Avatar feed
Responses: 3
SFC Stephen Atchley
3
3
0
You're right. Sounds like a bouncing Betty...

Just a way around a treaty they probably shouldn't have signed.
(3)
Comment
(0)
TSgt David L.
TSgt David L.
7 y
The human rights cats in the UN (don't get me started) don't like the billions of mines left buried around the world, so the new "compliant" mines have a self clearing feature so they won't remain for the long term.
(3)
Reply
(0)
SCPO Todd Sheckley
SCPO Todd Sheckley
>1 y
Imagine being Finland with Russians as neighbors. I do not blame them one bit given rising tensions in the area.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
TSgt David L.
2
2
0
We have a couple of systems like that. One will "wake up" when is senses a vehicle and orient itself for the proper attack attitude. An above ground system. This is another:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US6606951
(2)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Wayne Wood
Sgt Wayne Wood
7 y
Granted that AT is AP on steroids, this appears to be AP & light vehicle only

Also, command detonated unless i misread the article.
(1)
Reply
(0)
TSgt David L.
TSgt David L.
7 y
Sgt Wayne Wood - There are AT systems and AP. Lots of cool stuff now.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/volcano.htm
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SCPO Todd Sheckley
1
1
0
I am guessing b/c it is command detonated they are getting away with not calling it a traditional AP mines.

Section of treaty they are most likely using:
The treaty covers only anti-personnel mines; it does not address mixed mines, anti-tank mines, remote-controlled claymore mines, anti-handling devices (booby traps), and other "static" explosive devices.

When you look at the list of non-signatory countries it is pretty easy to tell there will be plenty of AP mines to go around due to the back door sales that go on all the time.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close