From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

George Sherwood wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 22:38:41 +0100, Adam wrote:
>
>> George Sherwood wrote:
>>> On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 07:11:46 +0100, Adam wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.darpa.mil/ato/programs/SHM/htmldemo.html
>>>>
>>>> Good lord.
>>>>
>>>> I do like this:
>>>>
>>>> "Now it's your move. Select one of the keywords below
to learn more
>>>> about Self-Healing Minefields and how they work.
>>>> Minefield
>>>> Network
>>>> Breach
>>>> React
>>>> Heal
>>>>
>>>> "
>>>>
>>>> Note no button marked "legal".
>>> So what in your esteemed opinion makes this anti-tank minefield illegal?
>>>
>> Chuckle so it would be just for heavy vehicles.
>
> You have evidence of this?  Doesn't seem so useful to me for
> anti-personnel.  People would more likely stream in once it was breached
> and since the arming is more sensitive would be more complicated to
> disarm, hope and then re-arm.  Anything anti-vehicle is legal. So it
> doesn't need a button for legal, since it clearly is legal.
>

Humm.. Minefield are such buggers to clear even when the damn things are
stationery that most fail/don't. This could well create a very tricky
option esp coz most AT mine fields are protected via AP mines.

wrt this it would appear to be blurring the line towards an "active
mine" which would be legal to use against people were one to push it.
i.e. effectively a short range killer drone (e.g. a mobile claymore).

People have posited this before & now that electronics are so cheap
& powerful you could see a repeat. e.g. a while back they were trying
out such a thing at Shrivenham (prior to it becoming the "Defence
Academy" but the "target recognition" of the beastie was too
poor (e.g. anything which had a footfall & gave off heat was a target).

The mobility was interesting though as in the exact same way as the
mentioned beasties the idea was that the machines would constantly spread
out via algorithms to make "clearance" an all or......unknown
option.

Course ye old "drive a herd of cattle/pigs/prisoners through"
would still work. Esp if the prisoners were lined in a wide front.

Always a good idea to put your prisoners in the front vehicle/drive them
ahead of you in such situations.

It was discontinued in part because of the land mine treaty etc which is
where my legal comment came from. Active mine with a claymore or with a
shaped charge...simply a different fitting.

For these things to be mobile they'd have to be of the shaped charge
/aimed variety as I can't see the dinner plates digging themselves up &
rolling off to pastures new.

I suppose you could put mini tracks under/around one but the visibility
would increase etc. (much like the German goliath updated for 2K).

But again...the only diff twixt AP & AT would be the
"software"/orders given to the beastie.

e.g. in Iraq is an IED AT/AV or AP?



>>> By the way got to meet one of your Princes the other night. 
>>>
>>>
>> I'm sure Andy was spreading goodwill & harmony.
>
> It was interesting.  My first celebration of the Queen's Birthday.
> Most likely since I was one of the only people in uniform he came over and
> wondered what a Navy person was doing here.   Have to see how the
> picture came out.
>
> George

Was he in civies or naval uniform too?


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5