That's not exactly true for +ve g's:
"from -1 to +2.5 (or up to +3.8 depending on design takeoff weight)"
If you were at 10,000' and you saw a radar-guided SA-2, diving downwards toward it would likely make it miss.
> It's .. not a problem the civilian manufacturers should be attempting to solve.
No, absolutely not. I was just wondering if they had at least the slightest idea what was about to happen.
Kind of gruesome to pass away like this, if you think about it. On the other hand: You can just as surprisingly be killed by a speeding car. Really bad in any way.
About a similar situation (in Ukraine): "It was not possible to ascertain at which moment the occupants died"
"Victims Could Have Remained Conscious During Fall"
https://time.com/3028548/mh17-malaysia-airlines-victims-ukra...
It was likely horrible here too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Transportes_Aéreos_Flight_...
Goes into a bit more depth on your point. Our expectation is that increasing use of tech in planes should make us safer, but in this case it _increased_ the chance of a mid-air collision. Of course planes have TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) to stop this happening, but it's no magic bullet ... particularly when it's turned off.
How much could Boeing, for example, modify one of their civilian airframes to support active countermeasures and make it capable of withstanding more stressful maneuvers without altering the outside too much? Quite a lot, I would think.
Airlines are hypersensitive to weight since that affects range and fuel costs. The action that American Airlines took to remove complementary magazines from their flights saved millions a year in fuel costs.
In Air Force One's case - they probably have some active countermeasures (flares) and some electronic countermeasures (jamming) built in, but that's about it. Probably useless against a foreign state's advanced SAM capabilities. Much of the extra weight capabilities are most likely taken up by communications equipment to provide the President and staff command authority. Minus some rudimentary capabilities for low-end SAMs, Air Force One is probably just as vulnerable to being shot down as your average cargo airliner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al#Onboard_missile_defense_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25
>All wiring is covered with heavy shielding for protection from a nuclear electromagnetic pulse in the event of a nuclear attack. The aircraft also has electronic countermeasures (ECMs) to jam enemy radar, flares to avoid heat-seeking missiles, and chaff to avoid radar-guided missiles
It's .. not a problem the civilian manufacturers should be attempting to solve.