By Mary Kirby in Philadelphia
A previously secret US government report has revealed that defences for civilian airliners against shoulder-to-air missiles are still currently inadequate, but that the technology is progressing.
Laser-based counter-Manpads (man-portable air defence systems) can protect airliners from missile attacks, but prototype units have so far only partially met US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) performance requirements and show some limitations to being adapted to the commercial aviation environment.
In a report to the US Congress dated July but only now being released, the DHS’s study of the completed first and second phases of its two-year counter-Manpads trial also stresses that testing of the military directional infrared countermeasures (DIRCM) systems adapted for commercial use by programme participants BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman is not complete, and further analysis of “integration complexities” is still required prior to final assessment.
Testing and analysis will be pursued during phase three of the programme, which is expected to formally begin in the next few weeks, involving the operational evaluation of counter-Manpads installed on aircraft operated by US cargo carriers.
BAE and Northrop are already preparing for this final part of the programme, which is expected to last about 18 months and cost the US government about $110 million.
During phase two, Northrop tested its Guardian laser jammer on a FedEx Boeing MD-11 and later on a Boeing 747-300. The manufacturer has already received a US Federal Aviation Administration supplemental type certificate (STC) on the MD-11 and expects a 747 STC by the end of August.
Northrop is also modifying the first of 11 FedEx aircraft at the freight operator’s Los Angeles facility, and FedEx could have this Guardian-equipped aircraft in operation as early as next month, pending the DHS’s formal award to proceed with phase three, the manufacturer’s director of infrared countermeasures business development Jack Pledger tells Flight.
BAE, meanwhile, flight tested its JetEye commercial DIRCM system on an American Airlines Boeing 767-200. It now expects to receive a STC on the aircraft type within days.
For phase three, BAE will install JetEye on a 767 aircraft operated by US cargo operator ABX Air. “The installation activity has already begun,” says business development manager, counter-Manpads Steve duMont. BAE will also continue to fly the American 767 as a test platform.
The two manufacturers’ initial performance assessments indicate that a counter-Manpads system “in either a distributed or pod configuration” can protect commercial aircraft selected and tested during phase two, says the DHS in its report.
But the regulator caveats this validation by noting that additional design, development, testing and operation in the commercial environment is required “to improve reliability, reduce drag and weight, incorporate technology protection, enhance producibility, and incorporate additional event notification capabilities”.
It notes that if narrowbody and regional jets are to be equipped to protect against missiles, further design refinements, integration, and tests must also be undertaken.
While the DHS acknowledges it is feasible to transition selected military technology to the commercial aviation environment, it cites challenges “from logistics, cost, export control, and, to some extent, from a liability perspective”.
Substantial affordability implications are raised by the proposed prototype units. “The risk remains moderate to high that the commercial airlines’ economic business model, which emphasizes high reliability and low cost, would be adversely impacted by the current prototypes,” says the agency.
The DHS, however, warns that its cost threshold of $300 per flight is not being met, although it notes that its goal of reducing total costs to $1 million by the the 1,000th installation does appear attainable by at least one of the two current contractors.
It also says that until a significant number of counter-Manpads units are installed and maintained by airlines, uncertainty with regard to operations and maintenance costs will remain.
“Successful countermeasures deployment can only occur if export controls, air carrier insurance considerations, future countermeasure certification, and international operations are addressed,” it says.
Another significant factor in deciding to deploy counter-Manpads is the acquisition timeline necessary to produce and install the equipment. “Even with expedited acquisition procedures, it would take 18 to 24 months to begin producing the countermeasures equipment, and to begin installation on a significant portion of the US fleet,” notes the DHS.
Source: Flight International
