BRITISH LANDMINES

November 1996

"A weapons designer is not, first and foremost, a killer; he

is a statistician, a metallurgist, an engineer. He is trained
for his profession and he thinks in its terms. Enter the world
of the munitions designer. It is filled with 'lethal area
estimates' and 'kill probabilities', 'effective casualty
radius' and 'expected damage to a circular target area'."
Eric Prokosch, The Technology of Killing (1)

CONTENTS

Introduction

1. Anti-personnel mines
2. Anti-helicopter mine - AHM
3. Anti-vehicle mines
4. Anti-tank rockets and 'off route' mines
5. Mine fuses
6. Other components
7. Other mine deployment systems
8. Details on companies listed

Alphabetical index of mines, systems and companies

Appendix 1 - The companies and their banks

This report was prepared by the UK Working Group on Landmines

and Mines Advisory Group. The UK Working Group on Landmines
would like to see a comprehensive worldwide ban on the
production, stockpiling, export, sale and transfer, and use of
anti-personnel mines.

1
Introduction
The privatisation of Royal Ordnance in April 1987 (sold to
British Aerospace) and the reduction in government-funded
research and development throughout the 1980s produced a
distinct change in the process of weapon development and
procurement in the United Kingdom. Previously, weapon
development was essentially responsive to the military's stated
needs. Now, companies involved in the development and
manufacture of mines must convince the military of the utility
of the weapons that they are producing. The recent International
Committee of the Red Cross report 'Anti-Personnel Landmines:
Friend or Foe?' suggests that this change "has placed the
responsibility for mine production more squarely in the hands of
the industry" (2). Landmine development is driven by the
producers as much as by the customers.

For the producers, there is an incentive to produce weapons that

will be marketable beyond the domestic military - the weapons
must fit into a broader international market if manufacturers
are to be confident of recouping development costs (and thus
keeping the price down for the domestic military). The UK
Government in recent years has worked hard to support arms sales
overseas. The system of Export Credit Guarantees and the linkage
of arms and aid evidenced in the Pergau Dam affair are
indications of the extent to which the arms industry and the
government are bonded. This appears to be further evidenced by
Government statements to the effect that "the manufacture of
landmines in this country is a matter for companies concerned
rather than the Government" (3). In turn, however, companies
appear to be looking to Government for leadership and for
instructions: "the company must reserve its right to consider
designing and manufacturing defence equipment of any type,
including mines, if it is requested to do so by Her Majesty's
Government" (4). There is much doubt (see below) as to the
legality of anti-personnel mines (APMs) but the above suggests
that companies do indeed view weapons production as an
engineering task encouraged by economic interest rather than a
moral and political one.

The Government has claimed that it is pursuing a "humanitarian

but realistic" policy regarding landmines. A desire not to
compromise the effectiveness of our armed forces is generally
cited as the basis for this realism. Increasingly, doubts are
being raised as to the effective military utility of anti-
personnel mines relative to their effects on the ground. Over 40
senior officers from around the world, including Generals Norman
H. Schwarzkopf and Sir Peter de la Billiere, have to date
endorsed the view that "the limited military utility of AP mines
is far outweighed by the appalling humanitarian consequences of
their use in actual conflicts. On this basis their prohibition
and elimination should be pursued as a matter of utmost urgency
by governments and the entire international community" (5).

2
This view complies with International Humanitarian Law which,
amongst other things, requires the military to weigh the
military advantages of a weapon against the effects of its use
on civilian lives and property. Some believe that APMs are
indeed already outside the law. "The nature of mines makes them
indiscriminate as to their effect; as such, they are prohibited
under international humanitarian law, and practical measures
should be taken to put that prohibition into general practice"
(6). If this is the case, then the legality of the production of
APMs and their components may be questionable. By down-playing
or perhaps conveniently ignoring the legal aspect, it is equally
possible then that our Government's view is based on an economic
'realism' and a desire not to compromise British industry's
potential outlets overseas (It must be stressed here that the
production, stockpiling and use of APMs in or by the UK is not
currently illegal under domestic law).

The 'smart' (self-destruct) mines that the Government has

promoted the use of are well suited to the high-technology
production capabilities of the UK. Whilst the UK has withdrawn
from the anti-personnel mine market in recent years, many
companies remain active in other aspects of the landmine trade -
particularly the development and production of fuses (7). It is
in complex new fusing technologies, being developed by companies
like Ferranti, that we find the brains of the self-destruct
mines. Significantly, the US Defense Intelligence Agency
predicts that demand will continue to grow for integral and add-
on fuses which resist demining and incorporate anti-disturbance,
delayed arming, self-destruction and self-neutralising features
(8). More recently, self-deactivation has been added to this
list of 'desirable' features.

The view of companies may be that the potential economic

advantage of adopting these 'smart' weapons as a miracle cure
for the problems caused by landmines almost certainly outweighs
any doubts as to their humanitarian effects. The UK Government's
'realism' may in reality be little more than a cynical
prioritisation of a perceived economic interest over
international humanitarian need.

The stance adopted by the UK at the recent review Conference of

the 1980 UN Inhumane weapons Convention typifies this. Hunting
Engineering's HB876 is at the forefront of the current trend in
landmine design and production (ie. the destruction of armour
and personnel at the same time). It is a high-technology weapon
that has been produced in collaboration with a number of
specialist agencies - experts in the engineering of complex
fuses, parachutes and sub-munition distribution. It is a weapon
that blurs the boundaries that have traditionally been used for
the categorisation of mines. Historically, anti-personnel mines

3
were developed to make the clearance of anti-tank mines more
difficult; the HB876 combines both functions being hazardous
both to vehicles and to personnel.

Rather than hand-emplaced, HB876 is delivered from a container

that is itself dropped from an aircraft. It is a 'hybrid mine'
and it is a 'sub-munition'. Neither of these developments from
the model of the anti-personnel mine as it was developed after
World War II alters the impact of the HB876 from a potential
victim's perspective.

Such developments have opened up a grey area in the

categorisation of landmines. The Government has been eager to
assert that the HB876 is not an anti-personnel landmine. Yet for
those involved in the campaign to ban landmines, the HB876 is of
fundamental importance because of the fear that Governments may
circumvent restrictions or statements of opposition to APMs by
asserting that de facto anti-personnel mines were made for a
different primary purpose.

Such fears have turned out to be well founded. The recent review
of the 1980 UN Inhumane Weapons Convention has adopted a revised
definition of anti-personnel landmine as a "'mine' primarily
designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of
a person and that will incapacitate, injure or kill one or more
persons". The HB876 will kill people when they approach it but
the Government argues that it was not designed primarily for
this purpose. Such a distinction is possible only if we accept a
categorisation of weapons from the producer's perspective - it
has little validity from a victim's perspective. The actual
effect of weapons, which is clearly the cause of humanitarian
concern regarding landmines generally, is being neatly side-
stepped. The UK Government was a driving force behind this
rewording of the definition of anti-personnel mine, and lobbied
effectively to ensure that the term 'primarily' was inserted and
retained in the amended text.

Until mid-1995, Government statements indicated that the UK had

not manufactured landmines 'for over a decade'. This then became
'for several years' when it was discovered that the PJRAD had
been manufactured up to 1986.

There are several other indications that suggest that the UK's
position on anti-personnel landmines may not be completely
forthright. In 1994, a Parliamentary Question asking "to which
countries the United Kingdom has exported casings or components
for anti-personnel mines since 1982" went unanswered: "[D]etails
of any export licences approved for this equipment could not be
obtained without disproportionate cost" (9). Two years later, in
1996, when questioned about the export of components for
landmines since 1990, the President of the Board of Trade
answered that "no export licences have been applied for or

4
granted for anti-personnel landmines or for specially designed
components for such mines during the period in question" (10).
Given the difference in words used (ie 'landmines' in the
question and 'APMs' in the answer, one can surmise that
components for landmines other than those classified by the UK
as APMs may have been exported from the UK.

The 1994-95 session of the House of Commons' Foreign Affairs

Select Committee was told by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
that "no United Kingdom company had won a contract or been
issued with a license to export an anti-personnel landmine,
falling under the terms of the March 1995 extension of the anti-
personnel landmines moratorium, for the last five years" (11).

The March 1995 criteria mentioned were that non-self-destruct

APMs could not be exported but that self-destruct mines could be
exported to countries that had ratified the 1980 UN Inhumane
Weapons Convention (before amendment). The APM moratorium did
not then, and does not now, formally cover components such as
fuses, casings or explosive fillings etc. The above statement
would put the last license issued at around early 1990. This is
at odds with Government statements at the time that no APMs had
been produced or exported since 1986.

"When asked recently "how many anti-personnel landmines were a)

exported and b) transferred from the United Kingdom between 1979
and 1985 inclusive", the Government replied that "the
information requested is not available" (12).

There must even now be some doubt regarding the UK's real
involvement in the export of APMs and their components. Until
transparent information is made public, this doubt will probably
persist.

The UK Government has stated that the isue of export licences

for APMs is considered i) on a case by case basis, ii) in the
light of established criteria including the guidelines agreed by
the five permanent UN Security Council members, the EU and by
the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (taking
into account the purchaser's human rights record), iii) in the
light of government policy. In August 1996, the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office confirmed that "while our moratorium does
not specifically cover components, an application to export
specifically designed APL components for either military use or
for the manufacture of APL in a third country would not be
granted. Such approval...would go against the spirit, if not the
letter, of our moratorium." In the absence of full and public
information on export applications and licences, it is difficult
to be completely satisfied with such assertions.

5
The material below is on landmines as a general category, not on
anti-personnel mines only, and not all of the weapons included
here are deserving of the same degree of opprobrium. It is
alarming, however, to note how many of the anti-tank mines
listed below are equipped with anti-handling fuses designed to
kill any deminer or person who touches or handles them. Despite
the technical sophistication of the new anti-tank fuses at which
British companies excel, the mines are not being made less
threatening to civilian populations.

This paper gathers together technical information on particular

weapons as well as often contradictory statements from the
advertising materials of the manufacturers and the Government's
or the manufacturers' spokespersons. A changing presentation of
mine systems by manufacturers and politicians is to be expected
in the light of the rapid development of the international
campaign calling for them to be banned - there have, however,
been some interesting changes in the presentation of British
mines in technical literature.

The final draft of this report was sent in early August 1996 to
all UK companies mentioned or their parent companies for their
comments. We promised to incorporate any further information and
to correct any errors or omissions they pointed out. Companies
were asked to go on the record with a statement against anti-
personnel mines. Some have done so.

For the purposes of the above-mentioned draft report, the

definition used is as follows: "A mine is a munition placed
under, on or near the ground or other surface area and designed
to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person
or vehicle. 'Mine' includes remotely delivered mines not
directly emplaced but delivered by artillery, missile, rocket,
mortar or similar means, or dropped from an aircraft. Anti-
personnel mine is a mine designed to be exploded by the
presence, proximity or contact of a person and that will
incapacitate, injure or kill one or more persons."

Finally, the companies were told that should they not reply by
mid-August, we would assume they had nothing to add. Some of
them did not reply at all.

To the best of our knowledge, the information contained in this

report is correct. The UK Working Group on Landmines considers
this report to be a basis upon which to build further research.

6
The Group is committed to keeping this report under review and
will publish relevant information given to us by companies
should any errors or omissions be pointed out in future.

"They made a wasteland and called it peace" Tacitus

BRITISH LANDMINES

The UK has had a considerable inventory of mine warfare

equipment and components. Mines that may no longer exist in
British Army stocks are included below to give some indication
of the extent of invention and capability in this area - some of
the older models can be found in mine-affected countries. A US
report from 1993 mentions that the UK has been a significant
source for the "landmines most commonly encountered in use" over
the past 10 years. The same report places the UK in the "Top 10
list for sources of landmines found in the ground throughout the
world" until the mid-1980s and as being one of the major
producers of landmines over the last 25 years. The UK is also
listed as being one of the primary export countries of "advanced
mine and countermine technology and equipment" (13).

While some of the mines listed below might be regarded by the

military as 'old', in some cases they have been used fairly
recently in other countries. It would be useful to know how many
of the mines described here have been exported, transferred or
otherwise 'disposed of' and where. The period before the mid-80s
is of particular concern in the case of older mines.

At 2 May 1995, the British Army's current stocks were of C3A1

Elsie, Ranger, L1E1 PJRAD and M18A1 'Claymore' anti-personnel
mines according to the then Minister for Defence Procurement,
Roger Freeman. The UK has recently declared a complete export
moratorium on all APMs to all destinations. On 24 June 1996, the
Minister of State, David Davis, declared that "we hope that all
EU member states will adopt an equally wide-ranging moratorium".
This was confirmed by the Council of Ministers on 2 October
1996. This welcome news is to be qualified however by the re-
definition of APM mentioned earlier. This definition may sadly
exclude from controls some of the mines described below and
other munitions that may act at least partly as anti-personnel
mines, particularly from the perspective of the potential
victim.

1. ANTI-PERSONNEL MINES

MK2 The Mark 2 is a bounding fragmentation mine designed to be

7
triggered by trip wire.

'OINTMENT BOX' This is a small blast mine with a main charge of

TNT.

No.5 is a small blast mine made of cardboard.

No.6 'Carrot mine' The No.6 is a relatively simple blast

anti-personnel mine. The mine is detonated when pressure is
applied to any one of the three plastic pressure prongs of the
No.2 fuse. The body of the mine is made of plastic and it
incorporates a detector ring that can be removed so as to reduce
metal content to the fuse components only. When the detector
plate is removed, the mine is almost impossible to detect.
According to Human Rights Watch, the No. 6 has been found in
Mozambique.

"At independence, the Rhodesians inherited stocks of this mine

from the Southern Rhodesian colonial authorities." It is not
known how the mines found in Mozambique arrived there. This mine
was first manufactured by Forpeach Ltd which was later taken
over by Royal Ordnance (14).

No.7 'Dingbat' The Dingbat is a relatively simple pressure-

initiated, blast anti-personnel mine. The mine is designed to be
scattered on the ground (it comes with a cloth camouflage cover
for use if there is not enough time to bury it) or buried, and
will function even if the mine is stepped on while upside down.
The metallic casing makes the mine readily detectable by mine
detectors. This mine was in use for several decades (1950s to
approx. 1980) by the British Army and was eventually fully
replaced by the C3A1 'Elsie'. The No. 7 was manufactured by
Royal Ordnance.

'DORIS' The Doris is an anti-personnel blast mine. The

explosive 'shaped charge' is formed into a conical shape to
direct the blast in one direction. The Doris is emplaced in the
ground as a complete assembly and then armed by removing the
safety clip.

C3A1 'Elsie' This mine was developed by SNC Industrial

Technologies Inc in Canada for the Canadian and British armies.
The British purchased these mines between 1965 and 1968 from
Canadian Arsenals Ltd. It comes in two parts, a body assembly
and a small charge assembly. It contains just 7.6gr. of
explosive. The charge assembly is placed into the body assembly,
and then a safety clip is removed to activate the mine. It is
olive or sand-beige coloured. It is undetectable although "if

8
required a detector ring can be fitted to enable the mine to be
detected". There are reports that this mine was found in Iraqi
arsenals. There are also reports in popular literature that the
SAS may have used this mine inside Iraq (15). The UK Government
has recently announced that it will destroy its stocks of this
mine as non-detectable APMs (containing less than 8gr of metal
or equivalent) are now prohibited.

L1E1 PJRAD 'PADMINE'

PJRAD (Projected Area Defence Mine), also known as the PADMINE
(Position Attack Defence Mine) was made by Royal Ordnance up to
1986 and is still in the stocks of the British Army. It is a
directional fragmentation APM based on the American MI8A1 or
'Claymore'. It can be activated either by manual detonation with
a Shrike exploder (also used for other demolition purposes) or
by trip-wire. It fires 650 steel balls with a lethal range of
50m. According to Jane's (16), "[it] was developed originally
for local defensive use at fixed installations in Northern
Ireland". According to a report in The Times (4 May 1995), the
mine was developed in the UK when America refused to supply
Claymore mines upon learning where they would be used.

M18A1 - 'Claymore'
Although this mine is not of British manufacture, the British
Army stocks an unknown quantity. Like the Padmine, it is a
directional fragmentation APM. The American-made M18A1 has a
curved rectangular casing containing 700 steel balls embedded in
a convex fragmentation face. It can be activated by a hand-held
'pulse generator' or by pull-wire or trip-wire. When the
explosive is detonated, the steel fragments are projected in a
60 degree arc to a range of about 50m and a height of about 2m.

Many countries make this mine under license, or copies of it and

there has been much recent debate about whether some of these
should indeed be classified as anti-personnel mines. Some say
that their versions can only be fired in 'command-detonated'
mode, that is by a soldier in ambush who could thus be sure to
discriminate between civilians and enemy soldiers. The soldier
commands the mine to detonate, it is not triggered by its
victim. These claims have frequently been contested, in Austria
and in Sweden for example where it has been shown that one can
very easily convert even a command-detonated mine into a victim-
activated mine by changing the fuse and inserting a trip-wire.
The UK has classified its two mines of this type as APMs except
when used exclusively in command-detonated mode (in which case
they are classed as "other devices").

9
RANGER BARRIER DEFENCE SYSTEM
The Ranger system was developed by Thorn EMI Electronics Ltd in
collaboration with the Royal Armament Research and Development
Establishment. It is a vehicle-mounted scatterable mine system
that launches L10A1 anti-personnel mines. Up to 1296 mines can
be fired at one time to form a random pattern to a range of
about 100m.

It has a plastic body and very little metal content as part of

its mechanism, thus is difficult to detect. The mine is
normally camouflaged green but can also come in a variety of
colours, it is water-proof and can function underwater. The mine
cannot be disarmed.

According to Human Rights Watch, Thorn-EMI actively marketed its

Ranger system in the 1980s and sold more than 1 million units to
at least four unspecified nations (17).

Other information indicates that in its present form, Ranger has

been exported to a Middle eastern country and to one West
African country - not Angola (18). The British Army is reported
to have procured as many as 1,3 million units up to 1986. "[A]
slightly smaller number [has been supplied] to a total of 4
overseas customers". Two other potential customers, one quite
substantial, were interested at the time (19). We were recently
told that the Army possesses far fewer than 1.3 million Ranger
mines (20) - it is not clear how the large stock has been
depleted.

Up to 1986, Thorn EMI developed, with Ministry of Defense

funding, a man-portable version of Ranger. This development may
well have foundered subsequently, probably for lack of further
funds.

Some of the applications of Ranger are listed as "...covering

rows of anti-tank mines as they are being laid, covering an
existing anti-tank minefield by firing anti-personnel mines from
outside the field, delaying the repair of demolitions, rapid
infesting of woods, roadsides and tracks to impair and canalise
enemy movement, infesting the far bank of a canal or river to
impede enemy movement" (21).

An amendment (introduced by the UK) to the new Landmines

Protocol of the UN Inhumane Weapons Convention ensures that
mines delivered from a land-based system to ranges of under 500m
are not considered to be 'remotely delivered' (ie. scattered by
air or artillery - scattered APMs are now required to self-
destruct and self-deactivate). They are thus not required to be
self-destructing provided the resulting minefield is clearly
marked and monitored - a difficult job in woods, across canals
and rivers, or indeed in existing anti-tank minefields,

10
especially where the rapid rate of deployment is considered as
one of the systems main advantages.

The UK Working Group on Landmines (UKWGLM) learned that the UK

sought this loophole in international law for economic reasons:
the mines cannot be retro-fitted with self-destruct mechanisms
and would be costly to replace (22). This loophole was certainly
not appreciated by all. The delegation of Mexico reportedly
wanted to know why the UK delegation insisted on a distance of
500m and were told that it was the line of sight. Israeli
delegates then apparently asked what would happen if there was a
hill in the way. The humour of this exchange nevertheless
indicated serious doubts about the UK's reasoning or its need
for this particular exemption (23).

It has however come to light that the UK is planning to replace

Ranger anyway. Thus a dangerous loophole in international law
has been created for nothing. The UK has also recently agreed to
destroy some of its Ranger stocks.

The Procurement Minister, James Arbuthnot, announced in the

House of Commons on 7 May 1996 that "[a] representative of
Valsella attended a presentation given to officials of my
department in September 1995 by the manufacturer of the Ranger
landmine delivery system about the potential for upgrading that
system." It is as yet not clear what was discussed at this
meeting.

Valsella is an Italian anti-personnel mine producer from which

seven officials were convicted in 1991 for illegally selling
$180 million worth of munitions to Iraq, including 9 million
anti-personnel and anti-tank mines. It was the largest unitary
sale of landmines ever recorded (24). Italy currently implements
a moratorium on the export of all anti-personnel mines. Copies
of Italian mines are also produced, presumably under licence, by
Chartered Industries in Singapore, by Sociedade Portuguesa de
Explosivos in Lisbon, by Explosivos Alaveses SA in Madrid.
2. ANTI HELICOPTER MINE - AHM

Ferranti Technologies Ltd has developed a number of helicopter

identification systems which they state in their advertising
material could be developed into a mine fusing system. The
HIBIRD and HIBRAD systems use infra-red and radar detection
respectively to distinguish enemy helicopters. The HIBAT system
uses acoustic recognition.

In collaboration with Alliant Techsystems (see also VLSMS and

M15), Ferranti have submitted a proposal for AHM to the US Army.

11
It has a dual acoustic/infra-red sensor system and 'friend or
foe identification' "ensuring the safe passage of friendly
forces". The mine can be scattered or hand emplaced and can
incorporate a "Command and Control module" to allow for remote
arming and disarming. It is reported to have a multiple
explosively formed penetrator (EFP) warhead. After the mine is
emplaced, the acoustic sensor listens for a valid noise
signature (ie. an enemy helicopter). The mine then aims the
warhead towards the noise and turns on the infra-red sensor. The
mine is detonated when the infra-red sensor acquires the target.
The EFP warhead has sufficient energy to do significant damage
to a helicopter.

A development contract worth $8,380,421 has been awarded to

Ferranti which is currently undertaking 'Advanced Technology
Demonstration' of their AHM technologies (25).

3. ANTI-VEHICLE MINES

Although anti-tank mines are not as such at issue with the

campaign against APMs, and the question of their military
utility is quite different, it is important to document the
development and use of these mines in the UK. Of the 100 million
landmines already laid, perhaps 20 million are anti-tank, but
they nevertheless close relief roads and hinder or prohibit
access for refugees, peace keepers, police and relief/aid
workers. Anti-tank mines are responsible for the deaths of
British soldiers in Bosnia and for the deaths and injury of UN
and aid workers around the world. Anti-tank mines may not have
caused as large numbers of civilian casualties as APMs have, but
they contribute to their misery in other ways (26).

The booby-trapping of anti-tank mines is often provided for in

the design of the mine; today, they are usually equipped with
anti-handling devices. When an inexperienced mine-clearer or a
civilian tries to remove or move such a mine, the consequences
are never less than disastrous. Mines so-equipped effectively
become de facto anti-personnel devices. At the recent Review
Conference of the UN Inhumane Weapons Convention, there was some
talk of making anti-tank mines detectable and prohibiting anti-
handling devices. Nothing came of it. The UK and other
governments stated that anti-vehicle mines fitted with anti-
handling devices were excluded from the definition of anti-
personnel mine (because they are not 'primarily designed' to
attack personnel) (27).

There is also considerable concern about the use of remotely-

12
delivered (air/artillery scattered) anti-tank mines and anti-
tank mines with low or variable pressure-thresholds.

Very few controls exist with regard to anti-tank mines. The

recent UN conference hardly addressed the question. Remotely-
delivered (ie. air/artillery scattered) anti-tank mines should
be "equipped with an effective self-destruction or self-
neutralization mechanism and have a back-up self-deactivation
feature" but only "to the extent feasible". If they are to be
scattered from the air, "effective advance warning" shall be
given "unless circumstances do not permit". Hand- or vehicle-
emplaced anti-tank minefields must be accurately recorded and
mapped. But the recording of air-scattered anti-tank mines need
only be "estimated" and "when feasible marked on the ground at
the earliest opportunity". Anti-tank mines do not need to be
detectable, nor are there minimum specifications for the
reliability of their self-destruct mechanisms (28).

DRAGONFISH This is an anti-landing craft mine for deployment

under water on beaches.

No.75 The World War II No.75 Mk.2 is a simple, pressure

initiated, metal-cased, blast anti-tank mine. When pressure is
applied to the top of the mine, the pressure plate bends and
crushes one or both of the chemical fuses. The resulting
chemical reaction causes a flame which sets off the booster, and
then detonates the mine.

Mk.5 This steel-cased mine from World War II may be found in two
different models: the Mk.4 GS (general service) and the Mk.5 HC
(higher content). The two mines are identical in appearance and
size. The HC model has explosives on both sides of the inner
wall of the case. Both mines may be fitted with either the Mk.1
or Mk.2 pressure 'spider' (an early attempt to give the mine a
full-width capability), which is held in place by four slotted
metal straps. This mine has been replaced by the Mk.7. The mine
was made by Royal Ordnance.

L3A1 The L3A1 anti-tank mine was developed in the late 50's by
Royal Ordnance. This is a relatively simple, pressure initiated
(100-200kg), blast anti-tank mine. The mine's casing is plastic.
The mine would be very difficult to detect when its detector
ring is removed. The mine cannot be neutralised. It can only be
disarmed by employing a special key.

Mk.7 - including Tilt Rod L93A1 The Mk.7 mine was manufactured
by Royal Ordnance. It is a metallic anti-tank mine which
normally needs a great deal of pressure to set the firing train
in motion (275kg). The mine has a main charge of 8.89kg of TNT

13
and will cause massive damage to any vehicle.

Although the mine normally needs a large weight to set it off,

this is not the case when it is fitted with a Tilt Rod (L93A1)
which is comprised of a number of frangible carbon rods each
containing a pre-stressed spring mechanism which operate the
detonator once the rod is broken. These rods are variable in
length and are designed to be set off by the belly of a vehicle
striking them. They are however extremely delicate and need only
a slight strike (3-18kg) to set the mine off. It is believed
that L93A1 tilt rods were not entirely satisfactory as the
action of humidity both in the field and in stockpiles has
caused the carbon/graphite materials to crumble. Nevertheless,
such sensitive tilt-rod design is a source of concern regarding
the potential consequences of anti-tank mines for civilians. In
addition the Mk.7 can be booby-trapped to dissuade clearance.
The Mk.7 is said to have been replaced by the L9 Barmine.

The Mk. 7 has been found in : Afghanistan, Angola, Eritrea,

Ethiopia, Namibia, Oman, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe (29).

BARMINE (L9)
Nearly one million Barmine anti-tank mines have been
manufactured by Royal Ordnance, initially as a replacement for
the Mk 7 anti-tank mine. It can be hand-laid, but is designed to
be laid by the "Barmine Layer" a dedicated plough system towed
by an armoured personnel carrier or other vehicles. The layer
was developed from a plough system used by the former GPO to lay
telephone cables. The elongated shape of the mine also greatly
increases the chance of a vehicle running over it, thus reducing
the number of mines needed to be laid per 'mine run'. One 3-man
crew can lay up to 700 mines per hour.

"The L9 Barmine is plastic with only a few components in the

fuse and is difficult to detect using current electro-magnetic
mine detectors." (Jane's Military Vehicles and Logistics 91-92
and 94-95). This sentence has been omitted from the 1995-96
edition though no mention is made of alterations to the mine.

The mine can have pressure-operated single-impulse or double-

impulse fuses (these latter counteract clearance by mine-
roller). Additional fuses are also available offering anti-
disturbance and Full Width Attack Mine (FWAM) capability.

The FWAM fuses were developed and manufactured by Marconi Radar

and Control Systems. The FWAM mechanical fuse has a sensor mast
which is activated by contact with the underbelly of a tank.

14
Over 100,000 units are reported to have been made. The FWAM
electronic fuse, produced under licence by Royal Ordnance as the
RO 150, is activated by seismic disturbance coupled with
electromagnetic signature recognition. It was originally
developed by Nea-Lindberg of Denmark as the M/88 anti-tank mine
fuse.

An anti disturbance fuse "employs an inertial system and

counteracts mine-plough clearance and other methods of mine
removal" (30). Such a sensitivity to disturbance would be
extremely dangerous to civilians or mine clearance personnel.
The mine has a main charge of 7.2 kg of RDX/TNT. The Barmine is
understood to be in service with the armies of Britain, Denmark
(Pansermine M/75), Egypt, India and some other countries (India
manufactures it under license as the Mine Anti-Tank 3A Non
detectable).
Vehicle-launched Scatterable Mine System - VLSMS
VLSMS is based on the Volcano Multiple Delivery Mine System
manufactured by Alliant Techsystems of the USA. The VLSMS
version is to be mounted on a Stormer armoured personnel carrier
to be manufactured or adapted by Alvis Vehicles Ltd for use by
the UK. While the Volcano fires a mix of anti-tank and anti-
personnel mines, the VLSMS is said to be purely anti-tank.

The UK recently purchased 29 Vehicle Launched Scatterable Mine

Systems from Alliant Techsystems (31). This is reported to have
cost some 110 million pounds. As yet, no information has been
supplied as to which type of mine has been procured for use in
this system. Other companies are said to be involved in this
deal under "industrial participation arrangements" but, with the
exception of Alvis, it is not yet known which.

It is believed that the UK purchased VLSMS and not Volcano

because the US has a moratorium on the export of anti-personnel
mines. The mine canisters used by the two systems are identical
and interchangeable. In the case of joint US/UK operations, this
could prove problematic from the point of view of shared use of
equipment.

IMP Hunting Engineering was at the forefront of the Infantry

Mine Project (IMP) during the 1980s The 1992-93 edition of
Jane's Military Vehicles and Logistics lists the IMP Lightweight
Anti-tank mine as being under development.

The IMP mine was designed to be small enough to be carried

inside a soldier's ammunition pouch. It has an 'influence fuse'
which detonates the mine after a short delay so as to ensure

15
that the target vehicle is directly overhead. Jane's states that
"The IMP's internal controls are electronic and incorporate an
anti-handling device armed shortly after the mine is armed". The
mine has a self-destruct facility. Hunting Engineering has
informed us that none of these mines have ever been sold.
4. ANTI-TANK ROCKETS AND 'OFF-ROUTE' MINES

LAW 80 This is a portable anti-tank rocket launcher,

manufactured by Hunting Engineering, that fires a 94mm rocket
with an effective range from 20 to 500m. It can penetrate armour
in excess of 650mm thick. It is used as a mine when
incorporating the following systems:

ADDER - A Hunting Engineering private venture which enables

a soldier to fire a LAW 80 remotely from up to 200m away using a
standard Shrike initiator.

ADDERMINE - This is an 'off-route' mine, that is designed

to be placed by the side of a road or other route and
camouflaged. When a trip- or break-wire is actuated, the LAW 80
is fired.

ADDERMINE/AJAX - This is a fully autonomous off-route mine

system employing the AJAX passive infra-red sensor system
developed by British Aerospace, Systems and Equipment.

ARGES The 'Automatic Rocket Guardian with Electronic Sensor'

is being developed to "meet an Anglo/French/German requirement
for an Aimed Controlled-Effect Anti-tank Mine" (ACEATM) (32).
The consortium of manufacturers also includes Giat Industries
(France), Dynamit Nobel (Germany) and Honeywell Regelsysteme
(Germany).

ARGES consists of a target detection and firing system, an anti-

tank rocket projectile and a tripod-mounted launch tube. Firing
is initiated by passive and active infra-red detection. The
warheads are the responsibility of Hunting Engineering Ltd
(subcontracted by Giat). Hunting Engineering also developed the
launch tube and tripod. the projectile's rocket motor is
believed to derive from that developed by Royal Ordnance for
Hunting's LAW 80.

An interesting and cynically amusing discussion of this weapon

and its utility by Alan Clark, the then (April 1990) Minister of
State for Procurement, who had been "resisting expenditure (some
hundreds of millions) on a completely unnecessary new piece of
Army Equipment known by its acronym as ACEATM" (33).

16
In its response to the UK Working Group on Landmines' draft
report, Hunting Engineering wrote that "The ARGES mine cannot be
initiated by the presence of a person. If the mine is disturbed
it automatically neutralises itself and cannot be reused: it
does not self-destruct. When being laid, ARGES is programmed for
a set period of activity after which it self-neutralises".
5. MINE FUSES

FULL WIDTH ATTACK FUSE - FWAF

Marconi Radar and Control Systems, a subsidiary of GEC, and
Ferranti Technologies (34) have both been involved in this
production designed to improve the mine's chances of seriously
disabling the tank (see also p.23 on GEC-Marconi's historical
involvement). Such fuses could also enable old style anti-tank
mines to have a Full Width underbelly attack capability using a
combination of pressure, acoustic and algorithm sensors.

Marconi's FWAFs have been noted above in relation to Royal

Ordnance's Barmine. Marconi produces four types of anti-tank
mine fuse designed to be adapted to a wide range of existing
mines - two are FWAF and two are simpler, and cheaper.

Options for all fuses include anti-handling protection, self-

neutralisation and self-destruction (35). They are:

MM/E An electronic FWAF using a special sensor and

algorithm system.

MM/MP A combination of belly and track pressure sensors, the

latter using pressure-processing for maximum effectiveness.

MM/M Provides effective belly attack under the most

vulnerable part of the target.

MM/P The Marconi Pressure Fuse with pressure-processing

sensor.

ATIS - 'Anti-tank influence sensor' and Intelligent Influence

Fuse (I2F)
ATIS is described in Ferranti sales literature as "the most
advanced intelligent influence mine developed to date", part of

17
the "latest generation of anti-tank mines". This technical
sophistication is founded on the fusing system produced by
Ferranti Instrumentation Ltd. The mine itself is produced by
Technovar Italiana and was originally intended to compete for a
contract for the Italian Army. The contract apparently later
fell through.

The fuse can determine the speed of the approaching target by

processing seismic sensor information. It can also establish the
vehicle's front edge. With a combination of this data, the mine
seeks to detonate beneath the central portion of the vehicle -
recognised as the tank's most vulnerable point.

The fuse is designed not to assist detection equipment (probably

by not responding to electro-magnetic fields). "Anti-handling
devices prevent removal or manual disruption."
M15
The M15 is a first-generation (heavy, metallic, pressure
activated) American anti-tank mine. In cooperation with the US
company Alliant Techsystems, Ferranti Technologies has produced
an upgrade kit for the mine which consists of the I2F fuse and
Alliant's 'Safety and Arming Unit'. The system effectively gives
the M15 the more effective targeting ability noted above for the
ATIS mine.

6. OTHER COMPONENTS

Graseby Dynamics Ordnance and Marine Division is listed in the

1995 International Defense Directory (IDD) as: "specialists in
the field of electronic/electrical & mechanical engineering
fulfilling UK & overseas government's requirements in areas
relating to: (a) Electronic electro-mechanical fusing, safety
and arming..."

Graseby appears under mine-related headings in the Product-

Supplier Link Index of the 1995 IDD including: 'air-launched
anti-personnel', 'air-launched anti-tank', 'scatterable anti-
personnel', 'surface-laid' and 'off-route anti-tank', 'fuzing
systems, mine'.

In a recent letter, the Managing Director of Graseby Dynamics

wrote: "Graseby Dynamics Ltd originally appeared in the

18
International Defence Directory, under several headings relating
to mines, as a statement of capability only. The information has
been there many years without being updated and is incorrect"
(36).

In an earlier letter, the same Manager had written that "as far
as can be ascertained by the group management, no company within
the Graseby Group has ever been involved with the manufacture of
anti-personnel mines or any components or sub-assemblies of
anti-personnel mines" (37).

Motorola Ltd are manufacturers of electronic equipment including

integrated circuits, semi-conductors and defense electronics.
Motorola is listed in the 1995 IDD under the Product-Supplier
headings: 'Mines', 'Mines, land launched/laid' and 'Mines, land,
anti-tank, surface'. It is probable that Motorola microchips (or
copies thereof) are incorporated into a number of mines
including the Chinese Type 72B APM.

In July of this year, Motorola Inc., the parent company of

Motorola Ltd of the USA, issued the following policy statement:
"...We will do everything reasonably possible to make sure that
Motorola does not knowingly sell any part that is intended for
use in an anti-personnel mine. Although it is impossible for a
manufacturer to trace each component through to its ultimate
application, we believe that we have an obligation and a unique
opportunity to proactively support the elimination of anti-
personnel mines".

This move should be applauded. The UK Working Group on Landmines

hopes that such initiatives will be taken by other companies in
the near future.

ML Holdings Plc is listed in the Defence Manufacturer's

Association List of Member Companies of March 1995 (p47) as
specialising in "aircraft weapons carriage and release systems".
This carriage and release technology is used in the HADES and
JP233 delivery systems for Hunting Engineering's HB876 mine (see
pages 21-22 for further information).

Plalite Ltd This company has been mentioned in the House of

Commons as a possible producer of anti-personnel mines. The 1994
Defence Manufacturers' Association lists the company's
specialisations as "MoD design and development (explosive
weapons)". Company brochures also show that it makes "Drill and
Training Mines and Charges" including all in-service British
anti-tank mines. The company also has competence in plastics and
moulding, including "tough, impact resistant elastomer".

19
In response to the draft of this report, the company informed
the UK Working Group on Landmines that "we have been involved
with work on anti-personnel and anti-tank mines for the British
Ministry of Defence for forty years. The work has included
feasibility and design studies, investigations, evaluation of
foreign mines and design and development." The company has also
"manufactured anti-tank and anti-personnel mines for trials to
establish that stores met the specified performance, rough
usage, climatic and safety requirements. Explosive filling was
carried out by a Royal Ordnance factory."

Plalite Ltd has "not been involved in the production of any live
in-service anti-tank or anti-personnel mines and will not be
involved in such work in the future...all the work we have done
on landmines has been for the British Ministry of Defence and we
will not accept such work from any other source".

Other companies Other companies listed in 1995 or 1996 IDD under

landmines-related headings (included in brackets) are: Alkan
(UK) Ltd (see p23), Machine Technology Ltd ('fusing systems-
mine'), Interarms UK Ltd ('Mines, land-launched/laid', 'Mines,
land, anti-personnel', 'Mines,land, anti-personnel, scatter' and
'Mines, land, anti-tank'), Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering
Ltd (VSEL) Armaments Division ('Mine systems', 'Mine systems,
ground-based', 'Mine systems, vehicle launched/laid', 'Mine
systems, vehicle launched/laid, scatter type'). Machine
Technology, Interarms and VSEL have said they have no past or
present involvement in landmines. It is not known whether any of
these companies have in the past or are currently producing or
selling mines or components. The UK Working Group on Landmines
is actively seeking answers to these questions.

7. OTHER MINE DEPLOYMENT SYSTEMS

MLRS AT2 (Phase II)

MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) is manufactured by MLRS
International Corporation. This is a joint programme between
USA, Germany, UK, France and Italy. The prime UK contractor is
Hunting Engineering Ltd which is responsible for integrating the
AT2 warhead. It is a medium range (10 to 40km) vehicle-launched
artillery rocket system, launched by the M270 launch vehicle.
The Phase II version dispenses 28 AT2 anti-tank mines
manufactured by Dynamit Nobel of Germany. The MLRS AT2 has now
been delivered to the British Army and is currently under field
trials before full deployment. The AT2 mines were due to be

20
delivered in 1995.

The AT2's fusing system employs a tilt rod and electronic

sensors. It is also fitted with an anti-disturbance device thus
proving extremely hazardous to clear. The mine has a self-
destruct mechanism said to be "for fixed periods of up to
several days" according to Hunting Engineering. According to the
UK Government, "the role of the system is the rapid deployment
of minefields" (38). It is unclear how the British Army intends
to reliably map and record minefields laid from such a distance
and at such speed.

Hunting Engineering claims that the "AT2...is easily visible to

personnel on foot". It is unclear how this claim can be upheld
for mines that are delivered by rocket, often to some
considerable distance from the launch point.

MLRS AT2 is reportedly in service with several other NATO

countries as well as Britain. MLRS systems are fielded by
France, Germany, UK, Italy, Turkey, Netherlands, Greece,
Bahrain, Israel and Japan.
ATACMS
A further rocket-delivered cluster bomb system that uses the
same launcher as MLRS is reported to be under consideration by
the UK Ministry of Defence. The ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile
System) incorporates the M270 launcher. Manufactured by Loral
Vought Systems of USA (Atlantic Research Corporation, Honeywell
- Military Avionics Division, Martin Marietta Electronics and
Missiles Group) the ATACMS currently has a range of about 90kms
and in its present form can deliver 950 M74 antipersonnel/anti-
materiel submunitions per rocket. This weapon was on display at
Britain's RN&BAEE 1995 arms fair. Not enough is known about the
weapons fusing system to be able to classify it as a landmine
deployment system. However, an undated company brochure shows
that other warheads may be under consideration including a mine
warhead.

HB876
The HB876 is the product of collaboration between a number of
Britain's leading arms and related technology manufacturers. the
HB876 incorporates technology from Hunting Engineering, Ferranti
Instrumentation Ltd, ML Aviation Company Ltd, Royal Ordnance
Plc, Irvin Great Britain Ltd and Venture Technology Ltd (39).

Hunting's promotional material states that the 'mission' of the

mine is "to close down, for prolonged periods, HQ sites, command
and control areas, choke points, dockyards, ammunition dumps,
cratered runways and other high-value fixed logistics target

21
areas by air-delivered mines".

The UK Government stresses that "[The HB876] is designed

specifically to destroy military airfields and prevent repair.
Not the place where you would expect to find ordinary civilians"
(40). However, it seems clear from the above that the weapon is
not restricted to use on air-fields. In fact Ferranti
advertising literature states that the "HB876 can be used
wherever there is a concentration of troops or vehicles in the
open."

HB876 IF incorporates an 'influence fuse' which means "the mine

can not only be detonated by disturbance, pressure or random
delay, it can now sense movement nearby and thus stop personnel
or vehicles from approaching it" (41). Ferranti literature
states "random detonation and anti-disturbance roles make ground
clearance...a hazardous operation".

In its response to the draft of this report, Hunting Engineering

informed us that "the HB876...become active on striking the
ground, erect themselves and then detonate at random intervals
or when disturbed, over a period of a few hours by which time
they have all self-destructed". This explanation does not sit
well with the claim (above) that HB876 will close off areas for
"prolonged periods" nor with reports that many of the weapons
did not self-destruct when used in the Gulf.

Hunting Engineering also claims, as does the UK Government that

"HB876...is easily visible to personnel on foot". This claim may
be true for weapons used on flat ground free of undergrowth, but
is difficult to understand in any other context.

When triggered, HB876 fires an armour-piercing slug designed to

disable clearance vehicles and capable of perforating the metal
blade of a bulldozer. The sides of the mine consist of pre-
formed fragmentation - metal that has been weakened in a
particular pattern - so that the mine produces a 360 degree
swathe of metal fragments. These are designed as a threat to
"soft-skinned targets, including personnel" (42). This is
reiterated in Ferranti's advertising literature which applauds
the "multiple 'P-charge' fragments for disabling personnel and
soft-skinned targets".

According to Hunting advertising literature, "the mine also

contains effective anti-countermeasure facilities, making it
exceptionally difficult to clear in large quantities" (43).

The 'drogue' and retarding parachute employed by the HB876 which

"ensures the correct ground pattern of the mines" after
deployment, is made by Irvin Aerospace, a branch of Irvin Great
Britain, both subsidiaries of Hunting Plc.

22
JP233
The JP233 is a "low level airfield attack weapon system" which
dispenses 30 SG357 cratering munitions and 215 HB876 "area
denial mines". The system was designed, developed and
manufactured by Hunting Engineering. Once craters are formed in
a runway for example, HB876 deters airfield repairs. Delivered
by Tornado aircraft, JP233 was used in the Gulf War and is in
service with the RAF. Hunting advertising literature states that
JP233 incorporates high technology from Thorn EMI Electronics
Ltd as well as those companies involved in the production of
HB876.
HADES
The 'Hunting Area Denial System' is an air-delivered weapon for
the "attack and closure of high value fixed targets and choke
points such as airfields, road and rail concentrations, river
crossings, munition dumps and HQ sites" (44). HADES' exclusive
payload is made up of 49 HB876 area denial mines. Hunting
Engineering has informed us that none have ever been sold.

Further more detailed information on HB876 and associated

systems is available on request (45).
RAYO
The Rayo is an artillery rocket system which is designed in its
Phase I form to fire either a high explosive fragmentation
warhead or bomblets "designed primarily for anti-personnel".
These two warhead options are fused to detonate at 9m above the
ground or on impact respectively.

The RAYO system is being developed jointly by Royal Ordnance and

FAMAE, a division of the Ministry of Defense of Chile, under the
company name FAMAE Ordnance. It is reported that the rocket
casings and warheads "will come from the UK" (46). The joint
company FAMAE Ordnance was apparently set up in 1992. Chile's
General Pinochet had previously visited Royal Ordnance in 1991.
FAMAE is listed in IDD 1995 and in Jane's Military Vehicles and
Logistics as makers of anti-personnel and anti-tank mines. The
company in Chile directed our UK-based enquiries to Royal
Ordnance Rocket Motors Division.

The RAYO is said to be a 'cheaper' version of the MLRS. As

"other types of rocket and warhead are being considered" (47),
one must consider the possibility that future developments may
include mine delivery warheads. British Aerospace has informed
the UK Working Group on Landmines that "the suggestion that
future developments (of RAYO) may include mine delivery warheads
are speculative".
8. DETAILS ON COMPANIES LISTED

Alkan (UK) Ltd

Listed for the first time in Jane's International Defense

23
Directory in 1996 under the name R. Alkan (UK) Ltd, this company
is a branch of the French company Alkan. Jane's mentions R.
Alkan (UK) Ltd under the following Product-Supplier headings:
'Mine systems', 'mine systems, helicopter-launched' and 'weapon
pods for aircraft'. At the 1994 Eurosatory arms fair in Paris,
the French parent company, listed under "grenades, grenade
launchers, close defense", shared a stand with Alsetex SAE, a
well-known former producer of anti-personnel mines (the
production of APMs in France is now prohibited).

At this year's Farnborough Air Show, Alkan Carriage Systems

Division exhibited "pyrotechnic ejector release units". These
units enable the installation of weapons pods beneath fixed wing
aircraft and helicopters (48). Such pods could include mine
dispensing bombs. It is not known whether Alkan has supplied
units for such use.

Alkan (UK) Ltd

Robert House
2A Shute End
Wokingham
Berks RG40 1BJ
Alvis

Product: Vehicles for use with VLSMS anti-tank mine scattering

system.

Holding Company:
Alvis Plc
215 Vauxhall Bridge Road
London SW1V 1EN

Subsidiary:
Alvis Vehicles Ltd
The Triangle
Walsgrave
Coventry CV2 2SP

"...We are providing the tracked armoured vehicles which will

carry an anti-tank mine laying system for the British Army"
(49).

British Aerospace - Royal Ordnance

24
Product: L3A1, Mk.5, Mk.7, and L93A1 tilt-rod, L9 Barmine, RO150
electronic FWAM fuse, No.6, No.7, L1E1 PJRAD, HB876 explosive
filling, and presumably other explosive fillings.

Holding Company:
British Aerospace Plc
Lancaster House
PO Box 87
Farnborough
Hampshire GU14 6YU

Subsidiaries:
Royal Ordnance Plc
Corporate Head Office
18 Euxton Lane
Euxton
Chorley
Lancashire PR7 6AD

British Aerospace Systems and Equipment

Clittaford Road
Southway
Plymouth
Devon

Royal Ordnance Rocket Motors Division

Summerfield
Kidderminster
Worcestershire DY11 7RZ

FAMAE Ordnance
Avenida Pedro Montt 1606
Santiago
Chile

Royal Ordnance has produced a number of mines as prime

contractors as well as working on collaborative projects. The
company has recently stated that "Royal Ordnance has, since 1
April 1987, not undertaken any work whatsoever on the research,
design and development of anti-personnel mines. As an ammunition
manufacturer, Royal Ordnance has the capability to research and
develop landmines and has been active in the past. But Royal
Ordnance is not currently procuring landmine components and has
in fact not done so since April 1987, Royal Ordnance does not
manufacture any landmines, has not licensed the production of
landmines to any other company or subsidiary in the UK or
elsewhere and does not currently employ personnel on landmine
research, design and development." (50)

In response to our draft, we were told that "British Aerospace

25
does not wish to be involved in the manufacture or sale of anti-
personnel mines and is not pursuing any business in that area"
(51)

Royal Ordnance also has a subsidiary in Holland, called Muiden

Chemie International Bv which, well before its purchase by Royal
Ordnance in 1991, had been involved in an informal cartel of
explosives manufacturers supplying explosives to Iran and Iraq
during the early 1980s. It is reported that Valsella made use of
cartel explosives in the supply of underwater mines to both
sides (52).

Muiden Chemie International Bv

Kruitpad 16
1398 CP Muiden
Netherlands
Ferranti

Originally, Ferranti Instrumentation Ltd belonged to Ferranti

International Inc of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, USA. After a
management buy-out in the UK in the early 90s, part of the
company became Ferranti Technologies Ltd. A brochure available
at Farnborough '96, mentions as part of the company's
"comprehensive range of products", 'intelligent fuzing, mines
and submunitions...minefield detection...mine countermeasures'.

Product: Technology for HB876, Anti-Helicopter Mine, FWAM fuses

for Mk7, I2F fuse for ATIS mine, upgrade kit for M15 mine.

Ferranti Technologies Ltd

Cairo Mill
Waterhead
Oldham OL4 3JA
GEC-Marconi

Product: Full Width Attack fuses for Barmine, MM/E, MM/MP, MM/M
and MM/P fuses for anti-tank mines.

As well as naval mines through their Underwater Weapons branch,

Marconi has also been involved in the development and production
of a number of fusing systems for landmines. But the company
recently stated that "...you are not alone in spotting the
erroneous reference to our company as a manufacturer of
landmines. Thank you for the opportunity to correct the record:
we can state categorically that we do not produce such products"
(53).

26
In response to the draft of this report, the Rt. Hon Lord Prior,
the company chairman, wrote that "While historically it is
correct that the company has been involved in the development of
mine fusing systems, that activity ceased some 7 or 8 years
ago...On a constructive note...GEC-Marconi is actively involved
in research into the detection and disposal of landmines in
cooperation with European partners".

Holding company:
The General Electric Company Plc
1 Stanhope Gate
London W1A 1EH

Subsidiary:
Marconi Command and Control Systems
Chobham Road
Frimley
Camberley
Surrey GU16 5PE
Graseby

Holding Company:
Graseby Plc
7/12 Tavistock House
London WC1H 9LT

Subsidiary:
Graseby Dynamics Ltd
Ordnance and Marine Division
459 Park Avenue
Bushey
Watford
Herts WD2 2BW

"Graseby Dynamics Ltd originally appeared in the International

Defence Directory, under several headings relating to mines, as
a statement of capability only. The information has been there
many years without being updated and is incorrect" (54).

27
 The Hunting Group

Product: HB876, JP233, HADES, IMP, LAW 80 (Adder, Addermine,

Addermine/Ajax), ARGES, MLRS

Holding Company:
Hunting Plc
3 Cockspur Street
London SW1Y 5BQ

Subsidiaries:
Hunting Engineering Ltd
Reddings Wood
Ampthill
Bedford MK45 2HD

Hunting Defense Ltd

Reddings Wood
Ampthill
Bedford MK45 2HD

Irvin Great Britain Producers of the drogues for HB876

Icknield Way
Letchworth
Herts SG6 1EU

Hunting Engineering Ltd is one of the UK's most significant

defense companies engaged in the development and large-scale
production - often as prime contractor - of weapons systems for
Her Majesty's Government and 'approved overseas customers'.

In its response to the draft of this report, the company stated

"that neither Hunting Engineering nor any other company in the
Hunting Group has ever manufactured or been involved in the
manufacture of an anti-personnel landmine, booby trap or similar
device. However, the company must reserve its right to consider
designing and manufacturing defence equipment of any type,
including mines, if it is requested to do so by Her Majesty's
Government. It will also consider the manufacture and export of
defence equipment of any type if such manufacture and export is
within the laws and regulations laid down by HM Government and
within international rules and conventions to which HM
Government has agreed to abide." (55).

28
 Londesborough

Londesborough Security Equipment Plc designs and produces anti-

terrorist and security equipment, including 'vehicle arresting
equipment' such as portable spiked road barriers designed to
stop speeding cars.

In the parliamentary magazine "Defence Review 1996", an article

by Londesborough's managing director described 'Scatterjacks'.
These are "tyre destructive elements mounted within a spherical
container...dispersed from an aircraft via a carrier pod over a
designated target...On contact with the ground, the scatterjack
bounces into the air, during which time it becomes armed...It is
principally used in areas of heavy vehicle concentration on
battlefields."

The same publication carried an advertisement for the company's

products that included a further description of the Scatterjacks
Airfield Denial Weapon System: "Designed to prevent aircraft
taking off or landing. Lightweight spheres from airbourne
delivery vehicle contain explosive tyre destructors, which
impinge and destroy aircraft tyres. Scatterjacks unused become
anti-personnel mines, which are very lethal, and would take a
long time to sweep clear from an infected airfield. Very low
cost weapon system."

A longer, probably unpublished, article sent to interested

parties reveals that "[w]hen activated by an aircraft tyre
passing over them, or being contacted by a vehicle or human
element, the projectile will fire off its elements in different
directions. This will cause injury in the case of the humane
element, and if the explosive charge detonates withion an
aircraft tyre it will bring about instant deflation and cause
the aircraft to veer and crash...This device may also be
effectively used against troop concentrations using vehicle
transport. Additionally, a version capable of destroying tank
tracks, rendering the tank a static target, is also available."

While the above implies that the weapon is already produced, the
UK Working Group on Landmines believes that the concept is
probably only at the design stage and is unlikely to have been
exported. According to the Independent (20 October 1996), the
Prime Minister has ordered an investigation into whether exports
have indeed taken place.

Holding company:
Londesborough Plc Group of Companies

Subsidiaries
Londesborough Security Equipment Plc

29
8 Gordon Court
Victoria Rd
Stechford
Birmingham B33 8AN

ML Holdings Plc

Product: Carriage and release technology for HADES and JP233.

Holding Company:
ML Holdings Plc
664 Ajax Avenue
Slough
Berks SL1 4BQ

Subsidiary:
ML Aviation Company Ltd
(same address)

The Managing Director of ML Aviation Ltd wrote to the UK Working

Group on Landmines to tell us that "There are a number of
inaccuracies in your report, and I would just like to point out
that a large proportion of the equipment produced by this
company is used by the British Armed Forces to ensure the
security of the Nation - much of it in a defensive role" (56).
The company did not elaborate on the inaccuracies it mentioned.
Motorola

Product: Electronic chips used in at least one APM. The firm is

listed in the 1995 IDD under the Product-Supplier headings:
'Mines', 'Mines, land launched/laid' and 'Mines, land, anti-
tank, surface'. Has since stated it will not knowingly supply
components for APMs.

Holding company:
Motorola Inc, USA

Subsidiaries:
Motorola Ltd
110 Butt Road
Slough
Berkshire SL1 3S7

Motorola Ltd
Government Electronics Group
Aerospace and Defence Electronics Group
Ste 5
Intech House
Wilbury Way
Hitchin
Herts SG4 OAP

30
 Plalite Ltd

Product: Research and development. Production of training mines.

Mentioned in Parliament as possible landmine producer.

Plalite Ltd
Star House
8 Star Hill
Rochester
Kent ME1 1UX
Thorn EMI

Thorn EMI sold the missile and ordnance fusing activities of its
Defense Group to Thomson CSF of France in 1995. This is now
known as Thomson-Thorn Missile Electronics. At the recent
Eurosatory arms fair in Paris, Thomson-Thorn is listed as
producing "fuses, homing and guidance systems" and drones. Thorn
EMI Electronics retained its sensor activities. Thorn EMI has
stated that it "completely ceased manufacturing and marketing
the 'Ranger' minelaying system in 1982". It is as yet unclear
whether manufacturing/marketing rights for the Ranger system
were also handed over in the sale. Recent requests for
information on Ranger have been directed to Thomson Thorn
Missile Electronics. It now seems likely that, by 1997, Thomson
will have merged with the Lagardere Group of France whose
defense branch, Matra, would presumably control Thomson's.

Thorn EMI Plc

4 Tenterden Street
Hannover Square
London W1A 2AY
Thomson Thorn Missile Electronics/Thomson CSF

Product: May now own the licence for Ranger. The parent company
in France, Thomson CSF, is a major developer/producer of high
technology weapons including anti-tank mines. The production of
anti-personnel mines is prohibited in France.

In the company's response to the draft of this report, we are

informed that "Thomson-Thorn Missile Electronics produces
electronic systems and sub-systems for European and US missiles.
It does not produce anti-personnel or anti-tank mines systems
nor does it have any intention of doing so...[It] is heavily
involved in the research...into sophisticated sensing techniques
for the detection of metal and plastic anti-personnel mines..."

31
Through its subsidiary Thomson TRT Defense, Thomson CSF (France)
produced the HPD series of anti-tank mines.

In July 1994, another Thomson CSF subsidiary, Thomson Brandt

Armements, created a joint venture with Daimler Benz Aerospace
of Germany. The company is called TDA in France and TDW in
Germany. "According to TDA vice-president Gerhard Nowicki, all
business would be transacted by...TDA...except where this is
inappropriate for legal reasons...". The new company "will
manufacture 'smart' munitions, mines and motor systems" (57).
The production of APMs in Germany was prohibited in April 1996.

Thomson CSF (UK) Ltd

81 Piccadilly
London W1V OHL

Thomson-Thorn Missile Electronics Ltd.

121 Blyth Road
Hayes
Middlesex UB3 1DL
Other Foreign Companies mentioned

Technovar Italiana
Via Argiro 95
70121 Bari
Italy

Valsella Meccanotecnica
25014 Castenedolo
Brescia
Italy

A 50% share of Valsella was sold to Fiat in 1986. Fiat stated in

1994 that it had sold its shares in Valsella. However the
Chairman of Valsella denied the withdrawal of Fiat at a board
meeting in December 1994. According to recent documents, Fiat
still half-owns Valsella through a subsidiary called 'Fiat
Componenti e Impianti per l'Energia e l'Industria' (58).

Alliant Techsystems Inc

Defense Systems
7225 Northland Drive
Brooklyn Park
Minnesota 55428
USA

32
Dynamit Nobel AG
PO Box 1261
53839 Troisdorf
Germany

ENDNOTES

(1) The Technology of Killing, Eric Prokosch, ZED Books, 1995,

ISBN 1-85649-358-X
(2) Anti-personnel Landmines - Friend or Foe?, International
Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva, March 1996
(3) Letter from the Rt Hon Nicholas Soames to William Cash MP,
27 August 1995
(4) Letter to a campaigner from C.I.P. Martin, Manager,
Marketing and PR, Hunting Engineering, 31 May 1996
(5) Anti-personnel Landmines - Friend or Foe?, and 'An open
letter to President Clinton' signed by 15 retired US officers,
New York Times, 3 April, 1996
(6) The Landmine Crisis, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary
General of the United Nations, in 'Foreign Affairs',
September/October 1994. This view is also shared by Human Rights
Watch.
(7) Landmines, A Deadly Legacy, The Arms Project/Physicians for
Human Rights, Oct 1993, ISBN 1-56432-113-4, p86-87
(8) ibid. p46
(9) Hansard, Written Answers, 1 November 1994, col 1018
(10) Hansard, Written Answers, 16 May 1996, col.540
(11) Foreign Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 2nd Report on
UK Policy on Weapons Proliferation and Arms Control in the Post-
Cold War Era, Volume I, p xxxiv, 30 March 1995
(12) Parliamentary Question from Ann Clwyd MP, 1 July 1996
(13) Answers from US Army Foreign Science and Technology Center
to 'Questions for FSTC - from the Arms Project - Human Rights
Watch', 1993
(14) Landmines in Mozambique, Human Rights Watch Arms
Project/Human Rights Watch Africa, March 1994, ISBN 1-56432-121-
5
(15) Bravo Two Zero, Andy McNab, Corgi Transworld. The author
mentions that the patrol carried Elsie mines into Iraq and
emplaced them. The book also includes photographs of the mine.
(16) Military Vehicles and Logistics, published by Jane's
Information Group, 1986; various other editions of the manual
are cited in this paper.
(17) Landmines, a Deadly Legacy p86
(18) Letter to a campaigner from Thorn EMI Electronics Ltd,
24.3.1995
(19) Jane's International Defense Review, 1 August 1986
(20) UKWGLM conversation with civil servant, Cambridge, 5

33
September 1995
(21) Military Vehicles and Logistics 1991-92
(22) UKWGLM conversation with civil servant, Cambridge, 5
September 1995
(23) UKWGLM conversation with a delegate to the preparatory
meetings of the UN Inhumane Weapons Convention review
conference, Geneva, 12 Jan 1995
(24) Landmines, a Deadly Legacy, p79
(25) Military Vehicles and Logistics 1995-96, p240

(26) British landmines of WWII vintage can be found in Belgium,

Egypt, Libya, Netherlands, Tunisia. Later models are reported in
Egypt and the Republic of Korea - Hidden Killers, The global
problem with uncleared landmines, United States Department of
State, Political-Military Affairs Bureau, Office of
International Security Operations, 1993
(27) The statement was also made on behalf of Austria, Bulgaria,
Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Norway, Romania,
South Africa, UK, Sweden, Poland, USA in Geneva, 3 May 1996.
(28) Amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use
of Mines, Booby-traps and other Devices, CCW/CONF.I/14 dated 1
May 1996
(29) Hidden Killers, and US Department of Defense CDROM
'Minefacts', 1995-96
(30) Military Vehicles and Logistics, 1995-96, p235
(31) Hansard Written Answers, 29.11.95, col. 768
(32) Military Vehicles and Logistics 1995-96, p206
(33) Diaries, Alan Clark, Pheonix, 1993, p290. Alan Clark
continues a revealing account of the weapons procurement process
and suggests the sluggish response of Britain's military to the
fall of the Soviet Union: "From the first moment I saw the
papers it was clear that this was a complete waste of money,
conceived at the height of the Cold War, and now totally
unnecessary. Trouble is, I'm not really meant to question
'Operational Requirements'. I'm meant to 'seek' and then, by
implication, follow advice on anything about which I have
doubts. In the nature of things, the advice comes from the same
people who drafted the 'Requirements' in the first place." Clark
then describes a meeting on the question: "'You leave them
behind, you see, to slow up the enemy's advance.'
'What advance?'
'Well, er, his advance, Minister.'
'What enemy?'
'The Warsaw Pact, Minister.'
'The Warsaw Pact no longer exists. It's disintegrated.'
'In villages, in built-up areas,' shouted somebody else, also in
uniform...
'I thought the first rule in deploying armour was to avoid
built-up areas?'

34
'Roads, Minister. Choke-points.'
'What happens if a truck goes past? That would be a waste,
wouldn't it. How does it know not to shoot?'
'Well it knows, Minister. It's programmed with all the Warsaw
Pact silhouettes.'
'Warsaw Pact?"
(34) Military Vehicles and Logistics 1994-95
(35) Military Vehicles and Logistics 1991-92 p196
(36) Letter from CP Fowler, Managing Director, Graseby Dynamics
to Mrs M Cranfield, Directorate General for Research, European
Commission, 12 March 1996. Curiously, the information on Graseby
Dynamics contained in the 1997 edition of IDD has not been
changed.
(37) Letter from CP Fowler to Environmental Investigation
Agency, 11 October 1995
(38) Hansard 10.01.95, written answers, col. 109
(39) Venture Technology is the US-based Venture Technologies
Group, 23642 Calabasas Rd, Ste 104, Calabasas Ca 91302-1592. The
company specialises in the R&D and application of terrestrial
and satellite communications systems
(40) The Guardian, 3.10.95, David Davis MP, Minister of State
for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
(41) Air Launched Weapons, Jane's Information Group, 19
(42) Air Launched Weapons, Issue 20
(43) Ibid
(44) Air Launched Weapons,Issue 19
(45) Briefing paper on Britain's HB876 landmine, UK Working
Group on Landmines, March 1996, 10pp
(46) Jane's Defense Weekly, 16 September 1995
(47) Ibid
(48) The brochures available in 1996 were dated March and April
1993 and carried the address of the French parent company.
(49) Letter from David Brittain, Managing Director of Alvis
Vehicles Ltd to a campaigner, 8 March 1996
(50) Letter from Terry Morgan, Managing Director, to Ann Clwyd
MP, 10 May 1996.
(51) Letter to UK Working Group on Landmines from Peter
McLoughlin, Director of Government Affairs, 12 August 1996
(52) The Death Lobby, Kenneth R. Timmerman, Bantam Books 1992,
p231. Also published by the French weekly L'Evenement du Jeudi,
23-29 July 1987. Another member of this cartel, the Belgian
company PRB, was later bought by the British company Astra
Holdings in 1989. It has since been acquired by Giat Industries
of France.
(53) Letter from Alan Tull, Director of Public Relations for
GEC-Marconi, to Ann Clwyd MP, 24 May 1996
(54) see note 36
(55) Letter from C.I.P. Martin, Manager, Marketing and PR for
Hunting Engineering, 13 August 1996
(56) Letter from R.C Bolter, 16 August 1996
(57) Jane's International Defense Review, vol. 22, p8 and vol.
28 p24, 1994 and 1995 respectively.
(58) Landmines, A Deadly Legacy pp78-79 and company statement to
30 June 1995, lodged with Tribunal of Brescia, Italy.

35
Index of anti-personnel mines
C3A1 'Elsie', 6,7,32(endnote15)
'Doris', 7
L1E1 PJRAD 'Padmine', 7,9,24
M18A1 'Claymore', 7,9
Mk.2, 7
No.5, 7
No.6 'Carrot Mine', 8, 24
No.7 'Dingbat', 8, 24
Ointment Box, 7
Ranger Barrier Defence System, 7,9-11,30
Index of anti-vehicle and anti-helicopter mines, anti-tank
rockets and 'off-route mines'
ACEATM, 16
Adder, 15,27
Addermine, 15,27
AHM - Anti-helicopter mine, 10
Ajax, 15,27
Arges, 16,27
AT2, 20
Barmine, 14,16,24,25
'Dragonfish', 12
HPD series, 30
IMP, 15,27
LAW 80,15,27
L3A1, 13,24
No.75, 13
Mk.5, 13,24
Mk.7, 13, 24
Vehicle Launched Scatterable Mine System-VLSMS, 14-15,24
Index of other systems
ATACMS, 20
HADES, 19,22,27,29
HB 876, 3,4,19,21-22,24,25,27
JP 233, 19,22,27,29

36
Multiple Launch Rocket System - MLRS, 20,21
RAYO, 22
Scatterjacks, 28
SG357, 22
Index of components
Atis, 17,25
Explosive filling, 24-25
Full Width Attack Fuse - FWAF, 16-17,25
Intelligent Influence Fuse - I2F, 17,25
MM/E, 17,25
MM/MP, 17,25
MM/M, 17,25
MM/P, 17,25
M15, 11,17,25
Shrike exploder, 9,15
Tilt rod, 13,24 (L93A1),20(AT2)

Index of companies
Alliant Techsystems, 11,14-15,17,31
Alkan (UK) Ltd, 19,23
Alvis Vehicles Ltd, 14-15,23
Atlantic Research Corporation, 20
British Aerospace, 2,22,23,24-25
British Aerospace Systems and Equipment, 15,24
Canadian Arsenals Ltd, 8
Daimler Benz Aerospace, 30-31
Dynamit Nobel AG, 16,20,31
FAMAE/FAMAE Ordnance, 22,24
Ferranti Instrumentation Ltd, 17,21,25
Ferranti Technologies Ltd, 3,11,16,17,21,25
Fiat, 31
GEC-Marconi, 16,25-26
Giat Industries, 16,34 (note 52)
Graseby/Graseby Dynamics Ltd, 18,26
Honeywell Military Avionics, 20
Honeywell Regelsysteme, 16
Hunting/Hunting Engineering, 3,15,16,19,20,21,22,27
Interarms (UK) Ltd, 19
Irvin Aerospace/Irvin Great Britain Ltd, 21,22,27
Londesborough Security Equipment Plc, 28
Loral Vought Systems, 20
Machine Technology Ltd, 19
Marconi Radar and Control Systems, 14,16
Martin Marietta Electronics and Missiles, 20
Matra, 30
ML Aviation Company Ltd, 21,29
ML Holdings, 19,29
Motorola, 18,29
Muiden Chemie International Bv, 25
Plalite Ltd, 19,30
Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment, 9
Royal Ordnance, 2,8,9,13,14,16,19,21,22,24-25

37
Technovar Italiana, 17,32
Thorn EMI, 10,30-31
Thorn EMI Electronics Ltd, 9,22,30-31
Thomson Brandt Armements, 31
Thomson-Thorn Missile Electronics, 11, 30-31
Thomson CSF, 30-31
Valsella Meccanotecnica, 11,25,31
Venture Technology, 21,34(note 31)
Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd - VSEL, 19

APPENDIX 1

The companies and their banks

In the current context of action on the financing of landmine

production, stockpiling and trade, it is appropriate to give
available information on the bankers of companies mentioned in
this report. The following list and comments should be read in
conjunction with the full report. The involvement of some of the
companies listed is historical; some of the weapons mentioned in
the report do not deserve the level of public opprobrium
accorded to anti-personnel mines. It should be noted that
companies may have several banks - this initial research may not
reflect this.
Under no circumstances should it be construed from the following
that any banks have financed the production or trade of anti-
personnel mines or other landmines, such information is not
available.

Barclays Bank plc British Aerospace

Graseby Dynamics
Graseby plc
Machine Technology Ltd
Plalite Ltd

Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Irvin Aerospace

Citibank Motorola Ltd UK

Credit Lyonnais London Matra UK

Hambros Bank Ltd ML Holdings plc

38
Lloyds Bank plc Alvis plc
British Aerospace
Hunting Engineering Ltd
Hunting plc
Irvin Great Britain
ML Holdings plc

Midland Bank plc (1) British Aerospace

British Aerospace Systems &

Equipment
Fiat UK Ltd
GEC-Marconi (2)
GEC-Marconi Defence Systems Ltd
Thomson (UK) Holdings plc and all
UK subsidiaries (3)

NatWest Group (4) British Aerospace

Daewoo (UK) (5)
Fiat UK Ltd
Graseby plc
Mercedes Benz (UK) Ltd (6)
Vickers Shipbuilding - VSEL

Royal Bank of Scotland Ferranti Technologies Holdings

Svenska International plc Hunting Engineering

Irvin Aerospace

Sources: EIRIS Services Ltd, Key British Enterprises '95, Dun &
Bradstreet Europa '96, Kompass 96-97, 'Smaller Companies' EXTEL
Financial Times 1996.

Endnotes to Appendix 1
(1) "Midland only finances equipment of a defence nature and
does not finance the sale of items of a military nature (eg.
bullets and missiles) or landmines" quoted from 'correspondance
dated 6.3.96 in 'The Ethical Standing of major British High
Street Banks, June-July 1996' in 'The Lloyds and Midland Boycott
Campaign' resource pack
(2) GEC Marconi Aerospace Ltd and GEC Marconi Avionics Holdings

39
bank with NatWest.
(3) The French parent company banks with Banque Paribas
(4) "...The issue of a global ban on anti-personnel landmines is
not a matter of controversy in Britain...I wish to make it
unequivocally plain that our bank and I support and my
colleagues personally fully support this objective", statement
by Lord Alexander, Chairman of NatWest, to the Co-operative
Bank, Mail on Sunday, 3 November 1996. "We are totally committed
to the ban on anti-personnel landmines both in a corporate
capacity and as human beings involved in the running of the
bank" from a letter from Lord Alexander to Clare Short MP, 31
October 1996.
(5) Jane's Military Vehicles and Logistics 1992-93 lists one APM
and one anti-tank mine manufactured by Daewoo Corporation, 541
Namdaemoon-Ro- 5-Ga, Chung-Gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Daewoo's K440 APM is a copy of the American Claymore, the M19
mine is a copy, made under licence, of the American M19 anti-
tank mine. This information is given as a further example of a
company that trades in the UK in other products.
(6) The German parent company banks with Baden Wuertembergische
Bank AG, Stuttgart.

40