Annati-Non Lethal NMIOTC

7/25/2019 Annati-Non Lethal NMIOTC

1/42

NON-LETHAL WEAPONSto Protect Critical Infrastructures

RAdm Massimo Annati, ITN (retd)

[email protected]

6thNMIOTC Annual Conference

2-4 June 2015


2/42


3/42

European Working Group

Non-Lethal Weapons

Forum for exchanging information and promoting

cooperation

Maintains the Commercially Available NLW Data-Base

Support to EDA No-Le-Cap Project Team

8thNLW Symposium (18-20 May 2015, Ettlingen, Germany)

www.non-lethal-weapons.eu


4/42

Non-Lethal Weapons

NATO Definition

Non-Lethal Weapons are weapons which are explicitly designed

and developed to incapacitate or repel personnel, with a low

probability of fatality or permanent injury, or to disable equipment,

with minimal undesired damage or impact on the environment.

NATO POLICY on NLW

(AC/259-N559)

Take military action in situations where use of lethal force is not

the preferred option

Improve forces protection

Delay / prevent hostile actions

Control escalation


5/42

Dilemma

Tourist or Terrorist ?

Early discrimination allows

Different types of action

(Lethal ; Non-Lethal; No action)


6/42

Dilemma

Tourist or Terrorist ?

Killing an hostile subject is the easiest part of the job. The difficult part is determining whether the subject is hostile or not

Sensors dont provide the target intentions and, most of the times, not even

its clear identification.

A BOAT IS A BOAT IS A BOAT


7/42

Stopping Suspect,Lethal Force

International

Incident

Defeat Prior

to Hostile Act

No Action TakenHostile Act

Takes Place

Not Threat Threat

Use Lethal

Force

No active

engagement


8/42

Stopping Suspect,Non-LethalForce

International

Incident

Defeat Prior

to Hostile Act

No Action TakenHostile Act

Takes Place

Not Threat Threat

Use Lethal

Force

No active

engagement

Act before discriminate

Graduated

NL response


9/42

Escalation of Force Concept

Warn/Determine Intent :If the subject, after receivingunambiguous warnings, keeps a potentially dangerous

behavior, then becomes a legitimate target for escalation of

force

Deter: Non-Lethal Reaction (mostly anti-personnel) Voluntary compliance (pain or fear of worse)

Disable: Non-Lethal Reaction (mostly anti-material) Incapacitation (physically stopped-disabled)

Lethal reaction End game, traditional way


10/42

Types of Targets

Offshore oil-gas platforms

Wind farms

Pipeline terminals

LNG terminals

Refineries

Harbors

Power stations

Crude carriers

LNG tankers

Offshore

Coastal

Afloat


11/42

Offshore Energy


12/42

Coastal Facilities


13/42

Four-Dimension Game:

Air

Water Surface

Underwater

Land


14/42

Four-Dimension Game:

Air

Water Surface

Underwater

Land

Some solutions work across many

domains

a) Acoustic and Optical Warning

b) RF Engine Stopper

Some is very target-dependant

Propeller Entanglers from Nail Bands


15/42

Types of Threats

Careless tourists-fishermen

Defying (drunk?) youngsters

Political protesters Environmental activists

Criminals (robbers-pirates)

Insurgents-Militias-Terrorists

Kamikaze Terrorists


16/42


17/42

The Environmental Warriors


18/42

And the Real Terrorists

2002 Limburg

2004 Basra terminal

2010 M.Star


19/42

Types of Threats vs. Reactions

Careless tourists-fishermen

Defying (drunk?) youngsters

Political protesters Environmental activists

Criminals (robbers-pirates)

Insurgents-Militias-Terrorists

Kamikaze Terrorists

Warn

Deter

Disable

Kill


20/42

Offshore Platforms Issues

Mix reqs between afloat and shore facilities

How off is offshore from shore ?

Legal issue for enforcing domestic law and establishingkeep-out security zones outside territorial waters

Are naval/coast guard fast response assets available ?

Manned or unamanned sites ?

Domestic legal issues for arming civilians and legal authorityfor use of force

Is armed security team available on site ? Training ?

Cost (life-cycle) is still a very serious issue !

Compared to ships lesser costraints for space-weight-power


21/42


22/42


23/42

NLW Protection

Warn

Determine

Intent

Deter

Delay

Stop

Disable

Nets/Barriers

Acoustic Hailing

Optical Warning & Disruption

Flash-Bang Warning

RF Engine Stoppers

Unmanned Vehicles


24/42

NLW Protection. At Which Cost?

Procure

Cost

Operate

Cost

Public

Accept

Nets/Barriers

Acoustic Hailing

Optical Warning & Disruption

Flash-Bang Warning

RF Engine Stoppers

Unmanned Vehicles


25/42

Very many

different types of

barrier available


26/42

Lightweight

Medium weight

Heavyweight


27/42


28/42


29/42

Acoustic Hailing Devices

Background - Environment

120 dB annoyance (40-50m)

140 dB pain (5-10 m)

156-160 dB ear damage (n/a)

This is a communication device,

this is NOT a weapon !


30/42

MASS (Multirole Acoustic Stabilized System) CS-424 In service onboard latest ITN vessels

HS-18 156dB acoustic projector

Receiving Remote Micro feature (10)

LaserSec 5 MW laser dazzler

Search Light 12 mln Cd

Stabilized and remote controlled


31/42

Laser Dazzling

The diverging beam of dazzler increases the safety of the laser andfacilitates long-range aiming at moving targets and multipleindividuals. At 100 meters, the spot size of a dazzler is alreadyabout 1 m, facilitating aiming at a moving individual, vehicle, orgroup of individuals, while keeping the laser harmless to the humaneye

Human eye 4X more sensitive to green light than red light during theday,

360X more sensitive to green at night.

Pointer - Targeting

Dazzler


32/42

Long Range Ocular Interruption - LROI

Under development Consideration given to 5 W

Adaptable NOHD

Effective up to 3 km


33/42

Current USN-USCG asset

Green Dazzler Laser

LA-9P replacedGBD-IIIC (B.E. Meyers) NOHD 65 m; incl. safety auto-switch off

250 mW

Hail & Warn: 300 m (day); 4,000 m (night)

Offensive glaring at up to 500 m (night)


34/42

LaserSec UC-5 Medusa

5,000 mW

Adjustable beam (circular-ellyptical, divergence), examples:

NOHD 80m; 2.5m diam @400m NOHD 400m; 2.5m diam @2km

UC-5 OEM module for EO/IR suites or LRAD coupling

Medusa (same circuits & optics) for compact rifle-like mounting 80 hrs op


35/42

LA-9P, 250 mWMEDUSA, 5000 mW


36/42

Joint Non-Lethal Warning Munition

40mm (USN)CSI Combined Systems Inc.

Flash-Bang-Smoke

300 m range (effects are visible-audible at much longer range)

170dB @1m

7 mln candles

About USD 40 apiece


37/42

RF Vessel Stopper.

USCG & USNLong Term (?) Effort

Uses RF transmissions to disrupt engine electronic components Required ranges:

50 m Chase scenarios (boat)

100 m Force Protection scenarios

Does not work against engines equipped with carburetors


38/42

RF Vessel Stopper.

US Navy trials with USV Achieved 20-50 m range (depending on target complexity)

Pulse generator and antenna


39/42

HPEM High-Power Electro-Magnetic

Portable Engine Stopper (Germany)

Diehl DS-110 family (suitcase)

Diehl and German BWB carried out trials with Royal Australian Navy and

DSTO against boat engines and jetskis.

Activity first began in 2009. Demonstrared in Jervis Bay-AUS in Sept 2014.

Demonstrated in Taranto-IT, during NATO NEMO trials, in Nov 2014.

Stopped a jetski at 70m and shot down a quadcopter UAV at 150+m range


40/42


41/42

coming back to unmanned systems

24/7 availability,

very limited dependence on sea and weather conditions, no risk for crew in case of approaching a suicidal terrorist (al-Basra oil terminal

multiple attacks, Apr 2004)

BUT very (very!) scarce public acceptance for an armed USV free to move in

crowded public area

BUT risk of interference or lost of control

Possible NLW for USV include:

acoustic hailing devices,

laser dazzler, flash-bang grenade launchers,

water cannons,

RF engine stoppers,

eventually, even a disarmed USV can ram or bump hostile/unknown boats


42/42

Questions ?

[email protected]

First ask !

Then shoot (if this is still the case)

Documents

Annati-Non Lethal NMIOTC