final report technology workshop - nkp.es · 2017. 8. 31. · shop fostered information sharing...

Final Report

TECHNOLOGY WORKSHOPMadrid 9 - 11 June 2015

C-IEDCENTRE OF EXCELLENCE

EODCENTRE OF EXCELLENCE

Funded by

NATO ESCD DAT POW and EDA

C-IED COE FINAL REPORT

This publication is a product of the NATO C-IED Centre of Excellence. It does not necessarily

reflect the policy or the opinion of the Centre or NATO. The Centre may not be held responsible

for any loss or harm arising from the use of information contained in this publication and is not

responsible for the content of the external sources, including external websites referenced in this

publication.

Digital or hard copies of this publication may be produced for internal use within NATO and for

personal or educational use when for nonprofit and non-commercial purpose, provided that copies

bear a full citation.

Unless other identified, the photographs shown in this Report are the sole property of the C-IED

COE and the presentation copyrights owners have authorized its publication.

Photographer: Cristina Gómez Villar (C-IED COE Graphic designer and Photographer)

www.ciedcoe.org

[email protected]

Disclaimer:

2nd COUNTER IED TECHNOLOGY WORKSHOP

INDEX

1

Letter from the director

Panel Discussions

Impressions

Way Ahead

Conclusions

Workshop Aim

Executive Summary

2

4

6

7

35

36

38


2



3

I am pleased to present the final report on the second C-IED Technology Workshop. The event was co-organized by the C-IED Centre of Excellence and the EOD Centre of Excellence between the 09th and the 11th of June 2015 in Madrid (Spain). The purpose of the event was to gather experts from military, law enforcement, industry and academia to provoke an exchange of views and develop innovative ideas on how to tackle the various challenges we face when combatting the IED threat.

Participants from 24 NATO and non-NATO countries, 45 recognized speakers, 175 attendees, 2 media partners, 19 exhibitors presenting fielded products and C-IED technological solutions, and 240 visitors confirmed the importance given to C-IED information sharing by the C-IED Community of interest. It is one of the only events where main governmental stakeholders, including the intera-gency community can network and interact with industry and academia representatives in a single place. The workshop once again provided participants with a very unique and professionally reward-ing experience.

The Counter IED Centre of Excellence was established and accredited in 2010, and since then it has solidified its leading position within the C-IED community. Over the last five years the type and number of requests to the CIED COE has substantially increased demonstrating that the COE re-mains a significant partner of the International Community facing and dealing with the IED threat.The C-IED COE fosters events aimed to facilitate the exchange of information among the various stakeholders involved in the C-IED fight. We will continue carrying out our mandated mission to support all nations and actors in the fight against this prolific global threat.


COL José Zamorano González(ESP Army)C-IED COE Director


4

2nd COE C-IED TECHNOLOGY WORKSHOP REPORT


5

The 2nd C-IED Technology Workshop, held at Madrid (Spain) from 09 to 11 June 2015, was co-organized by the C-IED Centre of Excellence and the EOD Centre of Excellence and sponsored by The NATO Emerging Security Challenges Division (ESCD) Defence against Terrorism Program of Work (DAT POW) and the European Defence Agency (EDA). The workshop was chaired by the Director of the Counter IED Centre of Excellence, Colonel Jose Zamorano.

For the second consecutive year the C-IED COE played the crucial role of being the NATO hub for C-IED activities, particularly focused on the technology solutions applied to fighting IEDs. The work-shop fostered information sharing between the main C-IED actors: military forces, law enforcement agencies, research institutions, defence industry, and other national and international organizations.

This year’s workshop consisted of a NATO classified day followed by two non-classified days. The three day event comprising 10 discussion panels provided the opportunity to present and analyse today’s most important C-IED issues. The panel topics ranged from Global IED threat trends and emerging IED challenges through C-IED Technology gaps and future requirements to discussions about Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) to counter Radio Controlled IEDs (RCIED), vehicle dam-age analysis processes, equipment standardization, maritime C-IED technologies, standoff IED de-tection technologies, Research and Development synergies among related agencies, and common military and law enforcement technologies.

The panel discussions were moderated by senior subject matter experts from across the C-IED Community. The discussion sessions were combined with live demonstrations and static exhibitions highlighting C-IED related equipment and solutions while offering the optimal setting to facilitate networking opportunities.

Participation included 175 registered delegates and 240 visitors from 24 countries including many across the European Union as well as Canada, the United States, Norway, Turkey, and Israel. In addition, 21 companies, institutes, and universities presented their products and projects in the ex-hibition hall at the Spanish Military Sport Club “La Dehesa”.

A number of important common elements were gathered to define the way ahead. While many were interesting the most pressing and relevant are below:

The key to countering IED threats is a widely understood and common view of the IED threat and current technologies. In addition to advanced technologies for detection, neutralization and mitiga-tion of IEDs the European/NATO C-IED Community of Interest (COI) requires strong interagency cooperation. This is especially true in the field of information sharing. Since IED threat networks operate in all environments, including maritime, C-IED should be institutionalized as a joint, intera-gency effort that includes information exchanges among all relevant organizations and standardized exploitation procedures and training.

Knowledge is the foundation on which we tailor C-IED training and develop innovative technology solutions. The basis to define the requirements for C-IED technologies (protective, reactive and proactive) is an agreed standards-based research model that ensures equipment interoperability. The need for standardization is particularly acute concerning stand-off IED detection technologies.

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


6

Information sharing and collaboration are essential to identify gaps and develop solutions. As a re-sult of the 2nd C-IED Technology Workshop, there are new standardization initiatives for a combat vehicle damage analysis process, IED evidence collection standards, C-IED training, and IED de-tection systems. There is also support for including maritime specific C-IED procedures into Allied Joint Publication (AJP) 3.15(C).

Understanding and tracking current and future IED trends is fundamental to develop technologies to counter them (such as advanced ECM platforms to counter high power RCIEDs). Pooling and shar-ing resources across the NATO alliance will greatly contribute to cost efficiency. Where possible, NATO should also collaborate and develop agreements with EU and other international agencies who are working on the same issues.

This report gathers the views and main aspects as given by the expert briefers during their oral presentations and provides the main points from the discussions conducted afterwards. The herein conclusions are expected to lead new C-IED technology research efforts and shape the current on-going ones, as well as to facilitate the defence industry to meet the permanently evolving operational requirements.

2. WORKSHOP AIMThe purpose of the event was to gather experts from military, law enforcement, industry and aca-demia to provoke an exchange of views and troubleshoot the various challenges we collectively face when dealing with the IED threat.

The workshop had the following specific goals:

Provide a valuable meeting point to promote C-IED technology info sharing among military, law enforcement, industry and academic communities.

Provide a global IED threat update to enhance the threat understanding among the Commu-nity of Interest.

Present upcoming or foreseen C-IED challenges and explore potential technological gaps and solutions.

Present current and future C-IED technology related programs. Provoke a valid discussion to provide solutions/suggestions that could be helpful to avoid duplicative R&D programs.

Discuss and provide way ahead for equipment standardization to enable the alignment of op-erational needs, technological efforts and industry developments.

Present industry with current and future proposals to facilitate C-IED capability enhancements.


7

3. PANEL DISCUSSIONS*We provided abbreviated summaries of panels 1 through 4 due to the classified nature of the dis-cussions on day one. A full report with detailed summaries of all panels is available on BICES.

1st Panel - Global IED Threat Trends and Emerging IED Challenges

Moderator:

Ms Paulette Arnold, USA, Counter-Terrorism Branch Chief, NATO Intelligence Fusion Centre (NIFC)

The intent of this panel was to introduce current threat streams and future trends in IEDs. The first briefing focused on the global IED threat, the second focused on IED threats against Europe and the law enforcement efforts to combat them, and the last two briefings focused on future IED threats with respect to devices as well as tactics, techniques, and procedures.

Mr Gonçalo Simões, EUROPOLEuropean IED Threat

Mr Simões reviewed all terrorist activity in Europe during 2014 with a prospective forecast for the future terrorist threat and the use of IEDs. He specifically focused on the impact of foreign fighters returning to Europe and the importance of close collaboration between military and law enforcement elements to eliminate intelligence gaps.

Mr Ricardo Fernandez, NATO C-IED COEIED Future Threats and Emerging Challenges

The evolution or re-adaptation of enemy IED tactics, techniques, and procedures requires C-IED forces to constantly re-evaluate and reassess the environment to stay ahead of the threat and en-sure the safety of our populations.

Mr Juan José Piñeiro, E&Q Engineering Inc, SpainMicro and Mini Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) Threats

Mr Piñeiro briefed on low, small and slow (LSS) VTOL UAS that can be used as IED delivery sys-tems and described several potential technologies and projects to counter this threat.

Armored VBIED

8


Way Forward

Intelligence and understanding is the key to detecting and forecasting new IED threats. The Internet is increasingly important in the C-IED fight as many of the threat networks’ activities are done on the Web (recruiting, funding, radicalizing, sharing expertise, etc…). There is a need for more European/NATO interagency coordination and information exchange on the types of IEDs that could be en-countered in counter-terror operations and specific information on threats to facilities and personnel. Advanced technologies are necessary to detect, neutralize and mitigate the new IED threats. Accu-rate threat assessments are critical to ensuring governments and industries can develop technolo-gies to counter evolving and innovative threats employed by an increasingly interconnected group of global terrorist organizations that use IEDs to achieve their objectives.

2nd Panel - C-IED Technology Gaps and Future Requirements

Moderator:

Colonel Rafael Jimenez, Spain, International Demining Centre Commander

Based on the current and future IED threat, there are identified C-IED technology gaps. It is im-

perative to constantly re-evaluate the threat environment and inform research and development organizations, academia, and relevant industries when a new capability is required to counter an emerging threat. This information must also inform C-IED training curriculums to ensure our forces are prepared to face the threat before encountering it on the battlefield. We must resist the tempta-

tion to hoard information and share it with all appropriate elements, not only military, but also law en-

forcement and international peacekeeping operations such as the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA). Only then can we truly affect the enemy’s freedom of movement and effective use of IEDs.

LTC Grzegorz Motak, Slovakia, NATO EOD Centre of Excellence

EOD Technology Gaps and Challenges

LtCol Motak discussed several EOD technology gaps to include modular remote controlled un-

manned ground vehicles, requirements for future detection technologies, and advanced bomb suit designs.

Major Eric Schilling, USA, United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) The UNMAS Perspective on IED Use and ResponseUnited Nations Mine Action Service is the UN agency in charge of dealing with IEDs at all current UN missions. Today, peacekeeping operations are being targeted with greater frequency, where threat actors and spoilers employ IEDs as a means to disrupt the political process and reconcilia-

tion, threaten humanitarian programs and to create general instability and insecurity. Major Schilling discussed UNMAS’ C-IED vision and the UN’s policy on IEDs. He also addressed the recent report

9


from the Expert Panel on Technology and Innovation in UN Peacekeeping which highlighted multiple C-IED capability gaps ranging from hand held detectors to information sharing, armoured vehicles, ECM, and IEDD assets with a goal of improving force protection and mission capacity.

Mr Russell Stokes, United States Army Europe (USAREUR), USAMultinational C-IED Training Program

Mr Stokes provided an overview of the USAREUR Multinational C-IED Training Program. Their mis-

sion is to conduct C-IED analysis as well as develop and synchronize C-IED Partner-Nation training and exercises, and resource USAREUR C-IED training. He also elaborated on their partner nation training opportunities that included courses on exploitation, attack the networks, IED/HME aware-

ness, robotics, ECM, and biometrics.

Mr Mike Harris, Allen Vanguard, UK Understanding Future Requirements

Mr Harris presented points to consider when identifying future C-IED technology and equipment requirements. He emphasized that without understanding and intelligence you do not have a solid base on which to establish your Prepare the Force (PtF), Defeat the Device (DtD), and Attack the Networks (AtN) operations. When it comes to technology development, we must fully understand the threat before developing future equipment requirements. When choosing an equipment solu-

tion, we have to consider limitations, understand the benefit the equipment provides, and realize that some capabilities are not fiscally feasible. Once you determine an appropriate technology solution, you must consider all aspects of Doctrine, Organization, Training, Material, Leadership, Personnel, Facilities, and Interoperability (DOTMLPF-I) to institutionalize the capability.

10


3rd Panel - The Future of ECM to counter RCIEDs

Moderator:

Mr Martin Underwood, Tonanti Ltd., UK

This panel looked at the current challenges to Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) designers and manufacturers. Presentations included an overview of the NATO organizations and groups coordi-nating development of ECM capability and some of the projects they are working on.

Mr Samuel Henze, Defence Investment Division, NATO HQ International Staff

What is NATO Doing about RCIED?

As the secretary of NATO’s Team of Experts on ECM for RCIED, Mr Henze described their latest activities and initiatives. He also provided information on how nations could join and participate in the only NATO group directly developing capabilities to counter the RCIED threat.

Mr Steven Lewis, NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCIA)NCIA Support to NATO Nations

Way Forward

One major gap is the way C-IED knowledge and information is managed and shared. We must develop a way to quickly share information across military and law enforcement channels so the relevant actors stay ahead of the threat.

C-IED training has to be tailored to the new mission scenarios. Training used during the last conflict cannot be pulled off the shelf and reused without a thorough evaluation of the threat and a modifica-

tion of the training to address the current challenge.

Understanding and intelligence is also the base to develop technological solutions for the AtN, PtF and DtD pillars of the C-IED fight. UNMAS identified several aspects to improve their capacity to effectively address the IED threat. UNMAS’s capability and technology gaps are outlined in the re-

cently released UN Peace Keeping Operations’ Technology and Innovation Panel Report.

11


Mr Lewis shared several RCIED ECM interoperability considerations when operating in the Coalition

environment.

Dr. Hubert Piontek, Airbus Defence and Space Inc, Germany

Beyond ECM - The Future of RCIED Jamming

Dr. Piontek presented an overview of the jamming methods ranging from barrage to state-of-the-art reactive and SMART jamming. He also elaborated on the potential future use of ECM systems to not only counter RCIED systems, but also provide communications jamming, and collect communi-cations intelligence.

Mr Carlos Garcia Gomez, National Institute of Aerospace Technology (INTA) / La

Marañosa Technical Institute (ITM), Spain

Evaluation and Test of Frequency Jammers

Mr Garcia Gomez briefed on the parameters to take into account when evaluating whether or not frequency jammers are effective against each threat scenario. He also described the ECM test fa-

cilities at the ITM.

Way Forward

Despite the effectiveness of IEDs using less sophisticated technology, the RCIED threat remains prolific and we should expect terrorists to continue exploiting the radio frequency spectrum. It is essential that we continue developing advanced ECM platforms to more effectively counter current and emerging anticipated RCIED threats. ECM interoperability among coalition forces is absolutely critical. We can only ensure compatibility by nations sharing design information during the develop-

ment phase of their ECM platforms. Operating with coalition partners in the future will be the rule rather than the exception and we must get beyond national caveats to ensure the protection of our military forces against RCIED threats during combat operations.The use of RCIEDs to initiate explosive devices remains a widely used approach. It is essential to continue developing advanced ECM platforms to counter this ever morphing threat.


4th Panel - Combat Vehicle Damage Analysis Process

Moderator:

Mr Frank Dosquet, Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Tech-

nology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw), Germany

This panel reviewed several combat vehicle damage analysis processes conducted by dif-ferent nations. The speakers shared experiences and showed the delegates the importance of conducting a thorough post blast analysis of damaged combat vehicles to improve protec-tion against future IED attacks and enhance the survivability of vehicle occupants.

Mr Jens Nawitzki, Technical Centre for Weapons and Munitions, Germany

Vehicle Battle Damage Analysis

Mr Nawitzki presented the incident analysis capabilities of the Experts Team on the Analysis of Inci-dents (ETAV) in the Bundeswehr. He explained that their five objectives when evaluating an incident are evaluate test procedures, modify equipment, influence new projects, adapt tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), and improve threat analyses. They analyse and assess all functions of a vehicle as an entire entity to identify the optimal path to improve its capability. The ETAV views com-

bat incident analysis as a core capability in asymmetric warfare scenarios to adapt to the increased rate of changes on the battlefield.

Mr Jeff Morgan, U.S. National Ground Intelligence Centre (NGIC), USA

Combat Incident Analysis

Mr Morgan outlined the U.S. process for collecting, integrating and analysing data on attacks against U.S. vehicles to determine specific weapon effects. His brief discussed critical data requirements and emphasized the importance of establishing agreements with all involved parties, especially medical, to facilitate data collection efforts. Together, the intelligence community, medical com-

munity, and materiel community can develop actionable analysis which results in fewer killed, less severe injuries, and less damaged equipment.

12


13

Mr Ian Elgy, Defence Science & Technology Laboratory (DSTL), UKThe Exploitation of Damaged Vehicles

Mr Elgy briefed on the UK process to analyse and evaluate battle damaged vehicles and casualties. He also provided an overview of all the DSTL capabilities that come into play to examine casualty data, threat data, vehicle data, and body armour data to develop a coherent solution for equipment and TTP changes. He emphasized the importance of consistent data collection and quality photo-

graphs to extract the maximum amount of information and best understand what happened.

Way Forward

The consistent and disciplined collection of data from combat damaged vehicles has allowed each nation to conduct meaningful engineering and statistical analysis. When linked with the analysis of casualty injuries, this effort has led to significant improvements in vehicle protection. Different exploitation levels, from the explosion scene to deeper computer analysis are required to obtain all viable data.

Data collection and the exploitation process after combat incidents is time consuming, but worth-

while. By analysing casualties, their location in vehicles as well as their wounds and injuries, many improvements can be made in the protection of vehicles and their crews.

The panel members are currently working with the NATO Standardization Office (NSO) to codify a combat vehicle damage analysis process in a NATO Standardization Agreement so that other na-

tions can benefit from this knowledge and potentially develop their own national capability.


14

5th Panel - Seeking Synergies among C-IED R&D AgenciesModerator:

Dr. Jöerg Hillmann, Head of Unit in the Capability, Armament &Technology Directorate EDA – European Defence Agency

This panel reported on the various agencies working on C-IED and the many ways in which collabo-

ration within the Community of Interest has and continues to take place. Individuals from a variety of entities shared information regarding their organization, program and scope of work, and efforts in the C-IED realm. The intent was to identify additional projects and initiatives that the research cen-

tres could collaborate on to reduce the number of duplicative efforts within NATO and work together towards solutions in line with the Smart Defence Initiative.

Maj. Ted Hussem, Netherlands, Defence Expertise Center (DEC) C-IEDEuropean Defence Agency (EDA) Improvised Explosive Device Detection (IEDDET) Programme

Major Hussem presented the EDA approach to seeking synergies among the C-IED R&D agencies. He mentioned that good cooperation between governmental bodies, industry, and research agencies is the key to producing relevant, high quality products. He also provided an overview of EDA’s “IED Detection Programme”, with the five demonstrator projects un-der it covering early warning, standoff detection, confirmation and identification, persistent surveillance, and force protection. Major Hussem mentioned that nations could still join the programme to support one or more of the projects. It is planned to start in early 2016.

Dr. Fong answered a question about sharing the data they collect during their tests. He explained that most of the information was classified; but that the U.S. had data exchange agreements (DEAs) with many European countries to share the results and that it was possible to establish new ones as necessary.


15

Dr. Richard Fong, U.S. Army ARDEC, USAU.S. Army Armament Research, Development, and Engineering Centre (ARDEC) C-IED Efforts

Dr. Fong provided a briefing on the U.S. Army Research, Development, and Engineering Com-

mand’s (RDECOM) organizational structure and the various C-IED initiatives that it oversees in its subordinate centres and laboratories. He focused on their material solution process and the incor-poration of end-user requirements and assessments to drive the rapid development and acquisition of critical C-IED equipment. Dr. Fong also elaborated on the procedures they use to collaborate with outside organizations that are working on common goals.

Dr. Fong answered a question about sharing the data they collect during their tests. He explained that most of the information was classified; but that the U.S. had data exchange agreements (DEAs) with many European countries to share the results and that it was possible to establish new ones as necessary.

Mr Carlos Garcia Gomez, National Institute of Aerospace Technology (INTA) / La

Marañosa Technical Institute (ITM), Spain

C-IED Synergies ITM-INTA

Mr Garcia provided an overview of the C-IED capability development activities at the Spanish INTA/ITM. He briefed on their electronic counter measure test facilities, blast effect testing, and explosive material characterization. The ECM Area is in charge of programming any kind of frequency jammer systems in order to get the maximum efficiency against RCIEDs. The Ballistic Effects Unit has the capacity to conduct nationally accredited tests as well as STANAG based tests in relation to IED det-onation, fragment analysis, and explosives. The Material Unit features a wide variety of materials, including explosives, adding the capacity to utilize military, commercial, or homemade explosives in any tests conducted at the INTA/ITM.Mr Garcia answered questions regarding the need for standardization of C-IED testing parameters. He also spoke with Dr. Fong about the need for IED evidence collection standards for Weapons In-

telligence Teams and the associated training that is required to ensure reliable results.

EFP MOUNTED FOR TESTING


16

Cpt. Ortega de la Rosa, Spain, National Institute of Aerospace Technology (INTA)

/ La Marañosa Technical Institute (ITM)

Chemical Analysis of Post-Explosion Evidence

Captain Ortega provided a more detailed briefing on the ITM’s Materials Unit. He elaborated on its duties and capabilities as part of the ITM’s CBRN Area. He briefed on the analytical procedure they use to identify the main explosive from IED residues, emphasized critical aspects in the identifica-

tion process, and covered the Unit’s Research and Development efforts regarding the IED threat. Captain Ortega also mentioned a Raman spectra database for explosives that the Unit is develop-

ing. Overall, there were several aspects of the Unit’s responsibilities that are directly related to other

nations’ activities where they can collaborate and share information.

Dr. Arnold Schoolderman, Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)

The Science and Technology Organization, its Collaborative Network and the Collaborative Support Office

As a great wrap-up of the national C-IED research and development agencies panel, Dr. Schoolder-man presented an overview of NATO’s Science and Technology Organization (STO). It is under the authority of the North Atlantic Council (NAC), reporting through the Military Committee (MC) and the Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD), in accordance with the provisions of its Char-ter. The STO is the world’s largest organization for collaborative defence science and technology. It facilitates collaboration among nations and across NATO organizations, leverages huge national research investments with a vast pool of expertise, connects military operators with scientists, spans nearly the complete scope of military technologies, and complements other science and technology groups. Dr. Schoolderman listed all the C-IED related projects currently active in the STO and ex-

plained how nations interested in specific groups could join.

Way Forward

In this era of shrinking defence budgets, the most cost effective way for countries to maintain mod-

ern, advanced military equipment is too pool their expertise and develop collaborative bilateral, mul-ti-lateral, EDA, NATO, or non-NATO nation agreements using established NATO standards to lead the effort. This panel provided the workshop delegates with some of the major initiatives currently on-going throughout NATO. It also addressed the need to develop NATO standards for specific C-IED equipment and training where interoperability among NATO forces is absolutely critical during expeditionary operations.


17

6th Panel - Standardization to Lead C-IED R&D EffortsModerator:

Mr Samuel Henze, Defence Investment Division, NATO HQ International Staff

NATO Standardization

As mentioned at the end of Panel 5, the importance of developing standards to guide national C-IED equipment development and fielding efforts is paramount in the combined, joint operational environments to which we commonly find our forces deployed. Standards and the ability for multiple national militaries to operate together in a combat zone are imperative for the overall success of the alliance. Subject matter experts must work together to first identify what to standardize and then collectively develop and agree upon the standard. It is not an easy task, but one that is necessary to save coalition lives during combat operations.

Mr Henze opened the panel by providing an overview of the NATO standardization process and po-

tential ideas for future standardization initiatives. He emphasized that nothing happens with these ideas unless Nations, Staff or Industry submit proposals for standardization to the appropriate NATO Committee and Tasking Authority. He reiterated the importance of understanding the NATO com-

mittee structure – highlighting that in regards to C-IED, the two most important committees are the Military Committee (MC) including its operational working groups who handle doctrine and the Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD), whose capability development groups handle materiel standardization.He further emphasized that Nations and Industry must sign up to do the work of actually writing the standard in one of the working groups under the MC or CNAD that works on C- IED. Mr Henze finished up with the details on how to submit a Standardization Proposal, a two-page form that can be submitted by subject matter experts to the appropriate NATO tasking authority for consideration.

Maj. Jose A. Pinto, Spain, Spanish Army Logistic Command

Standardization to Lead C-IED R&D Efforts: STANAG 4569 and Related AEP-55

Major Pinto gave an overview on NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) 4569, Protection Levels for Occupants of Logistic and Light Armoured Vehicles, and related Allied Engineering Pub-

lication (AEP)-55 Volume 3, Procedures for Evaluating the Protection Levels of Logistic and Light Armoured Vehicles for IED Threats, to show how they lead to C-IED R&D efforts. He described how the Team of Experts (ToE) works to develop these documents, and the necessary collaboration be-

tween countries. Furthermore, he highlighted the relationship between the threats that are included in the STANAG and the technologies, and how the ToE considers industrial capabilities a necessity.


18

Mr Enrique Martin, E&Q Engineering Inc., Spain

A Test Bed for Assessment of IED Detection Systems (IEDDS)

Mr Martin provided the framework to evaluate the effectiveness of IEDDS in chosen representative scenarios and tactical vignettes, developing a test-bed design and a methodology to quantitatively and qualitatively compare the different solutions. He highlighted that there is a lack of IEDDS as-

sessment standards and proposed an IEDDS assessment initiative (methodology, set-up, scoring, and scenarios) with detection capability focused on end-user, and developed an IEDDS effective-

ness framework (scoring/benchmark) as well as guidelines for standards development and further efforts that could be led by this conceptual initiative.

Maj. Geert-Jan Verkoeijen, Netherlands, EDA Joint Deployable Exploitation and Analysis Laboratory (JDEAL)C-IED Level 2 Laboratory Standardization

Major Verkoeijen presented information on the standards used for JDEAL and provided advice for future R&D processes. He also expounded on the challenges he encountered in relation to creating the technical and operational standards for JDEAL as well as the challenges to develop technical exploitation “standards” that fulfilled EU and NATO requirements. Lastly, he answered questions regarding the various deployable options of the lab and information sharing. He explained that the lab is only concerned with how to secure data and evidence and it is up to the nation that deploys JDEAL to determine what they do with the information.

JDEAL Facility, NLD


19

Ms Jessica Rajkowski, U.S. Joint IED Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) /MITRE, USA

Challenge-Based Acquisition for the JIEDDO Culvert Challenge

Ms Rajkowski gave an interesting review of Challenge-Based Acquisition and its application to De-

partment of Defence problem sets. She included information on JIEDDO’s active program utilizing Challenge Based-Acquisition to focus on culvert IEDs. JIEDDO held the “Culvert Challenge” in the fall of 2014 to seek technologies for inspection and long-term surveillance of culverts. Widespread industry participation resulted in an understanding of the state of the art of counter-IED technolo-

gies for these applications, and JIEDDO’s ability to make acquisition decisions based on the results. Ms Rajkowski emphasized that challenges provide an opportunity to communicate needs to indus-

try and allow performance to drive acquisition decisions while encouraging innovation and saving money. Counter-IED technologies are well suited for Challenge-Based Acquisition, which will allow technologies to be assessed against standardised criteria.

Ms Rajkowski fielded questions about the European companies that participated in the culvert chal-lenge. She also explained how and where JIEDDO posts the request for proposals to include the challenge specifications and scoring requirements for the event.

Way Forward

With the vast improvements in equipment technologies and the development of previously unantici-pated unique C-IED equipment over the past 15 years, it is time for NATO standardisation efforts to get ahead of the curve and start driving equipment requirements versus playing catch up after the required technology is developed. C-IED experts need to work together to identify specific technolo-

gies that require standardisation and then commit to developing the necessary standard. It is the only way to ensure the technologies needed on tomorrow’s battlefield will be ready and interoper-able across the alliance.

Mr Enrique Martin is working with Dr. Schoolderman to submit a NATO standardisation proposal for IEDDS to NATO in the coming months.

Culvert Search


20

7th Panel - Maritime C-IED Technologies and the Link to Exploitation

Moderator:

Captain Hendrik Monderen, NLD, Branch Head of Current Operations

NATO Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM)

Compared to the number of IEDs against land-based targets, there are very few against maritime assets, but the impact of a single successful attack can have massive ramifications across the stra-

tegic spectrum. In addition, with the vast majority of the world’s trade being transported via ship, it is imperative that naval forces are linked into the global C-IED fight to be able to effectively recog-

nize and interdict logistical movements of IED components. Beyond the purely Defeat the Device aspects of Naval C-IED, which most nations are very proficient at, maritime forces also have a huge role to play in the Prepare the Force and Attack the Network pillars to ensure we maintain a proactive mind-set and our enemies are not allowed freedom of movement in any environment.

Mr Richard Battrick, Allen Vanguard, UK

Maritime Evidence and Exploitation

Mr Battrick discussed the collection and analysis of evidentiary information in the maritime and un-

derwater environment. He mentioned that the concept remains embryonic because operators must manage in a particularly challenging environment that presents a physical barrier when attempt-ing to conduct information gathering, processing and data compiling for information management purposes. Mr Battrick highlighted multiple, varied threats that naval forces typically encounter in a maritime environment to include rocket propelled grenades, limpet mines, suicide bombers, rocket attacks, and IEDs both outside and inside the ship. He emphasized the importance of information sharing, standardized reporting, and exploitation efforts among land and sea assets to ensure a truly combined approach to C-IED.

Mr Battrick answered several questions regarding the challenges associated with evidence exploita-

tion in international waters and described the different types of boarding and interdiction operations. He re-emphasized the importance of getting C-IED intelligence to the boarding teams so they can effectively identify and exploit relevant materials.


Lt Deward Cummings, U.S. Navy, CTF 68, CJTF-HOA, TF SpartaMaritime Counter-IED Strategy..?

Lt Cummings led a discussion about U.S. Navy EOD Maritime C-IED and Expeditionary Mine Coun-

ter Measures Capabilities and Limitations. He emphasized that the IED is not nearly as prolific in the maritime environment as it is on land, but it is used as a strategic weapon that can have an enor-mous international military, political, and economic impact. He answered several questions pertain-

ing to the force protection training developed and employed since the bombing of the USS Cole to maintain a safe buffer around all U.S. Navy ships.

LtCdr Al Nekrews, UK, British Royal Navy, Southern Diving GroupMaritime IEDD (Mar-IEDD)

LtCdr Nekrews gave an overview about the British Royal Navy (RN) Maritime IEDD (Mar-IEDD) Capability, the Fleet Diving Squadron, the RN’s Capability Development, and recent participation in the Northern Challenge exercise. His main points were the maritime IED threat will endure, we must institutionalize C-IED as a truly joint requirement in all environments, and the RN capability development must evolve to meet the constantly changing threat. LtCdr Nekrews emphasized the importance of joint training exercises to test and validate interoperability issues. He spoke about his role as the Multi-National EOD Control Cell (MNEODCC) commander during the Northern Challenge C-IED exercise run by the Icelandic Coast Guard and invited additional nations to participate in the exercise.

21

Exercise Northern Challenge


Prof. Agostino G. Bruzzone, NATO STO Centre for Maritime Research and Ex-perimentation, ItalyInnovative Interoperable M&S within Extended Maritime Domain for Critical Infrastruc-ture Protection and C-IED

Professor Bruzzone led a presentation on CMRE’s Distributed Virtual experience and exercise (DVx2) which is a virtual interactive exercise enabling NATO Defence against Terrorism Program of Work (DaT PoW), Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and NATO Executives to demonstrate, validate, benchmark & appreciate the DAT accomplishments.

He also described many ways in which the CMRE Modelling and Simulation (M&S) capabilities could support Maritime C-IED. They included:

Each of these elements represents a great opportunity supported by the skills and capabilities within the Partnership CMRE. The Simulation Team, University of Genoa, and NATO COEs are able to use the M&S capabilities for Research and Experimentation in a wide spectrum of applications.

Education, Training and Crowdsourcing on C-IED by Modelling, Interoperable Simulation and Serious Games (MS..2G)

Development of new Autonomous Systems as Interoperable Assets in the Extended Maritime Framework for C-IED

Development of New Concepts and Solutions by Virtual Interoperable Testing (e.g. persistence, autonomy, reliability)

Evaluation of New Strategic Scenario including new threats (e.g. Autonomous Hostile Devices)

22


Dr. Francisco Javier Fortes Román, University of Málaga, Spain

Chemical Characterization of Submerged Materials Using a Remote Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) System

Dr. Fortes’ presentation included an introduction to the use of chemical analysis of submerged objects by Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) as one of the new milestones of LIBS technology. The laser laboratory of the University of Malaga has designed and developed a fibre optics-based platform for analysis of items up to 50 meters underwater. The purpose of this study is to compare different laser excitation schemes (single- and multi-pulse excitation) and to evaluate their influence on the laser ablation process and the analytical capabilities of LIBS. Dr. Fortes presented the potential of the multi-pulse approach to in-depth characterization of submerged materials. The primary take-away was that the novelty of this application opens a new horizon to the LIBS technique.

Way Forward

C-IED does not end at the water’s edge. In order to be truly effective in countering an asymmetric enemy that exploits every possible advantage, gap, and vulnerability, we must ensure C-IED is a connected and synchronized joint, interagency effort with maximum information exchange between all relevant organizations. There is a need for standardized exploitation procedures and an expan-

sion of C-IED awareness training for all forces. The salient observation from the Maritime C-IED panel was that although naval forces use different vehicles and sometimes have to abide by differ-ent laws, the C-IED process is the same regardless of the environment and information sharing and institutionalized training are critical to ensuring our enemies are afforded no safe harbour.The C-IED COE is working closely with MARCOM to incorporate relevant maritime C-IED aspects into the AJP 3.15(B) update. These additions are necessary to ensure NATO’s Allied Joint Publica-

tion for Countering Improvised Explosive Devices reflects the multi-environment nature of the threat and the comprehensive approach necessary to counter it.

Ms Elena Beganu, Counter Terrorism Section, NATO Emerging Security Chal-

lenges Division (ESCD)

NATO DAT POW Defence against Terrorism Programme of Work

Ms Beganu provided an overview of the various programs that NATO’s Emerging Security Chal-lenges Division manages in the Defence against Terrorism Programme of Work (DaT PoW). Those of interest to the C-IED community include the C-IED Technology Workshop, the EOD Trials and Demonstrations, Exercise Northern Challenge, the Analyst Notebook C-IED add-on, the NATO Au-

tomated Biometric Identification System, and the Route Clearance project. She explained how they use the DAT POW to mitigate NATO urgent requirements and provide political visibility while main-

taining niche capability development, maintaining interoperability, and supporting various C-IED ex-

ercises, workshops, and trials. 23


8th Panel - Common Military and Law Enforcement C-IED Technologies and Tools / Developing Effective CIV-MIL SynergiesModerator:

LTC Ray Lane, Ireland, Commander, Ordnance School Irish Defence Forces

LTC Lane opened the panel by presenting the Irish Ordnance School’s training opportunities. He provided an overview of the EDA-funded Home-Made Explosives (HME) course as well as the NATO Pre-Operational IED Defeat course. The highlighted lessons learned from those activities were the necessity of seamless integration of both military and civilian organizational cultures to attack the networks. He also talked about the development of standard operating procedures to include render safe procedures and forensic awareness in order to optimize the evidence recovery during HME lab investigations.

LTC Lane also gave a summary of the HOMER project, which is funded by the European Union with the main objective of establishing basic knowledge about HME, their composition and characteriza-

tion. Its objective is to expand the knowledge of European bodies about HME, mitigate the threat presented by HME, deliver sustainable HME courses for use, and draft a standard on HME vocabu-

lary and definitions.The HOMER project is a showcase of military – law Enforcement collaboration and resource sharing by combining efforts from industry, academia, law enforcement and military organizations.

24


Insp. Jacobo Orellana Suarez, Spanish National Police, Spain

The FORLAB Project

Inspector Orellana presented the FORLAB (Forensic Laboratory for in-situ evidence analysis in a post blast scenario) project. FORLAB allows the command and control centre an extensive overview of the scene in a real time through a 3D model, while every time a piece of evidence is identified, pictures, position and chemical information of the sample are transmitted to the CCC. It is also im-

proving the capability of recreating the scenario to assist with the real-time identification of areas of higher interest and helping on the recreation of the scene for later investigations. Using a terminal for evidence recording including data of the evidence like pictures, position or even LIBS or Raman spectra saves time on scene and preserves the chain of custody.

While the FORLAB project is primarily designed for permissive, law enforcement scenarios due to the time to set-up and operate the system, individual technologies from the project such as the termi-nal for evidence recording could be used by military forces to speed up the evidence collection and to preserve the chain of custody.

Mr Luis Afonso, Logicalis Inc., Spaini2 Analyst Notebook

After providing an overview on the various functions of the Analyst Notebook software, Mr Afonso fo-

cused on the C-IED add-on tool the C-IED COE is developing with inputs from U.S. National Ground Intelligence Centre and JIEDDO. The add-on is intended to help standardize reporting formats while building connections between IEDs and their components. This will vastly enhance military and law enforcement intelligence analysts’ ability to track trends and identify links between seemingly dispa-

rate terrorist organizations by the types of IED components and designs they employ.

25


Supervisory Special Agent Bomb Technician Mike Truebenbach, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), USAThe FBI’s Use of New Technology in the Furtherance of C-IED Operations and Exploitation

Special Agent Truebenbach presented a detailed summary of the FBI’s use of off-the-shelf and custom technology solutions to enhance the exploitation of IEDs. He emphasized the importance of liaising with private industry and the value of adapting existing technology to the C-IED Effort. He highlighted several technologies the FBI uses regularly during their domestic C-IED operations to include a detonator sampling tool, a rugged inexpensive blast over-pressure gauge, X-ray and Computerized axial Tomography (CT) techniques to conduct non-invasive device interrogations, and cutting edge robotic platforms they use to remotely disassemble live devices.

Dr. Carmen García-Ruiz, Alcala University, SpainRaman Spectroscopy for the Identification of IED Components in Pre- and Post-Ex-ploded Devices

Professor Garcia presented the European Commission funded project entitled “New identification methods of Improvised Explosive Devices and post-blast residues by Raman spectroscopy to pre-

vent criminal actions”. The project is called RAMANEX for short and was developed by the research group she leads named Inquifor. She elaborated on an open access database they created that contains the Raman spectra for over 110 explosives and pre-cursors. Dr. Garcia also briefed on their efforts to develop sensitive, selective, and fast Raman spectroscopic methods for the identifi-

cation of explosive components in post-blast residues in order to identify the explosive composition the terrorist employed.

26


Way Forward

An effective and rapid interagency information exchange is a key factor within the global C-IED fight. This applies not only to intelligence sharing, but also to technological advances. The military devel-oped a plethora of technologies to counter IEDs over the last 15 years. We must share our hard learned lessons with the law enforcement community and work together to develop future require-

ments that promote interoperability while pooling resources and subject matter expertise. By incor-porating different backgrounds and experiences, we can better approach a challenge that quickly transmutes from a battlefield to a domestic threat.

27


9th Panel - Future technologies for futureIED threatsModerator:

Dr. Steven Bishop, US Army Research, Development and Engineering Com-

mand (RDECOM), USA

Future Technologies for Future IED Threats

Different sensing technologies already exist across the entire electromagnetic spectrum including acoustic and high energy particle physics. The main disadvantage of the equipment and tools de-

veloped is not detection, but discrimination and their subsequent false alarms in detection systems when transitioning from the lab to field testing. Also, practical matters have to be considered to in-

clude cost, robustness, reliability, durability, specificity, etc.

Emerging technologies tend to be multidisciplinary, such as acoustic or seismic excitation with a Laser Doppler Velocimeter to measure surface velocities. These approaches attempt to quantify secondary or tertiary observables that would normally be overlooked. Additionally, novel uses of ex-

isting technology that only fill niche mission areas may be very practical for special operations. The important take-away is that researchers must understand the emerging and future threats as well as the operational constraints and operational environment to develop effective solutions and maximize R&D funding. Without that link to intelligence analysts and end-users, the researchers are blindly developing technologies without a clear picture of the requirement.

Dr. Jose Angel Sanchidrian, Technical University of Madrid, Spain

Numerical Modelling of Detonation/Damage to Structural Members from Blast Loads

Professor Sanchidrian provided an overview of the development and implementation of modelling programs capable of accurately replicating the effects of various IED main charges such as EFPs or bulk explosives against armoured vehicles and reinforced structures. His research group is also exploring the performance of different construction materials and building techniques against explo-

sive events. They collaborate with the C-IED COE on several projects funded by NATO ESCD and the U.S. ARDEC.

28


Dr. Ross Gillanders, University of St. Andrews, ScotlandOptical Chemical Sensors for Explosive Vapours

Dr. Gillanders reported on progress in the development and application of polymer-based chemi-cal sensors for trace explosive vapour detection. He also described newly developed luminescent sensing materials and characterized a library of materials for their sensing response to various ex-

plosives. They designed and prototyped a portable, robust instrumentation using this technology for field explosives vapour detection. Current target materials include military high explosives TNT and RDX, although the approach could be extended to other explosives and chemical precursors.

Dr. Zsuzsanna Balogh, Hungary, NATO Supreme Allied Command

Transformation (SACT)

Research on Defence of Buildings against Blast Attacks

Professor Balogh shared the results of her research regarding enhanced protection capabilities of buildings against blast attacks. The research included numerous analyses, modelling and real life scenarios against government and public buildings as well as military camps and resulted in sev-

eral suggestions for the standardization of structure blast resistance capabilities. Although terrorist attacks against buildings receive a great deal of attention, improving the protection of high profile buildings does not get enough attention. We lack construction standards to use when building NATO facilities in the rear echelon and tactical infrastructure during combat operations to effectively harden our critical infrastructure against these catastrophic attacks.

29

Test of structure integrity


Dr. Zsuzsanna Balogh, Hungary, NATO Supreme Allied Command

Transformation (SACT)

Research on Defence of Buildings against Blast Attacks

Professor Balogh shared the results of her research regarding enhanced protection capabilities of buildings against blast attacks. The research included numerous analyses, modelling and real life scenarios against government and public buildings as well as military camps and resulted in sev-

eral suggestions for the standardization of structure blast resistance capabilities. Although terrorist attacks against buildings receive a great deal of attention, improving the protection of high profile buildings does not get enough attention. We lack construction standards to use when building NATO facilities in the rear echelon and tactical infrastructure during combat operations to effectively harden our critical infrastructure against these catastrophic attacks.

Prof. Manuel Esteve Domingo, Technical University of Valencia, Spain

SIMTAC (Tactical Simulator for C-IED Operations Training) / GESTOP (Intelligence and Operations Management Tool)

Dr. Esteve highlighted the importance of communication and information technologies as key ele-

ments in C-IED activities for both the Prepare the Force and Attack the Networks pillars. Professor Esteve’s presentation included two different initiatives. The SIMTAC , which is a tactical level simu-

lator, especially useful for C-IED operations training, and the GESTOP intelligence and operations management tool using the Global Terrorism Database and incorporating a new data mining analy-

sis process to evaluate past events and predict new terrorist threats. The GESTOP is able to track a suspicious individual in an urban environment using the coordinates from the peripherals attached to the system, such as biometrics (facial recognition) or pre-determined suspicious behaviour. In order to respect basic human rights, the system is able to pixelate the face of a person being tracked by a video camera until this individual is identified as a viable threat.

30


Benjamin Rollins, Vaporsens Inc, USA

Nanofiber Sensors for Trace Chemical Detection

Vaporsens is developing a novel, portable vapour-sampling device capable of detecting trace amounts of explosives and relevant chemicals with accuracy, sensitivity, and speed. In short, it’s an “electronic nose”.

The core technology for the detector is an organic nanofiber that originated at the University of Utah and has generated over 30 peer-reviewed publications and 10 patents to date. Vaporsens was formed in 2011 to commercialize the sensor technology and has received funding from the Depart-ment of Defence and the National Science Foundation to develop the nanofiber sensory materials into networked gas sensors and handheld explosive detectors, respectively. The detector uses a chemiresistor approach: the nanofiber sensor changes its electrical resistance in response to changes in a nearby chemical environment. Different nanofibers can be fabricated for rapid, selective detection of a wide range of chemical compounds. The large surface area and porosity of the nanofibers deliver exceptional sensitivity (down to parts per trillion) and response rates (down to seconds).

Recent tests performed in January 2015 at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC dem-

onstrated the sensor’s ability to detect TATP and PETN vapours within seconds. Development of a handheld device using these small, robust, sensitive sensors is currently on-going.

Way Forward

The understanding and consequent tracking of the existing and future IED trends is the key to face the threat at an appropriate level. The modelling technologies could be implemented within vehicle designs to reduce the costs of field tests. A standardization regarding protection levels of structure against blast attacks would provide guidance to the participating nations within the combined current and future missions. With shrinking defence research and development budgets across NATO, it is imperative scientists have the correct requirements from end-users and work together to pool assets and knowledge in line with NATO’s Smart Defence initiative.

31


10th Panel - Standoff IED Detection Technologies

Moderator:

Dr. Arnold Schoolderman, Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research

Due to the fact the standoff detection has no standard definition and requirement within existing NATO doctrines and documents, personnel with different backgrounds and work experience in IED and landmine detection often have a different perception of ‘standoff’. As standoff results should increase safety for the operator of the detection device, the detection technologies that necessitate physical contact with the object under investigation cannot be considered as a stand-off detection technology.

Stand-off IED detection can be achieved by applying detection technologies that either have a long detection range or by use a remotely controlled (ground or aerial) platform to bring the detection de-

vice with a short detection range to the area or object to be investigated, while keeping the operator of the system outside the damage range of the IED. The briefings provided within this panel repre-

sented a number of developments and covered both methods to achieve standoff IED detection.

Major Ted Hussem, Netherlands, Defence Expertise Centre (DEC) C-IEDMounted Route Clearance

Major Hussem presented a concept for the development of a future route clearance system achiev-

ing stand-off detection through a combination of long range detection technologies. Options being considered are an electro-optical sensor suite as well as short range detection sensors on an un-

manned ground vehicle equipped with downward-looking ground penetrating radar (GPR), a metal detection array, and a command wire detector. Future projects focus on reducing false alarms and integrating UAS or fixed/rotary wing platforms to feed information directly to the Route Clearance commander.

Dr. Steven Bishop, US Army Research Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM), USAMounted Ground Vehicles Considerations

Dr. Bishop provided considerations on standoff IED detection including detection of off-route IEDs in route clearance operations combining GPR and forward looking radar to increase detection range as well as the area scanned. His presentation included several examples of forward-looking detection systems and displayed preliminary detection results.

32


Dr. Henric Östmark, Swedish Defence Research Agency, SwedenRaman Standoff Detection

Dr. Östmark provided the current development status of the Raman spectroscopy based technology with the ability to distinguish bulk explosives and particles / traces of explosives left on scene. His presentation also gave applicable examples from the detection of illicit IED factories as well as pre- and post-blast trace detection.

33

Vapor Detection ExperimentVapor Detection Experiment


Dr. Eric Schreiber, German Aerospace Centre, Germany

Application of Passive Millimetre-Wave Imaging and UHF-Based Synthetic Aperture Radar for Threat Detection

Dr. Schreiber’s presentation included two different developments. The millimetre wave technology is capable of detecting concealed IEDs and weapons under a person’s clothing. The system is able to provide situational awareness to the commander of a vehicle with respect to possible threats in the local environment (predominantly ahead), at a distance ranging from ten to a few hundred me-

ters. The second part involves medium standoff synthetic aperture radar used by the EU project TIRAMISU.

Way Forward

The panel agreed on the necessity for standardization documents regarding the definition of the stand-off detection as well as the stand-off detection equipment requirements. This gap was also perceived by the representative from the NATO Defence Investments Division and will be added as a future project. Information sharing and collaboration is important and the NATO Standardization Office can facilitate this process.

Due to specific technical limitations of the individual technologies, the effectiveness of stand-off IED detection can only be improved through a combination of a variety of sensors and platforms tailored for specific environments and missions. This approach would potentially increase the detection rate of Vehicle-Borne IEDs and Personal-Borne IEDs as these targets are characterized as typically in motion. It would also increase the possibility of detecting side-attack weapon threats.

34

The IED will continue to be the weapon of choice used by the adversaries and a major concern for military operations and national security organizations worldwide. The globalization of IED technol-ogy is contributing significantly to increased capabilities of threat networks as they successfully im-

plement new and more sophisticated IED techniques and rapidly spread lessons learned. The ease of access to IED techniques will allow violent extremist organizations to utilize home grown activists and the IED to conduct attacks within NATO nations’ borders and beyond. The C-IED COE posi-tioned itself to counter this threat by leveraging our unique authority to access pre-eminent sources of innovative expertise on all multinational aspects of C-IED in support of the sponsoring nations, by becoming NATO’S transformation expert for C-IED, by supporting C-IED operations, and by becom-

ing the focal point for C-IED education and training for NATO and other Allies.

This 2nd C-IED technology workshop is a perfect example of how the C-IED COE and the EOD COE are committed to bringing together the primary experts to achieve solutions so as to predict, mitigate, detect and neutralize the IED threat. Bringing together Military, Law Enforcement, Academia and In-

dustry in the same forum represents the right opportunity to evaluate what has been done recently, with respect to technology. It also facilitates raising issues on the existing gaps that can be filled in the future in order to achieve optimal solutions based on the operational requirements that, despite budget restrictions, will always be the key for future advancements.

The 2nd C-IED Technology Workshop was a world class event organized by the C-IED COE and EOD COE in close collaboration with IDS, a company that provided excellent support for the 3-day event and with the support of the NATO ESCD DAT POW and EDA. The large number of partici-pants, personnel from 24 countries, 2 media partners, 19 exhibitors, 45 speakers and 175 partici-pants from Military, Law Enforcement, Academia and Industry was the perfect result achieved due to the refined objectives and agenda, the active participation of all attendees, and the commitment of the event organizers.

The C-IED COE will continue hosting these types of events to support all nations and actors in the C-IED Community of Interest. The presence of the interagency community combined with other main governmental stakeholders highlights the importance of the Comprehensive approach needed to increase our effectiveness in the C-IED fight. This aspect added value to the event and will be increased in the future.

The general opinion from the participants, based on their critique sheets, was that the event should continue to be organized in the future while always keeping in mind the combination of the three main C-IED pillars, Attack the Network, Defeat the Device and Prepare the Force.


4. CONCLUSIONS

35


36

WAY A H E A D


5. WAY AHEAD

The 2016 NATO EOD Trials & Demonstration will be organized by the EOD COE in Trenčin, Slovakia next year and will be announced soon in order to maximize participation, gather high level speakers and determine the most relevant topics for discussion.

It is intended to increase the participation of other stakeholders or enablers in the next event, such as Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Training, which will also increase the interest to other participants.

The 3rd C-IED Technology Workshop will be organized by the C-IED COE in Madrid, Spain in June 2017.

If you would like additional information regarding any of the presentations or would like to assist with any of the initiatives, please contact Major Philip Cordaro at [email protected].

37

38


I m p r e s s i o n s


For more information on COE contact

Email: [email protected]: 0034 91 856 10 61

Fax: 0034 91 856 23 90Web: www.ciedcoe.org

Address:

Crta. M-618 Km. 14, Torrelodones - Colmenar viejo 28240 Hoyo de Manzanares

Madrid (SPAIN)

Funded by NATO ESCD DAT POW and EDA

final report technology workshop - nkp.es · 2017. 8. 31. · shop fostered information sharing...

Documents