Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS
From: Zoe Brain <aebrain@w...>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:53:57 +1000
Subject: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS
John Atkinson wrote:
> Detailed information about IED effects on US vehicles is generally
> S/REL AUS, GB. Anyone who knows, can't talk about it. Anyone who
> talks about it, knows anecdotal data or nothing at all but what he's
> seen on the news (ie, anecdotal data).
> John M. Atkinson
> SSG, USA
> Counter-IED Trainer, Task Force Troy
Oh good, something I can talk about, knowing nothing apart from the
basic theory. No NTK.
In the SimTerror05 exercise, one of the things I came up with was to
give all mobile phones in a cell a 3-ring call. Either on command, or
randomly. It would add a certain element of risk to the use of some of
the less sophisticated, cheaply and easily made devices. A cell-phone
jammer would also be useful, as would ELINT about where calls are coming
from. FLIR imaging and some of the higher frequency radars would help
spot things too. Not all, but it reduces the odds. Something to induce
currents in nearby wires might also be useful. Things to give spurious
signals to garage-door openers ditto.
Continuous surveillance of roadworks might help. A buried 152mm shell
can ruin your whole day, especially if used as an initiator for
HUMINT remains one of the more effective weapons in most scenarios.
Careful observation ditto. The real trick is not to cause a premature
detonation, but defuse and do some forensics on the device. Try to get
some Darwinian selection going, then go after the few remaining expert
bomb-makers, keep them on the move etc. If they get to plant an IED on a
known approach route, you've already lost half the battle.
How well this theory accords with practice, I have no idea. And those
who do know can't say. Probably mostly right in some areas, wildly wrong
(or at least impractical) in others.
Gzg-l mailing list