Re: Jamming IEDs

From: Juergen Nieveler (juergen.nieveler.nospam_at_arcor.de)
Date: 01/27/05 

To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org
Date: 27 Jan 2005 09:41:42 GMT

Brian Trosko <btrosko@panix.com> wrote:

>> No. Step up is simply having a receiver that will detonate the IED as
>> soon as a jammer is detected.
>
> That'd be fine, thanks. It's suboptimal, because the detonation can
> still take out innocent passers by, but I'd much rather detonate the
> thing when my convoy's hundreds of feet or yards away than when it's
> just passing by the device.

You think the Iraqis are that dumb? They'd simply include a timer and
detonate the IED x seconds after the jammer was detected, or as others
have pointed out, they'd simply use a wire.

If you look at IEDs used in terrorist attacks in the 80s in Europe, you
will find that some of those terrorists were pretty smart indeed -
homebrewn shaped-charge mines, for example... read up on the murder of
Alred Herrhausen for an example of a not so improvised ED.

In the Herrhausen case, the bomb was remotely activated but was
detonated only when a car actually passed it, timed so that the shaped
charge hit the rear seat of the car.

Juergen Nieveler 

-- 
Answers: $1, Short: $5, Correct: $25, dumb looks are still free.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Jamming IEDs
    ... >> still take out innocent passers by, but I'd much rather detonate the ... So I don't drive at a constant speed, or better yet I put the jammer ... I was pointing out that the postulated counter-response to jammer ...
    (sci.military.moderated)
  • Re: Jamming IEDs
    ... Juergen Nieveler wrote: ... Step up is simply having a receiver that will detonate the IED as ... > soon as a jammer is detected. ...
    (sci.military.moderated)