资源描述
英文原文ADDED VALUE:THE REQUIREMENTS OF MINE CLEARERS AND DONORSFROM NEW MINE DETECTION TECHNOLOGIESRobert KeelyHead of United Nations Mine Actions Center(Croatia)INTRODUCTION:Estimates suggest that there are some 6 million mines laid in the former Yugoslavia.These mines are mainly laid in belts along the former confrontation lines. The greatest contamination is estimated to cover about 8000 square kilometres throughout Bosnia and Croatia.Mine clearance is an occupation that does contain an inherent element of risk, and some casualties are inevitable. Although many mines are damaged or even booby trapped, training and the use of the appropriate render - safe procedure (RSP) contribute to the process of minimizing the risk to mine clearers during the rendering safe process once a mine has been located. Indeed,although some casualties amongst mine clearers are caused by the handling of the mine as part of the RSP,they are often caused by mines not detected by the mine clearer. In other words, It is the mine that the mine clearer doesnt see that bites him on the way to deal with the mine that he intends to disarm.Furthermore, and to put this into perspective, most of the number of mine incidents in Yugoslavia involved people not involved in mine clearance operations. For example,of the 200-plus incidents involving UN personnel in the former Yugoslavia, only 16% were engaged in mine clearance drills. The others were people engaged on normal tasks. Most of these incidents occurred because the mines were not visible. Similarly, the majority of mine casualties within the civilian population occurred because the victims were unaware they were in a mined area.In other words, it is the difficulty involved in the detection of mines and the identification of mined areas that present the greatest problems to mine clearance and bomb disposal operations, and limits our ability to warn civilian populations of the location of mined areas.There are therefore 3 distinct areas where the risk from mines could be reduced by the application of new technologies. These are:- The identification of areas of contamination;- Detection of individual mines;- Rendering safe of minesAIM：The aim of this paper is to explain the requirements of mine clearers and donors from new mine detection technologies.The utility of new technology solely for the rendering safe of mines or UXO will not be considered.DEFINITIONS：Mine. A mine is any munition placed under, on or near the ground or other surface area and designed to be detonated or exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person or vehicle.Mine clearance. For the purposes of this paper, mine clearance involves all processes involved in the removal and disposal of mines from a defined area. This may include an instance where the conduct of a mine detection operation allows an area to be declared as free of mines.Mine detection. For the purposes of this paper, mine detection is defined as the ability to identlfy the presence of a mine and determine its location without causing its fuzing mechanism to function.Render safe procedure (RSP). For the purposes of this paper, the term Render Safe Procedure (RSP) describes the action taken on a mine (or any item of unexploded ordnance) to separate the explosive from the action of the initiation mechanism.Mechanical clearance device. For the purposes of this paper, the term mechanical clearance device is used to describe an item of equipment that detonates, disrupts or destroys mines without manual approach by the equipment operator or other mine clearance personnel to within the danger area of the mine, except where protected by the armour of the clearance device.REQUIREMENT：The requirement of humanitarian mine clearance is not merely to clear mines perse. Rather, it is to return land contaminated, or believed contaminated, by mines or other unexploded ordnance UXO), to use by the civil population whilst minimizing the risk to the mine clearance team personnel.It is reported that current mine clearance resources are only able to clear an equivalent of 1/35 of the mines still being laid around the world. Therefore, the utility of any mine clearance technology must be measured against its ability to assist in this process by improving this ratio.The value of such new technology will be measured by its ability to assist mine clearers and donors to maximize the return of donors from mine clearance programmes whilst improving the effectiveness and safety of mine clearance operations.IDENTIFYING AREAS OF CONTAMINATION:The identifying of areas of contamination assists considerably in the clearance process. Firstly, it allows mine clearance planners to assess the extent of the problem, thus assisting in the resource allocation process; secondly, it allows mine clearers to maximize effort by concentrating resources in the areas of greatest contamination, rather than merely starting at one end of the affected region and working towards the other.Thirdly, given the long time that mine clearance takes, it allows the marking of areas of contamination thus advising the local population of the threat.Level One Survey:The process of identifying areas of contamination in general terms is known as a level one survey. This involves all assessment that can be carried out without actually engaging in the physical penetration of a suspected contaminated area. At the moment, a level one survey is usually carried out via a deductive process based on the following data:- the historical record of the conflict, from which a prediction of the areas of greatest general risk can be made, based on general military intelligence.- analysis of any minefield records left by the combatants, although experience shows that these records can never be regarded as complete or accurate; - reconnaissance reports (including correlation of mine incident information).Given the established effectiveness of the analysis techniques described above, any new technologies would have to demonstrate their cost-effectiveness against these existing methods. For example, where considerable survey and mine record data exists, as in the former Yugoslavia, new survey technology will be hard pressed to compete with existing analytical methods for general planning purposes.However, in green field sites where mine clearers do not have access to such information, the ability to generate a level one survey at short notice would be of considerable planning value.Level Two Survey:The identification of the exact edge of mined areas is the main aim of level two survey. For civilian clearance purposes it is becoming increasingly more common to place mine clearance in the context of the overall humanitarian or reconstruction process, rather than as an isolated project. In other words, the emphasis is placed on the need to find out how much of the target area is clear, not necessarily on identifying the location of the nearest mine.While the state of the art gives only an approximate location of mined areas, it is impossible to define and fence off the edge of a suspect mined area without actually clearing the area that lies immediately under and outside the fence, as a fence implies that the area on the outside of the fence is clear (indeed, mine casualties just outside fences are common).Unfortunately, a general here be dragons warning is of comparatively little use to farmers who want to know where the exact edge of the mined area is when it is on or next to their land.Therefore, any process that could assist in the identification of the edge of mined areas - either by improving the accuracy or speed of reconnaissance,would assist in the maximization of mine clearance effort and the promulgation of timely and useful warnings.For this purpose, it would not appear necessary at first glance to identify the location of each mine with 100% accuracy. However, if the level 2 survey process is to identify the edge of mined areas accurately and dependably without the need for further reconnaissance,it needs to recognise the mines at the edge of the target as well as those in the central area of probability of the contaminated area.A secondary requirement of level 2 survey is to identify the type of mine found in the mined area. This is often useful for military mine breaching operations where it might allow a faster breaching method to be used. However, the intelligence process conducted as part of initiating clearance work in the region, and the training package conducted by the mine clearers should mean that there is actually very little value added - for humanitarian mine clearance - by level 2 survey being able to identify the types of mines in the target area.The potential utility of new survey technology:The ability to carry out level 1 and 2 surveys remotely would be useful where political and security conditions do not guarantee freedom of movement for humanitarian mine clearance teams, and is an area where there may also be significant cross over between humanitarian and conventional military requirements.However, any survey technology used to identify the limit of mined areas must ensure that it achieves the humanitarian safety standard for areas declared outside contamination, or else be sold with clearly understood caveats of its limitations. If survey technology offers too vague a definition of a mined area, then the existing analytical methodology will remain the most cost-effective; if the survey equipment retains too wide a safety margin then the mine clearer will continue to expend resources clearing areas that are not contaminated if it retains too narrow a safety margin then clearance operations and civilian populations may incur casualties, thus reducing customer confidence in the technology.MINE CLEARANCE OPERATIONS:The actual clearance of contaminated areas can be split into 2 distinct functions: detection of mines and their subsequent rendering-safe. Although some technologies (such as flails) combine these 2 functions into 1 process,it is generally the detection of mines as the precursor to rendering-safe that presents the greatest problems during the actual clearance operation.Manual mine detection techniques:In order to understand where new technologies will be expected to offer their greatest potential, it is worth explaining how manual mine clearance tasks are currently carried out. The mined areas in and around the villages and towns of the former Yugoslavia offer what is perhaps the global worst case of mine clearance tasks.A typical task site. A typical mine clearance task site in Bosnia or Croatia will often include the ground immediately around a house or other building. Building plots in these villages are typically separated by metal-framed wire fences. The garden will include the underground utilities in iron pipes - gas, water and sewerage - and electricity and telephone wires usually pass into the house through overhead wires from wooden telegraph poles running along the street. In areas where there has been direct or indirect weapons fire,these poles are down and the wires lie across the ground.The land plots also contain the normal household scrap found in gardens, eg pieces of car, discarded nails, screws and childrens toys.As a result of military action, building rubble and shrapnel from explosions will scatter more metallic scrap into the gardens, and bushes and other crops in the gardens become overgrown if the house is no longer occupied or tended. Where the house is occupied or fought over, empty cartridge cases, discarded ammunition or unexploded ordnance may be found.The utility of metallic mine detectors is therefore limited in such sites. This is exacerbated by the tiny amount of metal content in the Yugoslav mines which are the main threat in the region.Manual mine clearance drills. As a result of the situation described above, the basic manual mine clearance drill recommended for use in the former Yugoslavia involves the mine clearer making his way along a lane of about one metre width. The first phase of the process includes a visual and a (gentle) hand search for surface mines and tripwires just ahead of the mine clearer. The second phase is a probing process, which involves the insertion of a lightweight mine probe or prodder into the ground, at an angle of 300, to a depth of 100 mm, repeated every 30 mm across the width of the clearance lane. The operator uses the probe to feel for hard objects buried under the surface. The insertion angle of 300 is intended to minimize the risk of the operator inadvertently pressing on the top of the mine,and the spacing of 30 mm is intended to take account of the smallest mines found in the region.An electronic mine detector able to detect Yugoslavian anti-personnel mines to a minimum depth of 100 mm in dry metal - free soil may be used as part of this process as additional confirmation before the mine clearer advances a further 30 mm along the clearance lane.However,given the degree of metallic contamination found in such locations it may be decided to dispense with the mine detector. Thus the use of minimum-metallic mines in the former Yugoslavia prevents mine clearers from utilizing electronic mine detectors as the primary means of mine detection. Any new detector technology will be required to allow reduction in the time spent prodding if it is to add value to the clearance operation.Performance data. The painstaking nature of manual clearance techniques, combined with the discomfort provided by the protective clothing and further limitations on progress as a necessary part of maintaining overall site safety standards, means that an individual mine clearer may only achieve a clearance rate of 2 m2/hr, while, allowing for rest periods, a team of 10 mine clearance personnel might only be expected to clear 40 or 50 m2 per day in the typical task site described above.Operating costs: exploding the $1000 per mine myth. It is therefore easy to accept that, at present, the greatest component of cost of mine clearance programmes is the per diem cost of mine clearance teams. Indeed, the cost of mine clearance is more accurately expressed as a cost per m2 than as a cost per mine (unfortunately, the press still refers to the soundbite-friendly statistic of $1000 per mine that was once achieved by dividing the annual cost of a mine clearance programme by the number of mines found that year). Because the aim is to clear ground, and the first stage of mine clearance is to detect and locate mines, much effort is expended on searching the ground between the mines. Mine clearers will therefore be seeking, from any new technology, the ability to reduce the amount of clearance effort currently expended on the ground between the mines. Mechanical mine clearance techniques:Counter-mine history has already seen the development of mechanical mine clearance devices, including rollers, flails and mine ploughs.Although Mechanical mine clearance devices offer fast coverage, they require skilled operators, considerable maintenance support and are greatly affected by the type of terrain they encounter.Indeed such devices, which are primarily intended for use in military minefield breaching operations, are not regarded as providing the necessary level of clearance for humanitarian clearance tasks. Indeed, some mines are specifically designed to resist such devices.However, although mechanical clearance devices may not, on their own, provide the necessary level of clearance, they may be used in support of manual clearance operations. For example, mechanical methods may be used as a proving method in areas where mines are suspected, as part of the quality assurance process after manual clearance operations, as part of a route clearance operation, or to clear vegetation before manual clearance.Mine sensing dogs:It is possible to train dogs to react to the smell of explosives, thus indicating the presence of mines. The value of such dogs is that they can screen large areas very quickly , may be used in terrain unsuitable for mechanical devices, and can allow mine clearers to focus clearance operations on the areas where the dogs indicate the presence of mines. The dogs require skilled handlers who are able to interpret their signals and maximize their limited endurance. Dogs have proved worthwhile in several mine - contaminated regions around the world,However, field trials carried out in Croatia in 1994 were disappointing. The results of the trial suggest that the abilities of the dog teams may have been limited by comparatively low temperatures and high explosive contamination. Further work needs to be done to establish the operating parameters of mine sensing dogs in the former Yugoslavia.STANDARDS:The football pitch test. Any mine clearance technique used for humanitarian purposes must effectively achieve a standard whereby those undertaking the operation would be prepared to let their own children play football on the ground concerned when they have finished. The current generation of mechanical clearance devices (rollers, flails and sniffer dogs) are not regarded as passing this test, and are considered more suitable as means of detecting the edge of contaminated areas and as quality assurance tools. Therefore, at present, only manual mine detection and clearance techniques are considered as providing the necessary clearance standard suitable for use in areas known to be mined.Residual problems: evolution of the 99% standard.Mine clearers will not guarantee that any cleared ground is 100% clear, but will normally certify that the ground is clear to the best of their knowledge and belief.This is intended to cover the eventuality of mines or UXO subsequently turning up, perhaps as a result of flooding or earth slip moving mines from nearby contaminated areas. As a result, clearance standards are generally expressed as in excess of 99%.In Bosnia and Croatia we are therefore developing a process of quality assurance which will rely on a 3-stage assessment process, involving the following:a. technical assessment of potential mine clearers at the project tendering phase, to identify potential weaknesses in the proposed methodology, while at the same time a clear scope of works included in the contract will clarify the exact expectation of the client from the mine clearer;b. random inspections of task sites to ensure that the mine clearers are actually conducting mine clearance in accordance with the terms of the contract;c. final testing of a sample area of the task site,during which we expect to find no mines or UXO within the area of the sample.If all of these conditions are met, then, although the mine clearer has to meet stringent QA standards at the time of handover, his liability for subsequent mine or UXO contamination found in the task site area is mitigated. The organization accepting the ground for use is instructed that there is a residual risk (ie less than 1%) of mines or UXO subsequently turning up.THE POTENTIAL OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES:The potential of new mine detection technologies would be realised when equipment that is able to detect the location of the latest generation of land mines will allow the mine clearers to:- survey contaminated ground faster and more accurately, in order to improve the mine clearance planning process; - reduce the unit cost of clearance (per m2), ie to allow mine clearance teams to cover more ground per dayAt present, a mine clearance team manager directed to clear a football pitch where mines are known to be present will divide up his team to operate in clearance lanes, and, in order to meet humanitarian standards, will probe the entire pitch at 30 mm intervals. Mine detection technology offered to the mine clearance manager will have to offer him unambiguous and dependable advice, such as there are no mines in the area west of the centre spot or there are 15 mines here, and th
展开阅读全文