Land Mine Detection - Assignment Example

?Land Mine Detection by HOW DOES THE UNDERGROUND LOCATION OF LANDMINES COMPLICATE DETECTION? 1.1 Problems with the Structure of Mines Mines are hard to detect because they come in various shapes and types of casings, therefore “[an efficient] detection system should be either insensitive to the…shape of the mine and the type of casing material” (Hussein & Waller 1999). If the detection system is sensitive to the shape of the mine, then it will falsely detect objects underground which possess the same shape as mines but may actually be rocks or shreds of metal. Similarly, if the detection system is sensitive to the type of casing material, for example metal, then it will most likely detect other metallic objects in the ground but not mines. 1.2 Problems with Depth and Speed An efficient detection system must not be sensitive to the depth of the mine underground and detection should be performed at a reasonable speed (Hussein & Waller 1999). On the subject of depth, if the mine detector is sensitive to the depth of the buried mine, then it will probably not be able to detect mines buried relatively deeper but which will still explode upon contact. Moreover, on the subject of speed, if the personnel in charge of the mine detector do not perform the operation reasonably fast, this will result in relatively more expensive operational costs. 1.3 Problems with the Background Since mines are buried all over different soil types and terrain as well as different local circumstances, then it follows that a good detection system must be extremely specific in the identification of the mine itself and should not be affected by the surrounding conditions (Hussein & Waller 1999). This means that the detection system must remain unaffected by the weather, the temperature of the soil as well as the relative amount or mere presence of moisture in the area where the mine is buried. Otherwise, the detection system may fail to identify the presence of the mine. Another problem concerning the fact that mines are buried underground is that even detection of dogs and electronic chemical sniffers can be thwarted because of the presence of residual vapor emissions from explosives that recently detonated (Hussein & Waller 1999). This means that despite the highly sensitive olfactory sense of dogs and the sophisticated nature of electronic chemical sniffers, they are still apt to detect the wrong vapors that would lead them to remnants of explosives and not mines. Other mine detection systems like pulse-induction metallic detectors and ground penetrating radars may be able to detect microwaves, but these microwaves are not pronounced if the mines are non-metallic. Moreover, echoes from the surface and from rocks and tree roots may interfere with the microwaves emitted by a particular mine, thus preventing accurate detection. 2. WHAT EFFECT DOES NEW TECHNOLOGY HAVE ON THE COST OF REMOVING LANDMINES? The cost to remove all of the estimated 110 million active mines in the world is around $33 billion and a total operation time of around 1,100 years given the current conditions (United Nations 1997). Moreover, the main reason for the high cost of landmine removal has always been the “the amount of clutter in typical minefields,” which account for 95% of detected objects by many landmine removal systems (Won et al. 2001). 2.1 Manufacturing and Operation Costs of Modern Mine Flails Mine flails, or devices mounted on vehicles that detonate land mines along its path, are highly sophisticated and complex that their manufacturing and operating costs are extremely expensive. The Aardvark, which operates on a 160 hp turbo charged diesel engine and which has a full armored structure and communication equipment, actually operates at the rate of $0.33 per square meter while clearing mines at the rate of around 600 square meters per hour (LandmineClearance.com 2004; Green 1999). Other flails however would cost up to $2 per square meter (Hartley 2003). That means $198 - $1200 per hour, and as it works for several hours per day for several months, one can only imagine the costs. It is also estimated that the manufacturing cost of the Aardvark is at 500,000 Euros (Barais n.d.). The chains, a part of the flail which absorbs the explosion, is an unavoidable operational cost (Green 1999). 2.2 Maintenance and Miscellaneous Costs of Modern Mine Flails Apart from the manufacturing and operations cost, one should also consider the costs of maintenance, safety, support and training and salary for the operating personnel. Other costs include spare parts, modifications, repairs as well as method of transportation, especially in those places without a well-developed road system (Hartley 2003). 3. CAN CHEMICAL MINES BE NEUTRALIZED WITHOUT HAVING TO BE REMOVED? Currently, the most common procedure for neutralizing mines is “demolition using small explosive charges such as C-4 or TNT,” which can be extremely dangerous due to the nature of the procedure, and so the challenge is the development of “a chemical solution for non-explosive mine neutralization” (Patel et al. 2006). There are currently two types of mine neutralization systems in their experimental stages. 3.1 Delivery Systems Delivery systems work by first cutting into the mine and opening the case in order to expose the explosive inside without detonating the mine. The chemical is then “delivered” into the opening and the chemical neutralizes the mine. This chemical is usually either diethylene triamine or DETA, or binary chemicals (Patel et al. 2006). There are four delivery systems. One of the delivery systems is known as the Bullet with Chemical capsule or BCC. It is like a simple tripod placed above the mine and neutralizes it in minutes. The Reactive Mine Clearing System or REMIC System is similar to the BCC but the former cuts a larger opening in the mine and burns the explosives in the mine for 5 to 12 minutes. A later version of it, Smaller REMIC-II, can neutralize AT and AP mines, while a larger version, the Large REMIC-II, can penetrate much thicker steel-cased mines (Patel et al. 2006). 3.2 Thermal or Flare Systems Thermal or flare systems are another type of non-explosive methods that destroy mines. One of these, the Humanitarian Demining or HD flare, or Thiokol flare, uses space shuttle propellant fuel and neutralizes mines in such a way that it quickly burns through the casing and ignites the explosive without detonation. Another flare system, the Mine Incinerator or MI, is placed above the mine on a stand where it is ignited with electric powder to produce hot liquid. The hot liquid penetrates the casing and burns the explosive upon contact. A third flare system, the Propellant Torch System or PTS, uses the same principle of ignition but using a glow plug (Patel & Burke 2010). Bibliography Barais n.d., 2011. Mechanically Assisted Demining: Current Products and Tools. [online] Available at: http://www.eudem.vub.ac.be/technologies/technology.asp?tech_id=4 [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Green W. E., 1999. The Case for the Flail: Mechanical Landmine Clearance for the Humanitarian Application: A Manufacturer’s View. [online] Available at: http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/3.2/profiles/robertson/aardvark.htm [Accessed 6 Sept 2011]. Hartley D., 2003. The Truth About Flails. [online] Available at: http://maic.jmu.edu/Journal/7.3/focus/hartley/hartley.htm [Accessed 11 Sept 2011]. Hussein E. M. A. and Waller E. J., 1999. Landmine Detection: The Problem and the Challenge. [online] Available at: http://www.unb.ca/ME/research/LTMD/LANDMINE.htm [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Kikkert C. J. and Fitch P., 2011. “A Low Cost Multi Frequency Landmine Detector.” James Cook University. [online] Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16581371 [Accessed 5 Sept 2010]. LandmineClearance.com, 2004. Aardvark. [online] Available at: http://www.landmineclearance.com/mk4leafleted2.pdf [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Patel D. L. and Burke S. P., 2010. “In-Situ Landmine Neutralization by Chemical versus Thermal Initiation Deminer Preferences.” US Army, CECOM, R&D Center. [online] Available at: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/39174036/In-Situ-Landmine-Neutralization-by-Chemical-versus-Thermal [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Patel D. L., Dillon J., and Wright N., 2006. “In-Situ Landmine Neutralization Using Chemicals to Initiate Low Order Burning of Main Charge.” US Army, CECOM, R&D Center. [online] Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA458512 [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. United Nations Mine Clearance and Policy Unit, 1997. Landmines Factsheet. [online] Available at: http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/banmines/facts.asp [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Won I. J., Keiswetter D. A., and Bell T. H., 2001. “Electromagnetic Induction Spectroscopy for Clearing Landmines.” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 703-709. [online] Available at: http://www.aeroquestsensortech.com/products/publications/EMIS%20for%20Clearing%20Landmines.pdf [Accessed 5 Sept 2011]. Read More