EFPs; the new AK-47?

[Stan]

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.

See JC's prior post:

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.

Thanks for the clarification to your previous post. JC's post came well after my inquiries, hence my questions regarding your comments.

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.

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.

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.

Regards, Stan

[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'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).

[Stan]

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).

Obviously something for another thread. However, since we've already hijacked this one, what the hey

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