cyber terrorist crash airplane?

[Ryan]

I’m currently pursuing my MBA and in one of my classes the topic of cyber terrorism arose. The Prof decided to assign a paper on the subject. So I looked to the internet for assistance (where else?) I found an amazing amount of info on the subject. Basically they all were about how cyber terrorists could hack into our computer systems and disrupt our lives in a number of hideous ways. But one of them really caught my attention: it claimed that a cyber terrorist could hypothetically take the controls of an airliner and do as they pleased with the now remote controlled airplane.

I find this very hard to believe. I know I only have my PPL and know nothing about the world of big jets and airlines but even so I just find this hard to believe.

Would something like this be possible? Even in the smallest probability? I only ask because on Sept 10 no one thought that what happened the next day could ever happen but it did.

Thanks for any opinions

Ryan

PS: congrats to bobbysamd for 2000 posts!!!

 

[avbug]

Seeing as we operate commercial aircraft from the inside-out (not the other way around), it would be quite a trick.

If one day systems are implemented to allow operation of an aircraft form the ground on a commercial basis, I'm sure that could become an issue. However, don't look for any such thing in the near future.

 

[Jeff G]

The likelihood of terrorists gaining remote control of an airliner is about the same as doing what the bad guys did in Die Hard 2, i.e. "reprogramming" the ILS glideslope with a couple of keystrokes to crash planes. That is to say, no chance at all. There is no mechanism to remote pilot an airliner, therefore there is no chance for misuse.

 

[A Squared]

Ryan,

I suspect that what you have been reading about was this:

In the 9/11 aftermath, many of the talking heads were *proposing* equiping airliners so that the good guys on the ground could take control of an airplane, override any and all control input from the cockpit, if it were hijacked.

The obvious flaw in this plan is exactly what you read, that such a system would be vulnerable to bad guys taking control of the airplane. It is not currently possible to do this.



regards

 

[Ryan]

Thanks jeff g and avbug for the replies.

a squared, you actually brought up the subject I forgot to include in my original post. I spent 6 years in the Navy in the nuclear power field but my favorite pass time while out at sea was going up to vultures row and watching the flight ops. I heard rumors that in the event of a "mishap" it was possible for the carrier to take control of an aircraft and land it safely back on deck. I don’t know if this is true or not but that is why I thought it might be possible for cyber terrorists to do something like I quoted in my original post. I understand though from your post that this is NOT the case with commercial airlines (thank goodness)

Ryan

 

[Dan CFI/CFII]

The proposals to allow someone on the ground to direct an airborne aircraft had three possible routes. Two were from the military, one was civilian.

Two of the proposals were basically a form of real time data being sent to the aircraft to very directly control it, the other was to send a signal that would que the FMS to take the airplane to an airport where it could land itself.

When you think about the ability to hack into the third type of system, it's mind boggling. Hackers learn by observing signals and the patterns they take, the third type of system would be tested so seldom that it would be nearly impossible to isolate, let alone decode the signal that it would be as secure as anything else on the planet.

That said, I really don't think that such a system would be either necessary, nor practical to implement. I highly doubt the same exact set of circumstances will ever exist to allow a hijacker to enter a cockpit, and the code to implement the FMS based ground control system is not particularly easy for computer scientists to figure out. It took a couple of self-taught computer programmers to figure out the core of that system (the original intent was not to provide a ground based means of controlling an airplane).

Don't ask how I know this, it's a long story, and I've been out of that picture for more than a year

Dan