Fighting the IED/RPG ambush threat

[Cdn Blackshirt]

First, my official disclaimer - you guys have forgotten more than I know....

That being said, although I like the premise of the authors argument, I think he stops one step short.  Specifically, that planning and procuring for an insurgent/guerilla type defence using the RPG-7 is at-best is dangerous and possibly fatal underestimation.  China and Iran are now producing anti-armour weapons at a very high rate (Iranian weapons which apparently are being shared with their various proxy terrorist groups around the Middle East as we speak).  In addition, the insurgents ability to daisy-chain IED's as per the last attack in Fallujah that killed 10 marines and injured many more shows an increasingly dangerous defensive ability to attack "patrolling" ground assets.

My uneducated take therefore is as follows:
1)  The biggest change you can make is to utilize high endurance UAV's to identify the placement of IED's and setting up of ambushes prior to your first man setting a foot anywhere near the area. 
2)  Once you have that information, you then need to determine what you're going to do with it.  My proposal would be you need several alternatives. 
a) Preferably you would develop a new class of UAV's where stealth and high endurance take priority over speed.  In essence a vehicle with a 24-hour operating time and the ability to carry (6) Small Diameter Bombs.  Call it "The Hand of God" factor.  If our commanders on the ground via TV link can see people up to no good, they die.  That also will send a powerful psychological message which will deter others from doing the same.
b) Where additional saturated fire is required in addition to the 1,500lb payload this UAV could carry, 155mm arty and 120mm mortar PGM support would follow.
c)  In areas where you were unable to set-up surveillance in such a fashion and now must enter after the defences have been set-up, I think you must equip your soldiers to be able to withstand a first hit and then respond (a theme I've been repeating for a couple of years now).  The only way I think you can do this is with something that can take an ATGM hit and respond.  That in my book is something equivalent to Merkava 4, preferably with a Russian Shtora-equivalent anti-ATGM self-defence suite.  Anything less and your basically killing off your recce guys as your trip wire.  And since the enemy as an ambusher now gets to choose which targets they are going to engage often picking the softest-skinned vehicles available to maximize casualties, you need a similar level of defence for your remaining vehicles, including your logistics and support (visual a Bisons converted to fuel tankers and cargo carriers).
d)  Remote sensing vehicles leading all patrols and convoys (also mentioned before) providing real time imagery with a sort of spider's eyes layout.  Severval different types of sensors looking in different directions for different things.  Wi-Fi sensors to penetrate curbs and pavement to  identify IED's.  Forward and upward (urban environment) looking IR sensors looking for camoflaged snipers or ATGM nests.  And chemical sniffers.  All information is fed back to a control vehicle that is mid convoy where a group of 5 or 6 guys review the data and complete threat identification (equivalent to a warship's stations and crew).
e)  Next generation body armour.  Where your soldiers are dismounted, they need that next generation of protection.

Bottom Line:  It is inevitable that defenders will continue to refine their tactics and improve their weapons over the next decade as they take the lesson learned in Iraq and apply them.  Since there is an inevitable arms race between tanks and anti-tank weapons, that means we have to turn it into a war of economics and build a force they cannot AFFORD to engage and since they are quickly cancelling procurements of BTR's and T-72-equivalents, we have to be aware they can afford a lot more ATGM's....

Comments invited....


Matthew.   

 

[KevinB]

Or we could just sent out Sniper Observer teams for overwatch of tgt areas and SOF forces to liase with the local population for hearts and minds...

  KISS

 

[Infanteer]

That being said, although I like the premise of the authors argument, I think he stops one step short.   Specifically, that planning and procuring for an insurgent/guerilla type defence using the RPG-7 is at-best is dangerous and possibly fatal underestimation.

That's not what he said - he was focusing specifically on combat operations against conventional Iraqi Forces.   His premise refers specifically to the high-tempo of sustained combat operations.   COIN and SASO are a different story.

1)   The biggest change you can make is to utilize high endurance UAV's to identify the placement of IED's and setting up of ambushes prior to your first man setting a foot anywhere near the area.

This is the exact opposite of what the article proposes; this is sensor technology and although it adds another ancillery capability to the toolbelt, it shouldn't drive strategy.   It is erroneous to presuppose that with the proper technology, we can achieve information dominance and strike the enemy from afar.   The bottom line is you need to give the soldiers themselves the right balance of mobility, protection and firepower to succeed - this will most likely mean fighting for information.   Little airplanes don't win wars; as Kevin says, KISS.

Look up Col H. McMaster - there was a thread on him and his monograph which dealt with this in detail.

Since there is an inevitable arms race between tanks and anti-tank weapons, that means we have to turn it into a war of economics and build a force they cannot AFFORD to engage and since they are quickly cancelling procurements of BTR's and T-72-equivalents, we have to be aware they can afford a lot more ATGM's....

We will never build a force that the enemy can't afford to fight.   Right now, the US spends 400 billion dollars on the most powerful military machine ever fielded and they are having trouble with an Iraqi Insurgency that is using low-grade technology to chip away at American strength.   The threat isn't the ATGM, it is the factor of who is running it; this threat cannot be templated (as the article argues).

 

[couchcommander]

Or we could just sent out Sniper Observer teams for overwatch of tgt areas and SOF forces to liase with the local population for hearts and minds...

   KISS

I'm a big fan of this myself, but Cdn Blackshirt also has some good points (me agreeing with you may not be a good thing, blindman + even more blindman = still just two blindmen, plus I may provoke the wrath of Infanteer ) I think that has been echoed in different language on other threads and by members with a lot of experience dealing with this type of thing.

I think sniper overwatch and actually talking and interacting with the local population are definately two of the best forms of intelligence (I've posted to this effect before),but this capability can be enhanced by remote survallance and other advanced intelligence gathering tools to create an overlapping and all encompassing sytem (without too much reliance on any one part).

As well, it does seem to me (and I may be very wrong in this, someone with actual experience please respond on this note) that sniper observer teams aren't used to as great an extent as they could be and represent an asset would could use to exploited more fully (as Kevin pointed out, for eyes on target areas and dangerous routes).

Saying that, Hellfire armed Predators have shown their worth in Afghanistan and Iraq, both independantly and in fire support roles. There is definately an argument for armed UAV's, and I think the CF is addressing this.

Re: the tank... I think we'd all like tanks. Not gonna happen though (unless MGS completely falls through... it looks like it's having problems, we can hope). Uparmoured LAVs and Coyotes provide reasonable protection though (from what i have been exposed too, feel free to correct this view if it's incorrect).

CASR actually did a modest proposal online the lines of turning bisons into armoured logistics vehicles. I think the idea has merit. A significant portion of the casualites in Iraq (at least initially) were had in unarmoured transport vehicles. With no front lines, there is no safe place.

Re: remote sensing vehicles - do you mean something like a coyote with sensory equipment or an actual remote vehicle? And what do you mean by Wi-Fi sensors?

The army is planning to field next generation armour, I think a contract has already been awarded.

EDIT:

Oh no he's here already! Cover man, cover! (just kidding )

 

[Infanteer]

I think sniper overwatch and actually talking and interacting with the local population are definately two of the best forms of intelligence (I've posted to this effect before),but this capability can be enhanced by remote survallance and other advanced intelligence gathering tools to create an overlapping and all encompassing sytem (without too much reliance on any one part).

Explain.

As well, it does seem to me (and I may be very wrong in this, someone with actual experience please respond on this note) that sniper observer teams aren't used to as great an extent as they could be and represent an asset would could use to exploited more fully (as Kevin pointed out, for eyes on target areas and dangerous routes).

And your substantiation on the proper/inproper employment of sniper teams is???

Saying that, Hellfire armed Predators have shown their worth in Afghanistan and Iraq, both independantly and in fire support roles. There is definately an argument for armed UAV's, and I think the CF is addressing this.

Proof?   Aside from a a few dead terrorists, I haven't heard of a substantial case that UCAV's are becoming the third leg to fire support.

The army is planning to field next generation armour, I think a contract has already been awarded.

Which Army?   What contract is that?   Funny that it hasn't been discussed here.

Like I said before, signal:noise.   If you are going to post a bunch of stuff up in the effort to get into the thread and at the end of every sentence include the disclaimer "I may be wrong as I've never been exposed to this so please correct me!", perhaps you are better off reading and asking the occasional question.   If you feel you have something to add, by all means build a case, back it up and add it to the discussion.   Don't assume because you include the disclaimer that you know nothing means you can tie up discussions.

 

[couchcommander]

And your substantiation on the proper/inproper employment of sniper teams is???

"As well, it does seem to me (and I may be very wrong in this, someone with actual experience please respond on this note)"

I believe I was quite clear that this was an "impression" that, due to my inability to go to Kandahar and look around (without putting on a uniform that is), I had garnered from mainstream media and this forum. Further, I was in effect asking for someone who has experience to provide some guidance in this respect.

Proof?   Aside from a a few dead terrorists, I haven't heard of a substantial case that UCAV's are becoming the third leg to fire support.

Firstly, I didn't think I implied third leg. Secondly, I was simply saying "had proven their worth" in both roles, and that there is a good argument for the CF to look into aquiring armed UAV's. Do you disagree with this?

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/national/s_131100.html - AP article detailing some of the sucesses (and failures) of tacitcal UAV's in the intial war in Iraq

http://www.defense.gov/news/May2003/n05192003_200305191.html - better sourced article, but no specific examples

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2005/ss_military_11_15.html - interesitng article on some of the uses the US has found for UAV's in Iraq

Which Army?   What contract is that?   Funny that it hasn't been discussed here.

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/Chief_Land_Staff/Clothe_the_soldier/hab/2/222_e.asp

"Status â “ Contracted. A contract has been let to MSA Gallet to supply DND with Bullet Resistant Plates. "

Like I said before, signal:noise.   If you are going to post a bunch of stuff up in the effort to get into the thread and at the end of every sentence include the disclaimer "I may be wrong as I've never even been in a uniform so please correct me!", perhaps you are better off reading and asking the occasional question.   If you feel you have something to add, by all means build a case, back it up and add it to the discussion.   Don't assume because you include the disclaimer that you know nothing means you can tie up discussions.

I think someone missed his happy flakes this morning.

"plus I may provoke the wrath of Infanteer ".... heh

 

[Infanteer]

I believe I was quite clear that this was an "impression" that, due to my inability to go to Kandahar and look around (without putting on a uniform that is), I had garnered from mainstream media and this forum.

Again, proof - I don't know where you got the information to form this impression.   Did a Master Sniper tell you about Sniper operations in Afghanistan; was there a story or a thread on it?   You're just adding to the noise by putting this "impression" up without bothering to back it up with any sort of source.   It doesn't appear that you are asking for guidance if you are saying that your impression is that they are ill-employed.

Firstly, I didn't think I implied third leg. Secondly, I was simply saying "had proven their worth" in both roles, and that there is a good argument for the CF to look into aquiring armed UAV's. Do you disagree with this?

How does that prove their worth with regards to reconnaissance tasks in high-tempo, sustained operations?   It's nice that you can google up some articles on how the UAV is used for strategic strikes or escorting convoys, but those have nothing to do with the topic at hand.   Major Taylor specifically addresses UAV's and their deficiencies in the "Saber for Stealth" conundrum, so instead of just posting to show us that you've read about UAVs and you know what they are, why don't you deal with the topic at hand instead of derailing it.

"Status â “ Contracted. A contract has been let to MSA Gallet to supply DND with Bullet Resistant Plates. "

You're talking about body armour which is already issued - rather irrelevant to the discussion.   This is a thread about "armoured vehicles" in the "Armour" forum, so make sure you clarify what you're posting up here.

I think someone missed his happy flakes this morning.

Have you anything else to add to the thread?

 

[couchcommander]

Again, proof - I don't know where you got the information to form this impression.   Did a Master Sniper tell you about Sniper operations in Afghanistan; was there a story or a thread on it?   You're just adding to the noise by putting this "impression" up without bothering to back it up with any sort of source.   It doesn't appear that you are asking for guidance if you are saying that your impression is that they are ill-employed.

"I may be very wrong in this, someone with actual experience please respond on this note"

EDIT: I am attempting to find the news article that gave me this impression, though it is rather old

How does that prove their worth with regards to reconnaissance tasks in high-tempo, sustained operations?   It's nice that you can google up some articles on how the UAV is used for strategic strikes or escorting convoys, but those have nothing to do with the topic at hand.   Major Taylor specifically addresses UAV's and their deficiencies in the "Saber for Stealth" conundrum, so instead of just posting to show us that you've read about UAVs and you know what they are, why don't you deal with the topic at hand instead of derailing it.

Sorry, I miss quoted myself, I said "shown their worth".

Secondly, I was responding to Cnd Blackshirt, who I believe was putting forth UAV use for strikes and escorting convoys.

"The biggest change you can make is to utilize high endurance UAV's to identify the placement of IED's and setting up of ambushes prior to your first man setting a foot anywhere near the area"

"Call it "The Hand of God" factor.   If our commanders on the ground via TV link can see people up to no good, they die"

And yes, Google was used to pull up articles I remember reading years ago. I didn't think that this was a bad thing.

You're talking about body armour which is already issued - rather irrelevant to the discussion.   This is a thread about "armoured vehicles" in the "Armour" forum, so make sure you clarify what you're posting up here.

Well I'm sorry the official DND website said Status was "contract awared", which according to the Clothe the Soldier Generic Timeline on same said site, indicates that this is before First Delivery. If this information is incorrect, I apologize.

Further, once again, I was responding to a suggestion put forth on said thread.  

Have you anything else to add to the thread?

Snark begets snark, and quite frankly it's beginning to piss me off. If you have a problem with something I say, post a rebuttal disproving it (given how inexperienced I am it shouldn't be that hard to find evidence to the contrary). I have clearly demonstrated I have no problem admitting when I have made a mistake.

 

[KevinB]

My comments on using the sniper/observer team was based on AAR's, and personal view based on my experiences.

  I don'ttrust a lot of the techy items - as it has the problem of giving the chain of command a great sense of situational awareness when they are not there   -- so while it is a great tool, it has to be taken with the understanding of its limitations.  They must not second guess the man on the ground.

The Mk1 eyeball with eyes on can place a bullet where it needs to go -- a Armed UAV is still relating an electronic image subject to misunderstanding etc - who is responsible for the the ordnance release? and Based on WHAT (I think they are a good tool - but once again their limitations must be understood), and Omar laying a daisychain out is not a tgt for a Maverick or Hellfire especially when you consider the potential for collateral damage.   Simply whistle in a 77gr or 168/175gr BTHP into his pumpkin - no fuss no muss.

  It is easier for the US to adopt this strategy, since they have a "Sniper" at Platoon level - and greater numbers other them that the CF, add in SOF SOTI cadres and you have the potential to own the ground from 0-1200 from your OP.   Then the ODA's with their language skills can filter in and play hearts and minds while the CAG TF's deal with identified threats.

It won't start happening in the CF until we get an effective DM course running - and some of the unit Master Snipers stop being so pig headed about letting "sniper" weapons into the hands of the "unclean" in the rifle colonies.   Snipers are Bn asset and the CO has bigger fish to fry with relatively few assets.    I could start another lament about marksmanship declining and the reasons that unit MS's are loathe to turn to the colonies...

 

[couchcommander]

Thanks Kevin,

I can understand the desire to not use a very expensive missle on one potential terrorist (and the limitations of the TV).

Would you agree though that when this type of overwatch is not availible that an armed UAV is a good alternative? Or would you suggest something else?

Re: the snipers being a Bn asset... that's probably what gave me my impression of their underuse. It seemed to me that they were deployed rather sparingly.

 

[KevinB]

I've gone "off mission" as it where in responce to some of the comments.

When the comments about IED planting etc I zero'd in on that aspect that they are doign that on MSR's as such is is not an advance issue I have focused on but of a COIN mission.

 

[Infanteer]

So much so that this jaunt gets its own thread in an effort to keep the original one on target.

 

[KevinB]

Thanks Infanteer  ;D


Couch -- I will see if I can dig up some photo's but Afghan and Iraq are both a mess of cellular coverage and they also use a funky battery powered radio (the battery is funky not the radio) in areas wehre they don't want or can't use cells.  UAV's take up airspace and despite them being all stealthy and all -- I've seen some operating with my Mk1 eyeball in Afghan - now I have good eyes, but I would not kid myself about thinking your fooling anyone with the network of schoolage informants they have -- as a buddy relayed to me - "just think of that scene from BlackHawk Down, modernized"...

  UAV's to me are a good way to take out things where you dont want to send a plane or chopper - but they are not what I would call a descriminating weapon specifically using a missle.


A det can setup along a MSR and cover a good 2k bubble provided they have a good spot - with good terrain and the .338LM TWolf you can push a 3k bubble (1.5 each way).  That det can GUARANTEE you they can pretty much negate any attempt to plan IED's or possition a VBIED inside their bubble.  A 4 man det can provide observation from a secure position for an almost unlimited time, if they have to provide local security there dwell time drops significantly.

Unlike parking a M1A2 on the roadway however MullahBob won't see or know about the det until he's bleeding out on the roadway.


So you have overt and covert OP's funnel the enemy into your killing zones in the covert OP's and pop.

 

[a_majoor]

Just getting back to Cdn Blackshirt's origional post, while UAVs or other high tech means can certainly help, they will not lift the fog of war sufficiently to help with the IED threat. Matt Fisher has posted on the situation on the ground in Iraq, where IEDs are hidden in the piles of garbage encountered on the roadsides everywhere. Do you drop shells or bombs on anyone littering since they "might" be planting an IED? (Although I would be tempted to borrow this solution for the litterbugs who make my own home town look like a trash heap....)

This actually blends in with the "Trading the Sabre for Stealth" thread. Armoured Recce is important in getting observation forward and across a braod frontage as fast as possible, while Infantry recce can be used like KevinB suggests to piquet areas of interest, and take appropriate action to deal with threats. (see also threads about the 173 Surveillance Det).  Boots on the ground can certainly develop HUMINT, and we certainly need a more robust way of deriving int from other government agencies and NGOs operating on the ground. In all cases, high tech surveillance systems can augment the soldiers on the ground, but will not replace them. Even if an effective means of detecting IEDs was to be fielded, it seems certain that the enemy will shift tactics to negate any advantage we might derive from this.

 

[Gunnerlove]

I have been told that explosives are now being cast in the shape of cinder blocks , complete with remote detonator.

Stop car in traffic open door and drop it off on the side of a road used by occupying forces. Then just maintain overwatch and wait for a target to get near enough to warrant a detonation. If you think anyone can maintain a total overwatch, thourough enough to catch the placement of all bombs and mines in a whole country you are right out to lunch.

 

[Infanteer]

Don't forget "Yell Allahu Akbar 27 times" in that process....

 

[scm77]

Some good IED info here.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/ied.htm

Check out the link there to "Package Type IED".  It's got a bunch of pictures of various IED's that have been found in Iraq.  Artillery shells hidden in bags, anti-tank mines with remote detonators hidden in concrete.  Even some sort of explosive hidden in a Pepsi can.

 

[KevinB]

I'm not concerned with observing small IED's (sorry) they are a threat more to children and noncombatants -- I am more concerned with someone emplacing a few 152mm shells alongside the MSR.  You can fill your tags quickly enough and get rid of some the competant bombers that way - plus learn more about their construction methods to get clues onto who to whack for building them. 

If you've seen some of the US forces ODA's roll you can see them taking their time slowly and methodically moving down the routes in their open Hummers OBSERVING for threats

  A buddy of mine has a good video on the effects of handgrenades and small EID's on his convoy (nill effects other than the suburban veered abit upon detonation of the IED)  Different mission form the ODA's in that they are guarding a client and not intent on solving the issues at hand.

RPG and other small arms ambush threats can be dealt with by good IA drills and accurate return fire -- most insurgents will not last long on a force on force shootout against contractors or western military forces.

DISMOUNT AND KILL.

 

[McG]

So much so that this jaunt gets its own thread in an effort to keep the original one on target.

Which thread did this start in?

Stop car in traffic open door and drop it off on the side of a road used by occupying forces. Then just maintain overwatch and wait for a target to get near enough to warrant a detonation.

There's the key.   With the large part of IEDs being command detonated, it is important to remain vigilant, treat every strike as an ambush, look for the guy that "pressed the button" and kill/capture him (even better if you identify & get him before he "presses the button").

 

[Infanteer]

Which thread did this start in?

Saber for Stealth