Passenger aircraft, as we all know, spend most of their tme in the air at an altitude somewhere north of 30,000 feet. Cruise missiles, as we all know, spend most of their time hugging the contours of the terrain at an altitude of a few hundred feet. The Closest Point of Approach as we sailors say (I expect the Biggles boys have something similar) is therefore about 10 kilometers.
So when the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) both (no doubt with their arms twisted behind their backs) issue scare warnings about the risk to intercontinental aircraft flying high routes over Iran and Iraq from Russian cruies missiles, you know 'our' side has pretty much lost it.
Passenger aircraft in the region are in actual fact at far greater risk of being shot down by rogue US warships - in 1988 Iran Air flight 655, en route from Tehran to Dubai, was shot down by USS Vincennes and all 290 civilians on board, including 66 children, were killed. In fact engine strikes by Kuwaiti geese or Turkish swans probably pose a far more substantial risk to passenger aircraft than Russian cruise missiles ...
The fact that the Telegraph's story is from some unknown stringer in Berlin suggests that even Con Coughlin, normally the most credulous and gullible of Fleet Street's finest, saw though this one - and that's saying something.
Try harder, please, boys.