The Threat Of Unexploded Munitions

Eeshaan

New Member
Hello,

I was reading up on the net about the dangers of the countless number of unexploded bomblets, cluster bombs, mines and other munitions that have become a serious threat not just to a nation's military, but to it's civilians as well. Not during wartime, but several years, and sometimes decade later.

A friend of mine in the defense industry told me that advanced munitions that can be remotely activated or deactivated for wartime & peacetime are under development, but of course they're going to be quite expensive and most 3rd world nations might not be able to afford them.

What are the solutions to this issue ? Is it possible to develop timed mines or cluster bombs that can deactivate or explode within a certain timeframe, thereby not being a threat to civilians several years after a war is over ? Can munitions be remotely detonated or deactivated once the fighting is over and area is secure ?

Thanks
 

Kilo 2-3

New Member
Some mines already do include (M131 MOPMS) time-based self-destruct systems. However, most of the people making mines, etc. in or for conflicts in the third world aren't really concerned with the future. They want to get their ordnance cheaply and to achieve their immediate objectives. Worrying about what happens to their mines and bombs after the shooting is over, is very far down their list of priorities, if it even makes the list at all. Plus, you have to have adequate encryption to ensure that your destruct signals can't be spoofed or triggered by the opposition.

Keep in mind that a fair amount of the unexploded ordnance out there is either dud munitions, unfused artillery shells/bombs, or "dumb" unspent ammo (loose small arms cartridges, for example). There really isn't a feasible way to destroy many of these munitions simply by flicking a switch. The ordnance may be too small to fuse, it may not be cost-effective to do so, or the ordnance's detonation system has already failed (e.g. a dud), which would (for obvious reasons), make a self-destruct difficult or impossible.

So, to answer your question. Yes, but the solutions aren't likely to be implemented in the places that need them most.

Just my two cents.
 

Spetsznaz

New Member
Does anyone know a comparison figure between the cost of building a simple mine and removal of the mine.

The number seems to be between Astonishingly low (and very hard to believe) that some nations acquire mines for just $15-20 but safe removal of UXO's hovers around $100.

Focusing a little more on the first part, how expensive can a (lethal) mine get? What are the economics of it.
 

Eeshaan

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
Thanks for the info, Kilo 2-3.

Yes third world nations and warring factions in places like Africa etc. do not care about civilian casualties all that much. Ordnance with self-destruct mechanisms are quite expensive and might not be bought by factions fighting their wars in backwater places.

I was wondering what the international community is doing to prevent and solve this issue...
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Thanks for the info, Kilo 2-3.

Yes third world nations and warring factions in places like Africa etc. do not care about civilian casualties all that much. Ordnance with self-destruct mechanisms are quite expensive and might not be bought by factions fighting their wars in backwater places.

I was wondering what the international community is doing to prevent and solve this issue...
At the moment there's this....

ICBL - International Campaign to Ban Landmines

The 1997 Mine Ban treaty. It was supported by nearly 100 countries, with notable exceptions of 5 major players in the manufacture & trade of these weapons.

Since then there have been several western countries who have developed landmine disposal systems...

Landmine Clearance Systems/Equipment - Armedforces Suppliers

http://www.larringtontrailers.com/agricultural-machines/mine-clearance/

Most are based on mechanical systems which either filter the soil to remove components, or physically disturb the soil, by replcating someone 'standing' on the mine.

There are other systems that dispose of the explosive part (using high temperature flames / chemicals reactions with products like THERMITE (Thermite experiments)), without destroying the detonator, so there's no explosion.

As for the 'time delay' mechanisims, yes there are a few out there, but when u consider that your average mine sells for $20-25 US & an equivelent one with a time-delay mechanisim cost say $75 US, you can understand that not many people are buying them....

As ever, there's a myriad of data out there to analyse. Here's what a 0.19 second search of Google turns up...

Landmine disposal systems - Google Search

...& here's what Wiki turns up....

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mine_clearance_agency"]Mine clearance agency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Dca._logo.gif" class="image"><img alt="Dca. logo.gif" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1e/Dca._logo.gif"@@AMEPARAM@@en/1/1e/Dca._logo.gif[/ame]

MORE than enough to trawl thru....


SA
 

Spetsznaz

New Member
At the moment there's this....

ICBL - International Campaign to Ban Landmines

The 1997 Mine Ban treaty. It was supported by nearly 100 countries, with notable exceptions of 5 major players in the manufacture & trade of these weapons.

Since then there have been several western countries who have developed landmine disposal systems...

Landmine Clearance Systems/Equipment - Armedforces Suppliers

http://www.larringtontrailers.com/agricultural-machines/mine-clearance/

Most are based on mechanical systems which either filter the soil to remove components, or physically disturb the soil, by replcating someone 'standing' on the mine.

There are other systems that dispose of the explosive part (using high temperature flames / chemicals reactions with products like THERMITE (Thermite experiments)), without destroying the detonator, so there's no explosion.

As for the 'time delay' mechanisims, yes there are a few out there, but when u consider that your average mine sells for $20-25 US & an equivelent one with a time-delay mechanisim cost say $75 US, you can understand that not many people are buying them....

As ever, there's a myriad of data out there to analyse. Here's what a 0.19 second search of Google turns up...

Landmine disposal systems - Google Search

...& here's what Wiki turns up....

Mine clearance agency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MORE than enough to trawl thru....


SA
I was reading up on the UXO, and Laos is the current most contaminated nation, filled with UXO's

Looks like there is about 200 million CB's lying around laos.
UXO clearance promotes development | Lao Voices

The US military is doing a good job by using "green ammunition" with 5.56 and 40mm grenades. These are basically duds with no charge.

By the way Systems addict is that...Cheburashka in your avatar? damn man where did you find that picture? looks pretty bad ass:smooth
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
...By the way Systems addict is that...Cheburashka in your avatar? damn man where did you find that picture? looks pretty bad ass:smooth
:eek:fftopic

Absouletly no idea who the little chap is, I just liked the look of him when I was scanning thru the Avatars when I joined. I'm sure there was a pile of pokemon in there at the time too...


EDIT[ Now I've went away & done the 'ole Google / wiki search, I would be pretty certain that it is Cheburashka (all be it in a Terminator-style)]

SA
 
Last edited:

My2Cents

Active Member
Hello,

I was reading up on the net about the dangers of the countless number of unexploded bomblets, cluster bombs, mines and other munitions that have become a serious threat not just to a nation's military, but to it's civilians as well. Not during wartime, but several years, and sometimes decade later.

A friend of mine in the defense industry told me that advanced munitions that can be remotely activated or deactivated for wartime & peacetime are under development, but of course they're going to be quite expensive and most 3rd world nations might not be able to afford them.

What are the solutions to this issue ? Is it possible to develop timed mines or cluster bombs that can deactivate or explode within a certain timeframe, thereby not being a threat to civilians several years after a war is over ? Can munitions be remotely detonated or deactivated once the fighting is over and area is secure ?

Thanks
There is no simple solution. This article gives some insight into the basic problem.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006fuze/hole.pdf

There are a lot of ways that a weapon can fail to detonate, with up to a 23% overall failure rate. The principle cause is ‘human error’ of course, but even without that the best case failure rate only drops to 7%. The problem with cluster bombs is the large number small bombs that are the sub-munitions, combined with the impossibility of checking the fusing on each sub-munition before use. A bomb with 200 sub-munitions can be expected to leave at least 20 unexploded pieces laying around.
 
There is no simple solution. This article gives some insight into the basic problem.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006fuze/hole.pdf

There are a lot of ways that a weapon can fail to detonate, with up to a 23% overall failure rate. The principle cause is ‘human error’ of course, but even without that the best case failure rate only drops to 7%. The problem with cluster bombs is the large number small bombs that are the sub-munitions, combined with the impossibility of checking the fusing on each sub-munition before use. A bomb with 200 sub-munitions can be expected to leave at least 20 unexploded pieces laying around.
There are solutions out there, as an example, check Instaza from Spain and their SD2 concept, it is already in use in their Alhambra hand grenades and their MAT 120 morter amo (submunitions) 0% duds.

Go to this page, choose English and then go to news.

Instalaza Web Site

There are more details of this system on the net.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
There are solutions out there, as an example, check Instaza from Spain and their SD2 concept, it is already in use in their Alhambra hand grenades and their MAT 120 morter amo (submunitions) 0% duds.

Go to this page, choose English and then go to news.

Instalaza Web Site

There are more details of this system on the net.
Nothing is 100% reliable. Their news release statement is undoubtedly a set of weasel words created by their publicity department with the assistance of their legal department.

The principle requirement of a modern fuse is to keep the projectile safe until fired, the safety mechanisms require an exact sequence of events, generally a combination of a trigger, acceleration and/or freefall, rotation, and time before the fuse is armed. If the sensor for any of these fails to function correctly the fuse does not arm and you have a dud. But in a partially armed state that can become completely armed later.

Then there are the mechanisms that initiate the detonation, usually impact, time, or proximity, plus frequently an additional time only backup to self-destruct duds. Proximity is the most complicated and least reliable, time the simplest and most reliable.

Finally there is the human element, failure to correctly assemble the firing train, failure to properly arm the projectile, improper storage, etc.
 
Nothing is 100% reliable. Their news release statement is undoubtedly a set of weasel words created by their publicity department with the assistance of their legal department.

The principle requirement of a modern fuse is to keep the projectile safe until fired, the safety mechanisms require an exact sequence of events, generally a combination of a trigger, acceleration and/or freefall, rotation, and time before the fuse is armed. If the sensor for any of these fails to function correctly the fuse does not arm and you have a dud. But in a partially armed state that can become completely armed later.

Then there are the mechanisms that initiate the detonation, usually impact, time, or proximity, plus frequently an additional time only backup to self-destruct duds. Proximity is the most complicated and least reliable, time the simplest and most reliable.

Finally there is the human element, failure to correctly assemble the firing train, failure to properly arm the projectile, improper storage, etc.
I would agree that nothing is 100% reliable but, these ammunitions work with a different logic behind, to get detonation all the sequence should be completed correctly or the submunitions are inert.

So .. for starters, the detonation sequence is fully electric/electronic.
Before fire the ammunitions do not store any electricity( is inert), when the pin is removed and during flight a little mechanical generator provides the necessary electricity to arm the submunitions ( the electricity is stored in the submunitions)

The submunitions then explode upon impact ( electric detonation ) or self destruct with a timer (electric detonation) or they self discharge the electricity stored (inert).

As you said nothing is 100% reliable but if all of this fails and for the very small amount of submunitions that fail, how long before the stored electricity is discharged naturally? No detonation without electricity, the submunitions do not remain armed without it.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
So .. for starters, the detonation sequence is fully electric/electronic.
Before fire the ammunitions do not store any electricity( is inert), when the pin is removed and during flight a little mechanical generator provides the necessary electricity to arm the submunitions ( the electricity is stored in the submunitions)

The submunitions then explode upon impact ( electric detonation ) or self destruct with a timer (electric detonation) or they self discharge the electricity stored (inert).

As you said nothing is 100% reliable but if all of this fails and for the very small amount of submunitions that fail, how long before the stored electricity is discharged naturally? No detonation without electricity, the submunitions do not remain armed without it.
Not that much different than some that have gone before. All of the components have been used before in fuses, though I do not believe that that particular combination (mechanical generator charging submunitions energy storage in flight) has been applied to an artillery shell before. Is the generator powered by a spring, an air turbine, or a flywheel? How do they apply it to a grenade? Can the existing fuses be used for artillery guns as well as mortars?

But duds still occur because the arming or detonation sequences fail to complete correctly. This results in submunitions left on the battlefield that can detonate later, even if only because the explosive fill becomes more sensitive with age.
 
Not that much different than some that have gone before. All of the components have been used before in fuses, though I do not believe that that particular combination (mechanical generator charging submunitions energy storage in flight) has been applied to an artillery shell before. Is the generator powered by a spring, an air turbine, or a flywheel? How do they apply it to a grenade? Can the existing fuses be used for artillery guns as well as mortars?

But duds still occur because the arming or detonation sequences fail to complete correctly. This results in submunitions left on the battlefield that can detonate later, even if only because the explosive fill becomes more sensitive with age.
It´s an air turbine on the MAT-120, the hand grenade is different Instalaza Alhambra hand grenade (Spain) - Jane's Infantry Weapons

It does not really matter, the Spanish government in all their wisdom signed the treaty on cluster bombs in 2008, they thought it would not be worth it to defend SD2 technology (INSTALAZA) since it would weaken the draft document and it would prompt other countries to doubt the "Spanish determination" . Very short sighted in my opinion, this technology would have gone a long way to reduce the risk of unexploded munitions.
Not only they did forbid Instalaza to continue production but they also forbade them to trade the patents. There is a court case pending in Spain on this matter.

Finland was the only country (that I am aware of) that defended this technology and was finally, through lack of a better option forced not to sign the treaty.

Patria from Finland was one of Instalaza´s customers on the MAT-120 for their AMOS mortar system.

The Alhambra hand grenade is in service with the Spanish and Italian armies.

To reduce the risky duds to the risk of explosive fill deterioration is an enormous step.
TNT gets quite unstable with time but there are other explosives.


Regards.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
To reduce the risky duds to the risk of explosive fill deterioration is an enormous step.
TNT gets quite unstable with time but there are other explosives.
They all get unstable with time, eventually to the point that spontaneous detonation can become a real risk. Keeping the explosives out of contact with metals also helps. The new formulas for the main charge are more stable and take longer to degrade, but the explosives used in the other components are less stable, and perfectly positioned to set the whole thing off.

And the true idiots are too ingenious, and too determined, to be stopped by any system of safeties. So it is not a good idea to leave the things lying around not matter how good the fuse safety is.
2006 Darwin Award: Hammer of Doom
2005 Darwin Award: Chimney-Cleaning Grenade
2001 Darwin Award: Grenade Juggler
:loony
 

GunSafe

New Member
There are still many Unexploded Munition places in this world mainly in the areas where World Wars occured.
 
Top