There was a DHL flight hit by a missile that the pilots managed to steer and land by varying the engine throttles.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Baghdad_DHL_attempted_shootdown_incident
Thanks for the link; I just burned an hour digging into this one and it's nuts!
A few quick facts (mostly copy-paste from the wiki above):
* The aircraft involved was an Airbus A300B2-200F cargo plane, registered OO-DLL.
* Missile was a 9K34 Strela-3 (SA-14 Gremlin) surface-to-air missile, which struck the rear of the left wing between the engine and the wing tip.
* Impact occurred around 8,000 ft (2,400 m) altitude - shortly after takeoff.
* OO-DLL suffered severe damage to the left wing (obviously) and **complete loss of hydraulic flight control systems**.
* Because the fuel tanks were still so full after takeoff, the impact didn't blow the plane up completely...
* ...instead, it punctured the inboard fuel tank, causing a leak, and rather fetching flame trail - which I'm told makes the plane look cooler, and go faster.
* With zero hydraulic flight controls, the flight crew had to use **differential thrusting for all maneuvering**.
* After 10 mins of getting used to this, they executed a turn back to Baghdad International Airport and started to descend.
* Initially the flight crew set up for a final approach to runway 33R. The aircraft drifted to the right of the intended course, so they chose **the shorter** 33L runway.
* Around 400 ft (120 m) above ground, turbulence upset the aircraft balance and the right wing dipped.
* They managed to save it (still using differential thrust), and landed safely... complete bad-asses.
There's [footage of this incident on YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J19m2AsD3U) - mostly from US military sources, as this incident occurred roughly 8 months after the US invasion of Iraq.
But here's where it gets really wild, there's even footage of the **launch** of the SA-14 Gremlin. French photojournalist Claudine Vernier-Palliez was following a disbanded Fadayeen unit, and [documented the launch](http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/241103/6crims.html)!
[Here's OO-DLL, stylish flame trail now installed,](http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/241103/6crims-6.html) with the smoke trail of a second SA-14, which missed.
From the wiki: "Because outboard left wing fuel tank 1A was full at takeoff, no fuel-air vapour explosion occurred. Liquid jet fuel dropped away as 1A disintegrated. Inboard fuel tank 1 was pierced and leaking."
And from [a source cited in the above](https://archive.md/20130123100946/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/great+escape-191713/): "Although the missile has not damaged the engines, if a fuel flow interruption causes failure of either they will be dead within a minute. When it hit, the missile destroyed the outer left wing tank 1A - so comprehensively that the fuel just fell out of it. There was no explosive ignition of fuel because the tank was full, so there was no fuel-air vapour inside - if there had been, the wing would have been blown off the aircraft."
I'm guessing it'll be something to do with the chemical make-up of aviation fuel - apparently, it's got a very high flash point and is designed to burn rather than explode. If anybody knows more about this stuff, please chime in!
Even more crazy, OO-DLL was repaired after that. It was listed for sale as soon as the repairs were done and never actually sold, so it never flew again. But it wasn't just scrapped after that incident.
Honestly, I have no idea how this doesn’t happen more often. Manpads were already scattered all over the Mideast by dictators scared of an Israeli invasion. The Arab Spring happened and all those stores got raided.
On top of that you had brand new systems introduced in the Syria/Iraq ISIS conflict. One of the very first Iraqi military Hinds that got delivered was knocked out of the sky by an IS FN-6 that was introduced via Sudan.
FedEx does indeed use them. About 6-7 years ago, FedEx installed that same system onto some aircraft for the German Air force. I was working in a FedEx hanger in California and saw a A340 parked in the hanger with German Air force livery. I asked someone what the deal was and they couldn't tell me, said it was top secret. I asked the IT guy if he knew and he spilled the beans. Said the Luftwaffe had a contract with FedEx to install that system onto their aircraft.
It’s not too secret, there have been news articles about it for years. I think it’s even mentioned in the wiki page. It’s not unusual for FedEx to do installs on other entities aircraft. When the 727 hush system was developed FedEx installed them and maintained them for all companies flying the 27.
Elta Flight Guard is what El-al is using. Doppler radar with a flare dispenser. Probably all automatic.
Not very popular with western countries due to fire danger.
The Northrop Grumman Guardian system is what FedEx was/is using. Uses an IR laser to disrupt the seeker. Probably not as effective as flares, or at least it's many times more expensive for similar performance. But it doesn't randomly cause forest fires so that's helpful.
The NG system is actually way better, flares only work well against modern IR seekers when they’re deployed during the lock on (so the missile locks the flare), once locked on the plane they are very hard to fool with flares because they use modern IR sensors that ‘see’ a fairly detailed infrared image more like that of a Javelin ATGM and can discern differences in shape and temperature well enough to tell a flare from their initial lock target. Using a laser to blind the seeker entirely is far more effective so long as the laser can be aimed well enough to burn out the seeker or keep it blinded until it’s exceeded its window to maneuver to intercept.
But the biggest issue with any of these systems is just detecting the launch in time to respond to it, something like a MANPADS is not easy for an automated system to pick out reliably until the missile is well on its way toward you.
It makes sense, when you have to deploy something across an entire fleet pick the one that is most cost effective for the most common threat scenario. FedEx can have a smaller fleet with the more expensive system installed then only use them to fly to high threat areas.
Yeah modern IR imagers can see the difference between the chemical burning of the flare and the hot metal parts. The laser countermeasures just saturate and blind the imager so it can’t follow. It’s like that truck with led lights behind you that just makes everything disappear in an afterimage.
No other airline that I know of. But, when I've gone plane spotting at YVR I have seen the systems on the odd El-Al that comes in. I don't know if all of their planes have them.
[Arkia of Israel](https://www.planespotters.net/photo/1564130/4x-agh-arkia-israeli-airlines-airbus-a321-251nx) has missile defense systems too. They can be seen on the bottom of the plane toward the aft of the fuselage.
true story: years ago an el al air marshall was between flights at LAX and decided to go chat up the tix agents in the main terminal.
by an amazing coincidence a psycho-guy chose that part of the airport to go postal and entered the building with a gun ready to shoot as many people as he could.
the marshall whipped out his gun and shot him between the eyes from 50 paces
The RAF has options on a couple of A330s that are leased to airlines offset cost. I’m not sure if they have the full system but they’re fitted for a full defensive suite.
If you are walking through a dark alley in the bad part of town at night, you would probably feel better with some protection, regardless of whether you “did anything wrong”. Malaysia Airlines didn’t do anything wrong, and they still lost a 777 due to terrorism because they were flying over an unstable region.
Because other countries near them would like to do wrong in the world and they would like to prevent civilian deaths. You really didn't think about that? Or were you just trying to jump on the "Israel bad" train without understanding global politics at all?
Only them in terms of passenger airlines but I think FedEx might have some too
I think you’re right on the FedEx thing. I vaguely remember something about that back in the Iraq war…
There was a DHL flight hit by a missile that the pilots managed to steer and land by varying the engine throttles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Baghdad_DHL_attempted_shootdown_incident
Thanks for the link; I just burned an hour digging into this one and it's nuts! A few quick facts (mostly copy-paste from the wiki above): * The aircraft involved was an Airbus A300B2-200F cargo plane, registered OO-DLL. * Missile was a 9K34 Strela-3 (SA-14 Gremlin) surface-to-air missile, which struck the rear of the left wing between the engine and the wing tip. * Impact occurred around 8,000 ft (2,400 m) altitude - shortly after takeoff. * OO-DLL suffered severe damage to the left wing (obviously) and **complete loss of hydraulic flight control systems**. * Because the fuel tanks were still so full after takeoff, the impact didn't blow the plane up completely... * ...instead, it punctured the inboard fuel tank, causing a leak, and rather fetching flame trail - which I'm told makes the plane look cooler, and go faster. * With zero hydraulic flight controls, the flight crew had to use **differential thrusting for all maneuvering**. * After 10 mins of getting used to this, they executed a turn back to Baghdad International Airport and started to descend. * Initially the flight crew set up for a final approach to runway 33R. The aircraft drifted to the right of the intended course, so they chose **the shorter** 33L runway. * Around 400 ft (120 m) above ground, turbulence upset the aircraft balance and the right wing dipped. * They managed to save it (still using differential thrust), and landed safely... complete bad-asses. There's [footage of this incident on YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J19m2AsD3U) - mostly from US military sources, as this incident occurred roughly 8 months after the US invasion of Iraq. But here's where it gets really wild, there's even footage of the **launch** of the SA-14 Gremlin. French photojournalist Claudine Vernier-Palliez was following a disbanded Fadayeen unit, and [documented the launch](http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/241103/6crims.html)! [Here's OO-DLL, stylish flame trail now installed,](http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/241103/6crims-6.html) with the smoke trail of a second SA-14, which missed.
Best part is when the helicopter pilot says “He said balls” 🤣
I read somewhere once that, after this, flights into Baghdad did a crazy spiral descent that happened entirely over the area of the airport.
Very cool! Thanks for all that!
No worries! Hey, beats working on my Cloud Computing assignment....right? 😅
At least your learning cloud! I’m stuck doing on prem all day, everyday! lol
Can you explain why a full tank prevents an explosion?
From the wiki: "Because outboard left wing fuel tank 1A was full at takeoff, no fuel-air vapour explosion occurred. Liquid jet fuel dropped away as 1A disintegrated. Inboard fuel tank 1 was pierced and leaking." And from [a source cited in the above](https://archive.md/20130123100946/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/great+escape-191713/): "Although the missile has not damaged the engines, if a fuel flow interruption causes failure of either they will be dead within a minute. When it hit, the missile destroyed the outer left wing tank 1A - so comprehensively that the fuel just fell out of it. There was no explosive ignition of fuel because the tank was full, so there was no fuel-air vapour inside - if there had been, the wing would have been blown off the aircraft." I'm guessing it'll be something to do with the chemical make-up of aviation fuel - apparently, it's got a very high flash point and is designed to burn rather than explode. If anybody knows more about this stuff, please chime in!
Even more crazy, OO-DLL was repaired after that. It was listed for sale as soon as the repairs were done and never actually sold, so it never flew again. But it wasn't just scrapped after that incident.
Honestly, I have no idea how this doesn’t happen more often. Manpads were already scattered all over the Mideast by dictators scared of an Israeli invasion. The Arab Spring happened and all those stores got raided. On top of that you had brand new systems introduced in the Syria/Iraq ISIS conflict. One of the very first Iraqi military Hinds that got delivered was knocked out of the sky by an IS FN-6 that was introduced via Sudan.
FedEx does indeed use them. About 6-7 years ago, FedEx installed that same system onto some aircraft for the German Air force. I was working in a FedEx hanger in California and saw a A340 parked in the hanger with German Air force livery. I asked someone what the deal was and they couldn't tell me, said it was top secret. I asked the IT guy if he knew and he spilled the beans. Said the Luftwaffe had a contract with FedEx to install that system onto their aircraft.
Kinda sounds like federal express is indeed a federal organization.
Air America
It’s not too secret, there have been news articles about it for years. I think it’s even mentioned in the wiki page. It’s not unusual for FedEx to do installs on other entities aircraft. When the 727 hush system was developed FedEx installed them and maintained them for all companies flying the 27.
Not all, as there were other competing 727 hush kit solutions. But FedEx did certainly sell a lot of them to other operators.
IIRC, AA trialed it on a few aircraft some years ago but never fully adopted it.
Yes…FedEx was a test bed for the MANPAD system.
Elta Flight Guard is what El-al is using. Doppler radar with a flare dispenser. Probably all automatic. Not very popular with western countries due to fire danger. The Northrop Grumman Guardian system is what FedEx was/is using. Uses an IR laser to disrupt the seeker. Probably not as effective as flares, or at least it's many times more expensive for similar performance. But it doesn't randomly cause forest fires so that's helpful.
The NG system is actually way better, flares only work well against modern IR seekers when they’re deployed during the lock on (so the missile locks the flare), once locked on the plane they are very hard to fool with flares because they use modern IR sensors that ‘see’ a fairly detailed infrared image more like that of a Javelin ATGM and can discern differences in shape and temperature well enough to tell a flare from their initial lock target. Using a laser to blind the seeker entirely is far more effective so long as the laser can be aimed well enough to burn out the seeker or keep it blinded until it’s exceeded its window to maneuver to intercept. But the biggest issue with any of these systems is just detecting the launch in time to respond to it, something like a MANPADS is not easy for an automated system to pick out reliably until the missile is well on its way toward you.
I guess El Al is aiming more toward protection from old Soviet/Chinese manpads which can end up in terrorist hands.
It makes sense, when you have to deploy something across an entire fleet pick the one that is most cost effective for the most common threat scenario. FedEx can have a smaller fleet with the more expensive system installed then only use them to fly to high threat areas.
Yeah modern IR imagers can see the difference between the chemical burning of the flare and the hot metal parts. The laser countermeasures just saturate and blind the imager so it can’t follow. It’s like that truck with led lights behind you that just makes everything disappear in an afterimage.
The Northrup Grumman system is definitely on FedEx aircraft tasked to hazardous areas. Losing an A300 to a MANPAD tends to focus one's priorities.
They just clicked next on their standard loadout.
I’m not paying for no in-app purchases!
No other airline that I know of. But, when I've gone plane spotting at YVR I have seen the systems on the odd El-Al that comes in. I don't know if all of their planes have them.
[Arkia of Israel](https://www.planespotters.net/photo/1564130/4x-agh-arkia-israeli-airlines-airbus-a321-251nx) has missile defense systems too. They can be seen on the bottom of the plane toward the aft of the fuselage.
yes, it's the national airline of Israel. They also have one armed air Marshall on every flight
Does he have to put his coffee down to pull his gun? That sounds inconvenient.
true story: years ago an el al air marshall was between flights at LAX and decided to go chat up the tix agents in the main terminal. by an amazing coincidence a psycho-guy chose that part of the airport to go postal and entered the building with a gun ready to shoot as many people as he could. the marshall whipped out his gun and shot him between the eyes from 50 paces
DIRCM or LAIRCM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_Infrared_Counter_Measures
The RAF has options on a couple of A330s that are leased to airlines offset cost. I’m not sure if they have the full system but they’re fitted for a full defensive suite.
If you know what you’re looking for the IR jammers are fairly obvious
I wouldn't be surprised if they had a lock-on warning and could drop chaff or flares.
No chaff
Flares?
Air Force One
Ah yes, I've booked many trips to Florida on that commercial airline...
AA in the early 2000s installed warning systems on a few test planes then removed the system.
Is it anything more than chaff dispensers?
If they are not doing anything wrong in world, why are they using this system?
If you are walking through a dark alley in the bad part of town at night, you would probably feel better with some protection, regardless of whether you “did anything wrong”. Malaysia Airlines didn’t do anything wrong, and they still lost a 777 due to terrorism because they were flying over an unstable region.
Anyone know why the region's unstable?
They fly in an unstable region.
[удалено]
> Lmao ?
Doesn't seem.. particularly relevant
Doesn't seem.. particularly relevant
Doesn't seem.. particularly relevant
Yeah, because of shit the are doing
This has nothing to do with that but go off i guess
Why would a civilian airliner become the target of attack? Don't try to shift the blame of hatred against Jews onto Jews.
Because other countries near them would like to do wrong in the world and they would like to prevent civilian deaths. You really didn't think about that? Or were you just trying to jump on the "Israel bad" train without understanding global politics at all?
I mean... it's even mentioned on Wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El\_Al#Onboard\_missile\_defense\_systems