Supered..
C-4 detection is difficult for most explosives detection technology, and certainly difficult in being performed in real-time as required for baggage inspection.
The normal detection process current relies upon vapor analysis for explosives effluent. But unless you have the explosive explosed to the atmosphere, there may be limited "plummage" in the air. Put C-4 in a air-tight container and it will be difficult for ANY system to identify the presence of the explosive.
Of course, through x-ray analysis, the CTX can detect the container, and likely the fusing and timing apparatus, including the blasting cap.
Thus, while there may be limitations with the current CTX system in detecting C4 and/or Semtex, they have been working on such a technology for land mine detection, and have had good success.
invision-tech.com
What I likely expect to see is that any current CTX equipment will be modified to incorporate either vapor analysis and/or some of the newer technologies should they prove efficacious.
But let's be truthful here... If someone wants to get an explosive on boards an aircraft, and they have the technical and financial means to do what necessary to accomplish this, they will succeed.
However, CTX does look at overall density of the compound (which with RDX/C4 and Semtex includes the platicizer which binds the explosive), and for sizable quantities of the explosive to be smuggled onboard, it would likely register an alert.
So just because they didn't wish to discuss what would amount to classified information regarding specific methodologies regarding how to avoid detection by CTX equipment, it should not be taken as an admission that they are unable to detect C4/Semtex compounds.
Every system performs better under certain circumstances that they do under others. This will be the case with other competing technologies as well.
Thus, eventually we'll see the best of both technologies combined together.
Hawk |
