Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
LANDMINES OF THE FUTURE
Dr. Zoltán KOVÁCS
Miklós Zrínyi National Defense University, Budapest, Hungary
The coming into force of the „Ottawa Convention” resulted significant changes in land-
mine policy worldwide. Signatory states took the responsibility to abstain from develop-
ing, producing and using antipersonnel landmines in the future which not satisfy regula-
tions of the Convention.
However, progress of military operations makes it more and more necessary to develop
such modern, precision weapons those can destroy military targets in all war-fighting
dimensions even without any human guidance.
Landmines might be such weapons of the future.
1. INTRODUCTION
I think no other weapon currently exists that provides all the capabilities provided by land-
mines. The 1997 Ottawa Convention banned the use, development, production, stockpiling
and transfer of anti-personnel mines (APM)1. Landmine technology has moved on and dis-
tinctions between mines designed to kill or injure people and mines labeled anti-tank or anti-
vehicle are not always clear. Certain anti-vehicle mines today are designed to be dual purpose
and may be detonated by both people and vehicles.
There is evidence of rapid proliferation and procurement of systems that can mimic the func-
tion of anti-personnel mines. Some of these alternatives are essentially modifications of exist-
ing weapons, while others are based on more advanced weapons technology.
Many different technologies are being investigated to produce APM-alternatives, some la-
beled lethal and some labeled “non-lethal”. This article tries to illustrate some of the newest
alternatives were developed and some landmines against targets in the air such as combat and
transport helicopters.
2. POSSIBLE FUTURE APM ALTERNATIVES
Lethal alternatives to APMs are thought likely to contain three main elements:
– Precise real time surveillance systems to automatically detect, classify and track vehicles
and/or personnel;
– Precise firepower to immediately suppress movement of enemy forces;
– Command and control systems (a “man-in-the-loop”) to cue the precise firepower.
All the concepts have sensors to detect and locate enemy intrusion, command and control sys-
tems to direct response and mechanisms to deliver APM effects.
1
APM: that is designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person.
-1-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
This is because armies in the world look for such technology as making replacement mines
capable of resetting, self-destruction or self-neutralization, redeployment, being open to com-
mand fire and “location reporting”.
2.1. Self-Healing Minefield
The Self-Healing Minefield (SHM) system was designed to achieve an increased resistance to
dismounted and mounted breaching. Instead of a static complex obstacle, the SHM is an intel-
ligent, dynamic obstacle that responds to an enemy breaching attempt by physically reorgan-
izing.
The system consists of surface scattered antitank mines that can detect an enemy attack of the
minefield and respond autonomously, by having a fraction of the mines move to heal the
breach. With this feature there is no need for APMs to protect anti-tank mines in the mine-
field. And since the minefield is no longer a static obstacle, an open breach cannot be main-
tained by the enemy forces.
The SHM forces the enemy to attack the minefield and deplete the anti-tank mines surround-
ing the breaching lane by either repeated assaults or a wide area breach/clearance. In either
case the enemy has increased their exposure to covering fires when compared to the current
mixed system minefield. An ongoing modeling effort indicated that a self-healing minefield
provided greatly increased military effectiveness of the obstacle.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) examined 13 different tactics for breaching
the SHM and found only one to be effective from the breaching force’s standpoint. Research
has revealed that the SHM is not only as effective as the mixed minefield system it is de-
signed to replace, but it also provides a greater contribution to the battle outcome. (LLNL has
also examined the utility of fitting the SHM into a configuration that might be launched by a
120 mm mortar.)
In order to complicate an enemy breach attempt, the mines within the prototype SHM were
designed to:
– Autonomously identify and respond to an enemy attack within 10 seconds of a breach at-
tempt or vulnerability in the minefield;
– Be mobile in all environmental conditions and terrain where enemy tanks and armored ve-
hicles can operate;
– Rapidly assemble a communication network and self-geolocate in 5-15 minutes;
– Have a mine-to-mine communication resistant to enemy countermeasures;
– Provide a compact multi-hopping system;
– Provide directional control and repeatability.
Currently three teams are engaged in research and development of the key technologies for
the Self-Healing Minefield. The development of mine mobility, mine-to-mine communica-
tions, and minefield behaviors – along with the integration of these technologies into small
numbers of anti-vehicle landmine-sized prototypes – is each team's main focus.
Alliant Techsystems (ATK) and its partners, Rockwell Science Center and Architecture Tech-
nology Corporation have developed a system concept. The SHM unit features a short-range
radio, onboard network and behavior algorithm processing and multiple rocket thrusters.
On deployment, each mine uses its radio to assess the local neighborhood and establish a sys-
tem-wide wireless network. No unit has any prior knowledge of other units other than loca-
tion and connection to the network.
-2-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
Disappearance of one or more members, noted by changes in the wireless network topology,
characterizes a possible breach in the field.
The minefield behaviors, on an anytime algorithm, examine these changes to determine
whether a breach occurred, whether the field should respond, and specifically which mines
should move to close the breach.
Small rocket thrusters provide mine mobility, allowing the mine to hop over low-lying envi-
ronmental obstacles to a location that heals the breach. (Figure No. 1)
Figure No. 1. Cut-away of the SHM with rocket thrusters
The system is based on a fully distributed collective system concept. Once the radio network
is established, the units perform the geolocation process using the acoustic ranging sensors.
(Figure No. 2) The system then enters a monitoring mode where it looks for the occurrence of
a minefield breach by periodically checking for the continued presence of known neighbors.
Figure No. 2. Communication system of the SHM
Disappearance of one to several units indicates that a possible breach has occurred. Behavior
algorithms on each unit analyze the last known location of missing neighbors and the current
location of present neighbors to formulate moves to heal the breach.
This process occurs in a distributed fashion in that each unit is capable of making its own de-
cision if it should move, and is so, what that move should be. A unit that determines that it
should moves steers itself to the proper direction and uses its mobility system to make the re-
-3-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
quired move. (Figure No. 3) After all units have moved, the system reestablishes the network
and returns to the breach monitoring mode.
Figure No. 3. SHM autonomous breach response
2.2. MATRIX and SPIDER
The Matrix is an adaptation of the technology developed under the Spider program in order to
get it into the field rapidly.2 Matrix is a new landmine system designed to allow an operator
equipped with a laptop computer to remotely detonate lethal and/or non-lethal Claymore
mines by radio signal from a distance. (Figure No. 4)
Figure No. 4. A Claymore and a SLAM connected to a SPIDER unit
The USA first produced Claymore directional fragmentation mine in 1960 and has since pro-
duced 7.8 million of them! When used in command-detonated mode, they are permissible un-
der the Ottawa Convention, but when used in victim-activated mode, they are prohibited.
In February 2004, the Pentagon requested 20.2 million USD to produce 40,000 modified
M18A1E1 Claymore mines. This modified version incorporates a new triggering system that
does not rely on either the victim-activated mechanical tripwire fuse or the command-
detonated electrical initiation. Instead, it is command-detonated by a new generation of mod-
ernized demolition initiator that uses explosive to trigger the mine.
Spider is under development at Textron Systems and ATK under the Objective Force anti-
personnel component program. The system is designed to protect friendly forces and shape
the battlefield while minimizing risk to friendly troops and non-combatants.
2
A total of 25 Matrix systems were sent to Iraq for the use by units of the Army’s Stryker Brigade in May 2005.
-4-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
The Spider system consists of a control unit capable of monitoring up to 84 hand-emplaced
unattended munitions that deploy a web of tripwires across an area. Once tripwire is touched
by the enemy, a man-in-the-loop control system allows the operator to activate either lethal or
non-lethal effects.
The first Spider units are scheduled to be produced in March 2007. (The USA spent 135 mil-
lion USD between 1999 and 2004 to develop Spider and another 11 million has been re-
quested to complete research and development. A total of 390 million USD is budgeted to
produce 1,620 Spider systems and 186,300 munitions!)
The Spider's Munition Control Unit (MCU) is a pedestal fitted with six munitions launchers
each covering a sector of 60 degrees, and a communications module which links the Spider
with its remote operator. (Figure No. 5)
Figure No. 5. A SPIDER unit
The MCU communicates with the Remote Control Unit (RCU) by direct wireless link, or via
field communications repeaters. On operator command, the Spider autonomously deploys trip
wires corresponding to each sector. When a trip wire is activated, a signal is sent from the
sensing MCU to the Remote Control Unit (RCU).
Based on that signal, the operator's own observation of the field, and other situational aware-
ness and guidance from the chain of command, the operator can direct the detonation of the
grenades associated with the trip wire detection. The operator may delay this action, to allow
more intruders to penetrate further into the kill-zone and deploy multiple charges for maxi-
mum effect.
Munitions include self-activated grenades, operator activated claymores or various non-lethal
munitions. The MCU is powered by a replaceable battery and can sustain continuous opera-
tion for 30 days. The system can be recovered and replenished with new grenades after an en-
gagement. The Spider can be deactivated on command, to enable safe recovery or passage of
friendly forces.
The RCU uses a laptop computer equipped with a touch screen to provide full control of an
area up to 1,500 meters deep. Each RCU enables the monitoring and activation of a single or
multiple charges (grenades or other connected lethal or non-lethal ordnance).
Furthermore, communications repeater modules can be placed between RCUs and the MCUs
to extend the effective communications range of the system. The repeater maintains commu-
nication with the multiple MCUs in the field as well as the RCU used by the operator.
-5-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
3. ANTI-HELICOPTER MINES
The speed of maneuvers, the need for mobile and rapid reaction forces will push up some of
the operations upward into the vertical dimension. The role of helicopters is increasing be-
cause Air Force and Army helicopters will play essential role moving these troops to engage-
ment areas, which will indicate the further improvement of anti-helicopter mines (AHM).
AHMs force helicopters to fly at higher altitudes, but in this case they become targets of other
air defense weapons. AHMs can also avoid or delay airborne operations and attack helicopters
flying at a low altitude and searching for targets will be in danger, too. AHMs have already
produced on the line in some developed countries (USA, Great Britain, Russia, etc.) and
likely will be widely distributed around the world.
The recently developed Russian AHM’s acoustic receiver can detect the sound of the ap-
proaching helicopter at a distance of 2 kilometers, and knock it down at an altitude up to 200
meters. (Figure No. 6)
After detecting a target by means of an acoustic system, it turns the warhead in the direction
of the target, and scanning by means of an infrared sensor determines the real direction to the
target and the moment of the warhead detonation.
The mine can be placed both manually and using ground or aircraft delivery means.
Figure No. 6. Russian anti-helicopter mine (TEMP)
The Bulgarian AHM-200-1 is activated by acoustic and radar Doppler shift signatures at a
distance of 100 m. This mine uses two warheads, an explosive formed projectile and aug-
mented by a second TNT bar charge distributing 17 kg of steel ball fragments.
The 90 kg mine can be activated for periods up to 30 days. The control unit uses a signal
processor to process the acoustic signals and determine activation parameters. Activation,
neutralization and explosion by radio control from a range of up to 2,000 meters is optional in
model AHM-200-1RC. The mine will explode when attempts for moving, tampering or disas-
sembly during its activation phase.
AHM-200-2 is a modified version of the original anti-helicopter mine, under development at
the Institute of Metal Sciences in Sofia, Bulgaria (Figure No. 7). This version weights also 90
kg, but uses a larger, 24 kg load of cubic steel fragments, rather than steel balls used in the ba-
sic model. It uses a different type of an explosive formed projectile, believed to incorporate
up to five sub-charges.
-6-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
Figure No. 7. Bulgarian AHM 200-2 mine
The institute is also developing a new concept of a distributed anti-helicopter mine designated
4-AHM-100. (Figure No. 8) This new mine will consist of 4 vertical, surface laying charges
positioned in an array to effectively cover an area of approximately 0.4 square kilometer.
Each charge creates a fragmentation cone maintaining effective lethality up to 100 meters.
The total system weighs 125 kg and can be operated continuously for up to 90 days. The four
charges linked to a centrally located sensor and control unit.
Figure No. 8. Bulgarian 4-AHM-100 mine
Unlike previous models, these warheads are placed horizontally on the ground enabling effec-
tive concealment. However, this system uses more sophisticated digital signal processor
which can identify specific types of helicopters, based on specific threat library.
4. CONCLUSION
-7-
Defence Technology 2006
ÁPRILIS 19-20. - ZMNE BJKMFK, BUDAPEST
IVth International Symposium on Defence Technology 19-20 Apr 2006 Budapest,Hungary
Landmines still have a valid and essential role protecting own forces in military operations.
The future tactical barriers will include a new generation of landmines or alternative systems
and they must be compatible with the transformed Armed Forces.
They should permit for increased control (On-Off capability, self or command neutralization,
discrimination of targets, etc.) and must have variable response functions (lethal or non-
lethal). Furthermore, barriers of the future must be a maneuver force multiplier and should be
controlled by the maneuver element.
As we seen afore, landmines of the future have already arrived and they are ready for their
mission very soon.
References
Additional members added to Russian TEMP familiy. – Jane’s International Defense Review,
Vol. 31 Issue 10, October 1998.
Alternative Technologies to Replace Antipersonnel Landmines (National Academy of Sci-
ences, 2000) – http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309073499/ html/1.html
U.S. Programs to Develop Alternatives to Antipersonnel Mines (HRW Backgrounder, April
2000). – http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/04/us-landmines.htm
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency – http://www.darpa.mil/
ATK Corporate – http://www.atk.com/
Defense Update – http://www.defense-update.com/
-8-
