RE: Obstacles, Part 2

I have used both electrical and fuse.  I prefered the fuse over the
electrical.  There was always a moment of hesitation attaching the
blasting cap to the line wondering if there is a current going through
the line.  Cool thing about electrical is that it feels so much more
satisfying to press a button and blow something up! 

There is a safety factor working with electrical.  Unless the wire is
sheilded, radio transmissions can induce a current in the wire.  I
actually saw this happen on an exercise.  Someone was walking around
with a remote control (to control popup targets), the signal coming from
the controller detonated a charge injuring a man.

The modern battlefield is full of radio transmissions I imagine a DS/SG
would have more (well, I shouldn't say that, could use lasers ;-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Bayan Schoonmaker [SMTP:schoon@aimnet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 1998 11:48 PM
> To:	FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
> Subject:	RE: Obstacles, Part 2
> 
> John Atkinson wrote:
> 
> >Uh-uh.  99%+ of battlefield demolitions are non-electrical, and will
> >become even more so over the next few years.  It's safer.  Besides,
> >even electric demo can't be jammed per se, simply prematurely
> >detonated.  Not that that's any more fun for the poor engineers.
> 
> Speaking as a somewhat frequent user of the stuff, John is right on
> the
> money with this one. We don't like to use the electrical stuff AT ALL.
> Much
> better to have a system contructed of det and timing cord.
> 
> Schoon
>