Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), Article 4
Compiled by David Barth on September 14, 2008 from an article by Rick Atkinson, Washington Post Staff Writer and
Staff researcher Madonna Lebling.
Article 1: IEDs, The Electromagnetic Spectrum, and
MOASS
Article 2: Jammers
Article 3: Types of IEDs & Vehicles
Article 4: First Objective: Defeat the Device
Article 5: Second Objective: Train the Force
Article 6: Third Objective: Attack the Network
Article 7: The Story of Lt. Col. Gadson
First Objective: Defeat the Device
"Defeat the device. Train the force. Attack the network." Meigs, a retired four-star Army general, had repeated
those three phrases a thousand times since becoming JIEDDO director in December 2005.
In the early years of the Iraq war, the U.S. government's counter-IED efforts had focused overwhelmingly on defeating
the device, and more than half of Meigs's budget still went to preventing detonation and, if that failed, mitigating
the blast. In fiscal 2007, for example, $113 million would be spent on mine rollers, a World War II technology using
heavy cylinders to trip pressure plate triggers in front of a convoy.
Fido, A Molecular Sniffer
The "molecular sniffer" long coveted by U.S. Central Command arrived on the battlefield in the guise of Fido, a
$25,000 machine developed by an Oklahoma company as part of a Pentagon program called Dog's Nose. Modern explosives
have very low vapor pressures, and therefore emit few molecules for a sniffer to detect; but Fido's sensor --
heated above 200 degrees Fahrenheit -- was effective enough that hundreds were deployed, including more than 70
mounted on mobile robots. "This is the closest thing we can get to a dog," a government engineer said.
Some technologies thrived:
- Warrior Alpha drones.
- Surveillance cameras on towers and blimps.
- Ground penetrating radar mounted on a South African-built Husky vehicle to detect buried IEDs.
- EA-6B Prowler electronic warfare planes flew above roads in Iraq and Afghanistan to try to "pre-det" -- prematurely
detonate -- bombs with radio signals,. The missions were called "burning the route."
Forerunner
Other technologies flopped. Forerunner, an unmanned vehicle carrying counter-IED gear, was to be "tele-operated" with
remote controls by soldiers in a trailing vehicle. It "simply did not work" and was banished from the theater, according
to a JIEDDO document. The controls proved sluggish, and some operators developed motion sickness while trying to drive
Forerunner via a television monitor in the jouncing trail Humvee.
Blow Torch
Still more disappointing was Blow Torch, a high-powered microwave emitter built at Letterkenny Army Depot in
Pennsylvania after besting four rivals in a government competition. Similar to an Israeli gadget called Dragon Spike,
Blow Torch was intended to defeat the electronic circuitry in EFPs. At $175,000 each, 101 of the devices took to the
field for operational testing early in 2007. But enduring shortcomings halted the deployment and Blow Torch was
diverted to New Mexico for more testing.
Detecting IED Detonation Wire
Also frustrating was the scientific effort to detect the gossamer-like copper wires increasingly used to arm or
detonate bombs, including about one-third of all EFPs by the summer of 2007. Certain airborne search radars gave good
resolution -- a clear picture -- when looking for a thin wire strung from a hidden roadside bomb to a triggerman. But
those radars failed to penetrate beneath the surface for wires slightly buried, while radars that penetrated gave poor
resolution. Different soils produced varying results, depending on moisture content, alkaline levels and other arcane
variables. False positives were legion in wire-strewn, trash-cluttered
Iraq.
Spiral Jammers
Meanwhile, the jammer saga rolled on. By midsummer, 13,000 Dukes had arrived, to be followed by an improved Duke 2.
The Pentagon also signed contracts with EDO Corp. for more than $535 million to buy the first 7,450 of an eventual
11,000 jammers -- known collectively as Spiral 2.1 -- intended as the next CREW generation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Research and development has already begun on Spirals 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, according to the Navy.
Quick Reaction Dismounted (QRD)
Few issues were more emotionally charged. Since early 2006, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee, had urged a "Take Back the Roads" campaign in Iraq. Among other solutions, he advocated a
backpack jammer known as the Quick Reaction Dismounted (QRD), which would succeed the little Warlock Blue he had
pushed into the field a year earlier. When a staffer called Hunter from Yuma and told him that "they have 163 more
iterations of the tests still to go" on the QRD, the chairman angrily accused Meigs of "the slows" and of "delaying
things from getting into the hands of the troops," according to sources familiar with the incident.
Meigs was furious. The backpack jammer was not ready for deployment, he countered, and the Duke's persistent difficulties
had disrupted the test schedule at Yuma. Eventually the Pentagon announced that 1,400 backpack jammers -- a QRD model
called the Guardian won the competition – would be sent to the theater by spring of this year. (Hunter lost his
chairmanship in January 2007 when Democrats took control of the House.)
MRAPs
Armor remained the last line of defense, and armor grew ever thicker, heavier and more expensive. Seven major
vendors toiled to build the V-shaped MRAPs, and the Pentagon pondered whether to triple the buy, to 23,000 vehicles,
in order to replace all Humvees in Iraq, according to senior officials. By the end of 2007, 1,300 MRAPs were to be
built each month, compared with fewer than one a day a year earlier. For expediency, plans were made to fly at least
some MRAPs to the war zone at a cost of $135,000 each, seven times the expense of sea transport.
A Marine general in the spring of 2007 publicly declared the MRAP to be "four to five times safer" than an
uparmored Humvee, but Pentagon officials conceded that it remains vulnerable to EFPs and large underbelly bombs,
as well as to anti-tank missiles and rocket-propelled grenades. An even stouter model, designed to better parry
EFPs, was under consideration.
Frag Kits
In 2007 the Pentagon also financed more than 8,000 anti-fragmentation kits, known as Frag Kit 5, which added still
more armor plating to Humvees. Frag Kit 6, a still heavier version, has doors weighing 650 pounds each -- so bulky that
soldiers may need a "mechanical assist device" to open and close them. "It's over the top," said an Army colonel in
Baghdad.
Article 5: Second Objective: Train the Force