Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

I.E.D's A solution ?

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.

I.E.D's A solution ?

Old 6th Feb 2010, 19:50
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The World
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A Thought!

I have been pondering about this for a while now. I believe what is needed is more eyes on the areas/routes that IEDs are being laid/used. We presently have a few UAVs but do we have enough for the size of the task? While Predator B and Reaper are fantastic pieces of kit but they are quite expensive. Wiki quotes Reaper at $10.5 million for one aircraft with sensors. This price does not include ground crew/aircrew, satellite bandwidth cost etc.etc.
Why not have a low cost airframe that has medium endurance/range (5 hours), with a medium cost surveillance pod, manned by people actually in the aircraft?
After a bit of research it seems we could actually buy one straight of the shelf!
The Seeker Sb7l-360A seems ideal for the task, already proven in desert conditions of the Middle East as it was bought by the new Iraqi Air Force.

http://www.seabirdaviation.com.au/pa...nfo%20Pack.pdf

Not only could they warn and report IEDs (and be used as FAC to call in Air/Artillary/Mortar fire on the IED teams) but could be used for other FP aspects - Searching for IDF teams around KAF/BAS etc.They could also be used by providing real time aerial surveillance to Coy level operations being on the same net as the troops below.
If we had a few Sqns of these aircraft we could could have more eyes on. We don't even have to crew them with Officers. SNCOs could do the task of both pilot and observer (RAF Regt)

Well, that's my two pence worth anyway......
Gunnerrock is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2010, 20:03
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,475
Received 2,599 Likes on 1,101 Posts
Already have one, was used in Iraq

Diamond Aircraft :: Major break through for Diamond Airborne Sensing; UK MoD operates DA42MPPs

RAF buys spy planes to monitor enemies from the sky - Telegraph
NutLoose is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2010, 20:24
  #43 (permalink)  
Green Flash
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Granted, there have been some weird/wonderfull/daft ideas proposed but history tells us that sometimes a weird/wonderfull/daft idea becomes an real breakthrough. At least some people are using their brains. And as my dear old Granny used to say, if it's daft and it works - it's not daft.
 
Old 6th Feb 2010, 20:56
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Evidently you do not appreciate the length the Coalition Forces go to in confirming "hostile intent" before taking action.
Good try to misread what I'm saying, but no coconut - I'm not saying, and never have said, that we are operating a policy of shooting without reasonable confirmation of intent, I'm saying that some of the suggestions on this thread are being overly simplistic and apparently indifferent to any appreciation that we are supposedly attempting to assist a friendly government and people.. look back at post 12 for example, where you said

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.
We aren't at war with Afghanistan, we're supposedly there to help them esatblish a lawful society. I think you'll find, correct me if I'm wrong, that Vietnam didn't prove a model of how to win over a population?

There appears to be a perception on here that the forces are muddling along a bit and just need a bunch of retired folk (or those with no previous experience at all) to come up with some wizard wheezes.

If you want to avoid casualties then you either need to stay in camp and build rocket and mortar proof bunkers, or you need very good recce and intel. Until we win the majority of Afghan nationals over (don't hold your breath waiting) then these are going to be very hard to come by except on a very local and short term basis.

Dave

Why don't I post good ideas myself, as somebody suggested earlier? Well, I haven't had any, and I've the sense to realise that.
davejb is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2010, 20:59
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
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.
I cannot help feeling that some expeditionary exploits are in the long term national interest of the UK. The Falklands may turn out to be the most important.
Not so sure about Iraq, or even Iran.

Pakistan must stand up to its western neighbours. If it all goes wrong then heaven help them and India.
Basil is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2010, 21:47
  #46 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bedford
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The whole ethos of this thread is to try and stop the use of IEDs killing our soldiers. We know why the Army and Government is in Afghanistan. How is it then that American forces IED casualties are lighter than ours ? better anti-IED equipment ?
T-21 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2010, 22:03
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Helicopters
tonker is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 00:31
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,267
Received 467 Likes on 191 Posts
Basil,

Beyond it being a victory for the British....and a tribute to the spirit, grit, and sheer courage of the Troops involved....just how is the UK holding onto a small group of islands at the far end of the World so important in the long run.

You are no longer a Colonial power.....why not go all the way and surrender your remaining "colonies"....grant them their independence and pull out altogether. Your military capability has withered to the point you cannot defend what is left of the Empire.

Could the British Forces of today repeat their success in the Falkands again?


Dave,

[/QUOTE]We aren't at war with Afghanistan, we're supposedly there to help them esatblish a lawful society.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you completely about needing accurate and timely Intel, and proper Recce/Force Protection efforts.

Until we can provide the necessary security for the nation building to take place....which means fighting the Taliban Forces that are resisting such efforts....we have to wage war on the Taliban.

As to using Vietnam as a model of winning the hearts and minds you are quite correct. We bombed our allies and never invaded the enemy homeland. We also got ourselves involved in a war of Re-unification and took up where the French left off. That was the core failure of the war....we should have been helping the Vietnmamese instead of fighting them. We had our chance several times when Ho Chi Minh asked for our help while he was helping us fight the Japanese then French.

We made a similar mistake in Iraq when Paul Breamer fired the entire Iraqi government, police, and military....cut off retirement pay and thus gave the Iraqi's good cause to come out and fight!

We are supposed to be fighting Terrorists and depriving them of sanctuaries....how do we do that is the question now. Thus far, we are having some success despite some awful setbacks and delays. As we run them out of one place....they will take up in another. The key is we have them on the run and once they are in the open and on the move we can operate much more effectively against them covertly.

Last edited by SASless; 7th Feb 2010 at 00:45.
SASless is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 02:17
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,475
Received 2,599 Likes on 1,101 Posts
Beyond it being a victory for the British....and a tribute to the spirit, grit, and sheer courage of the Troops involved....just how is the UK holding onto a small group of islands at the far end of the World so important in the long run.
Oil and Minerals, there is an untapped wealth of both in the Southern Oceans and that is why we hold onto those so called little Islands and their territorial waters....

Ohh and the fact the benn.... erm.....stil...... erm..... Falkland Islanders wish to remain part of the UK as do the Gibraltese .. Spelling
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 04:09
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: On The Edge
Age: 42
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think many are confusing just exactly what an IED is. There is a big difference between a military grade land mine and an IED. An IED is just that, an 'improvised' explosive device. The IRA were masters of this particular device and every time the British found a method of dealing with a device, the IRA would improvise it further to nullify that method, or even make it a trigger action.

The chain tanks were primarily dealing with predictable known types of mechanisms. That is not the case with an IED.
Vesper1 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 06:30
  #51 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bedford
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Vesper, So as Tonker said we need more helicopters. We have military defence studies at Sandhurst and Shrivenham who play out military scenarios why the lack of brains on this one ?
T-21 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 10:57
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a very much armchair general, can I just add my observations.

While I would love for us to come up with a fool proof mechanical/electronic means of defeating IED's, and am sure that all the coalition forces are doing their best to get as close to this as possible, I fear there is only one way to guarantee to detect IED's, and only a couple to stop them injuring our troops.

It seems that for several decades the only way to guarantee finding an IED is to have troops on the ground, who then find it in the worst possible way.

To stop them injuring our troops, the baddies either need to stop laying them, or to tell us where they all are!

Sorry if that sounds crass or over simplistic, and I wish it was not this way.
In the meantime, I wish all our troops as safe a time as possible, and keep relying on our best kit, including the mk1 eyeball.
Just my two penneth.
barnstormer1968 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 11:35
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ barnstormer1968

Well written.

In addition. With IEDs you have to think in three dimensions; not only as to where they may be placed, but also as to direction of charges. You also have to think of stacked or layered IEDs or linked or a combination. Then IEDs don't have to look like an IED should look like (stick of dynamite, coiled wires and ticking clock). Detectors don't help as you may see an object and not know it is an IED. Other times due to composition & size of IEDs, even when surface laid you may not see them. Someone has mentioned ground penetration radar and also "detecting disturbed soil". That's fine as long as they are buried and can be picked up by the survey kit. But many IEDs do not conform to this. There may also be many false positives. There are many other issues and potential solutions. Not all work in all situations. A mixture of solutions is often required, and even then won't be 100 % effective.

The best solutions are to avoid said areas, good intel, helicopters (helps a bit, but not when at location), or to blow the whole place up and set off all IEDS.

Much missed out, but hopefully my posting indicates some of the difficulties.


Hval
hval is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 12:40
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 47
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Hit - Nail - Head

To cut a long story short, the US & A were attacked because they've basically been resource driven global arseholes.

It's as if this country feels they owe the US & A a debt from WW2, but people forget they only joined the war effort 2 years down the line and after they were themselves attacked. The UK has only recently in the past few years paid back the war debt to our great 'special' friend.

Bollocks to the spams, let them sort out their own latest self inflicted mess, as I'm sure in the future there will be more.

No UK soldier's life is worth anything in Iraq, Afghan and certainly not a country full of war mongering to$$ers in the US & A, they're all ****holes.

Just my 2p worth.

Last edited by Thelma Viaduct; 7th Feb 2010 at 13:01.
Thelma Viaduct is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 13:00
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,475
Received 2,599 Likes on 1,101 Posts
For what it is worth I agree with all the posts, but sometimes thinking out of the box brings forth Ideas that can produce a totally new concept at a fraction of the costs that the Arms companies would spend on R and D.

The Americans have seen the benefits of this and are vigourously pursuing it and it is starting to pay results, The Rip Saw was developed for less than Bae would use as supposed "backhanders" ( $10 million ) and combines clever design and a totally new approach to an age old problem of track design. And that is why peoples suggestions no matter how "cranky" are valuable, you never know someone may think, hey that has merits............... and the rest is history

see

Howe & Howe - Vehicles


BTW I want one of those Mini ones....... looks fun
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 14:03
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,267
Received 467 Likes on 191 Posts
Pious Young Lad,

I reckon you think you would have whipped the Germans and Japanese all by yer selves!

If we had not joined the affray for the second time in forty years you would be speaking German, eating Schnitzel, and driving VW's.

Perhaps if the UK and Europeans had done more to put Hitler into his place early on, there would have been no war and we dstardly Americans would not have been forced to participate and could have lived on in Peace way across the Atlantic and have defended our own shores.

You recall Hitler did not want war with the United States....as he did not with the UK either....but when it all went egg shaped....your government declared War on the Germans despite not having been attacked by them.

Who do you reckon is more responsible for your war debt.....your political leaders who declared War....the Germans....or the Americans?

Read your history Lad.....all of it!
SASless is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 17:53
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: GUESS WHERE NOW
Posts: 539
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Hi
Didn't the Yanks have a new method in Afg ****** (can't spell thee rest) of mine/IED finding and disposal but due to their security they will NOT tell their Allies ???
SPIT is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 19:01
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WOW!
This thread started out a bit childlike with suggestions for getting rid of IEDs like you might get from a keen 10yr old.
Then it moved quickly onto childish "we hate the Yanks for getting us into this"
And now, it has moved onto astonishingly infantile consiracy theories!
Normally it takes many pages for Pprune to degenerate so far.
That's progress for you........
Tourist is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 19:05
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 52
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sometimes thinking out of the box brings forth Ideas that can produce a totally new concept at a fraction of the costs that the Arms companies would spend on R and D.
Really?

Why do so many people think we're not into this sort of thing as well?

Home | Defence Science and Technology Laboratory | dstl

Some good stuff comes out of this lot.

'Helicopters' isn't the answer to IEDs. You need troops on the ground regardless of how you move them between locations. Helicopters does reduce convoys etc, but you still need boots on the ground.
Mr C Hinecap is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2010, 20:57
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr Hinecap.
I think I can't get the grasp of your above post.
While I don't recall stacks of posters telling of how we don't do R and D on counter IED, that is a side issue.
Quote:
sometimes thinking out of the box brings forth Ideas that can produce a totally new concept at a fraction of the costs that the Arms companies would spend on R and D.
Really?

Why do so many people think we're not into this sort of thing as well?

If I have this right, A poster said that thinking out of the box can be a good thing, and cheaper than traditional R and D, and you counter this by saying that we do R and D in the traditional sense?

There have been countless examples of how 'the chap on the street' has solved a problem that years of government/MOD thinking has not achieved as good a result.

All light blue types should know how the Brits had thought the vic formation was the best doctrine for flyers to use, and look where that got us! By simply using something that worked (well, ok, copying the Germans, but at zero cost) we then transformed our dogfight scores, and the adopted system is still in use today
barnstormer1968 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.