I've never been to Iraq and I don't know very many veterans that can confirm this, but I do know from my PhD research that this problem is not an easy one to solve.
As was mentioned in another post, these explosive devices are improvised, so once our deployed forces come up with a solution to a problem, the terrorists are quick to try another method. They have infra-red triggers, trip wires, pressure plates, RF triggers, and possibly using other forms of wavelengths. Some wavelengths are particularly hard to jam because they interfere with our troops' own communication systems. Plus these jamming systems are expensive and high powered which is not easily scalable.
The Washington Post ran an excellent series in which they talked about the difficulty of this problem [1]. As for me, I'm doing my PhD research on trying to stop these acts of violence prematurely. So even though this technology isn't immediately deployable, we're looking at other types of sensing technologies that can "see" explosives devices from a stand-off distance, particularly > 50meters.
Hi, I've been there, and seen more than one up close.
You're right - there are a number of triggering methods in use, to include IR, GPRS/"family band" radio, and cell. More sophisticated devices use a combination, like cell arming and IR/pressure plate/trip cord detonation. Simple command-wire detonation begat command-wire with a stand-off cell phone arming unit. This was so we couldn't follow wires to the bomber. For a time fake command wires were set up and boobytrapped. When we stopped following wires, they'd do it again. Or use something really simple like a washing machine timer for a regularly scheduled convoy.
In Afghanistan (at least 5 years ago), "long range cordless" was a popular option in remote areas without cell grids. These are Chinese-made cordless phones operating in the 20-40mhz frequencies with ranges of 10 miles or more. These are also popular in areas of Iraq without cell infrastructure.
It is a cat and mouse game of trigger mechanisms versus detection/deterrent. New detonation methods would show up all the time, with various techniques being popular in different regions at any given time (in both Iraq and Afghanistan). New methods are analyzed, equipment is designed to counter, companies bid on devices, and the countermeasures are pushed into the warzone as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, in my experience, these devices are always behind the curve.
It wouldn't be a good idea for me to go into detail about what these detection and deterrence methods do specifically. Sufficed to say I browsed this article's responses and didn't run into any suggestions or techniques that I hadn't personally used or seen implemented.
There's a wide variety of communications equipment insurgents have access to, because there aren't Iraqi or Afghan equivalents of the FCC. There is access to consumer radios and devices of all frequencies and outputs in these countries. The entire spectrum is game. I don't think there's a magic deterrent or detection method here.
Our best bet was always to schedule movements and map routes as erratically and randomly as possible. If we could, we would mix vehicle movements with foot and air movement. Keeping a good relationship with locals and randomizing movement as much as possible proved much more valuable than using the hottest new gizmo. Pulling over and buying a soda from a street vendor and chatting with the local police generally yielded better information about the road ahead than sitting sealed in an armored vehicle staring at computer displays.
Thanks for your confirmation. I feel like lots of science and engineering projects could benefit a great deal from having a veteran on their team. Your insight is truly valuable.
As for the rest of the hacker community, I can see no better example of the importance of the "release-early-release-often" motto. It's frustrating for me as a scientist sometimes working on technology that has years of development time, when people's lives are immediately at stake.
I sincerely hope the military is getting more of a hacker-mindset.
As was mentioned in another post, these explosive devices are improvised, so once our deployed forces come up with a solution to a problem, the terrorists are quick to try another method. They have infra-red triggers, trip wires, pressure plates, RF triggers, and possibly using other forms of wavelengths. Some wavelengths are particularly hard to jam because they interfere with our troops' own communication systems. Plus these jamming systems are expensive and high powered which is not easily scalable.
The Washington Post ran an excellent series in which they talked about the difficulty of this problem [1]. As for me, I'm doing my PhD research on trying to stop these acts of violence prematurely. So even though this technology isn't immediately deployable, we're looking at other types of sensing technologies that can "see" explosives devices from a stand-off distance, particularly > 50meters.
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/specials/leftofbo...