoably tight.

Terrorist atacks are designed to be that, and the threat increased by the missiles is less than thechance of the attack which is tiny. If a terrorist group really wanted missiles they'd need less resourses and put themselves at much less risk to buy one in some of the less stable areas of the world.

These weapons are there not because such an attack is considered likely, but because of the outcry that would happen if they didnt do anything and something DID happen. THey will be real (dummy weapons in the UK are a different colour, as are training missiles). The impact on Londoners lives of these missiles will be among the lowest of all the security measures.

Ugh, this reeks of one of those things that goes on forever so I'm just leaving you with this article.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/9232749/Hi-tech-controls-partly-blamed-for-Airbus-crash.html

 

[Laughing Man]

You can't be sure that any deviation from a flight plan isn't from something mundane, could be an auto pilot over correcting, sudden updraft, pilot error.

Ugh, this reeks of one of those things that goes on forever so I'm just leaving you with this article.

All of which is pointless given that a simple call back to ATC, which takes a matter of seconds, will explain any such deviation from established flight paths.

The debate in general is moot anyway, the presence of the SAM units IS enough to prevent any such attempted attacks. The debate about the residence opinions on the missiles is also moot. The buildings will not become a target as a result of the sites being there. Let's face it if terrorists want to attack somewhere they ain't gonna attack some shit heap block of flats in the middle of London, SAM sites or not. The residents won't be affected by the sites at all and IF they are a cause of worry for them then they have an easy life if THAT is what they have time to worry about!

 

[direkiller]

Yes. That's exactly what I am saying.
They don't own the house, so it's not their decision to make, really. Life's unfair, and some people have to lose out to add security for thousands more.

Well you know what that's a frankly terrible attitude to have. It's the sort of thing I'd expect to read in the Daily Mail or hear on Fox News.

Fox news would be opposed to this
Conservatives love them some Constitution and 3rd Amendment would probably be used to bat this down quickly in the states.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Yes. That's exactly what I am saying.
They don't own the house, so it's not their decision to make, really. Life's unfair, and some people have to lose out to add security for thousands more.

Well you know what that's a frankly terrible attitude to have. It's the sort of thing I'd expect to read in the Daily Mail or hear on Fox News.

Fox news would be opposed to this
Conservatives love them some Constitution and 3rd Amendment would probably be used to bat this down quickly in the states.

If it was in the US the 3rd ammendment wouldn't stand up anyway. They don't own the building, and the soldiers arn't in their homes... hell, they aren't even being disturbed or inconvenienced in any way what-so-ever! :/

 

[direkiller]

Yes. That's exactly what I am saying.
They don't own the house, so it's not their decision to make, really. Life's unfair, and some people have to lose out to add security for thousands more.

Well you know what that's a frankly terrible attitude to have. It's the sort of thing I'd expect to read in the Daily Mail or hear on Fox News.

Fox news would be opposed to this
Conservatives love them some Constitution and 3rd Amendment would probably be used to bat this down quickly in the states.

If it was in the US the 3rd ammendment wouldn't stand up anyway. They don't own the building, and the soldiers arn't in their homes... hell, they aren't even being disturbed or inconvenienced in any way what-so-ever! :/

"They don't own the building"
In this case the owner becomes the tennets(Engblom v.Carey)
The 3rd amendment is also cited as right to privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut)
"Your home should be free from agents of the state"


U.S law extends a bit farther then then simply the words on the paper

 

[GangstaPony]

edit

 

[BristolBerserker]

I'd rather there be missiles and nothing happen than there be no missiles and something happen.