To Armor or Not to Armor? That is the Question

Defense Tech ^ | February 7, 2006 | David Axe

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The Army's pie-in-the-sky Future Combat Systems will make brigades more easily deployable by replacing vehicles like 70-ton M-1 Abrams tanks with much lighter alternatives. To match the survivability of the older systems, FCS will rely on superior communications, new surveillance equipment and forthcoming electromagnetic shields.

That's the fantasy. The reality might turn out quite differently. For while many of the communications and surveillance tools of the future force are already finding their way into service in Iraq, the Army isn't getting any lighter. In fact, it's only getting heavier.

The North Dakota National Guard's 164th Engineer Regiment has got to be one of the best-equipped Guard units in Iraq right now. They ride in factory-fresh M-1114 up-armored Humvees and a whole circus of new vehicles originally designed to clear mines: the Buffalo, the Meerkat, the Husky and the RG-31. Every day, they roll out to sweep Improvised Explosive Devices from the highways around Logistics Support Area Anaconda.

The Buffaloes are heavily-armored six-wheeled Mack trucks with an articulated arm used to pick up and shake suspicious objects. The Meerkat and its larger cousin the Husky are spindly four-wheelers with X-rays for spotting metal bombs. The RG-31 is a tall mine-proof vehicle that more or less duplicates the Humvee's gun-truck role and carries the 164th's Warlock IED jammers. All the vehicles are equipped with the Forward Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) battlefield internet, one of the lynchpin systems of the lighter future force.

But does the FBCB2 make the 164th any more survivable on Iraq's IED-infested roads? If the answer is yes, why all the expensive new armored trucks? The 164th is heavier than ever, and has all this armor to thank for its safety. They've been blown up many times; one Buffalo is scorched from nose to waist from a massive IED blast. But no one has died.

"Our vehicles take good care of us," says 164th Staff Sgt. Colin Thompson in his North Dakota accent. Note that he doesn't single out the FBCB2 for doing the same. For while information is a great enabler, it won't magically root out every homemade IED tucked inside the carcass of a cow -- and it won't save your sorry ass when that IED blows up under your vehicle.

--David Axe

[Cannoneer No. 4]

What can a Stryker do that a BTR-80 with FBCB2 couldn't do?

What if the BTR-80 had a 30mm Remote Weapons Station?

[domenad]

I want those E-field deflectors like the chick in Metal Gear 2 had - the bullets just fly away from you like water rolling off a duck's back. I want that, AND I WANT FLYING CARS RIGHT NOW.

[AZRepublican]

Didn't a fellow freeper post something recently about a new fiber that is something like 200 times stronger than steel and has twice the hardness of diamond? I didn't bookmark it and just relying on my fuzzy memory here, BUT it seems to me that would have a lot of potential for a new lightweight armor.

[exnavy]

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[spintreebob]

Every kid knows the solution is "gobots"

Equipment that is modular and interchangable.
It should be possible to build "connector knobs" on all equipment that interfaces with other "connector knobs".
Then different types of lightweight and heavier armor, or no armor can be quickly attached to the bottom, sides or top on any piece of equipment.

It doesn't just have to be "armor". Water tanks, fuel tanks, ammunition, and all other types of supplies and small equipment should have "connector knobs" so it can be attached to any other "connector knob".

[untrained skeptic]

Yes our previously lightweight equipment is getting heavier. However, these vehicles are still much lighter than an Abrams tank.

Our military is getting lighter and more mobile in general. These smaller and lighter vehicles are taking on roles that they couldn't take on before.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Google buckyballs and armor.

[Dilbert56]

Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on.

[El Gato]

All very well, until you come up against someone with Chinese tanks, whose guns out range yours. Then you just have to hope you can stay away from them long enough for your air to come kill them... assuming you have any that's not busy fighting outnumbered for it's own survival.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Equipment that is modular and interchangable.

You are correct. This idea has been around a long time, going back to before object oriented design and programming, but few seem to have embraced it. Glad to see you advocating it.

It would save a lot of money and improve performance while eliminating duplication and the continuously reinventing of the wheel. Maybe that is why it is ignored, too much money in doing it the way it is.

Thanks for the observation.

Since this article is from Defense Tech, I suspect someone is selling their product through an infomercial.

[June Cleaver]

Ping! What say you, Proud Legions?

[reluctantwarrior]

Yes it is lighter than an Abrams and an RPG7V will go through it like a bullet through a piece of paper

[Desron13]

"Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on."

Man Dilbert56! I just love how you think!

[SLB]

Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on.

IEDs are NOT being triggered by cell phones.

[spintreebob]

IEDs could be triggered by a walkie talkie, cellphone, ham radio or ANY thing that transmits a radio signal provided the frequency of the IED's receptor is the same as the transmitter.

It would be possible for an approaching vehicle to broadcast a "sweep" accross "all" frequencies. This would trigger the "dumb" IED's. Of course, then, the terrorists would have to develop a sequence of signals (a code) that the IED would recognize. Both us doing this and them doing this makes it more expensive.

[SLB]

It would be possible for an approaching vehicle to broadcast a "sweep" accross "all" frequencies. This would trigger the "dumb" IED's. Of course, then, the terrorists would have to develop a sequence of signals (a code) that the IED would recognize. Both us doing this and them doing this makes it more expensive.

The level of sophistication is way beyond this.

[Wiz]

Interesting

[Khurkris]

Terrs started using remote controlled (RC) switches to initiate improvised explosice devices in the '80's. Since then the bidness of countering these devices has been keping pace - understandibly under deep wraps for op sec reasons.
Now, with their widespread use in Afghanistan & Iraq these developments are coming more and more out in the open, commercially-wise.
Coalition forces are now investing heavily in technologies designed to detect and detonate RCIED's prior to their contact with troops.
These devices are in two primary classes:
Low-power devices - low frequency, low power devices such as garage door openers, key fobs and door-bell activator switches. Jamming/activator devices used to counter these use relatively low-power RF frequency energy to jam their freq's and prevent their functioning at a distance thereby enabling adequate protection. These jammers are intentionally low-power to prevent interference betweenan RF emitter (the jamer) and our own SINCGARS (VHF) radios and Blue Force (satellite) communications.
The second class is:
High-Power microwave systems - These devices cause greater interference and require more power to operate. This increase in the power amplifier of the jammer also draws more power from vehicle generators, detracting ferom other vehicle systems.
This is a newly created class of anti-IED devices that ranges from man-portable to vehicle mounted to truck based microwave emitter devices.
The technology is keeping pace with the threat. But there really is no secure protection to a terr who will do the suicide/homicide trip on Coalition forces.

With attributes to Janes IDR, Vol. 39, Jan 2006 - RCIED Countermeasures.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Fougasses were command-detonated by manually igniting a powder train from a protected position at the appropriate time. . . . in the right circumstances, fougasses caused heavy casualties, as occurred during the sieges of Ciudad Rodrigo, Badajoz, and Santander in the Duke of Wellington's Peninsular Campaign of the Napoleonic Wars.

What is an IED but the new buzz word for command detonated mine?