OT Safely stopping vehicles trying to run check-points

Military tests nonfatal ways to halt vehicles

formatting link
Two teams of military engineers competed to come up with a solution to a problem U.S. troops face daily in Iraq - how to stop civilian vehicles that blunder past checkpoints without destroying the vehicles or killing their occupants.

Maj. Gen. Ted Bowlds, commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory, said that after a little refinement, the teams' devices probably will be used in Iraq.

"These young researchers have come up with some pretty good, innovative

ideas," Bowlds said. "My guess is, based on what I've seen, bits and pieces of what we've found here will find their way out there (to Iraq) in some fashion."

On a test range in the Arizona desert Nov. 10, Air Force Research Laboratory engineers used remote-controlled automobiles and high-speed cameras to test four devices they designed to halt oncoming traffic by non-lethal means.

A team of junior officers and civilian military engineers from Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., was declared the winner for a pair of devices that literally lift an onrushing car off the ground, bringing it to an almost instant stop from a speed of 35 mph.

Bowlds said the Kirtland team's devices might be used in combination with elements of the designs produced by the competing team from Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.

The teams of six engineers and scientists, all with less than five years' military experience, were given six months and $60,000 to come up with prototypes to help solve a frequent problem on the ground in Iraq.

Hundreds of cars and pickups pass through U.S. military checkpoints every day. Civilians have been injured and killed when they failed to stop as

requested and been fired on.

Troops trying to halt such vehicles are told to shoot at the engine block to disable the car, and if they miss, "they might hit something more important," said Capt. Chris Rehm, leader of the winning team from Kirtland.

"We're looking for some kind of nonlethal device we could give them," he said.

The teams came up with relatively similar solutions, despite working without knowing what the other was doing, said Mark Lewis, chief scientist of the Air Force.

They included:

. A wooden wedge placed in the roadway with barricades channeling traffic directly to it. If the vehicle does not stop and strikes the wedge, it is lifted up and slides to a stop, leaving the wheels of the vehicle off the ground and its undercarriage resting on the wooden wedge.

. A "sled" consisting of two low-lying aluminum boxes with air bags inside and grappling hooks at one end. When a vehicle passes over it, a soldier controlling the checkpoint can remotely activate the device, causing the hooks to latch to the front bumper and the airbags to deploy. The car is lifted off the ground by the airbags as the device drags along underneath the vehicle.

. A pair of devices made of steel tubing, one of them shaped like a triangle that rises up when struck, lifting the car's wheels off the ground.

The first two solutions won. The tests were conducted on sedans, an SUV and a van - typical civilian vehicles encountered by troops in Iraq.

They were carried out at a proving ground near Sierra Vista, Ariz., operated by Raytheon. The southern Arizona site was selected both to replicate Iraqi conditions and because the facility is a hub for the development of vehicles operated by remote control. Because the stops can be violent, the military did not want to use manned vehicles.

In addition to seeking a solution to a frequent problem, the Air Force conducted the competition as part of a program to develop expertise among junior military and civilian researchers and engineers who work for the

research laboratory.

Lewis, the service's top scientist at the Pentagon, said the Air Force Research Laboratory tries to anticipate technologies of the future, and "at the same time, we've got folks out in the battlefield now whose needs we are trying to answer."

"One of the things the lab is looking at is how we can respond more immediately to problems we're facing today," Lewis said. "We're concerned about saving as many lives as we can."

Karl

Reply to
midlant
Loading thread data ...

Personally, I think the way to save the most lives (as the closing quote in the article states) is to blow the crap out of the vehicle that passes the checkpoint. There will probably only be one person in the vehicle. Sacrifice the one willing vehicle occupant, who is willing to die anyways, for the potential saving of everyone he was trying to kill. No brainer. "Click BOOM! (you), or "Click BOOM" (him)... Quick...You decide..... That counts for all checkpoints in all countries. Won't take very many episodes for the understanding of 'stop here' means... Jeff

Karl wrote:

Reply to
Jeff

Lots of innocent civilians have died over there due to just that tactic. Each one creates a family looking for revenge. We often had poorly marked check points and sometimes whole families were killed or injured. A majority of the people over there say it is OK to attack the Americans. The government we support has said it will, in the future grant amnesty to the insurgents, including those who attack us.

Reply to
Alex Magdaleno

Read the news Jeff, that attitude is what is causing so much strife over there, some dumb ass with a pregnant woman in his car ran a check point and got blown to heck.

Fodder for the insurgency.

Some dumb s**t decided to run the check point with his family inside, they got blown to heck, more fodder for the insurgency.

This is a marketing issue, and not a tactical issue, every 'innocent' Iraqi that gets shot up by a G.I. is yet another marketing opportunity for the Extremist Muslims or the Insurgency.

p.d.

Jeff wrote:

Reply to
Oujdeivß

Concur with Both y'all

Check points with armed people at them should set off a warning bell in your head.

" Gee, maybe this is a dangerous place. Perhaps I will comply with the directions."

Natural selection = The smart survive. Cruel, but fair.

We should advertise the rules for checkpoints

  1. stop
  2. comply
  3. failure to do 1 and 2 will result in death

I really ain't that heartless, but "they" attacked us time and time again. Now the fight is on raghead turf instead of Manhatten and DC.

Unfortunately the liberal half of America and their media bias will lose this battle for us.

We will pull out and abandon the people we tried to save, just like Vietnam. This time IRAN will become the dmoinant influence and a few months or years later, the conflict will be back inside our country.

Mark (Disgusted) Dunning

Read the news Jeff, that attitude is what is causing so much strife over there, some dumb ass with a pregnant woman in his car ran a check point and got blown to heck.

Fodder for the insurgency.

Some dumb s**t decided to run the check point with his family inside, they got blown to heck, more fodder for the insurgency.

This is a marketing issue, and not a tactical issue, every 'innocent' Iraqi that gets shot up by a G.I. is yet another marketing opportunity for the Extremist Muslims or the Insurgency.

p.d.

Jeff wrote:

Reply to
markshere2

Most of the time, the hajji that didn't stop were not driving pregnant women. If there were more than one in the car, it was 3 or 4 men, usually armed. The mindset in the middle east is not the one in western countries. If they don't stop it is usually a) they are doing something wrong or b) they want to prove their balls are bigger than yours. Either way, they make themselves a threat. Threats need to be neutralized. I know.

Dan Kay Iraq, class of '03

Reply to
Dan Kay

Again, it's a marketing issue, not necessarily a Military Issue. As long as the insurgency can point to 'innocent' deaths, then for many, America is evil, and killing Americans is O.K.

'Winning' this will require as much spin in Iraq as has been used here.

p.d.

Dan Kay wrote:

Reply to
Oujdeivß

Glad to hear from someone that has actually been there and is not just repeating what they heard on the 'drive by media'.

Reply to
Jerry Forrester

It is most definitely a tactical issue over there. It is only a marketing issue back here in this country, marketing used for political reasons.

Dumb ass'es that run checkpoints are asking to be destroyed. And some of them are doing just that. Asking, taunting, and trying to destroy themselves (martyrdom) and their indoctrinated perceived enemies. What part of stop don't you, or Alex, (or they) understand. I wasn't saying to shoot indiscriminately. Never did. I also added the caveat that the country, or countries, involved mattered not a bit. In a war zone (all nomenclature and adjectives aside), you stop when they ( the military, police, and government officials) tell you to stop. Not complying is asking for trouble. You say my attitude causing strife? WTF... That stuff has been going on over there for hundreds of years. Saying my attitude is making it worse is ...(thinking of the right word here...) stupid (yeah, that's the right word...it fits). What is causing strife over there is a very select group of people that want to take over and control things over there. They want to take control without letting any of the people there have a say in who is going to be in control. And if anyone argues... They kill them. Oh yeah. My attitude is making that situation worse. The mere fact that we are asking our military to be nice in a war is ludicrous. The mere fact that our very own citizens would openly speak about quitting is the biggest fodder we give to the terrorists and insurgents. What pisses me off is to hear about every GI that gets shot, or blown up by a roadside bomb planted by someone we are trying to 'market' to... What a load of crap. Let our military finish the job they were sent to do. They know what they are doing. And don't tell me to 'read the news'... I do. Try to read all different sides, too. OK.. Here's one for you guys... "Read ALL the news. Not just the stuff that you agree with".. Sorry, but this thread is as stupid as the day is long. Screw it. I'm going back out to work on Stude stuff.... My attitude must suck, and you guys aren't helping it any. Strife my ass..... Stupid, just stupid..

"Oujdeivß" wrote...

Reply to
Jeff Rice

Now you will understand why I have killfiled these two idiots.

Lee

Reply to
Lee Aanderud

Too late.

We lost over a year ago.

Politically correct warfare NEVER works. It didn't in WW II and it doesn't now.

This whole Iraq thing should have been concluded three years ago...

JT

Oujdeivß wrote:

Reply to
Grumpy AuContraire

What scares me is the confirmation of the parallels to Vietnam...

JT

Jerry Forrester wrote:

Reply to
Grumpy AuContraire

Towards the end of World War II, we gave the Japanese an ultimatum, surrender or suffer total destruction. It took two tries, but it worked.

During the first encounter in Fajulla (sp?), an ultimatum should have been issued to toe tune of "send the civilians out" followed by surrender of the remaining actors. Give 'em a day to think about it then if no response was forthcoming, drop a few MOAB(s).

It's the only language irrational people understand.

But nooooooo, we pursued a tap and dance to politically correct warfare and here we are, defeated. Almost 3,000 service members dead and for what?

I have nothing but contempt for politicians of all flavors. I was part of the receiving end in the 1960's and it's all playing out exactly the same now.

It's time to replace the entire regime in Washington...

JT

Jeff Rice wrote:

Reply to
Grumpy AuContraire

Run and hide Lee. Tough questions that ask people to think make some people uncomfortable.

Reply to
Alex Magdaleno

Yeah...... that would be US.

Reply to
Neil Doune Anblomee

OK OK.. I have had an evening to rethink my position and statement. I can see your point. A kid riding in the back seat of a car in a war zone at 3am that runs through a checkpoint all lit up with spotlights is an innocent victim. It's not the kid that is the dumbass, it is the parents. Lights in their faces? Poor driver. Hey, it's dark out at night. You drive at 3am and drive up to a lit up roadblock.... What do you do? Hit the gas and run on through? Parents who have either no common sense, or a death wish. I think the latter. And, yes, there were (and are) people waiting 'over there' to take over. Their culture is a patient one. They were waiting for the merciless dictator killing SOB to get tossed out. Then they saw their opportunity to drive a wedge in and move in. Yep, we were lied to in Vietnam. We pulled out and in a month almost everyone that was supporting the South Vietnam side was dead. Yep. "Finishing the job" is not killing everyone, just setting up a citizen elected government that can take care of itself. Our own country needed help when it was started. Wonder what would have happened if they had cut and run halfway through our fight for independence? Oh wait, they do that now. Look at the trail of fallen countries and projects they have in their wake. Fight communism over here? Hmmm... That's a good one. Our countries' largest employer is the government. (Wal-Mart is the largest 'company' employer..) Individual liberties and property rights are being legislated away by politicians elected by blocks of citizens who's sustenance is supplied by the government in some way. Which direction are we heading? What road are we on? Wonder if the publicly traded stock that your retirement fund is supported by is one of those 'American companies' that makes money in another country? Oh, wait. Your retirement comes from the taxpayers. I forgot. Sorry. I'll take that one back. You are correct. Every mistake is propaganda for our enemies. Just 'who' is broadcasting all these mistakes, and to what purpose? Yep, our noses are not needed or wanted abroad. Just let them all live the way they are and turn the other way.. (and then not broadcast the genocide until years or decades later). We should just let the same elected idjits (that voted to go over there) vote to do stuff here. Can you imagine the domestic damage that could be done trying to eviscerate the other party just to set up the next election? How naive I must be .. C'mon, let's get on with it. We're all American's here. Let's all pull together to solve all these problems. A truly bipartisan newsgroup would be a start Jeff (I have a dream....but it's a wet one ) Rice

"Alex Magdaleno" wrote...

Reply to
Jeff Rice

And what do you suggest replacing them with? Nothings available but more of the same.

Reply to
Jerry Forrester

Hmmmm.. After further reflection on that original statement, I think I'll add to it....

And, yes, there were (and are) people waiting 'over HERE' to take over. Their culture is a patient one. They were, and are, waiting for the person they continually label as a merciless dictator killing SOB to get voted out. Then they see their opportunity to drive a wedge in and move in.

There you go! Just want to be 'fair', you know.. ... Jeff (violating the 'Don't be a d*****ad rule' ) Rice

Reply to
Jeff Rice

Barney: How do you fight fire? Opie: With a hose.

Lee

Reply to
Lee Aanderud

For crying out loud!

I just ran across an article I thought would be interesting to a bunch of mechofreaks who might enjoy the challenge in finding another solution. WE need to stop people without killing the residents who, because of the culture in which they have grown up, they are ignorant of our methods - or at least enough for us to end up with egg all over our face, and perhaps a bit of guilt in later years for our poor guys tossed into such a situation. Little did I know that this would turn into a political thing.

I don't dare bring up my gear linkage problem as that might get into a discussion of minimum wages. Oops, there I go again!

Karl

Reply to
midlant

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.