Fascinating water-based IED disruptor

Discussion in 'The Science Forum' started by IndependentBoffin, Nov 29, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Interesting stuff...


    YouTube - Water Disruptor

  2. Old hat I'm afraid - was trialling something similar 15 years ago.
  3. Didn't the "wheelbarrow" needle do something similar?
  4. Did your trials involve a soldier-portable, compact weaponised version, or did they use a mechanical compressor?

    Is the main problem in Afghanistan detecting IEDs, rather than defeating them?
  5. Ahh the joys of "hub Kep!"

    I think I was the first to use one of them in anger (at least in its RARDEised form..)
  6. Depends what you mean by defeat, but yes, finding them (in a timely and safe manner) is generally considered the most technically challenging bit.

    And if Richard North or his cronies suggest that the Husky mine detection system is the answer, they should be slapped with a large wet haddock.
  7. I thought the guy that’s on Discovery developed and patented this sort of thing? His name escapes me at the moment but I do remember a programme with him demonstrating it on a VBIED.
  8. Sidney Alford, madder than a box of frogs; Explosives.net
  9. Not bloody Catweazle!, never invented anything in his life (although to be fair he is/was excellent at packaging and selling stuff to folk with large expense accounts, and getting his mug on the box..)!

    Nah, the first I saw the HE + water trick done was by the Rhodesians in the late 70's - det cord + VW hubcap + bucket of water - worked a treat!
  10. I'll second the comments on Sidney.I worked with him on the Hornestrand incident off Falmouth,some years ago.However,he is certainly an interesting 'character'


  11. Most of the Wheelbarrow disruptors did something similar:excited: Some were slightly more violent than others. And they were in use long before people thought they were. The RN used water shots to remove limpet mines from ships.

    Oh and Sydney Alford is so fill of shit you would need a real wheelbarrow to move him around.:judge: Use of Magnesium as a shaped charge liner - on a 155mm carrier shell FFS.
  12. Yes - most disruptors are man portable - try walking through a foot of mud in some shit hole in NI (or anywhere else for that matter) because your remote means is up to its battery box in shyte carrying 40 lbs of offset weight in front of you wearing a bomb suit :).

    One of the disruptors weighed less than 1 Kg but 'nuff said on further technical details.
  13. Magnesium as a SC liner is a good way to get behind target pyrophoricity, something lacking in copper liners. Horses for courses.
  14. You what? You mean set it alight mate?

    Never had a problem doing that with copper meself..

    If RM considers a magnesium liner to be "inappropriate" for cracking a carrier shell, then I know whose opinion I would back! He has probably done more of these than anyone on the planet..
  15. Yeppers.

    But copper as a metal is not particularly flammable. Once you get a bit of magnesium burning all you can do is pretty much stand back and watch. The metal is so reactive it burns in water and even nitrogen.

    Of course! I too would defer to RM's experience under the circumstances. But I was just suggesting there may be other reasons why one might want to use a magnesium liner despite its lower density and ductility (hence penetration efficiency) than copper.

    IIRC aluminium is used as a liner in Maverick missiles. It is denser than magnesium but also pyrophoric. If the Americans wanted pure penetration efficiency they could have gone with copper, so they had their reasons for going with aluminium.