Printable View
Moderator's Note
Thread closed as there is new, main thread 'IEDs: the home-made bombs that changed modern war': http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ad.php?t=16303
This post describes a new bomb that will be used offensively and defensively. the offensive uses are obvious and their is a link to one being used to destroy an F-14. Defensively it is anticipated the material will be used to shield against incoming mortars and rockets. The post is based on a Popular Mechanics story.
A thought presents itself, and I welcome criticism, discussion, rude gestures, etc. with regard to it.
In the 1950s and 1960s, if you wanted to arm an insurgency, you brought a bunch of WW II surplus arms (Mauser '98s, M-1 Carbines, etc).
In the 1970s and 1980s, you brought a bunch of AK-47s,
In the 1990s, RPG-7s were the gold standard for insurgents (Somalia and Chechnya leap to mind)
Currently in Iraq, EFPs seem to fill the role of the cheap, mass-produced, and effective weapon.
Is this a special case or will EFPs fill this role for a while? Why?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosi...med_penetrator
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Internatio...4837262&page=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/wo...dad&ei=5087%0A
I assume for the purpose of this discussion we are only dealing with the insurgency aimed at us versus the fighting amongst Iraqi groups. Yes, in many ways the EFP fills this role. The EFP allows the enemy to engage us with minimal conflict and effort. On the other hand, if it were not for the large amount of snipers and regular insurgents with AK-47s and RPGs, we would not need to be in the vehicles, designed to protect us, which in turn make us so vulnerable to EFPs. If we could walk around on foot more often I doubt that EFPs would be that big a deal. On the other hand, anti-personel mines would most likely fill their role. I do believe anti-personel mines qualify as "cheap, mass-produced, and effective weapon."Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Do I believe EFPs will remain in this role for a while? Yes, they are very effective and there isn't that much we can do about them except get into bigger more cumbersome vehicles.
To sum it up I would have to say that I feel they all fit together as a package (AK-47s, RPG-7s and EFPs.) This package is what is making our situation so difficult to deal with.
Adam L
As an example, yes, but I'm thinking more broadly. Does it seem likely that EFPs will become as common among relatively low-tech, relatively low budget insurgents opposing technologically enabled forces, especially motorized/mechanized units like Russians in Grozny, U.S. in Iraq, or Israeli's in Lebanon. Think general case.Quote:
I assume for the purpose of this discussion we are only dealing with the insurgency aimed at us versus the fighting amongst Iraqi groups.
Your point about EFPs as parrt of a bigger picture is well taken.
I would have to say that I believe that EFPs will become as common as any of the other mentioned weapons on the battlefield. EFPs are remarkably low-tech devices. This unfortunately means it will not be long until the skills and knowledge necessary for the construction of such devices will be all too common. It is quite frightening when you think about it. The most disturbing thing about it is that even though we are developing armor to counteract such devices, I am pessimistic that they will remain effective for very long. The ability of these devices to focus and direct the power of the charge is truly awesome and terrifying.
Adam L
I know its assumed the ieds are cheap and often simple to make, but in the case of EFPs its really not that true.
High quality efps are fairly expensive to make and show a good level of sifistication. In my Ao EFPs have been responsible for all most all of the casualties, but the are least plentiful type of IED you will find. The reason they acctually take a decent bit of engineering to make and quite a bit of skill to disguise effectively.
In many efps cooper plates are milled or machine on industrial machinery. Their casings are designed and aimed to set in preformed foam blocks with lasers and telimitrey devices on cut outs in detial of CF vehicles. Many times after that they are cased in a vineer of chicken wire/concrete. They will be set often with different angles in the same casing to inflict maximal damage at critical points they have found or know to be weak on our armor. Or made to hit certian types of CF vehicles.
The cheap ones made by the guys with little skill and in our AO (the high quality efps being made by others or those trained by a less than freindly country) are not effective or fail to go off in the designed manner or just are found becuse they are so poorly made.
In essence, the EFP isn't a weapon that can just be made around the block it often is a very select few who can and have the right equipment. Their not cheap, I've seen the threat stream reporting and what they have paid for them and you could buy a whole hell of alot of AKs for the good ones.
I think the EFP is the new Stinger missile.
The machete will be the new AK.
I was not suggesting they are simple to construct in the way that a suicide vest are simple to construct, rather that they are not exactly cruise or stinger missiles. My point is that between a skilled machinist with a good set of directions (which you can find for almost anything on the net these days) will have a shot at constructing one that is effective. I get your point that they are not exactly "easy" to construct, but it is possible to do so as long as someone has the proper skills. Also, the machinery necessary is not exactly hard to come by. Any mid-sized metal lathe is capable of most of the necessary machining. I'm not sure how close the tolerances have to be for the copper in the device, but if it is hundredths of an inch, rather than thousandths, it won't be long till people starting smelting metal in microwaves and casting it. What I am trying to say is that what is necessary for the construction of these devices is nothing very special or exotic. The electronic parts you mentioned may be more difficult to come by, but are not difficult to workwith, rather delicate and complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.C.
Adam L
Shmedlap,
Funny you shoud mention that. In a early 1960s Army study that was part of the flechette rifle program ("Spiw: The Deadliest Weapon That Never Was" by R. Blake Stevens), the guys behind the program asserted that in terms of casualties inflicted per soldier on the battle field per unit of time (I think, it's been a while), the deadliest weapon was an edged weapon with an 18 to 24 inch blade. They were a little more specific, and cited the Roman short sword. Still, you could make the case that the machete fits the same general profile.Quote:
The machete will be the new AK.
And then a solder arrived in my unit, who had left Rwanda with her family during their troubles ten years back...
This bears thinking about, but back to EFPs.
If I'm understanding it correctly, you have a carefully machined (would stamped work?) copper disk, a tube, high explosive (mach 6 projectile velocities were mentioned in one article; sounds like an RDX based explosive, SEMTEX or some such), a blasting cap, and the complicated bit that could be anything from wire and a battery to something involving a cellphone or some other electronic widget. Concealment materials added as needed and can range from improvised to sophisticated.
At the most basic level, it seems to me that the choke points are the copper disks and blasting caps. The tolerances of that disk and the tube can't be that high, but the shape of the copper disc requires some extra knowledge.
I'm mostly thinking out loud and trying to better understand what is being said in the media, thanks for your forebearance and sharing your expertise.
Interesting info about the machete!
It won't be long till someone posts the optimal specifications online.Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Adam L
'Interesting', yeah, for a bunch of reasons. The lack of significant improvement in statisitical lethality from whenever it was BCE to 1960s CE. That it was that odd little sword, not a manly man's sword, but the very utilitiarian secondary arm of the legions. Candor requires that I be open about my biases, note my avatar, the best all around close combat weapon against an unarmored opponent in history, the U.S. 1850 saber. Note also that it was militarily obsolescent when it was developed; the reliable repeating handgun had been in existence for decades. And the guys who did the study were trying to drum up money for their pet project, so their numbers can't be taken at face value.Quote:
Interesting info about the machete!
On a more contemporary note, Shmedlap has an excellent point. The shear number of people killed with machetes in Rwanda during the troubles is staggering. Note also, that Che Guevara's coach Bayo, encouraged machete's as a 'entry-level weapon for guerrillas. Any FARC SMEs have anything more contemporary to add?
Adam L,As Cavguy's apparent hero would say "Always with the negative vibes". Yer probably right though.Quote:
It won't be long till someone posts the optimal specifications online.
I think you are hitting on the right issue - the logistics involved. That is why I think that machete is the next AK. The mobilization of forces formerly achieved by conscription will be replaced by large numbers of oppressed/impoverished young males who get fed up, find a leader or movement, and start slitting throats. These masses will not likely have the means to field AK's for all of their angry young men and, more importantly, would not be able to sustain the inflows of ammunition necessary for the inevitable spray-and-pray method of fire that would predominate. The machete requires no training and no resupply (except maybe some sharpening stones). And for warfare that occurs due to grievances among the people, rather than disputes among politicians, the fighting will take on a more personal angle. They will not be content to fire at one another from afar. They will want to look their adversaries in the eye as they hack away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
The EFP, while it may not be so complicated as to preclude its fabrication by non-state adversaries, seems more analogous to the Stingers that we gave the Afghanis to use against the Soviets. It was a weapon that was used sparingly, but with devastating effect, just as EFPs are. The introduction of that weapon had strategic consequences, just as the EFPs do in Iraq. And it requires a fair amount of training and planning to use both effectively.
Hey Van,
As Tom so eloquently put it, the machete is Africa's neutron bomb. And, as one of Tom's NCOs put it, the machete doesn't click on empty :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
You're right on target, very few are precisely machined shape charges. There has to be a sufficient amount of room for expansion, or the 'tube' will merely explode before the copper disk begins it's hypervelocity adventure. Using RDX-based high explosives will also result in a tube fracture. Most of our home-made shape charges use small amounts of TNT with a detonator and wooden or rubber plug. A fairly stone-age looking shape charge travels at mach 8 and penetrates up to 10 times its diameter (our 25mm shape charges go through 5 inches of solid steel with a 7 inch stand off). However, this requires an extreme amount of accuracy using a laser to aim and the target cannot be moving. By no means high tech, and most of the data used for home-made shape charges comes from the late 60s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
There are few in the Ordnance field that would talk to a journalist...even if you paid them to do so. Conversely, I doubt there are any starving journalist with EOD backgrounds :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Van
Regards, Stan
Most of that is important, but the real choke points are pouring the HE and getting the (military grade) detonator exactly centered. If either of those is wrong, the EFP won't form correctly - still dangerous, but not even the same ball park for effectiveness. The device container doesn't need that fine a tolerence, but the tolerance on the metal disc does. (That's all I'll say about that.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
(See Stan's comments above. He's talking about home made, imprecise systems that have to be pretty close to be very lethal. My comments are directed to high quality EFPs - 4 to 6 km/s launch velocity, good stand off and high level of penetration.)
There is a quote in a Time article by Bob Baer regarding EFP's worth sharing:
I cannot debate the veracity of it, so I don't know. Thank you Adam L. and J.C. for your insight on this matter, the migration of EFP's is something I have been wondering about, and I'm confined to public sources only.Quote:
A former CIA explosives expert who still works in Iraq told me: "The Iranians are making them. End of story." His argument is only a state is capable of manufacturing the EFP's, which involves a complicated annealing process.
One question I have for ordnance guys:
How different are EFPs seen today, compared to the device used by Badder-Meinhof (suspected) to kill the Chairman of Deutsche Bank in '89? A device which I believe was an EFP or shaped charge. In terms of technological advances, skill needed to manufacture, sophistication...
Hey Bourbon !
Back here in the former East Bloc, we'd call it little more than a game of cat and mouse. However, we outnumber the criminals (well, we feel certain we do), and, we gather them up one at a time. This is not a combat zone, and the criminals do not have free access to sufficient explosives. Trying to figure out what the IEDs are intended for here is difficult (vs Iraq and Afghanistan), so we concentrate on where the raw materials are most likely to come from, and what or who is the likely client, and follow leads in conjunction with LE.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
If you mean the infrared trigger device used to kill Alfred Herrhausen, then nothing new in this part of the world. We've seen far more complicated devices assembled by disgruntled security personnel as early as 1987 and as late as 1991. Ours were in apartment buildings bringing down 7 stories with no apparent target nor advanced warning or threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
You barely need 9 VDC even for most crude detonators from WWII. How you get the juice to the detonator is little more than reading the owners manual from a remote controlled car to a home security system.
BTW, we don't really care what color the wires are when employing a water canon ;)
I was wondering if there's a reason they can't be portable and hand held: expansion, holding the disk on prevents the proper formation, the amount of explosive used creates too much heat/shockwaves/whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
In theory I agree with you. On the other hand, what is this mob going to do when they run into a smaller force with automatic weapons? Will they have the discipline or rage to take the mass casualties before they are in the thick of fighting and unable to flee forcing all to stay in the fight? In the end the question is will the AK-47 be the greater weapon of terror? All that the AK-47 needs to do is terrify enough people in an opposing group to break their “group think” (Forgive me for using this term. It is the best term I could come up with at the time) and in so doing pacify them.
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Although I see how heat treating the copper could be important, I'm skeptical of how important, let alone difficult, this really is. I'm not claiming its misinformation, but I want to know how much of a difference heat treatment would actually make. This seems to be more along the lines of whether a “nation” is necessary to construct the most refined form of EFP (as opposed to an “effective” one) to which the answer is “yes.” What is important to realize is that sadly insurgents don't need the devices to be that powerful. Most of our vehicles are not that well armored.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
Adam L
Mf x Vf = Mp x Vp That is, Mass of the firer times Velocity of the firer equals Mass of the projectile time velocity of the projectile. (Sorry, proper subscripts are beyond my ability) Velocity is a vector, not scalar motion (that means it has a specific direction).Quote:
I was wondering if there's a reason they can't be portable and hand held:
Hypothetically, a 4 ounce copper slug accelerating to say 6000 feet per second in a four hundredths of a second (and I'm being sloppy for ease of calculation) will...
Oh the heck with the numbers, this is like the weight of three .50 M2 bullets being pushed to more than twice the velocity of a .50 bullet. We're talking 25mm derringer here, but with a much higher muzzle velocity. Even if you could figure out a way to make this a cannon rather than an aimed bomb, the recoil would tear your shoulder off and probably cause all sorts of novel trauma. As it is, this is a bomb with a well focused directional effect. (or at least so far as I understand the physics of the Misznay-Schardin effect.)
RA, you bring up a good point, but EFPs are apparently at the very limit of improvised projectile weapons as it is. Of couse, some smart boy will come along and start pushing on that limit :rolleyes:
Adam L,I think you're on the right lines, you've got to anneal the copper, but the quality control on the process is the difference between servicable and optimum (like the difference between an early Russian AK-47 and a Finnish Valmet; same general design, worlds apart in performance).Quote:
Although I see how heat treating the copper could be important, I'm skeptical of how important,
You're right, quality control is the name of the game. I have to wonder what types of heat treatment are being used that are so complex that only a "nation" would have the resources. I've read about people (as well as met a few) who have done some pretty amazing things with heat treatment with very little. Again, the hard part is quality control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Adam L
Fascinating discussion. I am not sure how accurate that suggestion is about all EFPs in Iraq being Iranian. I have imagery of Sunnah Insurgent EFPs that are crude, much larger than the Iranian EFPs and made in a local machine shop. Unfortunately, they work too.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
With regards to the entire discussion about the EFPs being the new AK, I agree that the Stinger analogy is close but EFPs were used extensively by Hezbolah against the Israelis in their 18 year insurgency. I think the Iraqi/Iranian made examples are having some impact like Hezbollah's, but not in numbers strong enough to be real deal killers with the theater level impact that the Stingers had on the Soviets. Their deployment just racheted up the level of stress for convoys, defeated heavy tank units and caused a new and significant risk when out of the wire.
Personally, I think 122mm/155mm IEDs tripled up or quadrupled up into Super IEDs are the real AKs (machetes :D) of the future as they are cheap simple and have killed FAR more of us than EFP have. Now if EFP manufacturing and distribution by China or Iran goes global and you can buy them on the black market for $10 like an RPG round then we will have real trouble in our future.
I have to agree with Abu, here. In my guise as an Airplane mechanic, I come into contact with many talented machinists who can make absolutely *anything*, regardless of the available equipment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu Buckwheat
One man, in particular comes to mind, who, on his breaks, turned a little solid chunk of titanium into a sphere of titanium, using only a small gas torch, a hammer and an anvil. He did this, just to prove it could be done, as "everyone knows" it is impossible.
I also know a man who makes ultra-precise machine lathes and end-mills out of pieces of junk. I've been in Iraqi machine shops, and I don't see why they cannot make anything they'd like to, provided they're competent, creative, and know where to look for the science side of it.
Hey RA,Quote:
Originally Posted by Rank amateur
Most of the military-grade commercially-available charges are not only portable, a few will fit in your coat pocket :eek: I PM'd you the data sheet.
We normally hide behind a large dirt mound using RFDs from say 200 meters... There's a significant amount of back blast, and, not exactly something you wanna be holding :D
I don't think any force is ever going to be armed entirely with machetes. I think the machete will become more prevalent. And I am sure that a mob of thugs will have no qualms about sending some 12-year-old boys to take the brunt of the AK fire, while using a handful of their own AKs to maintain some standoff for the adults, until the opposing guns run out of ammo, and then hack away at the group of thugs that just went black on 7.62.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam L
I've seen them and seen vehicles hit by them. They are not nearly as devastating as EFPs and I'm pretty sure that they tend to hit their targets less often. But they clearly appear to be attempting to create them. In that regard, I've been wondering if we will be able to quell the Sunni insurgency and "Sunni" terrorists before they obtain this capability and wondering if Iran would see fit to start arming Sunnis with these just to stick another thorn in our butts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu Buckwheat
Part of the value of EFPs is that they can be fairly quickly and more easily emplaced (no need to transport bulky, heavy munitions or to exert the time and energy to dig an 8 foot hole without being caught). And so long as an outside, well-financed supplier is willing to give them away (similar to the US with its Stingers, and now Iran with its EFPs), then they remain, for practical purposes, "cheap."Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu Buckwheat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Hey Schmedlap !
Well, you certainly have my attention!
Some of the EFPs while by no means heavy, are not small, and hiding something with a 10 to 12 inch diameter must be a slight challenge. Granted, you wouldn't want it under 8 feet of dirt, as it probably won't work very well.
Could I ask for some anecdotal evidence of cheap Iranian EFPs being given away?
Regards, Stan
Thanks Stan. Very interesting.
I agree, but after two minutes on wikipaedia my list of amateur expertises now includes metallurgy.;) annealing of the cap is complicated and it's needed to increase ductility.Quote:
Originally Posted by 120mm
If I understand correctly, and it's possible that I don't, if they don't change the metallurgical properties of the copper disk, it'll fracture instead of producing the shape needed to puncture armor. (Or at least heavy armor.) If the cap is the production bottleneck, however, I'm sure Iran is stockpiling them in dispersed locations and there's no reason Iran couldn't have people smuggle the caps in their pocket and have the rest of the device made locally.
RA, I don't have my A&P like 120 obviously does, but as a professional mechanic in strange places (countries), we heat the material, perhaps hammer for annealing and quench... and.... voila :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Rank amateur
EDIT: Rapid cooling will create harder metal and slow cooling will result in a softer material.
Regards, Stan
Obviously, yes, but smaller than a trunk full of 155's and easier to conceal given that the camouflage is often part of the finishing process before it gets handed off to the cell that employs it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
I'm neither an Iranian nor a Shia militiaman, so I cannot give the anecdotal evidence. But if the Iranian pays for the materials and manufacturing process of the EFP, and then hands it off to the Shia militia, then, for the Shia militia, the EFP is cheap, since it is given to them. Kind of like if I were a rich kid and daddy bought me a sports car. For me, it would be cheap, since he incurs the expense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Talking about diameters, hiding, and logistics we just found a real piece of work in my AO today. The quality was class A work. 10 in diameter made to look like Iraqi curbs. I if you've been to urban centers in Iraq you will have probably seen their curds. They look like 1 1/2 foot by 3 feet cubes. the problem is they are torn up every where and then placed on top of the medians. During an average patrol I will see any where between 35-50 of these blocks in the medians of Known EFP areas.
Whats more scary is they have hidden the command wires using the spiders web of Iraqi electrical grids occansionally almost making them impossible to spot and run them back to a safe vantage point. The worst I have seen is a single array ( 1 fake block) with 4 8in plates inside with 2 single array 10 in kickers placed around. We would have had a real bad day had they not been found.
Some are so well hidden that they blend in seamlessly with damaged curbs and use a PIR sensor with time delay to catch the later vicks in a convoy.
Others which are made of class A stuff have been set upwards of 30 ft of the road or placed behind Alaska barriers!! No way to see the device or command wire. Trust me they will go through it, they will then go through our armor.
EFPs are a shia weapons, never seen a Sunni EFP, maybe a crappy shape charge, but not an EFP. Another fun fact EFPs where developed by a west pointer for use in oil drilling to punch through difficult rock and give less back blast and heat. Imagine that oil bitting us in the butt agian.
Logistical all the quality stuff is importated, sometimes in components. But, thats rare and we can tie those to high level guys known to have had training out of country some where to the east:mad: I've also seen mosques used as drop of points as well as cars as mobile cashe. The machinary to make the disk is also limited or the expertise. Through CSI stuff you can often trace the disk like bullets back to the same press or milling machine.
Someone mention quick drop off, it takes 2 minitues to set up a LRCT EFP. They see you coming cause misdirection and place it, bad day ensues.
Indeed smaller than a trunk full of 6 inch rounds. Why easier to conceal a 10 inch EFP (IED) which has a 'singular directional lethality' (for the most part) than say a 155 projectile under a foot of dirt with not only a blast effect, but also 50% fragmentation to boot ? What camouflage is often part of the package ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Sorry, wasn't trying to imply you were Iranian or otherwise. My Bad :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
The last time I read anything that remotely implied Iranian involvement in EFP manufacturing was late 2007 where 'US Officials' barely indicated that the growing body of evidence was based on machine-tooled parts discovered during forensics and post blast. Since I more or less do post blast for a living, I'd have to quote 120mm's recent post about individual abilities. There's no 'body of evidence' to convince us that Iran's machinists are, or were, better than say Iraq's. Banging out (no pun intended) soft materials in one's garage on even a cheap lathe with a washing machine motor is child's play.
On the other hand, scooping or spooning out HE from UXO to be later used in EFP production can be a smiggin delicate (we have several examples of folks that never made it past the Segal-syndrome of cooking or melting HE our of projectiles... Saved the legal system mucho bucks and we just buried the remains :D
Good Post, JC !
As I recall from a 06 report, CEXC's IED analysts not only found concrete street-side curbing, but also rendered safe sheep and dog carcasses :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by J.C.
Yeah, the Herrhausen device. From my understanding it was an IR trigger hooked up satchel of explosives and a copper plate. A spotter armed the device by remote as the car was approaching, and the Mercedes passing through the IR beam triggered the bomb sending a copper projectile into rear-passenger door. It sounded similar to these EFP's Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Security personnel putting bombs in apartment buildings? You were in Moscow during September 1999?:rolleyes:
Thanks JC. Very interesting; keep finding them. Stay safe.
Without going into it in detail, I can think of at least three ways you can precisely anneal a copper disk to varying degrees, using cheap, and/or free materials. I would need to waste about three EFPs to make it "right".Quote:
Originally Posted by Rank amateur
But that's all I'm going to say about that. A good machinist who knows basic metallurgy could turn out EFPs pretty easy, provided he had the luxury of being able to waste some material doing testing.
I meant easier to conceal during movement and less arduous to conceal during emplacement - see JC's previous post; it takes 2 minutes. I suspect that digging a hole for 155's takes a bit longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
See JC's prior post:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
They also often look like rocks. If Ali, the local EFP emplacer, has one of these in his trunk and suddenly finds himself surrounded by coalition forces who are searching vehicles and closing in, he can pop the trunk, and put the EFP on the side of the road before they get to his vehicle. JC gives lots of examples in his post of easy concealment as well. Since it looks like a cement block, rock, etc, there is a good chance that the focus of the search element is on the vehicle. They look into the trunk, see nothing, and continue on their way. On the other hand, if the trunk has 4 155mm rounds, then leaving them in the trunk or tossing them on the side of the road will probably result in either some zip ties or a bullet.Quote:
Originally Posted by JC
My information may be dated. If that is all that was in the public record as recently as late 2007, then I am not going to add to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Hey Bourbon !
If you look back to the mid and late 80s, US Military Attachés fell victim to very similar attacks in the middle east, even with the protection of light armored vehicles. The triggers then were components from just about any Radio Shack (breaking or passing through a beam). The 'plate' was propelled through the driver's-side armor, decapitated the driver, and continued through the passenger side armor.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
Someone had far too much time to think about defeating his/her target, and his target was too into his routines to pay sufficient attention !
Basically an inside job that went very wrong. Not in Moscow, but Estonia for over 10 years. We had more than a (UXO employed) detonation a day in the mid 90s (Mafia related) and in the late 90s, an IED a month. The bomb maker had an extensive engineering background placing home made linear charges on major structural foundations and also employed infrared triggers (from home alarm systems) for his VOIEDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
Thanks for the clarification to your previous post. JC's post came well after my inquiries, hence my questions regarding your comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Anti-terrorism courses in the US and UK for vehicle searches typically include turning over every stone (pun intended) and bagging every cigarette butt. It shouldn't matter if the trunk is filled with stones or 155 projectiles; a search is a search. Sounds sloppy to me.
If you have access to AKO, FBI/LEO and/or the International Bomb Data Center, you can see that there's very little to substantiate the profound comments from politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Regards, Stan
You convinced me.Quote:
Originally Posted by 120mm
For the record I have no interest in amateur EOD.
It's just not practical in all circumstances. There are time issues and other factors. And, none of the infantrymen in any battalion that I've served in ever took an anti-terrorism course (we generally had just enough time to meet the training requirements foisted upon us by higher in time to deploy).Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Obviously something for another thread. However, since we've already hijacked this one, what the hey :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
While I fully understand that a thorough vehicle and body(ies) search for forensics is certainly not practical for an Infantryman at a road block, I'm a bit appalled to learn of the severe lack of anti-terrorist training (that's been around since 84 at Bragg). I'd have to say I would never have survived as a member of a two-man team during 3 civil wars and an 800,000-plus refugee crisis without our in-depth training programs.
Part of the real problem with EFPs is like a Russian torpedo. There's little left once fired (even though post blast ops will recover sufficient evidence (unless someone quickly performs a clean up before we arrive), there's nothing like having the real thing to examine. Our vehicle and body searches typically include the employment of X-spray that immediately indicates the presence of explosives, and what type (even if weeks old).
Pedantic attention to details may preclude permitting a potential explosives conveyance from being used again.
Regards, Stan