Identifying DPICM
Andy Smith
February 2, 2012, 5:19 pm
Name the Cluster Bomb, an Update
By C. J. CHIVERS
Can you identify a cluster bomb found last year in Libya? The bomblets in question were used during the war by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. They remain scattered in at least one part of the country. And nobody – at least that we know of – has been able to identify them.
This morning we received a fresh batch of photographs of these mystery submunitions, including the image, top, of one of the bomblets before its stabilizing ribbon was deployed. More importantly, the researcher who sent the photographs was also in possession of images of what seem to have been the delivery system for these cluster bombs – a 122-millimeter ground-to-ground cargo rocket, shown below in a trio of images of its makeup and markings.
We also now have more images that show dimensions of the fragmentation casing, including these two, below.
For those arriving here fresh, read the previous At War post, and go here for general background (a painfully stiff video) on this category of cluster bomb, known as a dual purpose improved conventional munition, or D.P.I.C.M. And you can go here to see more photographs and background information, including on this crowd-source effort.
The feedback today in the comments section, and in many e-mails to chi...@nytimes.com or thegu...@gmail.com, often emphasize the bomblets’ strong resemblance to the M77 or other American-made cluster bombs. (A German ordnance specialist writing under the name Satchmo also explains why these do match the cluster bombs formerly used by his country; you can read his comment at the bottom of the previous post.)
We agree that the resemblance to the American M series is strong, and there is probably a reason for this, which we will take up in a moment. But most of the technicians and analysts who have seen the images have said that they do not come from the American inventory. It would not be inconceivable for American arms manufacturers or brokers to have sold cluster munitions to Libya; many other weapons or munitions of American provenance turned up in the Qaddafi stocks. But these particular items do not seem to be a technical match. Have a close look at several of the images of the cluster munitions, and at the frame below.
It shows the small metal vane at the base of the stabilizing ribbon. This vane appears designed to spin the submunitions in flight, after the bomblets are released by the cargo canister that carries them near a target. The vanes most likely help to arm each bomblet’s fuze and perhaps, working with the ribbon, also serve to keep the bomblets in a fairly tight and predictable pattern, or group, so that they do not scatter. As far as we know, such a vane has not been a feature of anything in the American M series. If we are wrong, correct us and we will gladly tip our hats your way.
One working theory – and only a theory – is that these are reverse-engineered descendants of the American-made line. Convergence in arms design is common. Many weapons made in one country are, in the end, updates or copies of weapons made in others. You can see it in rifles, pistols, antitank rockets, antiship missiles and the avionics packages in aircraft. Call it what you will – intellectual piracy, aggressive borrowing, the fruits of espionage or foreign military acquisition programs. It’s an old, old game.
And this leads to possible clues, including a theory that D.P.I.C.M. vanes underwent experiments in Germany in the 1970s, and that that technology migrated from there, to any number of other countries. Another possible lead, according to one analyst, is that Italy manufactured cluster munitions for the 122-millimeter Firos system, and those submunitions might have been designed for it but did not see large-scale licensed production, and made their way to Colonel Qaddafi long before the ban on cluster munitions was in vogue.
Again, these are theories. There is no clear evidence yet to point to a particular nation or manufacturer.
And so the questions here still stand: Who made these D.P.I.C.M.’s, and when, and where?
There are many reasons the answers might matter. We are grateful for your help thus far.
Note: We also would like to take a moment and thank the researcher who provided these photographs from Libya. The source asked to remain anonymous, to protect several relationships on the ground.
Stephan Lorenz
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the Humanitarian Demining forum - which is a forum for the discussion of all Mine Action topics - ranging from EOD and technical aspects of mines and ERW to field demining, survey, MRE, Advocacy, Campaigning and Victim's Assistance.
To post to this group, send an email to demi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
demining-u...@googlegroups.com
sean.mo...@talk21.com
| Looking at the markings, I would say that they look Chinese or North Korean. The Chinese often use WM or WS on artillery rockets but not always. I can't find anything to pin it down but my suspicion is one or the other. Sorry I can't be of more help. Cheers, Sean |
|
Rae McGrath
From: a...@nolandmines.com
To: demi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HD] Identifying DPICM
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 13:41:43 +0000
Didier Leonard
I found a similar sub-munition in Afghanistan (Kandahar) few years ago. Another copy of the M77 but made in Egypt. The dispenser is a 122 mm cargo rocket too !!!
De : demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] De la part de Rae McGrath
Envoyé : dimanche 5 février 2012 17:57
À : Robin Collins
Objet : RE: [HD] Identifying DPICM
I've already said to people who sent this to me on fb that I think this is all getting a bit anal - if we really want to know the origin (I would guess US or maybe Pakistan) let's just accuse the UK ... the MOD will freak out and soon leak a whole list of who sold CM to Gaddafi over the years ... just get them cleared and let people get on with their lives.
Rae
From: a...@nolandmines.com
To: demi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HD] Identifying DPICM
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 13:41:43 +0000
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/name-the-cluster-bomb-an-update/
February 2, 2012, 5:19 pm
Name the Cluster Bomb, an Update
By C. J. CHIVERS
Can you identify a cluster bomb found last year in Libya? The bomblets in question were used during the war by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. They remain scattered in at least one part of the country. And nobody – at least that we know of – has been able to identify them.
This morning we received a fresh batch of photographs of these mystery submunitions, including the image, top, of one of the bomblets before its stabilizing ribbon was deployed. More importantly, the researcher who sent the photographs was also in possession of images of what seem to have been the delivery system for these cluster bombs – a 122-millimeter ground-to-ground cargo rocket, shown below in a trio of images of its makeup and markings.
We also now have more images that show dimensions of the fragmentation casing, including these two, below.
For those arriving here fresh, read the previous At War post, and go here for general background (a painfully stiff video) on this category of cluster bomb, known as a dual purpose improved conventional munition, or D.P.I.C.M. And you can go here to see more photographs and background information, including on this crowd-source effort.
The feedback today in the comments section, and in many e-mails to chi...@nytimes.com or thegu...@gmail.com, often emphasize the bomblets’ strong resemblance to the M77 or other American-made cluster bombs. (A German ordnance specialist writing under the name Satchmo also explains why these do match the cluster bombs formerly used by his country; you can read his comment at the bottom of the previous post.)
We agree that the resemblance to the American M series is strong, and there is probably a reason for this, which we will take up in a moment. But most of the technicians and analysts who have seen the images have said that they do not come from the American inventory. It would not be inconceivable for American arms manufacturers or brokers to have sold cluster munitions to Libya; many other weapons or munitions of American provenance turned up in the Qaddafi stocks. But these particular items do not seem to be a technical match. Have a close look at several of the images of the cluster munitions, and at the frame below.
It shows the small metal vane at the base of the stabilizing ribbon. This vane appears designed to spin the submunitions in flight, after the bomblets are released by the cargo canister that carries them near a target. The vanes most likely help to arm each bomblet’s fuze and perhaps, working with the ribbon, also serve to keep the bomblets in a fairly tight and predictable pattern, or group, so that they do not scatter. As far as we know, such a vane has not been a feature of anything in the American M series. If we are wrong, correct us and we will gladly tip our hats your way.
One working theory – and only a theory – is that these are reverse-engineered descendants of the American-made line. Convergence in arms design is common. Many weapons made in one country are, in the end, updates or copies of weapons made in others. You can see it in rifles, pistols, antitank rockets, antiship missiles and the avionics packages in aircraft. Call it what you will – intellectual piracy, aggressive borrowing, the fruits of espionage or foreign military acquisition programs. It’s an old, old game.
And this leads to possible clues, including a theory that D.P.I.C.M. vanes underwent experiments in Germany in the 1970s, and that that technology migrated from there, to any number of other countries. Another possible lead, according to one analyst, is that Italy manufactured cluster munitions for the 122-millimeter Firos system, and those submunitions might have been designed for it but did not see large-scale licensed production, and made their way to Colonel Qaddafi long before the ban on cluster munitions was in vogue.
Again, these are theories. There is no clear evidence yet to point to a particular nation or manufacturer.
And so the questions here still stand: Who made these D.P.I.C.M.’s, and when, and where?
There are many reasons the answers might matter. We are grateful for your help thus far.
Note: We also would like to take a moment and thank the researcher who provided these photographs from Libya. The source asked to remain anonymous, to protect several relationships on the ground.
--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the Humanitarian Demining forum - which is a forum for the discussion of all Mine Action topics - ranging from EOD and technical aspects of mines and ERW to field demining, survey, MRE, Advocacy, Campaigning and Victim's Assistance.
To post to this group, send an email to demi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
demining-u...@googlegroups.com
Andy Smith
The collective effort to identify the unusual cluster bombs found in several places last year in Libya has yet to reach an answer, or even a consensus on the likely origins of the mystery submunitions. Several readers have pitched in publicly here on this site, or on Twitter. Others have sent material and suggestions by e-mail. The comparative illustration, above, fits that second category.
It was made and sent by Colin King, a specialist in explosive ordnance disposal in Britain and an analyst for IHS Jane’s. Mr. King suggested that while this submunition fit neatly within the D.P.I.C.M. (dual purpose improved conventional munition) family, it was at best a distant cousin of the American-made M77. Have a look at the pairing, with Mr. King’s notes. Much about it is self-evident. Mr. King added by e-mail, “Most D.P.I.C.M. operate on broadly similar principles, but ‘your’ bomblet clearly has a different fuze mechanism to the M77 — and I have never seen those angled holes on any other submunition.”
One reader suggested that this was a relatively easy-to-identify licensed copy of the American M77, and could be identified by attendees at arms shows in recent years, including IDEX. Mr. King and others had already checked that route, and so far no one in touch with us has seen this submunition in any form anywhere except in the field in Libya last year. That reader also suggested that the angled holes in the fragmentation casing had been copied by engineers who did not know their purpose — an idea that seemed flimsy to the group of specialists that has been helping At War. In any event, if it was a cinch to identify, that reader provided no identification. And so we are not yet at the end.
More information from the field did come in. Per Bjerde, the leader of an explosive ordnance disposal team who has been working in Libya, wrote by e-mail a few times to say he had found these submunitions and remnants of the cargo rockets that delivered them in two areas of Libya — near Jadu and Zintan, in the highlands of Libya’s west. Mr. Bjerde found them in August, he said, and he made photographs of the remains of those strikes, including several published in the second At War post in this series and on www.cjchivers.com. He agreed to allow us to publish more of his images, which we will do shortly. Mr. Bjerde had a theory suggesting that the crews that fired these rockets had not known how to use them effectively, and so mistakenly fired them in ways that fortuitously carried them away from populated areas. This would make them different from what we saw with the MAT-120 cluster munitions fired into Misurata, which were provided to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s military by Spain. We’ll explain that in a future post.
A specialist from the German-speaking world also sent documents pertaining to a small winglet, or vane, that had been designed for a German submunition now being destroyed as Germany demilitarizes its cluster munitions stocks. We’re reviewing the documents and will post more on them as we digest them. They do not appear to push us closer to an identification in this case, but perhaps provide fresh information to move along the debate among the specialists about the purpose of the winglet on the mystery submunition.
Rae McGrath
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 12:50:51 +0000
Andy Smith
----- Original Message -----From: Andy Smith
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 12:50 PMSubject: Re: [HD] Identifying DPICM - update
While nodding to Rae - yes, some of us do have an interest that borders on obsession, but that can pay dividends - Colin has approved my posting the following update from the NYT, and added: -The latest was an attempt to dismiss the many - most of whom should know better - who insist that it is a US M77 or 'close copy'. I got so fed up that I drew up the attached comparison, which you are welcome to post. Incidentally, one of the points not shown on the image is that I believe the mystery bomblet to have a single 'streamer' rather than a looped ribbon - that's particularly unusual.
Andy Smith
Colin King
I’ve attached are a couple of pictures for those having trouble visualising the components we’re talking about.
Personally, I believe it’s useful to think of arming as a process rather than an on/off switch. Several steps will always be involved, some of which (such as a screw turning or shutter sliding) involve degrees of continuous ‘analogue’ movement.
If the ribbon has deployed then the chances are that the striker release has started to unscrew – especially from a projectile. It’s the drag of the ribbon against the spin of the bomblet (retained from the spin of the dispenser) which unscrews the striker in most DPICM. If, as often happens, the bomblet has impacted before it is fully armed, the slide may be in the safe position, but only held ‘shut’ on the very tip of the firing pin. Picking it up may be just what it needs to fully arm.
The detonators are built to resist being pressed in during assembly, rough battlefield handling in the ammunition, several thousand G on firing and substantial shock when they’re ejected, yet they’re very sensitive to the sharp point of the firing pin. Just tipping them up won’t quite do it – they do need enough impact to get the tip of the pin to pierce the waterproof covering and penetrate the composition – but it doesn’t take much. Back on the ‘analogue’ theme, the pin may already be lodged in composition of an armed bomblet, in which case very little movement may be needed to set it off. Which is why the picture forwarded by George Z – showing armed (slide out) bomblets being held nose down (firing pin in contact with the detonator) is so horrendous.
As far as the mystery bomblets go, the advice is the same as I pin to my door every Sunday: Do not disturb unless absolutely necessary. Even if it isn’t armed, it might be once you’ve moved it.
Colin.
From: demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andy Smith
Sent: 09 February 2012 19:09
To: demi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HD] DPICM hazards
For anyone who does not know, in HMA there have been several DPICM deaths among Western trained demining EOD Techs - and more among serving soldiers working with the UN. The major lesson to be drawn from these events should have been obvious, but obviously wasn't. You can pick them up all day if they have not armed, but if they have armed - that can be the last thing you do.
Not all submuunitions are the same and some impact fuzed models can be picked up safely for bulk disposal but it is not that simple with the M42, M77 and "close cousins".
The deaths have occurred when someone who did not know what he was doing (often a Western trained EOD Tech, incidentally) picked up an armed DPICM and inspected it - unwittingly initiating it with the shaped charge facing towards them. The weight of the firing pin and its inertia is enough to initiate the stab-sensitive detonator - so turning it over quickly can do it. The tiny explosive charge means that the fragmentation does not have as much penetrating power as you might expect, and there are perhaps a dozen recorded non-fatal accidents involving DPICM frag in the DDAS (there is some evidence from Bosnia to suggest that the KB1 - where the frag is ball bearings - may be the worst for this).
What is important is, as Colin poinped out, the new version in Libya appears to have a different fuzing system. If they are on the surface, the slide on the M77, M42 and the KB1 can be visible. Despite a general no-touch rule, if the flapping orientation ribbon-loop has not worked the arming screw loose, so the slide that blocks the pin has NOT popped out on one side, these can be picked up - and they regularly are by people on the ground. The slide can then be "blocked" with sticky tape so that it cannot move out of the way of the firing pin - and the device can be safely moved. If the slide is even partly protruding, they should not be picked up. I definitely do not recommend picking them up by their ribbon (so holding the pin away from the det) - which I have run away from when I have seen it done - but I genuinely wish those who do it the best of luck.
The point is, as far as I can see you cannot tell when the Libyan variant has armed. At present, I only know of one accident with it - when a boy picked one up by its ribbon and tossed it aside (three non-severe civilian injuries), but would like to hear of any more. [Yes, I have stopped collecting accident records for the DDAS, but there is no one else to rely on over this and it might be important in Libya.]
So, it would be really useful to hear from those with hands-on - CAN YOU TELL WHETHER IT HAS ARMED, and if so, how?
Regards,
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Smith
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [HD] Identifying DPICM - update
While nodding to Rae - yes, some of us do have an interest that borders on obsession, but that can pay dividends - Colin has approved my posting the following update from the NYT, and added: -
The latest was an attempt to dismiss the many - most of whom should know better - who insist that it is a US M77 or 'close copy'. I got so fed up that I drew up the attached comparison, which you are welcome to post. Incidentally, one of the points not shown on the image is that I believe the mystery bomblet to have a single 'streamer' rather than a looped ribbon - that's particularly unusual.
And at the New York Times site:
The collective effort to identify the unusual cluster bombs found in several places last year in Libya has yet to reach an answer, or even a consensus on the likely origins of the mystery submunitions. Several readers have pitched in publicly here on this site, or on Twitter. Others have sent material and suggestions by e-mail. The comparative illustration, above, fits that second category.
It was made and sent by Colin King, a specialist in explosive ordnance disposal in Britain and an analyst for IHS Jane’s. Mr. King suggested that while this submunition fit neatly within the D.P.I.C.M. (dual purpose improved conventional munition) family, it was at best a distant cousin of the American-made M77. Have a look at the pairing, with Mr. King’s notes. Much about it is self-evident. Mr. King added by e-mail, “Most D.P.I.C.M. operate on broadly similar principles, but ‘your’ bomblet clearly has a different fuze mechanism to the M77 — and I have never seen those angled holes on any other submunition.”
One reader suggested that this was a relatively easy-to-identify licensed copy of the American M77, and could be identified by attendees at arms shows in recent years, including IDEX. Mr. King and others had already checked that route, and so far no one in touch with us has seen this submunition in any form anywhere except in the field in Libya last year. That reader also suggested that the angled holes in the fragmentation casing had been copied by engineers who did not know their purpose — an idea that seemed flimsy to the group of specialists that has been helping At War. In any event, if it was a cinch to identify, that reader provided no identification. And so we are not yet at the end.
--
Andy Smith
Thanks,
----- Original Message -----From: Stephan LorenzSent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 2:29 PMSubject: Re: [HD] Identifying DPICM
Didier Leonard
Andy,
On different website I’ve seen the same sub-munition photos (attached) but either named MZD-2 (Amnesty) or M85 (NPA).
Could you tell me the proper designation, please?
Thanks in advance.
De : demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] De la part de Andy Smith
Envoyé : vendredi 10 février 2012 19:02
À : demi...@googlegroups.com
Objet : [HD] Re: Chinese DPICM
Andy Smith
----- Original Message -----From: Didier Leonard
Colin King
Didier,
The submunition in the photo is the Israeli M85 and is very different from the mystery bomblet.
Regards,
Colin.
From: demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Didier Leonard
Sent: 10 February 2012 19:14
To: demi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [HD] Re: Chinese DPICM
Andy,
Can you identify a cluster bomb found last year in Libya? The bomblets in question were used during the war by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. They remain scattered in at least one part of the country. And nobody – at least that we know of – has been able to identify them.
This morning we received a fresh batch of photographs of these mystery submunitions, including the image, top, of one of the bomblets before its stabilizing ribbon was deployed. More importantly, the researcher who sent the photographs was also in possession of images of what seem to have been the delivery system for these cluster bombs – a 122-millimeter ground-to-ground cargo rocket, shown below in a trio of images of its makeup and markings.
We also now have more images that show dimensions of the fragmentation casing, including these two, below.
For those arriving here fresh, read the previous At War post, and go here for general background (a painfully stiff video) on this category of cluster bomb, known as a dual purpose improved conventional munition, or D.P.I.C.M. And you can go here to see more photographs and background information, including on this crowd-source effort.
The feedback today in the comments section, and in many e-mails to chi...@nytimes.com or thegu...@gmail.com, often emphasize the bomblets’ strong resemblance to the M77 or other American-made cluster bombs. (A German ordnance specialist writing under the name Satchmo also explains why these do match the cluster bombs formerly used by his country; you can read his comment at the bottom of the previous post.)
We agree that the resemblance to the American M series is strong, and there is probably a reason for this, which we will take up in a moment. But most of the technicians and analysts who have seen the images have said that they do not come from the American inventory. It would not be inconceivable for American arms manufacturers or brokers to have sold cluster munitions to Libya; many other weapons or munitions of American provenance turned up in the Qaddafi stocks. But these particular items do not seem to be a technical match. Have a close look at several of the images of the cluster munitions, and at the frame below.
Didier Leonard
Colin,
Thanks for your answer .
Could you post a pic of the MZD-2, please?
Regards
De : demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] De la part de Colin King
Envoyé : samedi 11 février 2012 14:04
À : demi...@googlegroups.com
Objet : RE: [HD] Re: Chinese DPICM
Didier Leonard
Many thanks Colin !
De : demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] De la part de Colin King
Envoyé : dimanche 12 février 2012 13:33
Mark Hiznay
I'm looking at an item, which looks like a cartridge, in a Soviet equipped environment, that is 85-100mm in diameter with a single red band around the lower third of the cylinder.
Happy to send a picture to those who want a peak.
Thanks, Mark
Colin King
Happy to look at a photo, as always.
Colin.
-----Original Message-----
From: demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Thanks, Mark
George Zahaczewsky
From: Mark Hiznay <hiz...@hrw.org>
To: <demi...@googlegroups.com> <demi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 12, 2012 3:47 pm
Subject: [HD] Red colored bands
For non US ordnance, what does a single red band on a cartridge/projectile mean? I'm looking at an item, which looks like a cartridge, in a Soviet equipped environment, that is 85-100mm in diameter with a single red band around the lower third of the cylinder. Happy to send a picture to those who want a peak. Thanks, Mark -- You have received this message because you are subscribed to the Humanitarian Demining forum - which is a forum for the discussion of all Mine Action topics - ranging from EOD and technical aspects of mines and ERW to field demining, survey, MRE, Advocacy, Campaigning and Victim's Assistance. To post to this group, send an email to demi...@googlegroups.com
Mark Hiznay
Thanks for the kind offers all. My initial size estimate was too large but I think Sean got it -- UK MK2 38mm Riot Control round. Here is the picture. Many other items in it to ponder too and the location is Syria. I always appreciate the assistance.
From: demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of George Zahaczewsky
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 10:53 AM
To: demi...@googlegroups.com
Colin King
Mark,
Also worthy of note (leaving aside the obvious PG-7 bits) are what appears to be Russian OG-15 (73 mm HE frag) tails and a rare VOG-25P (40 mm bounding frag grenade).
Regards,
Colin.
From: demi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:demi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Hiznay
Sent: 13 February 2012 17:53
To: demi...@googlegroups.com