EXHIBITIONS AND CONFERENCES
Mar 09. IED’s are the single biggest killer in Iraq and Afghanistan together. That’s a fact, taken from the JIEDDO Report (November 2008), and an unwelcome at that. You’ll know that advances in pre-deployment training, greater use of intelligence to intercept IED networks and increased technological investment, aren’t by themselves, enough. How are you coping with IEDs “left of boom”? How are your military and industry colleagues dealing with these challenges?
Over the past 2 years, the C-IED community has been gathering at Defence IQ’s Countering IEDs to share this vital intelligence and proven tactics. What have your peers said of the series?
“Excellent array of speakers with tremendous experience in different areas, creating a wide picture about C-IED and the trend towards asymmetric warfare focus. Very productive.”
NATO C-IED Centre of Excellence Team Logistics Division, Spanish Joint Staff.
“Overview of projects will be very useful in the next few years. Excellent information about NATO and allies.”
Join your peers at the 3rd annual Countering IEDs (www.defenceiq.com/uk/counterieds)on the 22nd and 23rd June 2009 at One Whitehall Place, London, UK and share expertise on how to:
– Mitigate the threat of IEDs with prevention, prediction and detection
– Harness intelligence, training and technology effectively
– Maximise the latest technological developments of neutralisation
The agenda, which boasts sessions on the latest tactical and operational experiences of coalition forces in theatre such as UK MoD, NATO, Swedish EOD and Demining Centre, Danish EOD/IED Demining Centre and Canadian Forces is now available to download at (www.defenceiq.com/uk/c-ied).
For more details:
Call: +44 207 368 9300
Priority code: 1-927956424
BATTLESPACE BOOK CLUB
13 Mar 09. Type 45 Destroyer: National Audit Office (NAO) Report. The NAO published (13 Mar 09) a report on Providing Anti Air Warfare Capability: the Type 45 Destroyer. The Report concludes that the Type 45 project has suffered delays of over two years with costs escalating from £5,000m to £6,500m for six vessels. Problems arose due to “over-optimism about what could be achieved, inappropriate commercial arrangements and, in the early stages, poor project management”.
Comment: All in all, this is a sorry tale with not enough emphasis placed on the reduction in numbers: from an original 12 to eight and then to six. Despite the blustering of some Senior Officers, there is no substitute for numbers (whether destroyers or Infantrymen). The Report is available, as HC 295, for £14:35.