Hello There;

I am curious to know, without giving out too much detail, what equipment is being used to find, locate and prematurely destroy the IED, and VBIED threat in Iraq and Afghanistan?? I have done some research and found these websites at: http://www.policerescueeod.com/html/products/iedsimulators.html , as well as another one at: http://www.iedrobot.com/ . I was wondering if any of this technology is now being used in Iraq and Afghanistan??? It seems the American Press refuses to or does not acknowledge what is being done to combat these deadly weapons, along with the suicide bombers.
The suicide bombers sound to me a lot like the way that the Japanese military was back in WW2, with kamikaze pilots, as well as the highest level of fanaticism.
All I ever hear is the negative aspects of how many soldiers died in Iraq or Afghanistan due to VBIED and IED's on a daily basis through ABC's World News Tonight. It turns my stomach, and makes me wonder what is going on? I salute all that are serving right now in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as other Theaters of Operation. I do not even hear about how many schools there are opening in Iraq for Iraqi children, or anything else. Is there any way that someone can keep me posted on the daily happenings in Iraq that is not depressing in nature???

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 12174039,

Those sand boxes used before they up-armored the humvees would probably work to defend against the new iranian "copper fist" ied. it's penetration depends on velocity and heat, the sand would allow the armor to do its job by slowing and cooling the molten copper slug.

First, to all brave coalition military and support staff out there..... THANK YOU!

The IED is killing more US troops than just about any other enemy tactic... and I would very much like to know why this has not yet been countered? How are they detonated? clearly they are detonated by someone watching the road ...and it is likely wireless.
Do convoys try to avoid using streets? Why aren't we scanning and jamming the frequencies used to detonate? Please explain to me if this is already being tried, or why it is not feasible? It just seems an obvious question.

Oversight Council Checks Out Mine-Resistant Vehicles

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued May 21, 2007)

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. --- Senior military and civilian leaders from the Joint Requirements Oversight Council got an up-close look at Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle capabilities during a visit here yesterday.

The group was led by Navy Adm. Edmund P. Giambastiani, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and head of the JROC, and included senior military officers and civilians from the Defense Department and all four services. Other attendees included Navy Adm. Patrick M. Walsh, vice chief of naval operations; Air Force Gen. John D.W. Corley, Air Force vice chief of staff; and Tina W. Jonas, the Defense Department’s comptroller.

While at Aberdeen, the group saw a dozen versions of the vehicle from different contractors. The MRAP has a raised, V-shaped underbelly that deflects the force of improvised explosive devices and other blasts from below. It’s expected to reduce casualties from mines, improvised explosive devices and rocket-propelled grenades.

“MRAP vehicles have saved lives in Iraq and will continue to save lives,” said Giambastiani. “It is the best vehicle protection we have to date.”

Another attendee said getting the vehicles to troops quickly is a high priority.

"We have an urgent and compelling need for these vehicles,” said Delores Etter, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition. “It is our civic duty and our responsibility to get these vehicles to our deployed servicemembers as soon as we possibly can."

After test-driving the vehicles, the group traveled to a range to watch an explosive test on one of the MRAP vehicles. According to members of the JROC, the visit confirmed the urgent need to get MRAP vehicles to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“The MRAP is the JROC’s highest priority acquisition program, and it is a notable improvement over the armored vehicles currently in use,” Giambastiani said. “The design and armor provides greater protection and increases survivability.”

But while the vehicles may increase troop protection, the admiral cautioned they are not an end-all solution. “No vehicle, whatever its armor, is invulnerable,” he added. “It is inevitable that we will lose some of these in the course of combat. We also expect the enemy to make an all-out effort to disable or destroy an MRAP.”

However, the testing is a critical part of providing the best possible solution for troops. “I am so impressed with the hard work and dedication of the testing team here at Aberdeen,” said Etter. “They are working seven days a week to put these vehicles through a rigorous cycle of tests so we can better determine which vehicles will be selected for further production.”

-ends-

quote:

The IED is killing more US troops than just about any other enemy tactic... and I would very much like to know why this has not yet been countered? How are they detonated? clearly they are detonated by someone watching the road ...and it is likely wireless.
Do convoys try to avoid using streets? Why aren't we scanning and jamming the frequencies used to detonate? Please explain to me if this is already being tried, or why it is not feasible? It just seems an obvious question.

Raytheon Delivers Radars for Vehicle Protection Device

(Source: Raytheon Co.; issued May 22, 2007)

MCKINNEY, Texas --- Raytheon Company's Network Centric Systems has delivered the first two Multi-Function Radio Frequency System (MFRFS) radars for integration into the Quick Kill Active Protection System that Raytheon is developing for the U.S. Army.

MFRFS is a state-of-the-art, electronically-scanned, solid-state phased array radar system that can detect and track a full spectrum of threats to current and future Army vehicles. These threats range from rocket propelled grenades fired at close proximity to more distant threats such as kinetic energy projectiles.

In addition, MFRFS, the system selected as the common radar for Future Combat Systems (FCS) manned ground vehicles, is capable of supporting a number of radio frequency functions including surveillance, high- band secure communications and combat identification.

"Delivery of the MFRFS marks an important milestone in the development of Raytheon's Quick Kill Active Protection System," said Colin Schottlaender, president of Network Centric Systems. "MFRFS has achieved all milestones to date, and we are confident it will be integrated successfully on current force platforms."

Raytheon's Quick Kill APS is capable of providing a "bubble" of coverage to protect current force Stryker, Abrams and Bradley vehicles, as well as FCS platforms, from a broad range of threats from any direction.

With the MFRFS delivery and progress anticipated over the next few months, Raytheon's Quick Kill APS will be integrated on a Stryker for end-to-end system demonstrations and design verification testing beginning late this summer.

Joint Organization Trains Troops to Defeat IEDs

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued May 26, 2007)

WASHINGTON --- Service-members need to learn the techniques, tactics and procedures for defeating improvised explosive devices before they deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, according to officials with the Joint IED Defeat Organization.

“IEDs are the number one killer on the battlefield,” said Army Brig. Gen. Robert W. Cone, director of Joint IED Defeat Organization’s Joint Center of Excellence at Fort Irwin, Calif. “I don’t think we’re doing enough to address that at home stations.

“Our training audience is typically on their way to Iraq for the third time,” said Cone, a Manchester, N.H., native and 1979 West Point graduate. “Our customers want to train here to attack the network — we can’t give them the basics and expect them to learn the rest in theater.”

The Joint IED Defeat Organization, known as JIEDDO, is attacking the IED threat using a balance of intelligence, training and technology. Originally formed as the Army’s IED Task Force, the group has transformed into a combined joint service, interagency, multi-national program designed to leverage all available resources and technologies in a coordinated campaign to defeat the IED threat, according to the organization’s mission statement.

JIEDDO officials have set up four training centers, known as Joint Centers of Excellence, one for each branch of service. The centers ensure troops have a chance to train before deployment with the equipment they will use in the IED fight and in conditions that more closely mirror theater situations, JIEDDO officials said. Training centers are located on the Marine base in Twentynine Palms, Calif., a Navy facility in Indian Head, Md., Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, and the Army’s Fort Irwin, Calif.

JIEDDO hosted an IED Defeat Seminar last week at the Army’s National Training Center at Fort Irwin. The four-day seminar was designed to identify gaps in counter–IED training as well as make participants aware of training JIEDDO now provides for units heading to Iraq and Afghanistan.

In his opening remarks at the seminar, Cone emphasized three important counter-IED training issues and encouraged the audience to make the training more of a priority in pre-deployment work-ups. He spoke of the need for better integration of technology onto the battlefield, the need to increase home station training and the importance of tailoring all counter-IED training to fit the audience.

Cone asked the leaders and trainers to start evaluating where changes can be made in home-station training. Then, shifting from training to communicating, he challenged leaders to share information at home and while forward deployed.

“We are a community of practice,” he said. “If you’re not participating in these VTCs (video teleconferences) we have, then you’re a day late and a dollar short.”

He said a breakdown in communication and information sharing is the leaders’ fault and the troops lose as a result. “We need to share information and ideas,” Cone said. “Shame on us if we’re doing something here at NTC that they’re not doing at the Joint Readiness Training Center (on Fort Polk, La.)”

Switching back to training, Cone addressed JIEDDO’s role in home-station training. He reminded leaders to take advantage of JIEDDO and the training centers’ resources all the while recognizing their own responsibilities.

“We need to take an appetite suppressant when we talk of what JIEDDO can do for us,” he said. “JIEDDO is a great asset, but ultimately, the responsibility of training soldiers and Marines lies with the commander.”

Opening a two-hour panel discussion, Army Brig. Gen. Joe E. Ramirez Jr., deputy commanding general, Combined Arms Training Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, likened the IED fight to a game of chess.

“For every move we make, the enemy makes three,” said Ramirez, a Houston native. “Multi-National Corp Iraq told me the enemy changes Techniques, Tactics and Procedures (TTP) every two to three weeks.”

Ramirez, who served as deputy chief of staff for U.S. Central Command before being stationed at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, echoed Cone’s thoughts on information sharing.

“You can’t rely on the last time you were there,” he stressed to the audience. “If you haven’t been to theater in the last four months—you’re not up to date. Our biggest task is staying current and relevant.”

Ramirez reminded the leaders and trainers of bi-monthly virtual teleconferences available to units all around the world. He said the feedback he receives from theater relates specifically to training and TTPs.

He urged the leaders and trainers at the seminar to place more emphasis on battle staff training.

“They need to address defeating not only the IEDs, but the network, the bomb maker and the financier,” he said. “We need to assess how we train our battle staff.”

Ramirez emphasized home station training needs to be more of a priority for reserve and active-duty units. He suggested changing the mobilization process to allow for pre-deployment training.

“The tip of the spear is absolutely the priority,” said Ramirez, using a moniker commonly applied to forward deployed units. “We need to work harder to prepare them here to be the tip of the spear over there.”

Another panel member, Marine Col. Niel E. Nelson, commanding officer of the Marine Corps’ Engineer School located on Camp Lejeune, N.C., spoke of the importance of training troops at entry-level service schools.

“It’s easier to form a habit than break one,” Nelson said. “We get the kids right out of boot camp and the young lieutenants straight from The Basic School—and start teaching counter-IED techniques right then.”

Nelson said instructors at the Marine Corps Engineer School teach that every movement is a route clearance movement.

“Teach that early enough,” the 1984 graduate of San Diego State University said, “and they’ll take it to theater with them whenever they deploy.”

Nelson encouraged units across the Corps to conduct counter-IED training prior to attending Mojave Viper, the Marine Corps’ premiere, live-fire pre-deployment training in Twentynine Palms, Calf.

Nelson’s closing statement was met with a volley of “hooahs” from the Army, “oorahs” from the Marines and a scattering of applause from the audience.

“This isn’t a Marine Corps thing or an Army thing,” said the Bethpage, N.Y. native. “We might have different words and different uniforms, but we have the same mission — keep people alive, keep them aware and keep them going forward.”

-ends-

EDO Wins $210M for Anti-IED Countermeasures

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued July 17, 2007)

EDO Communications & Countermeasures Systems (EDO CCS), Thousand Oaks, Calif., is being awarded a $209,884,759 modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-07-C-6311) to exercise options for the production and support of 3,000 vehicle-mounted, Counter- Radio Controlled Improvised Explosive Device (RCIED) Electronic Warfare (CREW) systems to meet urgent Department of Defense requirements in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Vehicle-Mounted CREW systems are one element of the DoD's Joint Counter RCIED Electronic Warfare program. Spiral 2.1 CREW systems are vehicle-mounted electronic jammers designed to prevent the initiation of RCIED.

Work will be performed in Thousand Oaks, Calif. (87 percent); and Lancaster, Calif. (13 percent), and is expected to be completed by August 2008.Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.

-ends-

EDO Details Latest Orders for Counter-IED Jammers

(Source: EDO Corp.; issued July 19, 2007)

NEW YORK --- On July 16 the Department of Defense announced that EDO Corporation has received orders for 3,000 additional "CREW 2.1" vehicle-mounted electronic jammers, to be delivered by August 2008.

This award is in addition to the 1,100 units ordered in April. The total value of this new fixed-price award is $210 million.

This award is for EDO's model known as the CVRJ (CREW Vehicle Receiver/Jammer) system. CREW is an acronym for an electronic warfare system that counters radio-controlled improvised explosive devices.

In making this award, the Naval Sea Systems Command and the Program Executive Office for Littoral and Mine Warfare exercised options included in the original contract competitively awarded to EDO on April 6.

"We have been working in concert with our customer and our suppliers to gear up for the production capacity and quality required for this critical product," said James M. Smith, EDO's chief executive officer. "We have demonstrated to our customer that we have a process in place to meet the urgent and compelling need for this equipment."

think simple!!!!!!!!!!! the more high tech, well who knows. think of egypt and washdc.!!!!!! sgt rocks paper sissors.

A TECHY IS NO GOOD IF HE OR SHE CAN NOT FIND HEAT....?TRAINING STARTS AT THE AGE OF 4 OR FIVE. OURS 18YOA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HERE IS A RIDDLE: ONE ROCK WILL BE TRANS FORMED IN A HOLE OF HOLES WILL FARTHER THE ADVANCED. GET READY.

Hello, I read this thread (didnt notice dates, however they cant be too old.). One simple question.

Okay, so we can begin to defeat rcieds, and one rpgs and atgw's, however, simplest one would think of all? How about some armor that utilizes the same "gee whiz tech" to simply cocoon the the troops in protection during a blast event?

Consider this, if the speed of intercept of a "rocket" is @ velocity X, then what speed of deployment would this "mounted crew cocoon" have to be?

The obvious question (and I'll try to be helpful) is 1st, what is the speed of the rocket (ie- rpg, atgw rockets) VS. the speed of high order detonation (or technically: HOD- Blast Wave Propagation) (hod is 29,900FPS).
One quickly realizes that the "reaction time" of the two, the blast wave moves faster than any rocket.

So, gotta wonder, anyone figured that out yet? I have a feeling someone has, if so, what would you think of such a system?

Best, D.W.@SCI
(The only difference between Science Fiction and Science is will and a couple of years.)