DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Iraq Diary » Mahdi Army Using ‘Flying IEDs’ in Baghdad

Mahdi Army Using ‘Flying IEDs’ in Baghdad

lob-bomb.jpg

Our boy Bill Roggio got his hands on some intel that filled in the blanks on that truck explo­sion in Sadr City this week.

“…the explo­sions were caused by the pre­ma­ture det­o­na­tion of a Special Groups impro­vised rocket launch­ing sys­tem. The sys­tem, which has been described as a fly­ing impro­vised explo­sive device, or air­borne IED, had received lit­tle atten­tion until yes­ter­days explo­sions in Shaab.

“What I find dis­con­cert­ing is there have been few cor­rec­tions. This was not an engage­ment and these were not Special Groups trans­port­ing mis­siles and mor­tars in a bongo truck.”

The bongo truck was actu­ally the “launch vehi­cle,” accord­ing to bomb experts who sur­veyed the scene. “This was a crude rocket launch­ing sys­tem we call an IRAM [impro­vised rocket assisted mor­tars] that pre­ma­turely det­o­nated caus­ing the other rock­ets in the truck to cat­a­stroph­i­cally exploded,” Stover said. Two Mahdi Army Special Groups fight­ers were killed in the sub­se­quent explo­sions, as well as 16 civil­ians. Twenty-​​nine civil­ians were wounded and 15 build­ings were severely damaged.

There were five blast sites, the US mil­i­tary reported. The ini­tial blast occurred at the rocket launcher, while the four other rock­ets were thrown sev­eral hun­dred meters to the east and det­o­nated. “It is believed the intended tar­gets were US Soldiers at [Forward Operating Base] Callahan and while in the final stages of prepar­ing for the attack, for an unknown rea­son one rocket pre­ma­turely det­o­nated caus­ing the remain­ing rock­ets to launch and explode erratically.“ 

I dunno, what’s the dif­fer­ence between an impro­vised MLRS and an IED? Roggio tries to explain:

While the US mil­i­tary related the IRAM explo­sions in Sha’ab to the April 28 IRAM attacks on Joint Security Station Thawra I in Sadr City and Forward Operating Base Loyalty, there may be two impro­vised weapons sys­tems at play. Both the JSS Thawra I and the FOB Loyalty attacks were con­ducted by pulling trucks right out­side of the bases’ blast walls and fir­ing the impro­vised rock­ets into bases. The attack on FOB Loyalty resulted in two sol­diers killed and 16 wounded.

The US mil­i­tary said the weapons used in the April 28 attacks had a lim­ited range of between 50 and 150 yards, accord­ing to a source famil­iar with the attack who wishes to remain anony­mous. The US mil­i­tary said the range and size of the war­head on the IRAMs is classified.

Based on the images of the launch­ers used in the April 28 attacks [see slideshow], the IRAM looks to be a large can­is­ter, per­haps a propane or fuel tank, filled with explo­sives and pro­pelled by 107mm rocket booster. These types of impro­vised weapons — essen­tially fly­ing IEDs — would have a short range and would be highly inaccurate. 

So, in a sense, what we’re look­ing at is a remote con­trolled, impro­vised multiple-​​mortar sys­tem. Kinda like an insur­gent ver­sion of the Non-​​line of sight Launch System, or NLOS-​​LS…

What is clear is that the devices are using 107mm rocket charges. The US mil­i­tary said these charges are “of Iranian-​​manufacture.” The lot num­bers and dates of man­u­fac­ture show the rocket cas­ings have been man­u­fac­tured within the past three years.

The rocket cas­ings shown in the images pro­vided by Multinational Forces Iraq are the same type used in the Chinese-​​made Type 63 towed 107mm Multiple Launch Rocket. The Iranians man­u­fac­ture this weapons sys­tem and the rock­ets, accord­ing to a for­mer US mil­i­tary intel­li­gence ana­lyst famil­iar with Iranian muni­tions and weapons systems.

The type of impro­vised launch sys­tem and rocket is not new to war­fare. The Irish Republican Army used a sim­i­lar sys­tem to con­duct a February 1991 attack on 10 Downing Street, the London office and home of the British prime minister. 

(Gouge: BR)

– Christian

Share |

June 6th, 2008 | Iraq Diary | 289223 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/06/06/mahdi-army-using-flying-ieds-in-baghdad/Mahdi+Army+Using+%27Flying+IEDs%27+in+Baghdad2008-06-06+13%3A50%3A03Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Wynne/​Moseley Update… | Computer Hack Could Lead to JDAM Strike » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. pedestrian says:
    June 6, 2008 at 9:25 am

    I’ve seen many con­cepts of IEDs in the past few years, I’ve heard about anti-​​air IEDs as well, but I have no clue about the advan­tages of this sys­tem over trucks loaded with mor­tar and MLRS. Usually I get excited about new con­cepts, but there were just unan­swered ques­tions that flooded my mind before get­ting excited. I don’t know what the Mahdi Army is try­ing to achieve with this inef­fe­cient sys­tem. Why blow it up and trash an equip­ment? Why not just engage in MLRS attacks?

    Reply
  2. C4Casey says:
    June 6, 2008 at 9:43 am

    Anti-​​air IEDs? How do those work?

    Reply
  3. DJ Elliott says:
    June 6, 2008 at 9:50 am

    It means they are run­ning short of muni­tions. they are try­ing to get a big­ger bang from smaller pro­pe­lents since they are not get­ting the heavy 240mm rounds any­more.
    The sup­ply lines are being rolled up.
    Notice this started in April, after Basrah and the south were engaged. No sup­ply lines…

    Reply
  4. atacms says:
    June 6, 2008 at 10:32 am

    This is a job for the Centurion/​Phalanx CIWS, we def­i­nitely need to have more of them out there, not just for the Green Zone!

    Reply
  5. SpudmanWp says:
    June 6, 2008 at 10:52 am

    I think these are designed to over­whelm any defenses. Being close in and mul­ti­ple rounds does not give the defend­ers much time to react.

    Reply
  6. Camp says:
    June 6, 2008 at 12:53 pm

    Reminds me of the IRAs 10 Downing Street attack.
    http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​B​a​r​r​a​c​k​_​b​u​s​ter
    It’s rather inter­est­ing to see 2005 & 2006 stamped on those tubes. I’d have to guess they’ve run out of the pre-​​war stock­piles. Makes you pon­der where the new stuff came from… No?
    I have no idea how the CRAM would han­dle a mul­ti­ple spread & short range sys­tem like this. But I won­der if the Army could mod­ify an anti-​​RPG sys­tem (with longer range) to use inside the wire & work it in con­junc­tion with the CRAM?… Eh, maybe.
    http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​k​m​j​Z​B​a​Q​L​sCw
    The IRAM prob­a­bly has a tra­jec­tory just like the Israeli Carpet sys­tem at 65m-​​165m.
    “Carpet“
    http://​youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​P​K​H​c​i​i​t​9​ipg
    For the heck of it…
    “Tropic Thunder” :p
    http://​www​.apple​.com/​t​r​a​i​l​e​r​s​/​p​a​r​a​m​o​u​n​t​/​t​r​o​p​i​c​t​h​u​n​d​e​r​/​t​r​a​i​l​e​r​_​l​a​r​g​e​.​h​tml
    “Royal Irish Regiment — Clear The Way“
    http://​youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​P​K​H​c​i​i​t​9​ipg

    Reply
  7. J House says:
    June 6, 2008 at 1:20 pm

    It seems like a good way to stealth­ily move closer to the tar­get with­out being tipped off early that it appears to be a weapons sys­tem.
    I hope trucks near FOB’s are thor­oughly being searched for arma­ments like these.
    Quite an improve­ment over the Donkey-​​assisted MLRS attack on the al Rashid hotel in Oct 2003.
    I don’t think these are acts of despa­ra­tion, but more like improve­ments in the enemy TTP’s to move in closer to coali­tion forces before exe­cut­ing an attack, instead of fir­ing blindly from a dis­tance like in Sadr city.
    This IED ter­mi­nol­ogy busi­ness is start­ing to lose meaning…these aren’t much dif­fer­ent in their work­ings to mor­tar rounds, and prob­a­bly less effec­tive (and def­i­nitely less safe to trans­port).
    Maybe they are hav­ing dif­fi­culty get­ting qual­ity arms, but I doubt it. There is still alot of money flow­ing around Iraq and plenty of oppor­tu­ni­ties to get hold of weapons like mor­tar rounds, rock­ets and RPG’s.

    Reply
  8. J House says:
    June 6, 2008 at 1:31 pm

    How many Iranian-​​assisted attacks must our coun­try suf­fer before we unleash the full mil­i­tary might of the U.S. on Iran?
    They have been respon­si­ble for killing our troops directly and by proxy now for over 25 years.
    When will we have a leader that will say ‘enough’, and bring war to the Iranian lead­er­ship respon­si­ble for this?
    Would we have taken this crap in 1944?

    Reply
  9. SZ says:
    June 6, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    First off, quit call­ing the group the Madhi Army, they are not the Army of the Mahdi, they are the Muqtada (al Sadr) Militia. To call them the Mahdi Army, is to give them a reli­gious man­date and fur­ther their aim.
    Second, Iran is pro­vid­ing a great deal of exper­tise and arms sup­port. We must acknowl­edge that and inter­dict that support.

    Reply
  10. Hooded swan says:
    June 6, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    If they call them­selves the Mahdi Army, then that’s what they are. To call them some­thing else is another ver­sion of call­ing other peo­ple “sup­port­ers of ter­ror­ism” just because they don’t sup­port Bush admin­is­tra­tion pol­icy. (If I was a Shia Muslim that doesn’t approve of MAS, I’d be offended at this mis-​​appropriation of the title of my mes­siah)
    If these guys were really being armed by Iran, they wouldn’t have to impro­vise their own rock­ets instead using ones made in Iranian factories.

    Reply
  11. Kaltes says:
    June 6, 2008 at 4:58 pm

    “Air IED”?
    Oh please, call it what it is: a crude mortar.

    Reply
  12. TB says:
    June 6, 2008 at 5:07 pm

    To call them the Mahdi Army, is to give them a reli­gious man­date and fur­ther their aim.
    Their actual lit­eral name is Jaish Al Mahdi, “Army of the Mahdi.” They have busi­ness cards and and their mem­bers carry ID cards stat­ing as much.

    Reply
  13. David says:
    June 6, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    So why dont we just go stick an American flag in IRAN already what the hell are we wait­ing for? They talk the talk but do they really think they can hold up against us in a all out war? My boots are on Stand by wait­ing for the day. Hopefully we make a move sooner than later before they catch us off guard. Why wait for them to attack? When we can have the ele­ment of sur­prise, to our advantage.

    Reply
  14. Sven Ortmann says:
    June 6, 2008 at 7:15 pm

    “The US mil­i­tary said the range and size of the war­head on the IRAMs is clas­si­fied.“
    OMG. They don’t want civil­ians to know abut for­eign weapons. That’s BS. As long as it’s no Western weapon design but an adver­sary design there#s no good rea­son fro clas­si­fy­ing.
    This clas­si­fy­ing does not pro­tect our secrets, but pro­tects secrets of “them” that were already compromised.

    Reply
  15. Brad B. says:
    June 6, 2008 at 10:46 pm

    Sven, it’s safe to assume that who­ever built this thing was never able to field test it. Because of that, the US releas­ing data on the range of the weapon would only help the builders either develop tac­tics based on it’s capa­bil­i­ties or help improve the weapon. That’s why it should remain classified.

    Reply
  16. Jimbo Jones says:
    June 7, 2008 at 5:04 am

    i bet the anti­war left­ies are rejoic­ing about this…

    Reply
  17. pedestrian says:
    June 7, 2008 at 11:14 am

    >Anti-​​air IEDs? How do those work?
    Aerial IED may be the more often used term back then. It was also men­tioned in Defense Tech. You may also look at the arti­cle from Telegraph for a brief expla­na­tion. This was one of the most shock­ing IED con­cepts I have ever heard in my life. However, there are also reports that denies such IEDs, and not much is known about it, and it has not been often used.
    http://​www​.defensetech​.org/​a​r​c​h​i​v​e​s​/​0​0​2​1​0​8​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.tele​graph​.co​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​w​o​r​l​d​n​e​w​s​/​m​i​d​d​l​e​e​a​s​t​/​i​r​a​q​/​1​5​0​8​1​4​2​/​U​S​-​h​e​l​i​c​o​p​t​e​r​s​-​i​n​-​I​r​a​q​-​f​a​c​e​-​m​e​n​a​c​e​-of–‘aerial-bombs’.html

    Reply
  18. pedestrian says:
    June 7, 2008 at 11:21 am

    >I’d have to guess they’ve run out of the pre-​​war stock­piles.
    I hope so, but there are more rumors com­ing from Pentagon about China export­ing weapons to these ter­ror­ists via Iran. Is this a nother proxy war of a New Cold War against China?

    Reply
  19. Da' Buffalo Amongst Wolves says:
    June 7, 2008 at 4:16 pm

    Nothing new here: http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​K​a​t​y​u​s​h​a​_​r​o​c​k​e​t​_​l​a​u​n​c​her

    Reply
  20. Smith says:
    June 8, 2008 at 9:17 am

    At least there is one small con­so­la­tion — bomb builders who work out of their garages have a dif­fi­cult time sur­viv­ing their own learn­ing curve.

    Reply
  21. Smith says:
    June 8, 2008 at 9:28 am

    And to those who want to invade Iran — with what army? Afghanistan and Iraq cur­rently have the Total Force (all ser­vices) stretched to the max in order to sus­tain it. Iran has a pop­u­la­tion of about what, 70 mil­lion? How on earth do you intend to exert con­trol over that large of ter­ri­tory and pop­u­la­tion?
    A lim­ited incur­sion is more fea­si­ble, but from what we saw of the last lim­ited incur­sion into Iran (Hussein in the early 1980s) it would offer no last­ing advan­tage for he who attempted it.
    The only option for Iran now is air strikes, which thank­fully both the US and Israel greatly excel in.

    Reply
  22. hj says:
    July 10, 2008 at 6:48 am

    Our troops need to invade our own gov­ern­ment, specif­i­cally those who have motives in direct­ing our gov­ern­ment to fight and hate.

    Reply
  23. upchuckie_cheezits says:
    July 14, 2008 at 11:13 pm

    This is my first time at this site so I may be ask­ing a ques­tion which may have been answered before, or which is obvi­ous to every­one but me. If so, my apolo­gies.
    Why do Iranians mark their 107mm rock­ets with date and lot labels in English?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    Recent Comments
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      They are going to have to look at the whole...
      Wembley
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Just look at this " picture " for a moment. The...
      Zandor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      I know LOSAT seemed awesome but wasn't it cancelled? I...
      JimboJones
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
      Yes you're quite right, I get to witness...
      JimboJones
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage