ts@uunet.UU.NET (03/13/91)
From: portal!cup.portal.com!ts@uunet.UU.NET Does anyone make or use "smart" mines? For example, suppose you put a CPU and some simple communication system, such as a very low power radio, in each mine. Each mine would communicate with its neighbors. Such a minefield could do rather nasty things, such as wait for a groups of soldiers or equipment to get deep into the minefield before exploding. Tim Smith ps: instead of a land mine, one could call this a lan mine! (sorry)
cassman@athena.mit.edu (Baby Killer) (03/14/91)
From: cassman@athena.mit.edu (Baby Killer) From portal!cup.portal.com!ts@uunet.UU.NET #Does anyone make or use "smart" mines? Landmines are EXTREMELY clever these days. The multitude of types available staggers the mind. Some are air-scatterable, some are specifically anti-tank, some are anti-personnel, and they all can be tripped in a variety of ways. How should I begin.... Anti-tank mines: These seem to be the most clever of the mines. One type of anti-tank smart mines actually senses the change in the earth's magnetic field caused by large, moving metallic objects (i.e. tanks). These mines sense the increase in the field as the tank approaches. This arms the mine, which has been dormant until now (usually). The mine then waits until the magnetic field begins to decrease before detonating. The result is that the mine explodes just after the center of the tank passes over (or by) it, creating maximum damage with its shape charge. Wouldn't want a mine to go off at the front of the tank where damage would be less !! It is also true that mines can be "tuned" to know the difference between a tank and a jeep. Why waste a mine on a jeep when you can destroy a tank? (different magnetic field strengths or different vibration frequencies give them away) Some air-scatterable mines (drop 'em out a plane or throw them out of a truck) wait for a set time, then explode. Set the time to match when the enemy is expected to be there or set the times randomly for the terror effect. This is enough for now. There is way too much info to be posted at once. Anyway there are smart mines. --------------------------------------------------- .....and then the blood returned to my brain..... ---------------------------------------------------
ccspgo@gdr.bath.ac.uk (P G Overend) (03/14/91)
From: ccspgo@gdr.bath.ac.uk (P G Overend) I seem to remember reading several years ago about "smart" mines. They were called BTRs (Bad Tempered Robots) and had two types of sensor, audio and IR (??). They could be programmed to ignore certain types of target. When they detected a valid target they would launch a charge/shell of which they carried two. This charge/shell (from memory) was to attack the top surfaces of AFVs. The article only said that the system was in development for the US forces. I think that they were to be deployed by air or artillery (what would the shock of being fired do to all those components??). A 'chute deployed to help them land gently. They also seemed to have legs which made them self-righting. Sorry, can't remember any more than that without referring to the article. Paul G. Overend
Russ Traub (rtraub@PICA.ARMY.MIL) (03/14/91)
From: Russ Traub (rtraub@PICA.ARMY.MIL) >From portal!cup.portal.com!ts@uunet.UU.NET >Does anyone make or use "smart" mines? For example, suppose you >put a CPU and some simple communication system, such as a very low >power radio, in each mine. Each mine would communicate with its >neighbors. >Such a minefield could do rather nasty things, such as wait for >a groups of soldiers or equipment to get deep into the minefield >before exploding. This idea was discussed in a recent open forum briefing. One concept would do exactly what you suggest, i.e. wait for a large group of soldiers or equipment to get into the middle of a minefield before detonating. Imagine the damage and confusion. Another concept is for a mine to go off after it has been "tripped" a certain number of times. This could allow a retreating army to lure the attackers into a minefield, without becoming a casualty of the minefield themselves. I don't know if any of these systems are currently available. They may be just be on the drawing board or concepts right now. Russ
cga66@ihlpy.att.com (Patrick V Kauffold) (03/15/91)
From: cga66@ihlpy.att.com (Patrick V Kauffold) > From: portal!cup.portal.com!ts@uunet.UU.NET > Does anyone make or use "smart" mines? For example, suppose you > put a CPU and some simple communication system, such as a very low > power radio, in each mine. Each mine would communicate with its > neighbors. > > Such a minefield could do rather nasty things, such as wait for > a groups of soldiers or equipment to get deep into the minefield > before exploding. Proper minefields may include command-detonated mines as well as contact-detonated mines. Minefields are generally laid out to slow an advance and/or channel the attackers into a killing ground. Major rule of minefileds: they have to be kept under observation, and they have to be maintained. The Iraqis did neither of these with their mine fields in Kuwait; the Marines just went in at night and took out many at their liesure (relatively speaking). Plus many mine fields were apparently laid out in a very bad manner. They were supposed to have good engineers. Guess not.
scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) (03/15/91)
From: scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) ccspgo@gdr.bath.ac.uk (P G Overend) writes: |> I seem to remember reading several years ago about "smart" mines. They |> were called BTRs (Bad Tempered Robots) and had two types of sensor, |> audio and IR (??). They could be programmed to ignore certain types |> of target. When they detected a valid target they would launch a |> charge/shell of which they carried two. This charge/shell (from |> memory) was to attack the top surfaces of AFVs. The article only |> said that the system was in development for the US forces. I think that |> they were to be deployed by air or artillery (what would the shock |> of being fired do to all those components??). A 'chute deployed to |> help them land gently. They also seemed to have legs which made them |> self-righting. Sorry, can't remember any more than that without |> referring to the article. Browsing through Janes Weapon Systems yesterday, I came accross a description of a mine something like this. The thing was deployed by almost any type aircraft (the illustration showed an F4 delivering one mine per "bomb" capsule). It has three antenae on top of a two round turret. When a tank is detected (by magnetic field disturbance I presume), it predicts the point of closest approach and then launches a projectile in a high arcing trajectory which then looks around for IR emissions from the tank's engine. After firing the projectile, the turret pivot's 180 degrees, preparing to fire the second round at another target. I believe they said the mine attempts to only fire on tanks. This device was called an "Extended Anti-Armor Munition" or something like that. /-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Scott Silvey | Ronald Reagan to surgeons in emergency ward after | | scott@xcf.berkeley.edu | being shot: | | | | | Flames to /dev/null | "Please tell me you're Republicans." | \-----------------------------------------------------------------------------/
ferguson@maitai.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Dennis Ferguson) (03/25/91)
From: ferguson@maitai.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Dennis Ferguson) [ 13 lines of redundant quoted text deleted -- CDR] There are several different types of "smart mines" under development. The one closest to deployment for armor is WAM (Wide Area Mine). There is another smart mine under development for helicopters called AntiHelo Mine. WAM senses the signature of the target from some distance and upon deciding that it has a good target, it fires a SADARM type submunition at the target. AntiHelo Mine bascially listens for a helicopter and fires something like a Sidewinder (all aspect version of course) at the target. The communication system on which you speculate is under development. It is not simple. Dennion s