Alternative Technologies to Replace Antipersonnel Landmines (2001) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
7 Alternatives Potentially Available After 2006
7 Alternatives Potentially Available After 2006
Pages 60-76
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 60... ...
Elements of technology development expected to be pertinent to APL alternatives include advanced intelligence, sensors, and reconnaissance capabilities; new weapon systems and munitions; and integration through networking. The Army Research Laboratory's Annual Review publishes 60 many descriptions of projects in support of a future digitized battlefield, including ideas for advanced sensors, signal and image processing, displays, information distribution, visualization, modeling, simulation, vehicles, armor, and munitions (U.S.
|
From page 61... ...
In most cases, the two-way communication link between the surveillance element of a future minefield alternative and a remote operator would not require line of sight, would be secure, and would be capable of working with networkcentric architecture. Its primary purpose would be to enable a remote operator to evaluate mounted and dismounted intrusions into the minefield, distinguish enemy from friend and noncombatant, and control the actions of the lethal and/ or nonlethal elements.
|
From page 62... ...
The network would update precision-guided munitions in flight for precise engagement of moving surface targets (Grayson, 2000~. The goal of the program is to develop, investigate, and evaluate technologies that could lead to affordable architectures for destroying specific moving targets on land, the littorals, and water.
|
From page 63... ...
would consist of four parts: a sensor and communications unit that would function as a hub for a section of the denied zone; an overmatch controller to control the modular munitions; the modular munition; and an electronically programmable radio. The radio would perform three functions: · self-location and munitions location using either GPS or multilateration with other units communication to the overmatch controller unit with a soldier/operator in conjunction with other sensor and communications units · multistatic radar to detect and track human intruders
|
From page 64... ...
· warning devices, such as flashers or sirens nonlethal deterrents, such as flash/bang units and malodorants · lethal devices, such as small fragmentation grenades The overwatch control unit, a computer terminal with a radio, would perform three functions: display a situational awareness map to the soldier/ operator showing the geometry of the munitions in the denied zone sound an alert and display the track of an intruder · allow the soldier/operator to command a lethal response when necessary To create a denied zone, RRASMS would be deployed in the following way. The soldier/operator would place sensor and communications units in the denied zone approximately 50 meters apart.
|
From page 65... ...
The system would give the operator the time and information necessary to determine if a lethal response IS necessary. The system could be enhanced by providing devices to friendly soldiers that would identify them as friendly and would disable lethal responses in their vicinity, thus allowing them free passage through the denied zone and avoiding fratricide.
|
From page 66... ...
to maintain surveillance over a denied zone and for precision aiming of an automatically aimed machine gun. The machine gun would fire two types of munitions: nonlethal rubber bullets and lethal explosive/fragmentation rounds.
|
From page 67... ...
For Use Against Mountecl Threats Distributecl Web Sensor Complex Source: Committee on Alternative Technologies to Replace Antipersonnel Landmines The concept of the Distributed Web Sensor Complex (DWSC) is based on an Army science and technology program intended to enable a commander to take advantage of high-tech sensor and communications technology by providing near real-time situational awareness of the extended battlefield.
|
From page 68... ...
The antihandling device on remotely delivered mines would have a psychological impact on dismounted enemy forces. Disadvantages · Because the system has no APL or human sensors, the mines could be very susceptible to clearance by a dismounted enemy, especially at some distance from friendly forces.
|
From page 69... ...
Because there are no APL in this system, it appears to be conceptually compliant with the Ottawa Convention and CCW Amended Protocol II. The self-destruct feature would further address humanitarian concerns.
|
From page 70... ...
To develop and integrate the sensor package into an existing dispenser, a number of technological challenges would have to be overcome: hardening and militarizing the sensors; developing enabling sensors that could determine their location and orientation; developing of infrared sensors that could "pop up" above vegetation and other obstacles; developing a limited, autonomous network of deployed sensors that could communicate with each other; devising methods of overcoming power and bandwidth challenges to allow nonline-of-sight communication of infrared imagery and other sensor feedback to friendly operations centers located many kilometers away. Advantages Because RD-Sensor does not include APL, it would be conceptually compliant with CCW Amended Protocol II and the Ottawa Convention.
|
From page 71... ...
Equipped with the WAM PIP detection/localization sensors (acoustic/seismic) , and incorporating a GPS receiver and antihandling device, the single-weapon BATAAM launch canisters would be hand emplaced in the centers of the BAT target acquisition footprint (the spacing between weapons would be an abutting grid of such footprints)
|
From page 72... ...
This AT mine would comply with the Ottawa Convention and could be made to comply with CCW Amended Protocol II. · BATAAM would provide for a less expensive means of delivering the BAT submunition than the present .
|
From page 73... ...
73 The AT mines and Taser nonlethal munitions comply with the CCW Amended Protocol II. Even though the Taser nonlethal munition fires electrically charged darts, the electric shocks are considered to be nonlethal, which should make this system acceptable under the Ottawa Convention.
|
From page 74... ...
Following delivery, the AT mines and sensor package would deploy one or more low-power, miniature sensors to detect vehicles or dismounted intruders. A transmitter would send ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES TO REPLACE ANTIPERSONNEL LANDMINES appropriate imagery information back to the soldier/operator who could determine the appropriate course of action.
|
From page 75... ...
Reduces casualties/risk for U.S. and/or allied forces Deters pursuit to facilitate breaking of contact under pressure Humanitarian Concerns Sum: Reduces postconflict residual hazard (CCW)
|
From page 76... ...
Denotes capability equivalent to that of the baseline system ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES TO REPLACE ANTIPERSONNEL LANDMINES ; l l l l Extent to which | requirements are exceeded Mounted Extent to which [1 requirements are met - Sensor Healing RAAM Non Raptor RDWAM BATAAM Lethal o FIGURE 7-1 Military effectiveness of alternatives potentially available after 2006 based on qualitative scoring by the committee. man-in-the-loop, a commander could make an informed decision about an appropriate response to an intrusion.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.