Britain leads the field in landmine technology...
The latest generations of 'smart' landmines are really very clever.
They build in lifespans etc, which disable the mines after a set period (granted, the explosive remains active, but the trigger doesn't).
The anti tank mines are genius - they can tell the difference between a British Challenger CR2 and a Russian T60 (or whatever) and only go off if an 'enemy' tank drives over it. It can recognise the engine note apparently.
Also, anti-personnel mines aren't designed to kill. Tactically, if you injure someone, it takes 3 people out of the squad, because 2 people need to carry him. You can argue the ethics of this till the cows come home, but modern mines are a lot safer than the old ones.
Also - There are mine field clearing vehicles now (couldn't find the video on youtube) that fires the equivalent of an enormous string of chinese crackers across a mine field. It's then detonated, and any mines in the ground will be set off, rendering the ground safe again.
I'm not one of those military hardware geeks (freaks), I just had a talk about it when I was in the Cadets at school.
(
HoratioFellatio Taking the the out of psychotherapist, Sun 1 Mar 2009, 10:57,
Reply)
They're sold as being clever but that doesn't mean they actually are
Let's take that lifespan business as an example. The best advertised failure rate for the disarming mechanism I've seen for FASCAM mines is 4%. That's the manufacturer's figure and it's based on optimal conditions. Even if it's true, I don't find it particularly reassuring to know that 1 in 25 land mines will still be live after their expiry date.
I would be even more sceptical of the claim to be able to differentiate between targets. It may well be true that they never detonate when a Challenger passes over them, but I wonder just how many different tractors or school buses they've tried these things out on.
Suppliers of military hardware have a long and distinguished history of over-stating their products' effectiveness, and there's no reason to believe that they've become any more honest recently.
(, Sun 1 Mar 2009, 11:48, Reply)
There's no pleasing some people....
Would you prefer 1 in 25 land mines going off, or 24 in 25 going off? They're not perfect, but they are designed to injure people/blow up vehicles.
They're pretty nasty things in general, but they serve a purpose in war, and you've got to win it before you can worry about whether your kids are going to be walking over them in years to come...
(
HoratioFellatio Taking the the out of psychotherapist, Sun 1 Mar 2009, 20:06,
Reply)
yay for landmines!
(
the RAND corporation a.k.a. Kevin Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Sun 1 Mar 2009, 15:58,
Reply)
I prefer the self-healing minefields
where if some are set off the others are designed to redeploy themselves to 'heal' the hole
(, Sun 1 Mar 2009, 16:26, Reply)