PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 5th Feb 2010, 09:44   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bedford
Posts: 399
I.E.D's A solution ?

Probably one for the Army ? During the last war we had Sherman tanks and a specially designed tank called the "Baron" designed to flail with heavy chains any mines in their path.
My question ? have defence chiefs thought of reinstating this idea ? as it was 80% to 100% effective in mine clearing.
Would be interested in other peoples thoughts as I think it will save service personnel lives.
T-21 is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 09:57   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 21,910
Good programme on ITV last night 'Road Warriors' - a fly-on-the-wall documentary about the hazards of land convoy work in Afghanistan. IEDs were stated to be the primary threat and anything which can reduce that would be very welcome.

However, flail tanks are very slow - about 1.5 mph - and only effective against contact-detonated mines. No use against buried IEDs triggered remotely or against roadside booby-traps. In a built up area they would be lethal to their crews due to their extreme vulnerability.
BEagle is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 12:44   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 75
How long before the Taliban work out that all they need to do is move the explosives six feet or whatever in front of the trigger? Probably only a matter of a few failed IEDs and hours?

Plus by the end of the Second World War, the simple counter for flail tanks was to plant the odd large sea mine/air-dropped bomb in a minefield. Sherman crab proceeds to drive across the normal AT mines then suddenly sets off the surprise.
ninja-lewis is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 12:55   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a bolt
Posts: 9,129
I often wondered as a lot of the explosives used are "cooked" from Fertiliser, why, as they did in Ireland during the troubles, do they simply not make fertilisers with a high nitrate content illegal? there by reducing amount of potential explosive available.

I realise it would be difficult to control, but when stocks of the then illegal fertilisers were discovered they could be destroyed, thus removing a potential bomb making source, Heck you could even supply the safer variant at a cheaper price to the Afghanistanis or replace their discovered stocks with the safer versions........ I would imagine it would be cheaper to give the stuff away than replace some of the vehicles lost, let alone the sad loss of life.


Just a thought.
NutLoose is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:08   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bedford
Posts: 399
Thanks for the input ,anything to stop our soldier/airmen getting maimed or killed. Do the MoD have brain-storming sessions like these ? An anti-IED suggestion box at the front-line might be a good idea.
T-21 is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:20   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 126
What about soldiers walking on a type of snow shoe that spreads the pressure for any pressure type IEDs?
navibrator is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:22   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 65
Posts: 1,171
Most IED's are triggered remotely, and mobile (cell/sat) phones are a favorite ignition tool. IED's can be hidden out of reach of flails. Mines have a vast array of ignition mechanisms, not just pressure-sensitive methods. There are magnetic mines, time-delay mines, mines that need circuits to be connected by the likes of sappers searching bayonets.
There's one highly satisfactory way to eliminate IED's - and that's to promptly and regularly eliminate from this world, those who plan, design, build and detonate them.
Then there are the "entrapment" mines or IED's. The nasty buggers set off one charge to create some damage - and as soon as more people arrive to help, they set off other hidden charges. There are often mines hidden under mines, set to trap those who defuse the top mine, and as soon as the top mine is lifted, the bottom mine, or IED, is activated. There is no end to the methods of evil. I can regale you for an hour on the inventiveness of the SE Asians when it comes to IED's - the perfectors of IED's. The current crop of terrorists have only learnt from the NVA and VC - but they have more technological tools at their disposal.
Highly sensitive explosive sniffers will likely be the tool of the future.
Super-sensitive explosive detector developed - tech - 13 April 2005 - New Scientist
onetrack is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:36   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 3,983
The development of a hovercraft type vehicle would make most IED's pretty much useless against vehicles. Also a group mapping scan system that scanned downwards to show what was in the ground ahead would also improve matters.

The technology is there but is pretty slow at this present moment in time for use by vehicles but has been available for military satellites for many a year.

Guess its a combination of a metal detector type implement, amonia sniffer, combined with ground mapping radar combined with a very fast microprocessor to take account of vehicle movement and stability. Combine the elements from all 4 from a number of different companies and pretty much you would have a working model within a year or less. Course could build it into a remote vehicle driven in front of a convoy like a UAV controlled from elsewhere, a fleet of theses doing a hop further along the route and you have convoy protection. Its doable but question is whether the will is there.
racedo is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:48   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 55 degrees north ish.
Age: 43
Posts: 173
Lots of the current IED's have been 5ft up built into walls etc.
RotaryWingB2 is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 14:53   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lincs
Age: 96
Posts: 189
Nutloose - very prescient. Look here. Gist of which is....

The Afghan government banned ammonium nitrate fertilizers, the key ingredient of roadside bombs that have emerged as the deadliest weapon used by Taliban fighters against NATO troops in Afghanistan.
Captain Kirk is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 15:10   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,355
Please don't or discuss mention what WE know about them - even if in open source etc.......every hint of our knowledge is a hint to change by the Fu***ers that lay these things.
L J R is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 15:13   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Destin
Age: 66
Posts: 12,979
One tactic that worked well in RVN.....was to use the tactic against the enemy. One battalion aggressively engaged in a "mechanical ambush" campaign in their area of the jungle which contained numerous NVA/VC units.

When they pulled out....the area reeked of success and they had taken no causualties themselves. Fight fire with fire when the circumstances provide the opportunity. Deny the roads to the Taliban then move to the trails....make it very dangerous for them to be moving....box them up....then run the B-52's in on them using JDAMS. Forget this patroling and being the target only.
SASless is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 15:14   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 56
Posts: 1,473
As has been pointed out, IED's are not simply mines in the traditional sense. They are, in fact, quite cleverly conceived devices of death. There is no "silver bullet" for their location because their composition, placement and triggering are, ultimately, dependent entirely upon the imagination of human beings.

The suggestion that there can be a foolproof method for their detection is one that, really, only a fool can make. Taking into account the number of different, commonly available, compounds that can be used to create an explosive mix multiplied by the number of compounds that could be used to mask said compounds multiplied by the number of ways the explosive could be used at greater range to effect damage, (claymore, shaped charges, larger explosions), multiplied by the number of ways they can be initiated one quickly realizes that the combination's are myriad and, therefore, reliable detection becomes proportionately less likely and rapidly approaches impossible unless you restrict the detection device to only a small subset of the whole thus defeating the premise of a universal detection solution.

There is no viable solution to the problem of IED's with our current level of technology, (nor in the forseeable future), other than not deploying foot soldiers and vehicles into areas where they might be encountered. Clearly, that is not an option.
Airborne Aircrew is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 15:57   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,788
"The development of a hovercraft type vehicle would make most IED's pretty much useless against vehicles. Also a group mapping scan system that scanned downwards to show what was in the ground ahead would also improve matters.

The technology is there but is pretty slow at this present moment in time for use by vehicles but has been available for military satellites for many a year."

--------------

Racedo,

A, a hovercraft has to put pressure on the ground to support it's weight, albeit dispersed better than on wheels,

B, It's a hell of a hovercraft, even beyond Thunderbirds, if it can be available ( beyond comm's ) to satellites !

C, if using a scanning ( I suppose a development so as to be non surface contacting of the 'underground radar' as used by archaeologists ) it wouldn't take long before the enemy caught on to the wavelength, and as I understand it most IED's are planted at the roadside, with a beady-eyed git watching for the juciest target to remotely detonate.

Seriously, I am one of the lucky gits not in the forces ( though I have worked with them a lot ); one thing I feel very strongly is that we should NOT be sending out manned patrols on foot, or sappers trying to find IED's with bayonets etc.

If we are actually using more advanced methods, I and no-one here needs to know about them - though I fear that is wishful thinking.

Going out on foot, toe-to-toe, gun against gun is meeting the enemy on their own terms, on their home ground - I know Vietnam was lost through over-reliance on infant technology, but if ever there was a time to use high tech', it's now.

Otherwise blow the crap out of any roadway - inc' the sides one is facing, by air or ground fire, and everyone stay in ( better ) vehicles ?

Very much more difficult in villages etc; how about military vehicles avoiding them, while the ' hearts & minds ' bit would be kept up by air-drops of food, water, radios etc ? I know some would fall into enemy hands, but better than our guys getting killed...

Anyone in a position to know better & able to say anything, which will not breach security at any level ( the last I/we want is to feed info' to the gits* who I don't doubt read this site ) ? Please chip in.

*Polite version of utter *****

Last edited by Double Zero; 5th Feb 2010 at 16:16.
Double Zero is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 17:02   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a bolt
Posts: 9,129
Quote:
Nutloose - very prescient. Look here. Gist of which is....

The Afghan government banned ammonium nitrate fertilizers, the key ingredient of roadside bombs that have emerged as the deadliest weapon used by Taliban fighters against NATO troops in Afghanistan.
Thanks Captn Kirk, I had been wondering about that very simple point for some time, I knew we did it in Ireland and could not seeany logical reason as to why it could not be implemented.

Here are some more, simply shut down the Mobile phone Network in Areas of high risk or where patrols are, I cannot believe that the technology is not available, I realise that the military use it so their must be some logical way of jamming it.....

GPS, as it was a Military system and the Americans built it, there must be away to encode it so it can only be accessed by the Military closing the civil side down.

Radio hand helds as used on the TV for detonating IED's, I would take it the prudent use of a transmitter on Vehicles are already in use that put out a high output signal that rapidly transmits through the range of frequencies to detonate any radio controlled bombs before vehicles approach them.

For vehicle actuated pressure devices, I see what is said about flails, but why not have to sprung arms out front carrying two or four normal wheels that would detonate a device forward of the lead vehicle, or better still build a vehicle where all the wheels were on out riggers as such with the main body of the vehicle being mounted like a separate pod between them. does that make sense?
NutLoose is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 17:24   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,788
Nutloose, Oi !

I am a yachtie, and while I am fortunate ( ? ) to be old enough to have learned to navigate without anything like GPS - in fact it was a science fiction dream to us then - many, many modern yachties would be buggered without it ( civil & amateur flyers, car users & ramblers etc too for that matter ).

When Gulf War 1 broke out, the U.S. cunningly put a spoof signal into the non-friendly GPS (as in everyone else but friendly military ) version; the system already had a built-in inaccuracy of 10-30 metres.

A lot of people found themselves in trouble, particularly sailors who found to their surprise they were doing 500+ knots at 10,000', which is unusual for most sailing boats.

The Iraqi's weren't that bothered, as they could barely read a compass and were on home ground anyway...

The built in error has since been discarded, and in my little boat if I zoom in I get a picture ( not google earth but real time ) of us alongside the appropriate jetty etc.

I think it's been accepted that the bad guys know even better than the good guys as to who is where...
Double Zero is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 17:26   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 56
Posts: 1,473
Quote:
GPS, as it was a Military system and the Americans built it, there must be away to encode it so it can only be accessed by the Military closing the civil side down.
Yikes. You'll piss off everyone in the entire world for zero benefit. IED's do not rely upon GPS for triggering unless it was a booby trap to catch ATO moving the device to a safe area...

Quote:
Radio hand helds as used on the TV for detonating IED's, I would take it the prudent use of a transmitter on Vehicles are already in use that put out a high output signal that rapidly transmits through the range of frequencies to detonate any radio controlled bombs before vehicles approach them.
Ok, so you want to randomly detonate IED's regardless of the potential for collateral damage. Flies in the face of western policy - won't happen.
Quote:
For vehicle actuated pressure devices, I see what is said about flails, but why not have to sprung arms out front carrying two or four normal wheels that would detonate a device forward of the lead vehicle,
I'll lay out more explosive that will overcome the additional distance to the target. You will make your arms longer, I will make my IED bigger... Eventually you won't be able to drive your vehicle.
Quote:
or better still build a vehicle where all the wheels were on out riggers as such with the main body of the vehicle being mounted like a separate pod between them. does that make sense?
Nice employment opportunity here... widening all the roads and tracks in Afghanistan. Pretty soon they will have a whole new system of 60 goat highways...

Try to imagine a bad dream where, no matter what cunning device you contrive, your adversary defeats it in short order and another small piece of you is painfully cut off.
Airborne Aircrew is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 18:10   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 743
How about staying at home and minding our own business!

We are a small bankrupt island off Europe, not the worlds policeman. Not even a community policeman or traffic Womble. Accepting it and moving on will probably defeat the root causes of terrorism a load more than the recruitment campaign for nutters that is Afghanistan/Iraq.

We are not an Empire or Super power, and i don't want my 3 young boys all desperate to join up as soon as possible dying for such a myth.
tonker is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 18:26   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a bolt
Posts: 9,129
Quote:
Ok, so you want to randomly detonate IED's regardless of the potential for collateral damage. Flies in the face of western policy - won't happen.
I wasn't refering to built up areas
NutLoose is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2010, 18:42   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 56
Posts: 1,473
That's ovinicide...

Complicated little issue isn't it...
Airborne Aircrew is offline   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:43.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network