Marines award contract for IED jammers

UPI ^ | 8 February 2006

[HiTech RedNeck]

How far away does the fiend triggering the bomb need to be? Within sight of it?

Seems to me that if they can't radio control the bomb due to jamming, they'll just lay down a pair of thin wires. This project would do well to come up with some countermeasure for that too.

[Starve The Beast]

Seems to me that if they can't radio control the bomb due to jamming, they'll just lay down a pair of thin wires. This project would do well to come up with some countermeasure for that too.

I thought the same thing. And what about LOS communication? I bet you could rig a photoelectric cell to trigger when it's hit by a laser, which could be shot from a surrounding building.

[endthematrix]

???


Please expound.

[Spktyr]

The same tech could be applied to that problem too.

If you hit a wire circuit with a powerful enough RF signal, you induce a current in the wires. If the terrs used an electrical detonation system, sweeping the road ahead with RF would result in premature detonation, and some very surprised terrorists.

[Hypervigilant]

Line Of Sight communication.

[Hypervigilant]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1458718/posts

[KiaKaha]

Agreed, Command detonation by wire, pressure pads, mercury tilt switches. Unfortunately a "high tech" solution is only effective against "high tech" methods of detonation.

[endthematrix]

I know the jargon, but what was his point? If you could answer for him, go ahead.

[CarrotAndStick]

Sort of like this:

http://www.elexp.com/opt_f512.htm

Except that instead of sound being transmitted via modulated laser, it'll be a trigger-signal to blast the IED.

[CarrotAndStick]

Wouldn't that have to be one heck of a powerful RF signal?

What if the trigger is designed to activate at, say 12V at .5 A(ie, 6W)?

It would need to be a really powerful RF signal to induce 6W of power on a pair of thin wires, at a distance.

Besides, the wires can be chosen to carry a much higher wattage, to move the bar even higher, quite easily.

[endthematrix]

I understand that concept, but I do understand the post more clearly, thanks. I was under the impression there would be a system that would be able to detect and detonate the IED's. The laser (and IIRC they are using lasers to detonate IEDs) would have have to be on target and the IED would have to be known. The same accomplishment could be done via gun.

[endthematrix]

And without a known IED in a specific location to aim at, the spread/scan of powerful EM wave cause "unwelcome disturbances" in nearby power systems?

[CarrotAndStick]

But from the terrorist's point of view, a laser beam aimed at the trigger of the IED is much less revealing than a gunshot at a mechanical switch on the IED.

Strangely, I feel I have completely misunderstood your query.

[The Red Zone]

especially if twisted pair

[CarrotAndStick]

It'd probably be strong enough to cause bodily harm to everyone nearby, I guess.

[The Red Zone]

Said gunshot would also have to be mighty accurate if it wasn't to just kick up dust or even destroy the bomb.

[CarrotAndStick]

That depends on the size of the switch, and its location. A twisted-pair wire is far easier.

[The Red Zone]

Maybe the best countermeasure for wire would be some kind of aerial surveillance that can spot it via electromagnetic means. (Disturbance in radar signal bounced against ground, or whatnot.)

[Qout]

The spread/scan of powerful EM waves can also cause "unwelcome disturbances" to the Humvee, the soldier's gear, and even possibly that bio-chemical-electrical processor located between the ears.
 
The signal jammer needs to be more sophisticated and not just brute force. The insurgents are using all sorts of signals to set off the IEDs including garage door openers, cell phones and children's R/C toys. Hopefully the new jammers are more effective than "Warlock Red" and "Warlock Green" ordered by the Army last year. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66395,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1