( CNN ) -- Checking the weather display for our departure from JFK Airport in New York to London 's Heathrow Airport , an awkward blob of green , yellow , and red is sprawled diagonally across most of the New England coastline . Studying the computer in Operations , the routing filed with ATC ( air traffic control ) appears to navigate through the least intense area of a very wide storm system . I pick up the company phone , taking a rare opportunity to consult with our dispatcher located in a central location at our main hub almost 1,400 miles away . On most occasions , through our collaborative efforts , the dispatcher and I agree to the planning of the flight by electronic means . This day is different . On this day I require the verbal communication of a trusted professional who has more resources available to assist in our flight planning . In light of the now-lifted FAA ban on flights into Israel 's Ben Gurion Airport , it seems that the resources available will have to include intelligence on airborne hostile activity . But let 's be honest , why did the FAA exercise their authority in the first place ? Israel has been the center of conflict since its birth in 1948 , with the airport having been in existence even before that time . The answer for the FAA 's decision had to lay in what happened to Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 . I think we all get it . So what ? One rocket is launched from Gaza and lands within a mile of Ben Gurion Airport . Big deal . The Israelis said , `` What 's one missile when we have the Iron Dome ? It 's just another day in Tel Aviv for us . C'mon back . '' Many flights soar over conflict zones . Well , one mile from the airport and one little ole rocket may not seem like much , but our arrivals to a runway begin at least 10 miles away . And our lumbering airliners are the most vulnerable in the approach phase , notwithstanding the initial takeoff phase of our flights . Airline pilots are paid to be paranoid . I 've never flown with a colleague whom I considered too cautious . That being said , U.S. airline pilots understand the concept of mitigating risk . Not everything we do as humans is completely safe . But Israel 's El Al airplanes have a little more risk mitigation in their arena . The robust Israeli airline has missile detection and defense systems installed . Most of these systems are designed to automatically thwart an attack from shoulder-launched weapons and low altitude threats . A similar system was proposed a couple of years after 9/11 for U.S. airlines but the costs were deemed to outweigh the potential risk . My airline went so far as to have the test hardware installed in three of our Boeing 767s . The technology was designed to defend against MANPADs -- a weapon considered to be the next terrorist threat . A cause for concern was that once the system was installed , the potential existed for it to be defeated by newer weapon technology . But now that it seems the FAA has set an arbitrary standard for safety of flights into areas of conflict what exactly is the criteria ? How can yesterday be unsafe but today is all clear ? Should missile launch frequency and distance from the airport be calculated via an algorithm ? Should the type of warhead be considered ? If there is to be a standard , the requirement to have it disseminated for airlines and their flight crews is a must . The Israelis have obviously set their own standards . I ca n't think of an area on the globe that is more focused on security than Tel Aviv . In that regard , should the criteria to halt flights be different for Ben Gurion Airport than it is for Cairo International Airport ? Because of our military , U.S. airspace is full of activity involving more live ordnance than anywhere in the world . Airspace that is off-limits to civilian flights dot the entire country . Our military is practicing war tactics in these areas both on the ground and in the air . One does not stray into restricted airspace that is `` hot '' without authorization from ATC even if it is required for a weather deviation . A tense week for air travelers . I can guarantee that until the horror of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 , the furthest concept from an airline pilot 's mind when it came to threats was a missile attack â€ ” and certainly not a missile attack at cruise altitude . But if this is a new day , then airlines and their pilots need to be provided with the tools to make safe routing decisions around areas of conflict . These tools will have to include appropriate intelligence . If airline pilots can be trusted with intelligence information after 9/11 but still ca n't take gels and liquids through airport security , something has to change . And now , as crazy as it seems , in 30 years of flying for my airline , my dispatcher and I have to incorporate missile threats into pre-flight planning . Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion .
Les Abend says a commercial pilot 's pre - flight checklist just got much more complicated . The FAA has lifted restrictions on landing and taking off in Tel Aviv . Worrying about whether rockets are flying near Israel makes a tough task more difficult . U.S. military is also full of activity involving live rockets , due to military training .