Real E.F.P.: Pocket-Sized Tank Killer

The pictures released last week of Iraqi high-tech explosives surprised me. These special 'superbombs' that have caused so many US casualties -- they look like they had been assembled in someone's garage.

These bombs belong to a class known as EFP --'Explosively Formed Projectile' or 'Explosively Formed Penetrator,' depending on who you're talking to. They compress a metal liner into a slug and fire it at the target some distance away.

The picture shows what a real EFP munition looks like. This is M2 Selectable Lightweight Attack Munition (SLAM). It's small enough to put in your pocket and weighs a couple of pounds.

This version has been used by US Special Forces for the last 15 years or so. As GlobalSecurity.org describes it, SLAM is versatile, too:

It will be used to support hit-and-run, ambush, and harassing, and urban warface missions. SLAM will also be employed by Light Combat Engineers and Rangers where missions warrant the use of such a device....SLAM is lightweight, lethal, easily emplaced, and can be carried in the quantity necessary to neutralize a broad range of targets.

Different modes allow SLAM to be triggered by the heat or magnetic signature of a passing vehicle or by a timer -- or it can be set off by a human operator. It can be emplaced in seconds and spits out a lethal slug which can punch through 40mm of steel armor at a range of 25 feet. You can leave it on the ground covered in dirt to attack a vehicle's belly, or conceal it beside a road for side attack.

No doubt the Russians and Chinese have their own versions of SLAM, and these have probably been copied too. So you might expect a rougher, cheaper copy to appear in Iraq if it was supplied from the outside.

But as has been observed here, anyone can make crude and simple EFP munitions in a basic workshop. All you need is a lump of plastic explosive and a piece of copper. Shape the copper into a saucer, put the explosive under it, and you're there. Obviously this will be a lot less efficient, accurate and reliable than something like SLAM (optimal design of the the metal 'lens' is an art requiring a lot of computer power), but you can compensate by making it ten times bigger if you need to.

Maybe the insurgents should be given some credit for being able to build their own gear, or maybe there's more intelligence we don't know. But if EFP mines were being supplied by an outside source, you might expect to see somethng a lot slicker.

UPDATE 11:37: Speaking of surprises, Centcom commander Adm. Fox Fallon doesn't agree that the Iranian government has been supplying Iraq's EFPs. He's not alone. Joint Chiefs chairman Gen. Peter Pace, on the other hand, seemed to back away from his previous, doubting statements -- at least a little. More here.

UPDATE 01:20: The bombs aren't the only issue, of course. According to the Telegraph, Iranian-supplied sniper rifles are also making their way into Iraq.

UPDATE 02:24: Bush has no doubt.

UPDATE 15/02/07: Steyr, the Austrian makers of those .50 cal sniper rifles say there's no proof they came from Iran - and that they might not even be Steyr-made rifles at all.

-- David Hambling

New Camera Sees In Bullet Time

Here's your cool gadget of the week: a video camera that can follow speeding bullets midflight. I took a look at the gizmo, built by Nova Sensors Inc for the Air Force Research Laboratory, for Wired News. I've examined Nova's goods before. But this is the first time it's ability to mimic the Matrix's bullet time sequences has been revealed.

The first videos -- which you can see via the Wired story -- are crude. But it's an impressive capability. Existing sniper-finding systems rely on radar or acoustic sensors. And they can be heavy, bulky, and are one more piece of kit to carry. Nova Sensors device (known as VAST) can be integrated into a thermal imager, devices which are small enough for personal use.

Effectively, it could turn every round into a tracer bullet. Anyone firing at you would give themselves away immediately, even if the muzzle flash is hidden. From Nova President Mark Massie’s comments on the sensor, it sounds as though different types of rounds may have very different signatures, so enhanced software would not only be able to pinpoint the source of a shot, it could say what type of weapon is being fired. A system that tells you that two AK-47s and one AK-74 are firing from the upper story of Building A? Sounds pretty useful.

Interestingly, right at the moment a new evaluation is being carried out using ShotSpotter acoustic sniper location system in conjunction with Boeing's ScanEagle UAVs. The idea is that the ShotSpotter indicates the location and Scan Eagle goes over to get a better look. A ScanEagle equipped with the VAST camera system would be a logical extension of this idea.

(The bad guys could try to get around it by using bullets cast from ice when they are sniping, an approach only used so far in bad thrillers as far as I know. It's possible; it gives terrible ballistics and very limited lethality, but the bullets could not be tracked by the VAST system. Or at least, not until Massie's team spend five minutes on the software and get it to pick out cold objects against the warm background as well as hot ones.)

If only Zapruder had had one of these, we would be able to see exactly how many bullets were fired at Kennedy and from what direction...

There are likely to be a lot of other applications which are more prosaic than following bullets in flight. But as a first demonstration, it’s pretty impressive.

-- David Hambling

Earthquake Array Hits Deeper Than Nukes

Attacking hardened and deeply buried target is one of the Air Force’s biggest challenges. They are meeting this challenge with a devastating new approach: a focused underground shockwave that amounts to an artificial earthquake.

At present the kinetic approach – a.k.a. ‘brute force’ – is favored; the most powerful weapon in the inventory is the BLU-113, a 4,600 lb weapon with a thick steel casing capable of piercing 22 feet of concrete -- or 100 feet of dirt -- before exploding. There are plans to go even bigger, with a monster 30,000 lb ‘Massive Ordnance Penetrator’ which would take the maximum depth to 60 feet. That’s about as big as you can carry on a plane.

I’ve described Deep Digger here previously. Unlike earlier weapons this is an active penetrator, a bomb that actually burrows into the ground by drilling a shaft with volleys from seven cannon. In a demonstration last year a Deep Digger prototype penetrated more than 30 feet of limestone. The makers were tight-lipped about how much further it could go.

This presentation from David Burns of the Medium Caliber Weapons Systems Branch of ARDEC reveals much more about the weapon than previously released. In particular, it is described as being able to dig down to 150 feet. That’s impressive on its own, but the ‘Concept Of Operations’ in Slide 4 is staggering: an array of 20 Deep Diggers would be detonated together to produce a shockwave which will collapse all underground structures to a depth of 300 feet over a 200-yard square area.

Compare this to this description of the B61-11, the only bunker-busting nuclear bomb in the arsenal:

For a penetration depth of three meters and a yield of 0.3 kilotons, the B61-11 could destroy a target buried under roughly 15 meters [= 50 feet] of hard rock or concrete. For the same penetration depth and the maximum yield of 340 kilotons, the destruction depth would be roughly 70 meters [ =210 feet ] for a hardened target.

In other words, the Deep Digger array is more effective than a 340-kiloton nuclear weapon optimised to attack underground targets.

The secret is in effectively combining 20 separate explosions into a coherent pulse. This area has been researched for many years, in particular in the 90’s under the name of ACE, for Array of Conventional Explosives. It takes a phenomenal amount of computing power to calculate the non-linear effects of multiple explosions combining in a three-dimensional volume (which may not be homogenous), and new software tools were developed for the job. In addition, real-world testing is needed to validate these models – hence exercises like the notorious Divine Strake which involves a underground explosion of 700 tons of explosives.

The last I heard the Array Of Conventional Explosives had been axed, in favor of simpler and more straightforward approaches, but Deep Digger has some key advantages over earlier weapons that make it more suitable:

- Deep penetration means that all of the blast goes into creating an underground shockwave, not just digging a crater. For blasting rock, it’s basic that the charge need to be drilled to a depth to be effective.

- Deep Digger parachutes down to a soft landing before digging in. Other bunker busters hit the ground very hard and experience a deceleration tens of thousands of g's. This affects their reliability, and the loss of a few warheads may make the whole array ineffective.

- Deep Digger may be able to maneuver underground, correcting the configuration of the array after it is in place.

And Deep Digger is only a first-generation active penetrator. Devices like General Dynamics Worm which Noah described last week may burrow much more effectively.

Or course, bunkers can always be dug deeper. One British Cold War plan involved relocating government centres to coal mines 5,000 feet underground. However, given that the Deep Digger array can collapse the entrance tunnels to a depth of 300 feet, any such deep bunker may become a tomb from which the occupants will never escape.

More importantly, such an array would make the vast majority of existing bunkers obsolete, or at any rate insecure. This would include nuclear facilities such as missile siloes.

((Of course the idea is not new. In WWII Barnes-Wallis used the shockwaves from Grand Slam bombs to bring down German railway viaducts when standard bombs proved ineffective. A Deep Digger array might also be used to cause the simultaneous collapse of blocks of skyscrapers, or dams or other large structures.))

I’ve been advised that the Deep Digger program is undergoing a ‘security review’. If past experience is anything to go by, this means you won’t be hearing any more news updates on the program.

Meanwhile, DARPA have started their Strategically Hardened Facility Defeat (SHFD) program which :

...seeks to leverage recent advances in non-nuclear earth-penetrating technologies for the defeat of strategically hardened targets. System and technology areas to be developed in this program include: new penetration technologies, robust self-contained aerial deployment options, sensing and navigation subsystems

This sounds like someone is going to start throwing a heap of money at something very much like Deep Digger. In the near future, digging yourself into a hole is not going to offer any protection -- and that could change a lot of things.

-- David Hambling

Bunker Busters Bulk Up

None of them are anywhere near as cool as Deep Digger, the bunker-busting bomb that drills its way underground. But various arms of the Defense Department are working on a number of next-generation munitions, designed to take out deeply buried targets, Aviation Week writes.

Pentagon will be testing the theory next year of whether bigger and heavier is... better for penetrators. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) is a behemoth of a bomb, weighing almost 30,000 lb. It is designed to "overwhelm target characterization uncertainties," according to program officials.

With 5,300 lb. of explosive material, MOP will pack more than 10 times the explosive punch of its BLU-109 [today's bunker-busting workhorse] predecessor... Optimum penetrating distance is classified, but some analysts say it is as much as 200 ft. through reinforced concrete and soil or sand...

MOP will have a blunter nose than its predecessors to keep the weapon intact during penetration... The majority of MOP's weight is actually carried in the heavy steel casing, according to AFRL [Air Force Research Lab] officials. Once the tests are finished next year, the Pentagon will decide whether to produce the MOP and begin a small stockpile...

About six years ago, AFRL officials developed the Advanced Unitary Penetrator (AUP), which can burrow twice the depth of the BLU-109. The weapon uses denser materials "to pack more mass into a smaller cross-section," Sands says. It is essentially a massive explosive bullet encased in a shroud that is dimensionally the same as the BLU-109. During penetration, the outer casing peals off, leaving the core to dig and detonate. The technology has been proven but has not been purchased by the Air Force, quite possibly because they need to go deeper still.

Thus, engineers have been experimenting with various steel formulations to improve the likelihood that a penetrator will survive on its path to a target without breaking up midcourse.

Through years of work, AAC and Ellwood National Forge in Irvine, Pa., have developed a very strong steel that is being used on the BLU-122, the Air Force's newest penetrator, weighing in at 5,000 lb. The team has applied for a patent for the chemical composition and manufacturing process that has produced "Eglin Steel," a strong blend estimated at one-eighth the cost of experimental metals with similar strength. Prior attempts to formulate similar steel have proved cost prohibitive. The patent for Eglin Steel -- a blend of carbon, chromium and tungsten for hardness, and of silicon and nickel for durability -- is under final review.

Hezbollah`s Thermobaric Arsenal (maybe)

Hezbollah have deployed a range of new high-tech weaponry in Southern Lebanon. Many commentators have noted the effectiveness of their anti-tank missiles against Israeli armor , with apparently reliable reports of Iranian-made copies of the AT-5 Spandrel and Russian-made Kornet-E and Metis-M anti-tank guided missile which were apparently supplied by Syria.

However, less attention has been paid to the reported use of missiles against infantry. In particular, in one instance

“a missile that was fired at a building soldiers were staying in caused the building to collapse, claiming the lives of nine reservists. "

That sort of effect does not suggest a HEAT warhead, which would punch a hole through a wall and do limited damage beyond. It looks more more like a powerful thermobaric blast, which produces a sustained pulse capable of knocking down walls. Both the Metis-M and Kornet-E missiles have thermobaric warhead options. Note that, as the Russians do not make a distinction, the makers describe Kornet warhead as ‘fuel air explosive’.

According to the Marine Corps Gazette, US Marine developed the tactic of using thermobaric SMAW-NE rounds in Fallujah: "SMAW gunners became expert at determining which wall to shoot to cause the roof to collapse and crush the insurgents fortified inside interior rooms."

As previously noted with the proliferation of thermobaric rounds coming from China, Russia, Eastern Europe and possibly Iran, it was only a matter of time before they turned up in the hands of guerrilla forces. Thermobaric weapons are likely to cause greatly increased casualties for three reasons.

- As is clear from the above, they turn buildings from safe cover into death traps. (One US thermobaric test was called 'Bring Down The House'). Armored vehicles, unless buttoned down, also offer little protection.

- They negate any benefits given by body armor; some studies (NB - PDF) suggest that wearing armor may actually worsen the injuries produced by a thermobaric blast – “enhancing blast effects by increasing target surface area and changing the effective loading function on the thorax."

- The internal injuries produced may be much harder to treat in the field than more normal shrapnel wounds. Hence the rush for new diagnostic tools: "Early diagnosis of internal trauma induced by a primary blast wave via a field-deployable, rapid, and non-invasive technique will provide an invaluable tool in the subsequent success of treating such conditions".

When Israel was accused of using fuel-air weapons earlier on in the conflict there was a wave of objections to this type of munition. It will be interesting to see whether Hezbollah denies or confirms using them, and whether any similar objections are raised.

-- David Hambling

Not So Divine After All?

Remember Divine Strake – a.k.a. "strakes on a plain"? Well, forget it. At least for this year.

Palm Springs’ KESQ reports that the planned massive explosion at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) has been put off till 2007, at the earliest.

Divine Strake, recall, was supposed to consist of 700 tons – many, many trucks’ worth – of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil emplaced in a shallow pit. The test did not represent an operationally realistic conventional weapon (700 tons!!! of explosives!). Rather, it was intended to simulate the effect of a very low-yield (under 600 ton) nuclear weapon on underground structures.

It is still unclear what the reasons for the delay are. The report from KESQ hints, though, that the issue may involve disputes over Western Shoshone tribal claims to NTS lands, as well as concerns that the explosion might stir up contaminated soil and send radioactive material downwind.

I guess Samuel Jackson got his way this time....

- Haninah Levine

Thermobarics All Over

The conflict in the Lebanon has once again brought up a discussion about the use of fuel-air explosives and thermobaric weapons - this time it’s Israel’s use of them that’s been questioned. But armies around the world are building up thermobaric arsenals -- a trend that's not likely not stop any time soon.

Unlike normal ("condensed") explosives, much of the blast in these fuel air weapons is produced by the fireball. A cloud of exploding material does most of the damage, producing an overpressure wave of longer duration than a point source.

Different kinds of injuries are the result. Instead of shrapnel/fragment injuries, you get blast effects. As one study puts it:

Each tissue type, when interacting with a blast wave, is compressed, stretched, sheared or disintegrated by overload according to its material properties. Internal organs that contain air (sinuses, ears, lungs and intestines) are particularly vulnerable to blast.

And those wounds have made thermobarics controversial. (Colorful media reports of other effects like 'displaced eyeballs' are dubious, but persistent.). The U.S. Marine Corps, for instance, took exception to my Defense Tech piece about their new thermobaric SMAW-NE, a handy, hand-held device capable of leveling buildings. An article posted shortly afterwards in Marine Corps News insists that the SMAW-NE is not 'brutal' - a term that came from a Human Right Watch report - and that it is not an incendiary weapon. (You may remember the rumpus over reports of white phosphorus being used as a weapon in Fallujah "Lethality... is caused primarily by its concussion with secondary effects from flying debris from the target area," the article claims.

This does not quite agree with the analysis by Dr. Anna E Wildegger-Gaissmaier, who concludes that "the primary injury mechanisms are blast and heat," but this is typical of the debate that surrounds these weapons.

The controversy does not seem to have slowed down procurement, and the Marines are first in line. One of their latest purchases is the South African M-32 Multiple shot Grenade Launcher – the USMC are buying 9,000 of them. The weapon gets an endorsement here

“I thought it was pretty bad the first time I saw it,” said Cpl. Jason H. Flanery, a 23-year-old mortarman from St. Louis, Mo., assigned to RCT-5’s Personnel Security Detachment. “… You can put six rounds on target in under three seconds,” Flanery said. “I thought this thing was sick.”

And here's video of an earlier version in action - if it looks familiar, you probably because you saw it in the movie Predator. One of the big selling points appears to be the Direct Range Air-Consuming Ordnance (DRACO) Grenade, a thermobaric round of supposedly radical destructive power – "when you absolutely, positively need to eliminate the enemy," Milcor says. (A full run-down on the M-32 by Military.com is here)

The M-32 comes on top of the 40mm thermobaric grenade America already owns -- the XM1060, which was "developed and fielded in record time" for use in Afghanistan, where its powerful blast proved very effective.

An e-mail from Maj. Gen. John Vines, commanding general, Combined Joint Task Force 180, made it all worthwhile.
"We love it," he wrote. "We want more! The rounds work wonderfully in caves; they are quite effective. We want a boatload."

As with the SMAW-NE, the new thermobaric grenade has received very little publicity in spite of its effectiveness. (The Russians also sell a multi-shot grenade launcher with thermobaric rounds for urban combat.)

Meanwhile, the British government is spending almost $70 million on a new Anti Structures Munition from Dynamit Nobel Defence. It'll have a very similar capability to the SMAW-NE and Russian Shmel. But, British sensitivities being what they are, this will not be thermobaric:

There are no thermobaric weapons in service with the British Army and we have no plans to procure any….. However, in view of the threat such weapons pose to our own forces (particularly when fighting in built-up areas or in caves), we are examining with industry the scope for technological advances in the area of enhanced blast explosives.

An Anti Structures Munition programme, based on enhanced blast explosives technology, has been established, which seeks to offer a precision capability designed to minimise casualties, and will be fully in accordance with our obligations under international humanitarian law.

There are more thermobarics out there, including a weapon by Swiss makers RUAG, but the distinction between enhanced blast and thermobaric is a fine one, and as Armada magazine puts it

Because of the amplifying effect of the scandal press, very few warhead manufacturers will admit that they are, or have been, looking into thermobaric techniques.

And the debate about who is using what and whether it's thermobaric is set to continue.

-- David Hambling

Hezbollah's Surprise Weapons

Wonder why the Israelis thought their ship had been hit by a drone last week -- when it turned out to be a radar-guided missile instead? Or why the crew of the Hanit corvette didn't use their countermeasures to protect themselves? Simple: the Sabras knew that Hezbollah had been playing with drones; they had no idea that the terrorist group had such a sophisticated missile in their arsenal. It's one of a number of ways that the "power and sophistication" of Hezbollah's arms "has caught the United States and Israel off guard," the Times reports. "Officials in both countries are just now learning the extent to which the militant group has succeeded in getting weapons from Iran and Syria."

The missile that hit the Hanit was a C-802, an Iranian-made variant of a stealthy, turbojet-powered, Chinese weapon. It's "considered along with the US 'Harpoon' as among the best anti-ship missiles" in the world, GlobalSecurity.org says.

"Iran began buying dozens of those sophisticated antiship missiles from the Chinese during the 1990’s," the Times notes. "Until Friday, however, Western intelligence services did not know that Iran had managed to ship C-802 missiles to Hezbollah."

Now that the Israelis know, it's influencing their choice of targets to hit. The C-802 was most likely "fired it from a truck-mounted launcher cued by a coastal radar installation," Situational Awareness says. So "Israel has stepped up its attacks against coastal radar sites, as any sort of surface-search set would be able to provide data for the initial launch."

After launch, the missile takes care of itself with its own inertial guidance system and onboard radar seeker. Since the launchers are mobile, the trucks carrying them could scoot after firing. And we all know how notoriously difficult it can be to locate mobile units, even when you have lots of reconnaissance assets.

The terrorists' more traditional weapons, like Katyusha rockets and Fajr-3 missiles, have contained surprises, too. "In the past, we’d see three, four, maybe eight launches at any given time if Hezbollah was feeling feisty," one unnammed official told the paper. "Now we see them arriving in large clusters, and with a range and even certain accuracy we have not seen in the past."

70 Katyushas were fired at Israel "within the space of an hour" on Wednesday afternoon, Ha'Aretz writes. Israel is responding by sending small group of ground troops into Lebanon, and by striking targets in Beruit -- including ones in the Christian part of town.

The Times says that "while Iranian missile supplies to Hezbollah, either by sea or overland via Syria, were well known, officials said the current conflict also indicated that some of the rockets in Hezbollah’s arsenal — including a 220-millimeter rocket used in a deadly attack on a railway site in Haifa on Sunday — were built in Syria."

Officials have since confirmed that the warhead on the Syrian rocket was filled with ball bearings — a method of destruction used frequently in suicide bombings but not in warhead technology.

"We’ve never seen anything like this," said one Western intelligence official, speaking about the warhead.

Conflicts Forum's Mark Perry, on the other hand, isn't as alarmed as most about Hezbollah's weaponry. {Joe Katzman says that's because the guy is a terrorist shill.} Perry declares that the militia only has a handful of sophisticated and long-range missiles. Check out his All Things Considered interview here.

UPDATE 1:43 PM: "Israeli military officials have warned that the next Palestinian uprising could be 'a ballistic intifada,'" the Washington Post reports.

(Big ups: Umansky)

UPDATE 7:13 PM: The Jerusalem Post is reporting that "IAF fighter jets dropped over 20 tons in bombs late Wednesday night on a Hizbullah bunker, possibly the hiding place of the group's leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, in the Bourj al-Barajneh refugee camp in southeast Beirut. It was still unclear who was in the bunker at the time and what their fate was, but IDF sources said the bunker was totally destroyed and that all that was left was a crater."

Hezbollah's Biggest Missile Yet

Watching the news over the last few years, we've grown accustomed to seeing terrorists as a low-tech threat -- guys who hijack airplanes with pocket knives and make bombs out of leftover parts. And that threat has been plenty scary, on its own.

But in recent days, we're starting to see what happens when Islamic extremists get their hands on the relatively sophisticated arsenal of a country like Iran. Talk about terror.

On Sunday, Hezbollah again struck Haifa -- a city untouched by the militia until a few days ago -- using its biggest and most powerful missile yet. It's one of 800 rockets Hezbollah has launched against Israel in the last five days.

The weapon "hit a busy railway maintenance building, destroying the roof, killing eight, wounding more than 20 and leaving congealing pools of blood on the platform," the Times reports. "Israel said [the missile] was a Syrian-produced model of a Iranian Fajr-3 model, [which Tehran claims can avoid radars and carry multiple warheads -- ed.]. [It] has a range of more than 30 miles and carries a warhead with about 100 pounds of high explosives, which includes antipersonnel shrapnel, a significant change from the smaller Katyushas that Hezbollah has mostly been using."

And there may be worse to come, Ha'Aretz warns.

The fighting between Israel and the Hezbollah, which is backed by Syria and Iran, has still not reached its zenith. The Israel Defense Forces' operational plans against the Shi'ite organizations have not yet been carried out. The next two days are the most critical and a lot depends on whether Tehran decides to take a chance and authorize Hezbollah to launch long-range missiles with more powerful warheads. This is a capability Hezbollah still retains, despite the heavy blows it has suffered in the IDF air strikes.

UPDATE 10:44 PM: Kathryn Cramner has worked some of her Google Earth magic, and come up with a fascinating picture of how far Hezbollah can now reach.

Hezbollah's Deadly Arsenal

For years, the border towns and kibbutzim in the upper Golan section of Israel, near Lebanon and Syria, have been under threat from Katyusha missiles. Cities just a few miles further south -- like Haifa and Tsfat, the crumbling, quiet mountaintop home of Jewish mysticism -- were safe; relying on short-range Katyusha rockets, Lebanese militants had the ability to sew terror only twelve miles into Israel. That changed on Thursday, when Hezbollah launched a new weapon, the Ra'ad rocket, which hit Tsfat and, for the first time, Haifa, 20 miles from the border. 220,000 Israelis stayed in bomb shelters last night to avoid the missiles, Ha'Aretz reports.

The exact make-up and configuration of these weapons is unclear. Some sources call it a modified anti-tank rocket; others a cruise missile. Range estimates vary from 120 to 350 kilometers, or more. One report calls it a 122mm projectile. Hezbollah claims the Iranian-made "rocket is of 333 mm in diameter and has a warhead of 100 kilograms."

Hezbollah's arsenal is likely filled with even deadlier weapons. Israel believes the terrorist group "has missiles that can hit most of Israel, and which could even strike Be'er Sheva [deep in Israel's southern, Negev desert] under optimum conditions," Ha'Aretz notes.

Iran supplied Hezbollah with solid-fuel, Zelzal-2 missiles with a 200-km range, but these are not very accurate, since they do not have a self-guidance system.

The Zelzal-2 missiles, intended to strike broad targets such as communities and cities, are equipped with explosive warheads weighing up to 600 kilograms...

Hezbollah's original Katyusha rockets had a range of 12 kilometers to 22 kilometers. At a later stage, it obtained Iranian Fajar-3 and Fajar-5 rockets, with a range of 45 kilometers and 75 kilometers, respectively. Hezbollah did not use these rockets until the current conflict.

I was supposed to spend my honeymoon next month lounging around Haifa, hiking in the Golan, maybe spending the sabbath in Tsfat. Now, these Hezbollah weapons have introduced a new calculus: how much fear is my wife willing to take?

(Big ups: Roggio, Umansky)

Miniature Bomb, Heavyweight Punch

You hear a lot of big claims in this industry. So when I read about a 31-inch, 64-pound weapon that's supposed to have more killing power than a 1,000-pound cluster bomb, I was more than a little skeptical.

After all, a typical cluster bomb distributes over two hundred BLU-97 bomblets over a wide area. Together they produce thirty times as many shrapnel fragments as the 64-pound mini-munition, Textron Systems' Clean Lightweight Area Weapon. It was hard to see how CLAW could compete.

But it turns out that CLAW can be awfully deadly, in its own right. After ejection, CLAW descends by parachute, and a proximity sensor detonates it sixteen feet above the ground. That means its fragments get dispersed far and wide. In contrast, the BLU-97 only goes off on contact with the ground, which sends a lot of fragments into the dirt – instead of into targets. (Check out this video to see what CLAW does to a 16 by 12 foot target.)

The design of the warhead casing helps, too. It's a steel cylinder scored on the inside, so that it forms diamond or arrowhead shaped fragments, over two thousand of them. A special proprietary technique is used to cut the pattern on the warhead casing, creating fragments which are bullet-sized (about 7 grams/114 grains) and effective over a very wide radius. BLU-97 fragments are much smaller (about 30 grains) and less effective.

The explosive filling of CLAW is PAX-21, which is both more powerful and more stable than previous explosives. The combination of explosion and fragments produces thorough coverage of a circular area over 140 yards across, effective against targets including personnel, soft vehicles, parked aircraft and anti-aircraft sites. Textron Systems have precisely quantified this performance with ground tests, and their claim about its effectiveness looks like a strong one.

CLAW’s small size means that strike aircraft could carry it in large numbers, but at present it’s being marketed as the ideal weapon for killer drones. Even something as large as a Predator drone can only carry two Hellfire missiles. For the same weight you could carry several CLAWs, but it also means that even smaller UAVs could be armed for the first time. The development of this type of miniature munition – and even smaller weapons are in the pipeline – brings the possibility of large numbers of armed UAVs on the battlefield for the first time.

(CLAW is not effective against heavy armor, but the same GPS-guided Universal Aerial Delivery Dispenser which delivers it can also be loaded with a BLU-108 anti-tank weapon with four target-seeking warheads.)

But perhaps the most impressive thing about CLAW is how much work has gone into making sure it only explodes when it’s meant to. There is a triple-redundant fuzing system – the proximity fuze, a ground contact fuze, and a time delay. If all of these fail, then the battery dissipates within seconds and the munition is inert. It’s not just unexploded, but unexplodable.

You could hit the CLAW with a hammer, run over it with a tractor or put it in a fire, and it will not detonate. You could take it apart without any personal risk. The insensitive explosive really is insensitive.

“The only way you could make it explode would be to take it to a laboratory,” says Richard D. Sterchele, Textron’s Business Development Manager for Smart Weapons.

This means that unexploded CLAWs cannot be turned into IEDs. Iraq is awash with weaponry, but in other conflicts like Vietnam guerrillas have used unexploded bombs as a major source of explosives.

More importantly, it does not leave hazardous unexploded bomblets scattered around. The failure rate of BLU-97 is widely quoted at around 6%, so each CBU-103 leaves about a dozen potentially lethal bomblets to be cleared up. It is hard to over-emphasize just how dangerous these are; according to the USMC’s Multi-Service Procedures for Operations in UXO Environment:

“Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity Studies show 40 percent of the duds on the ground are hazardous and for each encounter with an unexploded submunition there is a 13 percent probability of detonation…Thus, even though an unexploded submunition is run over, kicked, stepped on, or otherwise disturbed, and did not detonate, it is not safe. Handling the unexploded submunition may eventually result in arming and subsequent detonation.”

In one incident in 1991, seven members of the 27th Engineer Battalion were killed during operations to clear a runway at As Salam when a pile of ‘dud’ BLU-97’s exploded.

In the Cold War scenario, where the enemy was an invading Soviet horde, unexploded bomblets may not have been seen as a problem. But in scenarios like Iraq and Afghanistan where US engineers are likely to have to deal with them, the argument for a ‘clean’ weapon like CLAW is a compelling one.

It remains to be seen whether the Pentagon will take up CLAW, which is a private company initiative. Live CLAW munition tests from operational UAVs are being conducted by the U.S. Air Force and Army over the summer 2006. It’s a fraction of the cost of a cluster bombs, but the saving in lives could be much more important. But in the world of defense procurement, unfortunately it’s not always that simple.

-- David Hambling

Look Out, Pyongyang? Rail Gun in the Works

One of the big selling points of the Navy's new destroyer is that it can rain a whole lot of hell -- 20 rocket-propelled artillery shells, in less than a minute -- on targets up to 63 nautical miles away. Fully armed, two DDG1000s should have the firepower of an entire, 640-man artillery battalion, the Navy promises.

But really, that's the start. The ship's real power will come when it moves away from chemical powders to shoot its projectiles -- and starts relying on electromagnetic fields to shoot projectiles almost six kilometers/second, instead. With an electromagnetic rail gun pushing the rounds out so quickly, the number of rounds fired per ship would jump from 232 to 5000, Navy planners believe. (Military.com has a great primer on how it works.) Because they travel so fast -- nearly Mach 7 -- the destructive force those rounds deliver would more than double, from 6.6 megajoules to 17. And they would fly almost five times farther -- up to 300 nautical miles. That's enough to put 100% of targets in North Korea "at Risk" from a single battleship, a Navy briefing notes (right, sorry for the crappy scan).

No wonder the Office of Naval Research just handed General Atomics Aeronautical Systems a $9.6-million, 30-month contract for the preliminary design of an electromagnetic launcher, Defense Daily reports.

But don't expect to see a rail gun around North Korea any time soon. The destroyer program is in flux. And the Navy isn't looking for a "full-scale demonstration" of the rail gun until "around 2014," DD notes. "If the acquisition community decides to place it on a ship it could be done around the 2019 time frame."

Look out.

(Big ups: Haninah)

Defense Pork: Indestructible

Is there anything -- anything - that's harder to kill than a Congressman's pet defense project?

In December 2004, the Pentagon decided to stop funding next-generation, air-to-surface munition called the Joint Common Missile. The weapon has better range than its predecessors. And it featured a mighty cool "tri-mode seeker combining semi-active laser, passive imaging infrared and active millimeter wave radar" to find its targets.

But, in the end, the current crop of weapons -- "the Hellfire II, the laser-guided bombs, the joint direct attack munitions all... provid[e] for this nation the amount of precision munitions needed for the perceived warfights," General Peter Pace told Congress. "Therefore, the [JCM] munition... was recommended to be taken out of the budget so we could apply that $3- plus billion to other programs that were more needed than it, sir."

Congress didn't take Pace's recommendation, however. It pumped $30 million into the 2006 budget for the JCM.

A year later, the Defense Department still sees the weapon as overkill. So the Pentagon has tried to kill the JCM again, in its budget for 2007.

Again, Congress hasn't taken the hint. This year, House appropriators have given the project $35 million, Inside Defense reports. And at least one Senator, Richard Shelby of Alabama, is making noises about doing the same. The fact that the JCM is being built in Troy, AL is just a coincidence, surely.

But at least there has been a common mission for the JCM, throughout its series of deaths and resurrections. That's not always the case when lawmakers adopt a defense program.

Take "Project M," which has received $37 million over ten years from Congresscritters like Rep. Jim Moran. As the Washington Post notes, the "technology involving magnetic levitation was conceived as a way to keep submarine machinery quieter, was later marketed as a way to keep Navy SEALs safer in their boats and, in the end, was examined as a possible way to protect Marines from roadside bombs.

"All the applications have one thing in common: The Pentagon hasn't wanted them."

Cancer Worries for New U.S. Bombs

The U.S. military is working on a small, precise bomb that could hit targets "previously off limits to the warfighter." The problem is, it might cause cancer.

Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME) is one of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s responses to the challenge of fighting in an urban environment without hurting innocent bystanders in the process.

Recent news about an airstrike which may have killed civilians, as well as Taliban fighters, highlights the problem. Similar situations have occurred repeatedly in Iraq and Afghanistan; sometimes targets could not be engaged, because of the risk of harming nearby civilians. One option is to use smaller weapons. Another is dropping inert bombs, filled with concrete rather than explosives, to minimize collateral damage.

But what's really required is something which is just as lethal as a standard bomb, but keeps its lethal zone to a minimum. This is exactly what DIME delivers.

DIME is used in the Low Collateral Damage version of the Small Diameter Bomb currently under development. This has a carbon fiber casing which turns into dust rather than creating dangerous fragments. The bomb is filled with explosive mixed with tungsten powder, which becomes micro-shrapnel. The small-sized tungsten particles drag to a halt at about 40 charge diameters. In the case of the SDB, that gives a destructive radius of about 25 feet.

The result is an incredibly destructive blast in a small area, what the Air Force Term "Focused Lethality." The AFRL Munitions Directorate provided this picture of a DIME test, but were unable to discuss the topic. However, I talked to others who have worked in this area. They were consistently awed by the destructive power of the mixture, which causes far more damage than pure explosive within the near field. The impact of the micro-shrapnel seems to cause a similar but more powerful effect than a shockwave.

Early blasts even destroyed test instruments:

Unfortunately, the high-velocity, high temperature inert metal particles found in DIME fills have proved to be extremely damaging to traditional pressure measurement instruments. Hence, new measurement diagnostics had to be developed to investigate DIME formulations.

Because there are no large fragments, Focused Lethality Munitions should not cause a hazard at any great distance. The standard Small Diameter Bomb is claimed to be lethal out to 2,000 feet or more, the Focused Lethality version will have a smaller but deadlier footprint - a 12-gauge compared to a rifle.

Little has been released on the exact effects of DIME explosives, but it’s interesting that a presentation on future munitions illustrates focused lethality with a tank which had been turned on its side by blast. Aimed accurately, it looks like it would be capable of destroying a building completely without damaging the rest of the neighborhood.

Metal powders -- typically aluminum -- have been added to explosives for many years. But those are reactive metals, making the blast even stronger. Tungsten, on the other hand, is inert. So it remains in metallic form and absorbs some of the energy of the explosion. DIME originated in work to increase the density of the explosive mixture, improving the penetrating power of bunker busting bombs. But the bonus effect of the micro-shrapnel proved to be more significant than the increased density.

The Air Force's focused lethality munition had an enthusiastic write-up in the Wall Street Journal. The US Navy's Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren is also working on DIME munitions.

According to the Air Force’s FY 2007 Unfunded Priority List, the focused lethality munitions "will be able to prosecute targets previously off limits to the warfighter."

This suggests that they will be used in close proximity to civilians or friendly forces. The only collateral damage may be stray tungsten particles – clumping, or larger particles in the mix might mean some effect outside the focused zone. Would grains of inert tungsten present a problem? According to New Scientist magazine:

In a study designed to simulate shrapnel injuries, pellets of weapons-grade tungsten alloy were implanted in 92 rats. Within five months all the animals developed a rare cancer called rhabdomyosarcoma, according to John Kalinich's team at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Maryland.

92 out of 92 - "tumor yield was 100%" - is a significant result. The full report is here.

I checked with University of Arizona cancer researcher Dr. Mark Witten, quoted in the New Scientist story, to see how things have developed. Dr. Witten is investigating links between tungsten and leukemia, and is concerned about its possible use DIME or other munitions:

"My opinion is that there needs to be much more research on the health effects of tungsten before the military increases its usage."

We don’t know whether a Focused Lethality Munition is likely to result in tungsten particles striking anyone outside the lethal area. Nor do we know the possible environmental impact tungsten powder left afterwards. But given that the Focused Lethality munition will be used in situations which are likely to produce media attention and political repercussions, these should be addressed.

The aims of the Low Collateral Damage program are worthwhile. But unless the issues around tungsten are resolved we could see a repeat of the depleted uranium story. Instead of decreasing controversy, the new weapon might create even more.

-- David Hambling

UPDATE 05/22/06 1:45PM: Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch comments:

While Human Rights Watch is supportive of the US military's commitment to reducing civilian casualties, collateral damage as they call it, it is unfortunate that these weapons are being developed specifically for use in densely populated areas which may negate the intended effect.

Bunker-Busters Readied; Iran Attack Near?

As you've probably heard by now, Sy Hersh has a new scoop: that planning for an attack on Iran is further along than you think, and that nukes might be involved.

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz... reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year... The elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete.

Based on a 1950's design, the B61-11 bunker-buster has been around in its current form since 1997. That Divine Strake test -- the one that's gonna produce the "mushroom cloud over Las Vegas" on June 2? Probably a B61 simulation, the Arms Control Wonk says.

The Pentagon and the Energy Department have been pushing for an update for several years, now -- something that can penetrate deeper, and rely on a lower nuclear yield. That program, the "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator," is officially cancelled. But there's widespread speculation that money for this project is just hidden elsewhere.

Meanwhile, Lockheed is looking into the "Kinetic Energy Cavity Penetrator Weapon" -- a bunker-buster that surrounds the bomb with a gas bubble, so it can plow into the ground ten times further than similar weapons. Testing continues for the Army's "Deep Digger," the bunker-buster that uses cannon to tunnel through solid rock, drilling a channel for the bomb. It's the current record-holder for non-nuclear penetrators, going down twice as deep as the nearest competitor. But still, that's only 30 feet. The Natanz bunker is down another 45. Which is why we're getting ready to see that massive explosion outside of Vegas.

UPDATE 04/09/06 10:56 AM: "The Air Force is proposing to build a new 'prompt global strike'" missile, Inside Defense notes. "Land-based boosters traditionally used for nuclear weapons would be reconfigured and fitted with conventional warheads, according to Air Force Space Command."

UPDATE 04/10/06 9:02 AM: "The White House, sensitive to President Bush's image as a war hawk, is trying to play down the possibility of a military strike," the AP notes.

Meanwhile, the Wonk says that "we are not going to nuke Iran."

How deep down the Natanz facility is less important than what's covering it, the Wonk notes. In Natanz' case, we're talking about a lot of rock and soil. Which means that 5,000-pound conventional bunker-busters, like the GBU-28, ought to do the job of knocking out Natanz rather nicely.

Iran's Kooky, Incendiary Arsenal

Super-fast underwater missiles -- they ain't the half of it. Iran's armed forces are rolling out a slew of new military hardware this week, as part of its "Great Prophet" naval war games. Some of the gear seems downright comical. Others, downright dangerous.

(Most of these links are crimped from Kathryn Cramer and Airborne Combat Engineer. Make sure you show 'em a little click-love.)

First, the comical -- a "flying boat," which moves at low altitude above the water. "The vessel appeared to be a more-advanced military version of the common seaplane," Iran Focus observed. "Because of its hull’s advanced design, no radar at sea or in the air can locate it. It can lift out of the water. It is wholly domestically built and can launch missiles with precise targeting while moving," the Mullahs' Defense Ministry mouthpiece crowed. Mayyybe. But ACE notes that "you can buy your own such boat/plane (in kit or finished form)." He finds some pictures of awfully similar craft over here.

Next, the dangerous. The Times takes a look at Tehran's embryonic satellite program. The orbiters the Iranians are launching are crude. "But some Western analysts note that such technologies can also have atomic roles and that a crucial element of a credible nuclear arsenal is the ability to launch a missile accurately and guide a warhead to its target," the Times says.

While Iran now depends on Russia to launch its satellites into orbit [and we know how helpful Moscow is feeling these days -- ed.], it has vowed to do so itself, and is developing a family of increasingly large rockets. In theory, the biggest could hurl not only satellites into space but warheads between continents.

"The real issue is that they have a very large booster under development," said Dr. Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington who wrote a recent report on Iran's nuclear effort.

Closer to home, Tehran is bragging about an "advanced shoulder-launched rocket 'Mithaq 1' - which can be carried by IRGC fast ships and used on shore and on islands - was successfully test-fired," Iran Focus quotes a military spokesperson as saying.

The Mithaq 1 anti-aircraft rockets have a heat tracking device and are "fast" and "manoeuvrable," the report said, adding that they were particularly good at targeting light helicopters...

Iran also has the Mithaq 2 on its production line. The more advanced rocket is [almost identical to the Chinese shoulder-fired missiles and is] capable of destroying choppers and jet fighters which fly at low altitude. Tehran claims that it is good for use in electronic warfare and it can also hit fake targets.

On Friday, Iran "tested the Fajr-3, a missile that it said can avoid radars and hit several targets simultaneously using multiple warheads," the Associated Press noted. Again, it appears to be based on a Chinese model.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies' Jason Alderwick, reminds Reuters about the Iranian habit of "military bravado and posturing."

But Tim Ripley, with Jane's, adds that, "You don't actually need lots of weapons to close (the Strait of Hormuz), you just need lots of threats... "You don't even have to sink a ship, you just have to double the insurance rates (for shipping) and it has a knock on effect on the price of oil."

And Kathryn Cramer notes that the man behind Tehran's new technologies is a seriously bad dude -- the man "responsible for recruitment of suicide bombers in Iran’s armed forces." Not coincidentally, Brigadier General Hossein Salami also crafted Iran's doctrine of "the massive use of suicide operations to target U.S. and Western interests around the world, and the use of weapons of mass destruction."

UPDATE 5:12 PM: "For months, I have told interviewers that no senior political or military official was seriously considering a military attack on Iran. In the last few weeks, I have changed my view," says Joseph Cirincione, with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "In part, this shift was triggered by colleagues with close ties to the Pentagon and the executive branch who have convinced me that some senior officials have already made up their minds: They want to hit Iran."

(Big ups: Kevin Drum)

UPDATE 04/05/06 3:12 PM: Well, now we've got the sneaky missile hat trick. "Iran said Wednesday it has successfully test-fired a "top secret" missile, the third within a week, state-run television reported." To which Kathryn asks, "If it's so secret, what's it doing on TV?"

"A Mushroom Cloud over Las Vegas..."

...Is what will almost, but apparently not quite, be seen on June 2. According to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency , the dust cloud from Divine Strake, a massive conventional explosion scheduled to take place at the Nevada Test Site this summer, "may reach an altitude of 10,000 feet (3,048 meters) [but] is not expected to be visible off the Nevada Test Site."

The open-air test will ignite 700 tons of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil, good for 593 tons of high-explosives equivalent, according to the Washington Post . The Associated Press describes the test as the largest-ever open-air chemical explosion at the Nevada site – by a factor of forty. Due to the size of the blast – and its sensitive location at the home of the United States' erstwhile nuclear test program – DTRA has taken the trouble to warn the Russians ahead of time of the upcoming test.

The test’s purpose, according to Defense News, is "to examine ground shock effects on deeply buried tunnel structures." The WaPo describes the test as "a conventional alternative" to the politically ornery Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, or "nuclear bunker-buster."

Here’s my $64,000 question, though: is this (700-ton!) explosive really a conventional "alternative," or is it a stand-in being used to simulate a low-yield nuke?

By the way – a "strake” is "a straightedge used for leveling a bed of sand ."

-- Center for Defense Information science fellow Haninah Levine has been passing tips and comments to Defense Tech for months. This is his first post for the site.

(Big ups: Xeni, DS)

UPDATE 11:08 AM: "Ain't nothing you can do when it's Strakes on a motherfucking plain."

UPDATE 04/03/06 12:15 PM: John Fleck, from the Albuquerque Journal, has the answer to whether Divine Strake is nuke-related. "A Pentagon budget request is explicit about its
purpose: to "improve the warfighter's confidence in selecting the smallest nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage."

Meanwhile, Globalsecurity.org decodes the media gobbledygook surrounding the Divine Strake test.

UPDATE 04/03/06 5:15 PM:"In response to an email earlier today, a DTRA spokesperson confirmed that Divine Strake is the same event that is described in DTRA budget documents as being a low-yield nuclear weapons shock simulation," the FAS Strategic Security Blog notes.

It also turns out that Divine Strake is "an integral part" of STRATCOM's new Global Strike mission, which is normally reported to develop mainly non-nuclear capabilities against time-urgent targets. Global Strike is one of the plillars of the Bush administration’s so-called New Triad which is said to be reducing the role of nuclear weapons.

The Naked Cartridge

Ladies and gentlemen: Jimmy Wu. He's a 1st Lieutenant in the Alabama National Guard, an MIT grad in mechanical engineering, and a missile defense systems engineer at Boeing. (Nice resume, hunh?) Jimmy also, in his words, "loves to shoot." So ammo is the subject in the first of what I hope will be a long line of posts for Defense Tech.

Soldiers hate lugging gear around, especially in a hot and sweaty place like Iraq. But going without ammo -- they hate that even more. So they load up on bullets, when they go on patrol.

A different kind of ammunition, being tested out by the Army, could help. Caseless ammunition give us a lighter round, allowing the soldier to carry more of 'em. A regular cartridge has the bullet, the casing, and the propellant powder inside the casing. In most rifle ammunition, the casing is bigger than the bullet. Caseless ammunition discards the brass and instead molds the propellant around the bullet, giving a lighter and more compact round. For example, a soldier carrying the HK G-11 rifle can carry up to 10 times more ammunition, for the equal weight, than a soldier with an M-16.

Caseless ammunition is not a new idea. The concept has been with us as long as the auto-loading rifle, but it took awhile for the technology to mature. Back in the 1980s, the US Army tried out caseless ammunition under the Advanced Combat Rifle program, but it didn't go anywhere following the end of the Cold War. Germany did the same to their HK G-11.

Today, following experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US Army is paying attention again to soldier load. The Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center has been working on a technology demonstration program, with a light machinegun prototype to be built FY06. Perhaps this time around, caseless ammunition will finally take hold in the United States.

-- Jimmy Wu

Guns-B-Gone

Almost everywhere they go in Iraq, American soldiers find stacks of explosives and guns. According to one 2004 survey, at least 7 million small arms -- including AK-47 rifles, rocket launchers and mortar tubes, and more sophisticated arms like ground-to-air missiles -- have fallen into the hands of Iraqi civilians since "Mission Accomplished" in 2003.

U.S. troops would like to get rid of all of those weapons, as they find them. "However, the extremely large number of both weapons and storage sites has rendered global securing and destruction of caches nearly impossible," notes Darpa, the Pentagon's way-out research arm.

What the agency wants to see instead: a non-toxic spray that can "penetrate rapidly into the [weapon's] active firing and/or actuation mechanisms and render them instantly and permanently inoperable."

The formulation will produce an accelerated corrosion (or other) reaction over a longer period of time (a few months or less), perhaps using the weapon material itself as a metallic catalyst, to destroy the weapon internal structure. The formulation must be effective in small quantities (i.e., a few grams per weapon), safe to use, stable over the range of operational temperature/humidity conditions, have a long shelf-life, be capable of large-area dissemination, and produce a non-toxic residue after the weapon is destroyed...

[The spray] must not be reversed by simple chemical, thermal, or other means. Such a chemical system has the potential to enable the systematic and effective removal of small arms from the battlespace.

Breaking Rocks - Lots of Rocks

This is the second in a two part series by Weapons Grade author David Hambling on weapons that drill and scrape their way through targets. Check out part one here.

The Pentagon is developing a bunker buster that can burrow into the ground and break up rock far more efficiently than existing rounds. But hitting underground lairs isn't the only thing the technology can do.

David Burns, program manager of this "Deep Digger" bunker buster, mentioned that a breaching device based on his weapon was already being investigated. Like the Deep Digger, this will fire a volley of projectiles, creating a man-sized hole in walls. Today, you need hand-emplaced explosives or heavy weapons to get the job done. The Deep Digger-ish breaching device would have more fine control -- cutting progressively through the several feet of concrete, or breaking through a single layer of brick without demolishing the building.

Another option would be to combine the special projectile with a million-round-a-minute MetalStorm launcher for a lightweight, rapid-fire mobile system. Burns believes that this could be a distinct possibility if MetalStorm can handle the rounds. Such a weapon would be able to reduce pillboxes and strongpoints into gravel almost instantly.

The special projectiles would also be useful for the traditional combat engineering tasks of demolition and creating field fortifications. And they could have humanitarian uses, too – Burns suggested that a mobile Deep Digger would provide the fastest way of getting to rescuing victims buried under rubble or in mine collapses.

Larger projectiles already exist. BAE Systems Advanced Technologies, Inc. (ATI), who were involved in creating Deep Digger have looked at a larger-caliber cheap version of the round for quarrying and similar uses. They have already tested a 60mm round which can pulverise 0.4 cubic metres of rock with one shot - see the picture above - and they believe that a cubic meter per shot is possible. This represents an awesomely fast and efficient means of mining and tunnelling.

To bring the cost-per-shot down from dollars to pennies, ATI are talking about firing concrete projectiles from an electrothermal launch system. What this really means is a steam gun - a sort of retro-future technology not seen for a while. This seemed to be the future back in 1824 when Mr Perkins’ steam gun was firing 900 rounds a minute; a bit later on the Confederacy had one in the Civil War which was supposed to fire twenty-four pound projectiles and scythe down opposing ranks, but was captured without a fight. The ATI proposal should be more practical. Given an unlimited supply of cheap projectiles and the possibilities multiply for both military and civilian applications. If you want to build a new metro much faster than standard tunnel boring machines, or dig an underground bunker complex in a hurry, this could be for you.

Of course, if such digging device proliferate, they could end up in the wrong hands. I'm thinking of Clint Eastwood in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot, where he plays a robber whose signature is using a 20mm Oerlikon cannon to break into bank vaults. With projectile-based excavation, Thunderbolt could try his luck with Fort Knox.

More seriously, this technology means that reinforced concrete cannot necessarily be relied on to protect strategic assets in the long term. Conventional weapons will be able to even threaten facilities that were built to withstand nuclear attack.

-- David Hambling

New Bomb Drills for Bunkers

Weapons Grade author David Hambling has another fascinating two-part series for Defense Tech, on weapons that drill and scrape their way through targets.

Meet Deep Digger, first of a revolutionary new generation of bunker-busting weapons, described in this week’s New Scientist. This is literally ground-breaking new technology which uses cannon to tunnel through solid rock, drilling a channel for the bomb.

Existing weapons for attacking hard targets are kinetic, relying on sheer momentum to break through rock and concrete. To get much improvement you have to make them much bigger - like the outsize 30,000 lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or much faster - like the proposed conventional version of the D5 Trident ballistic missile, or denser - like the heavy BLU-109 with its ballast of dense metal. But you can’t get around the laws of physics. As Princeton's Robert Nelson points out in a very thorough analysis, even if the penetrator is a hypersonic projectile made of solid depleted uranium:

“…no Earth Penetrating Weapon can penetrate reinforced concrete deeper than four times the l