Counter-IED systems jam tactical comms in Iraq

[rainbow4321]

Nice...so troops have a choice..either be able to communicate OR jam the IEDs that will kill them?

http://www.fcw.com/article97264-01-05-07-Web

Jammers used by U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq to defeat radio-controlled improvised electronic devices (IEDs) have the side effect of knocking out a wide range of tactical radio systems, according to the Naval Sea Systems Command.

Navsea, which is asking for industry input on mitigating the problem, said IED jammers, known as Counter Radio Controlled Improvised Explosive Device Electronic Warfare (CREW) systems, can cause the “loss of all communications” from co-located or nearby tactical radio systems. The Navy manages the joint CREW program for Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Joint IED Defeat Organization.

At the same time, active battlefield radio systems interfere with the IED jammers “to the extent that the CREW systems become ineffective,” according to Navsea's request for information

John Grimes, chief information officer and assistant secretary of Defense for networks and information integration, speaking at the DOD spectrum conference last month, said that the department faces a real challenge of operating IED jammers while at the same time ensuring the jammers do not knock out tactical systems.

[Jacobin]

1. Oh. And it only cost $2 billion to develop that little toy

Rumsfeld had an emergency group put together with no limits on budget to stop what cannot be stopped...guerilla warfare tactics

[rainbow4321]

2. "A jammer costs about $10,000, and it probably costs about $10,000 to bury a dead GI,"

Umm..what about the third option...bring the GI's HOME!


http://www.fcw.com/article84817-12-26-04-Web

Army units that would seem most in need of IED jammers, such as transportation companies that operate daily convoys in Iraq, have not been furnished with the systems. Capt. Eric Hedlund, a transportation platoon commander with the New Mexico Army National Guard's 720th Transportation Company, said he never saw or heard of an IED jammer during his 15-month tour in Iraq, which ended in August.


"This is a new technology that everyone would like to have," Hedlund said. His unit's convoy operation covered 3.5 million miles in Iraq, and during his tour, he encountered IEDs "more often than I even want to remember," he said.

Taylor, who rode in an armored Humvee equipped with an IED jammer when he visited Iraq, believes such protection should be extended to all the troops.

"A jammer costs about $10,000, and it probably costs about $10,000 to bury a dead GI," Taylor said in a statement. He added, "I believe Americans would rather spend the $10,000 to prevent the GI's funeral from being held."

[Jacobin]

3. More on it

A vast anti-IED research and development effort is underway involving a variety of technologies. Since 2003, the Joint IED Task Force has spent more than $375 million on acquiring anti-IED technology.

Among those technologies are countering radio-controlled IED devices—electronic jammers. They involve the use of radio frequency directed energy, which can jam cell phones and other types of detonators. An electronic jamming device reportedly deactivated an IED that was meant to assassinate the president of Pakistan in late 2003. Such devices can be vehicle-mounted, vehicle-portable and handheld. Following are highlights of some, but by no means all, anti-IED technologies.

Warlock Blue. In May 2005, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld directed the Army to buy 10,000 Warlock Blue jammers. It was the largest single purchase of such jammers to date. The systems are said to cost less than $1,000 each.

Congress provided $60 million for the jammers, in addition to allotting $308 million in vehicle armor. Under pressure from Congress to expedite the jammer purchase, Rumsfeld gave the authority to waive all procurement rules involving the testing, development, solicitation and contract award. Within 60 days of Rumsfeld’s directive, the Navy and California-based Tyco Electronics produced and delivered the first Warlock Blue handheld jamming devices—a significant feat, considering that such a process normally would take six or nine months.

http://www.special-operations-technology.com/article.cfm?DocID=1129

These costs are as of September 2005.

I can't find the article I read about a month ago that they'd spent over $2billion on DEVELOPMENT of the systems.

My point is not that I don't want the soldiers protected. My point is that there is NO way on earth to fight a guerilla war and simply throw treasuries of money at each iteration of the use of simple cheap weapons that are in endless supply.

Bring the troops home NOW.

I think we are saying the same thing

[dogday]

4. Amen to that

"A jammer costs about $10,000, and it probably costs about $10,000 to bury a dead GI," Taylor said in a statement. He added, "I believe Americans would rather spend the $10,000 to prevent the GI's funeral from being held."

[Selatius]

5. Iraqi guerrillas already use alternatives to defeat jammers.

Since we began deploying radio jammers, they simply use copper wires connected to the detonator. You can't stop that.