In the Reuters article in the section “Business” from a few days ago, Americans (and Reuters) admitted they consider that war is a business. Reuters news agency is a part of Thomson Reuters Corporation – where Thomson part is well known for taking part in Transatlantic military-industrial complex. Reuters, the news part reported about another civilian company (FedEx Corp) taking part in military business.
US’ delivery company FedEx Corp submitted in 2019 an application for the approval to install an Infrared Laser Countermeasure System on the Airbus Model A321 200 airplanes to work outside the planes while in the air. Specifically, Directional Infrared Countermeasure System, or DIRCM by Northrop Grumann is in question. As for now, the system is installed in military transport aircraft and helicopters, expected that fighter jets get it, as well. and It is worth mentioning that FedEx does not possess Airbus Model A321 200 airplanes in its fleet.
Neither FAA nor FedEx and Airbus’ representatives wanted to comment on FAA’s document (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/01/18/2022-00505/special-conditions-fedex-express-airbus-model-a321-200-airplanes-installation-of-an-infrared-laser) from January 7th, 2022. The FAA document on FedEx application reads: “The FedEx missile defense system directs infrared laser energy toward incoming missile, in an effort to interrupt the missile’s tracking of the aircraft’s heat.”
But, further in the FAA document it is said: “FAA design standards for transport category airplanes did not envisage that a design feature could project infrared laser energy outside the airplane. The FAA’s design standards are inadequate to address this capability. Therefore, this system is a novel or unusual design feature, and the FAA has developed these proposed special conditions to establish a level of safety equivalent to that of the regulations.” FAA admits it would need to introduce special conditions, “because FAA standards are inappropriate for this design feature” (note: Infrared Laser Countermeasure System)
The first of special conditions by FAA “requires the design to have means to prevent inadvertent operation of the system while the plane is on the ground including during maintenance.”
FAA also explains that the approval to install such supplemental system would not constitute approval to operate the system. FAA further calls on its Advisory Circular 70-1 (“Outdoor Laser Operations”) which “provides guidance on obtaining operational approval”.
Although the FAA’s document is set to be administrative act according to all the rules, norms and procedures, it also forms a good basis for the future mess – FAA concludes that, if FedEx is to be approved to build in laser based missile defense system into one certain type of aircraft, it would be further approved to exercise the same special conditions to install the same system in the other aircraft types. FAA also concludes that this “unusual design feature” is “not a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant”.
If FAA would confirm and approve FedEx Corporation’s application, it would also confirm that FedEx becomes a part of US military or, that US military forces started to mask as “civilian forces” in order to continue its endless war. It also worth mentioning that there is only one commercial carrier which (in 2004) equipped its aircraft with missile countermeasure system – it was Zionist entity’s El Al.
This FedEx’s unusual business activity may be connected to some of the Airbus’ activities, which Airbus started, together with “certain governments” in an attempt to protect the planes from MANPADs. They are all together worried that MANPADs thermo-vision can target aircraft engines. The justification for this business is a bit silly – 42 civil airplanes have been hit by MANPADs since 1970s; in 2002, Zionist entity’s civil Boeing was hit while taking off from Mombasa Airport, but it got to Tel Aviv with minimal damage; in 2003 DHL’s Airbus was damaged by MANPADs and was forced to emergency landing in Baghdad. And, that would be it – in the time span of 50 years, MANPADS affected less than 50 planes.
Where, then, the need for military gear in a civilian aircraft comes from? It appears FedEx Corp has been taking part in US military-industrial complex since 2006. FedeEx and Northrop Grumann cooperated within “Department of Homeland Security’s Counter-MANPADs Program”. The goal of the programme was to develop anti-missile systems for commercial aircraft. Does it mean Transatlantic crew will not consider existing protocols for international civilian aviation and will introduce military gear into it?
Two different DIRC systems were tested within the programme – Northrop Grumann’s Guardian and BAE Systems JetEye – against 29 MANPADs systems. FedEx cooperated with Northrop Grumann and American Airlines cooperated with BAE Systems JetEye. US Department of Homeland Security’s report on the programme from 2010 can be found online (https://programs.fas.org/ssp/asmp/documents/DHSMANPADSReport.pdf), but it is half blackened – although the price tag is visible and it is over $30 billion for the equipment of 3, 600 aircraft. It is also visible that some additional procedures and control should be established in order to be used internationally. Maybe international law and its rules are planned to be replaced with “rules based order” where the rules are established by the conglomerate of military and multinational companies, which use both military and civilian laws randomly, depending on which end justifies which means. US DHS had the same study in 2019 with the additional assessment on using high-altitude long endurance drones to circle airports from around 20, 000 meters in order to provide standoff protection against MANPADs. So-called “Project Chloe” (US DHS – Homeland Innovative Prototypical Solutions Project – HIPS) gave its assessment (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA525292.pdf) on the drones mentioned.
Whatever will unfold with the application of military systems into civilian and commercial aviation, some questions remain. About MANPADs: if statistics say that there is a bigger threat of a random bird than of MANPADs – why, then, anti-missile laser systems against MANPADs? About the high-altitude long endurance drones: how the drones from 20 000 meters height can protect airplanes (within airport areas as projected) against MANPADs attacks from the ground?