# Aerial IED's



## tomahawk6 (17 Jan 2006)

The latest threat to US Army aviation in theater is that of the aerial IED as reported in this week's army times. The bomb builders are using proximity fuses from old AA and artillery shells. 

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=0-ARMYPAPER-1466218.php

"Insurgents place these “aerial IEDs” along known flight paths and trigger them when American helicopters come along at the typical altitude of just above the rooftops. 

The devices shoot 50 feet into the air, and a proximity fuse touches off a warhead that sprays metal fragments, said Brig. Gen. Edward Sinclair, commander of the Army’s Aviation Center at Fort Rucker, Ala."

Another technique is the medevac ambush. They will ambush a patrol and inflict casualties, When the medevac bird sits down an IED is exploded damaging or destroying the helicopter.


----------



## a_majoor (18 Jan 2006)

Wild stuff. 

In the "old days" stakes were driven into the ground to impale paratroopers and gliders. In Viet Nam, various devices were created by the VC/NVA to damage helicopters, although the usual device was a land mine with the fuse triggered by a small windmill like device. Rotor downwash from the landing helicopter would spin the windmill and.......boom!, no more helicopter. Attacking medivac choppers was also a big tactic to attack morale.

For every tactic we come up with, look for some vicious and ingenious counter measure from the other side.


----------



## McG (18 Jan 2006)

While possibly new, this is not a surprising turn of events.  Many IEDs mimic the function of AT mines.  We now have ones that mimic functions of anti-helicopter mines.


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Jan 2006)

Here is a newspaper version of this story.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=R5E3SVNCXH2AZQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2006/01/18/wirq18.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/01/18/ixportal.html


----------



## CBH99 (18 Jan 2006)

If nothing else, you have to give the insurgents some credit for being creative.  Here, "The West", has gone in with some of the most technologically advanced military equipment the world has ever seen - and yet it is still being effectively countered by old fashioned, tried n' true technology and methods.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (19 Jan 2006)

At first glance this aerial IED discussion appears to be really hard to comprehend as factual. The chance that an AA shell or Proximity fuse could be used in this fashion is almost impossible. I never say never and there is always a chance that the possibility exists for an insurgent to have the capability to pull this off, but I doubt it. I think we have a little misinformation here. Not that aerial IEDs are not a reality just that they are probably not proximity or AA shell fused. It is more probable that they are explosives with remote detonators on them. This would place them in the normal IED category just that they are aloft or fired at a helo much like a bouncing Betty for lack of a better example.

Proximity fuses by there design would detonate once armed to proximity mod, that given it is very difficult to manually arm one.

AA shells without proximity fuse would be time or altitude fused, again if one could get around normal arming and manually do it then it would go off once armed, never getting a chance to be set in place and await a helo.

  I need more info on this subject before I can believe it.


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Jan 2006)

This report is from the Joint IED Task force so I think its accurate. Link below has some good info.

http://www.jsjremotesensing.com/id12.html


----------



## Michael OLeary (19 Jan 2006)

One possible explanation, at least for the theory behind the weapon:

Suvorov Viktor *
Spetsnaz. The Story Behind the Soviet SAS
http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov6/index.html

Chapter 9.
Weapons and Equipment
http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov6/09.html



> On the subject of mines, we must mention a terrible spetsnaz weapon known as the Strela-Blok. This weapon was used in the second half of the 1960s and the first half of the 1970s. It is quite possible that by now it has been very substantially improved. In a sense it can be described as an anti-aircraft mine, because it operates on the same principle as the mine laid at the side of a road which acts against a passing vehicle. It is related to mines which are based on portable grenade-launchers which fire at the side of a tank or an armoured personnel carrier.
> 
> The Strela-Blok is an ordinary Soviet Strela-2 portable missile (a very exact copy of the American Red Eye). A spetsnaz group carries one or several of these missiles with it. In the area of a major airfield the launch tube is attached to a tall tree (or the roof of a building, a tall mast, a hayrick) and camouflaged. The missile is usually installed at a short distance from the end of the runway. That done, the group leaves the area. The missile is launched automatically. A clockwork mechanism operates first, allowing the group to retire to a safe distance, then, when the set time has run out (it could be anything from an hour to several days) a very simple sound detector is switched on which reacts to the noise of an aircraft engine of a particular power. So long as the engine noise is increasing nothing happens (it means the aircraft is coming nearer), but as soon as the noise decreases the mechanism fires. The infra-red warhead reacts to the heat radiated by the engine, follows the aircraft and catches up with it.
> 
> Imagine yourself to be the officer commanding an aircraft base. One plane (perhaps with a nuclear bomb on board) is shot down by a missile as it takes off. You cancel all flights and despatch your people to find the culprits. They of course find nobody. Flights are resumed and your next plane is shot down on take-off. What will you do then? What will you do if the group has set up five Strela-Blok missiles around the base and anti-infantry mines on the approaches to them? How do you know that there are only five missiles?


----------



## 3rd Horseman (20 Jan 2006)

Mike O very good info.

    It would appear these could be the culprit, much more feasible than IEDs with proximity fuses or AA shells.


----------



## Armymatters (22 Jan 2006)

The Strela-2 MANPAD isn't a good missile compared to today's missiles, but one must take into context when it was designed. The similar US FIM-43 Redeye was just as restricted in capabilites. Both systems were tail-chase only, and were easily fooled by flares and other infrared sources. I have heard of an incident regarding a Strela-2 and a El-AL airliner, where a terrorist fired a Strela-2 at the airliner, but the pilot of the airliner saw the missile, and turned towards the sun, and the missile lost lock on the airliner, and the airliner was able to get away safely. With the proliferation of such missiles, such attacks on Coalition aircraft in Afghanistan and Iraq should be expected, and countermeasures should be prepared against such missiles.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (22 Jan 2006)

I have my doubts that this would actually work with a Strela 2, given how narrow the seeker head field of view is and just how insensitive (relatively speaking) that is.  The Strela 2 is also incredibly suseptible to relatively simple countermeasures.

The idea is interesting, however.


----------



## Armymatters (22 Jan 2006)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I have my doubts that this would actually work with a Strela 2, given how narrow the seeker head field of view is and just how insensitive (relatively speaking) that is.  The Strela 2 is also incredibly suseptible to relatively simple countermeasures.
> 
> The idea is interesting, however.



It may work better with the more modern MANPAD's such as the Russian Igla or Strela-3 (both are apparently easily available on the world arms market) or the Chinese HY-5 MANPAD or QW-2 missiles, but the mere threat of such missiles is there. That is what concerns everyone the most; the availability of such missiles on the world arms market, and the possible use of such missiles in an attack on a civilian airliner.


----------



## 3rd Herd (24 Jan 2006)

Although we are digressing a little from the subject of aerial IED's here is a brief list of attacks on civil aircraft by shoulder fired missiles from the CRS Report/ Homeland Security: Protecting Airliners From Terrorists Missiles (http//www.airsafe.com/events/war/crs_missile_report.pdf) :

1983 Nov 8 Angola Boeing 737 130 Fatalities

1984 Feb 9 Angola Boeing 737  no Fatalities a/c a complete loss

1984 Sept 21 Afghanistan DC-10 no Fatalities severe a/c damage

1998 Oct 10 DRC(Congo) Boeing 727 41 Fatalities

2002 Nov 19   Kenya   Boeing 767  no Fatalities

2003 Nov 11  Iraq  A300  a/c damaged (possible SA-14 used and and that the SA-14 is used by non-state groups in Afghanistan and in at least two other countries.)Source:
http://www.airsafe.com/journal/v1num18.htm

In addition Angence France Presse in October 2003 states " the have been 19 shoulder fired SAM attacks in and around Bagdad Airport since May 2003. (CRS Report)


----------



## JEBackofen (1 Nov 2006)

This issue as well as EFP IEDs was exposed as a future threat in -->  J. Backofen and L.W. Williams, "Antitank Mines", Armor Magazine, July-August, 1981, pp. 26- 30; "Part II", Sept.-Oct., 1981, pp. 35-37; and "Part III", Nov.-Dec. 1981, pp. 334- 39

Unfortunately, R&D against such threats is low priority until a nation is engaged in a conflict .... and, then history is forgotten in the rush for protection solutions.


----------



## Korus (1 Nov 2006)

> Another technique is the medevac ambush. They will ambush a patrol and inflict casualties, When the medevac bird sits down an IED is exploded damaging or destroying the helicopter.



Sick.


----------



## Infanteer (1 Nov 2006)

~RoKo~ said:
			
		

> Sick.



...but cunning - we should expect nothing less.


----------



## dglad (1 Nov 2006)

Indeed.  It's "maneuver warfare"...attacking your opponent (i.e. us) where he is most vulnerable, rather than attacking his strength.  Really no different than various other terror tactics employed through history, intended to erode the will to fight.


----------

