• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Animal Army (Animals Trained Or Exploited For Warfare)

A

Anonymous

Guest
Here is a report on how the US Navy is using trained Sealions in the Gulf to spot potential saboteurs, then goes on to give other examples - Dolphins, kamikaze camels, bat bombs .etc.

I remember the dead rat bombs reported in FT a few months ago, but are there any other good examples? And do you believe it to be ethical?
 
Ah, you beat me to it,

Clearly the most interesting section was this:

'Perhaps the most bizarre plan was when the US launched Project X-Ray in World War II - an attempt to attack Japan with bats carrying tiny satchels bearing incendiary devices.

The plan backfired when on a practice run the bats attacked the wrong target, and set fire to a military airfield in New Mexico.'

I'm going to have to have a search for more information on this!

edit: interesting link - http://www.news-journalonline.com/column/cshock/CULT053001.htm
 
There's also the story of the Russians training dogs to run under tanks while carrying satchel charges. The problem being that, when finally being deployed in combat, the dogs ran under the Russian tanks, as they didn't recognise the enemy tanks.

(I may have the wrong country here, it could have been the US, but I think it was the Russians. Anyone else remember the story? Of course it could just be another urban legend, so which country it was is irrelevant.)
 
anome said:
There's also the story of the Russians training dogs to run under tanks while carrying satchel charges. The problem being that, when finally being deployed in combat, the dogs ran under the Russian tanks, as they didn't recognise the enemy tanks.
sounds like the Darwin award story about some guys, a jeep, some dynamite and a dog
 
Is it ethical? No, it's sick imho.

Dolphins and sea lions don't drop bombs, or deliberately maim and kill each other over ideological disputes. Why should they help us because we do?

Furthermore, what are they going to gain from taking part? A medal or something? On the contrary, they are instantly expendable in the event of something going wrong. Heroism on our behalf, and then instant nemesis. It's a measure of our own inhumanity that we can even consider using such beautiful creatures to fight our wars for us.

Having said that, animals have been used in warfare since time immemorial. There was a good exhibition at the Imperial War Museum a few years ago on this subject. Elephants, horses, dogs, and the oft-forgotten carrier pigeon, some of which made it home against astonishing odds. Then there were the exploding camels used by the Muhajadeen (sp?) against the Russians in Afghanistan.

Bill Robinson
 
James Whitehead said:
It's their poodle in Parliament that worries me. :(

Well, things have gone steadily downhill since Humphrey the cat was 'retired' from no 10 . . .

Carole
 
anome said:
There's also the story of the Russians training dogs to run under tanks while carrying satchel charges. The problem being that, when finally being deployed in combat, the dogs ran under the Russian tanks, as they didn't recognise the enemy tanks.

(I may have the wrong country here, it could have been the US, but I think it was the Russians. Anyone else remember the story? Of course it could just be another urban legend, so which country it was is irrelevant.)

It was the Russians. They trained the dogs to expect to find food under tanks, but of course they used their own tanks to train them. Silly sods.
 
Of course dogs didn't recognise the enemy. Dogs don't have an enemy, they just do what they're told to.

This seems to me perverse. I agree very much with Big Bill - why should we involve other species in our petty tribal disputes? I'm not a veggie, I'm not even anti-hunting, but strapping a bomb to a living creature and wielding it as a blunt weapon has got to be one of the most dispicable things a nation can do. Bad enough people who don't give a fuck and don't have a clue what's going on get used as cannon fodder, let alone turning innocent members of the animal kingdom into weapons of mass destruction as well.

It seems particularly perverse using aquatic mammals like that, partly because they're not even domesticated, so they really have nothing to do with our wars, but also coz when it comes down to it, we have *no* idea how intelligent these animals are, or how aware they are of what's actually happening. We just measure intelligence by our own standards, which is highly debatable, considering how much shit we seem to stir up without even trying to.
 
Eburacum45 said:
sounds like the Darwin award story about some guys, a jeep, some dynamite and a dog
Actually, that sounds like The Loaded Dog by Henry Lawson.

Thanks IJ, I thought it was the Russians, but you know what they say. The memory's the second thing to go. (I can't remember what the first is.)
 
According to an MSN/Reuters report, the US are using bottle-nosed dolphins (flown over from Florida) to detect mines around the port of Umm Qasr.

I think it's nice that animals aren't being left out of this war.
 
It all started with Pavlov and Skinner of course. I personally think it is unethical to use animals in this way. Bit like Bush using Blair really... woof woof
 
What do they need Dolphins for? I thought they were using Australians :D
 
Mike P said:
What do they need Dolphins for? I thought they were using Australians :D
Hey, whatch it. I'll have you know we dropped a bomb the other day.

And a bill has been introduced into Parliament to raise funds to allow us to drop another.
 
DARPA's Wild Kingdom

Weaponized bees, robotic rats, sleepless soldiers; does Mother Nature stand a chance in the face of the Pentagon's new science?

By Nick Turse

March 8, 2004



When, in October 1957, the USSR launched the first man-made earth satellite, the basketball-sized Sputnik, it caught the United States off guard and sent the government into fits. Not only had the Soviets exploded an atomic bomb years before the Americans predicted they would, but now they were leading the "space race." In response, the Defense Department approved funding for a new U.S. satellite project, headed by former Nazi SS officer Wernher von Braun, and created, in 1958, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to make certain that the United States forever after maintained "a lead in applying state-of-the-art technology for military capabilities and to prevent technological surprise from her adversaries."

Almost half a century later, what's left of the USSR is a collapsed group of half-failed states, while the U.S. stands alone as the globe's sole hyperpower. Yet DARPA, the agency for an arms-race world, seems only to be warming up to the chase. There may be no country left to take the lead from us, the nearest military competitor being China which reportedly had billion in military expenditures in 2002 (compared to our 6 billion according to GlobalSecurity.org) and which, only in 2003, put its first "Taikonaut" into outer space. Undaunted, DARPA continues to develop high-tech weapons systems for 2025-2050 and beyond – some of them standard fare like your run-of-the-mill. hypersonic bombers, others more exotic.

In an August 2003 article, Los Angeles Times reporter Charles Pillar noted that DARPA has put forth some of the "most boneheaded ideas ever to spring from the government" -- including a "mechanical elephant" that never made it into the jungles of Vietnam and telepathy research that never quite afforded the U.S. the ability to engage in psychic spying.

As former DARPA Director Charles Herzfeld noted in 1975, "When we fail, we fail big." Little has changed. According to DARPA's current chief, some 85%-90% of its projects fail to meet their full objectives. Still, Piller points out, DARPA "has been behind some of the world's most revolutionary inventions" – "the Internet, the global positioning system, stealth technology and the computer mouse."

DARPA's spectacular failure rate and noteworthy successes stem from its high risk ventures. For years DARPA has funded extremely unconventional, sometimes beyond-the-pale, avant-garde research in all realms of science and technology. It is, perhaps, the most creative place in our vast government for a scientist who wants to stretch his or her mind in adventurous directions and be well paid to do so. If you have a wild idea, DARPA's the place to try it out. Said Harvard University pathologist Donald Ingber in a 2001 Los Angeles Times article, "DARPA [has] funded things that a lot of people thought were ridiculous, and some that people thought were impossible. They make things happen."

There's only one caveat -- in one way or another most every project, however mind-stretching, invariably must end, directly or indirectly, in the incapacitation or death of future American enemies.

The projects are often some of the most lethal ever conceived. Over the years, DARPA research has led to a plethora of products designed to maim and kill, among them the: M-16 rifle, Hellfire-missile-equipped Predator drones, stealth fighters and bombers, surface-to-surface artillery rocket systems, Tomahawk cruise missiles, B-52 bomber upgrades, Titan missiles, Javelin portable "fire and forget" guided missiles and cannon-launched Copperhead guided projectiles, to name but a few.

A question seldom asked is why pie-in-the-sky creativity exists unfettered and fostered only in the context of lethal technologies? As the U.S. continues its mad dash into a post-Cold War, one-nation arms race, fears of a missile gap or the menace of a technologically advanced foreign foe drop away as explanations; nor can it just be a generalized fear of falling behind the rest of the world. Look at the state of education in America -- in 2002 the U.S. ranked 18th in UNICEF's list of teenagers in 24 industrialized countries falling below international academic benchmarks. Despite the poor showing, no one is rushing to set up an Advanced Education Research Agency.

According to the CIA's annually-published World Factbook, "the US is the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels," yet the Environmental Protection Agency's "National Center for Environmental Innovation" is a far cry from a DARPA-like entity. It doled out a mere 7,500 in seven state-innovation grants in 2003. DARPA, by comparison, spent about billion on some 200 projects that ranged from space weapons to unmanned aerial vehicles. But just because the government isn't pouring money into the projects of scientists eager to attack environmental problems doesn't mean environmental research is of no interest to it. Quite the opposite. DARPA has taken up the torch and is funding a rigorous research program aimed at finding novel ways to weaponize the natural world.

As evidenced by their Vietnam-era mechanical elephant project and a recent grant to researchers developing a robotic canine called "Big Dog" for the Army, DARPA might be said to have something of an animal fetish, reflected perhaps in various projects whose very names evoke the ethos of the wild kingdom. Among them:

WolfPack, a group (pack) of miniaturized, unattended ground sensors that are meant to work together in detecting, identifying and jamming enemy communications; Piranha, a project to "enable submarines to engage elusive maneuvering land and sea targets"; and Hummingbird Warrior, a program to produce a helicopter-like vertical take-off and landing unmanned air vehicle (UAV).

The agency also embraces the imagery of the natural environment in its "Organic Air Vehicles in the Trees" project, which sounds downright "green," though it's actually a tiny UAV that will fly in the forests, over hills and through cities searching for enemies.

Allusions to the natural world, however, are the least of it. While the military is well-versed in employing all sorts of creatures to do its bidding, from Army guard dogs to Navy dolphins used for locating sea mines, DARPA is keen on branching out from class Mammalia. One way is through its "Bio-Revolution" program which seeks to "harness the insights and power of biology to make U.S. warfighters and their equipment... more effective."

Killer Bees

After all those years of warnings about sinister African killer bees inexorably heading toward the U.S., DARPA decided to draft bees into military service. In 2002, projects examining the performance of honeybees trained to detect explosives and locate other "odors of interest" were launched. Since then, DARPA has been creating insect databases while increasing efforts to "understand how to use endemic insects as collectors of environmental information." DARPA says it has already tested "this endemic insect system in key operational demonstrations here and abroad." How long until they start thinking about weaponizing insects as well? Instead of your plain old, garden variety Stinger missiles, you could have a swarm of missile stingers.

Fly Boys

At the University of Florida, DARPA-sponsored researchers are working on biologically-inspired "eyes," patterned after those of flies. "We think we can use this concept to make smart weapons smarter," says professor of materials science and engineering Paul Holloway, the project's lead researcher. It's a safe bet that a new set of eyes would help, since the current crop of smart weapons couldn't get much dumber! Despite the pronouncements of U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Timothy Keating who, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, bragged of a military "plan that... reduces to an absolute minimum, if not eliminates, noncombatant casualties," nothing proved further from the case. While 68% of munitions used in Operation Iraqi Freedom were precision-guided, as opposed to only 6.5% in the 1991 Gulf War, the ratio of civilian to military deaths turned out to be almost twice as high this time around, according to Carl Conetta of the Massachusetts-based think-tank, Project on Defense Alternatives. Are fly eyes the answer? Perhaps... at least until some rogue state develops a fly-paper missile defense shield.

Little Shop of Horrors

In July 2003, DARPA held a workshop to "help researchers in various disciplines self-assemble into teams capable of developing plant inspired actuation systems that will ultimately have application in military adaptive or morphing structures." What's on the horizon then? Giant Venus Fly-trap-inspired fighting vehicles? A brigade of Swamp-Thing warriors?

(Octo)Pie in the sky camouflage

According to the agency's 2003 strategic plan, "DARPA-supported researchers are studying how geckos climb walls and how an octopus hides to find new approaches to locomotion and highly adaptive camouflage. The idea is to let nature be a guide toward better engineering." Imagine the ink-squirting, suction-cup-covered frogman of the future!

Remote-Control Robo-Rats

In 2002, DARPA researchers demonstrated that they could remotely control the movements of a rat with electrodes implanted into its brain using a laptop computer. In 2003 and 2004, DARPA's "Robolife" program researchers will turn their attention to the "performance of rats, birds and insects in performing missions of interest to DoD, such as exploration of caves or covert deposition of sensors." Militarizing the animal world, however, carries its own risks. Take World War II's Project X-Ray in which bats with incendiary explosives strapped to their bodies turned on their military masters and set fire to an U.S. Army airfield. Just imagine what an army of Army rats might do! Anybody remember Willard?

The Wildest of Apes

Perhaps the most frightening of DARPA's weaponized science projects are those that deal with militarily enhancing that most violent of apes -- man. In its 2003 strategic plan, DARPA touted the "Enhanced Human Performance" component of its "Bio-Revolution" program whose aim is to prevent humans from "becoming the weakest link in the U.S. military." Lest rats, bees and trees become the dominant warriors, Enhanced Human Performance will "exploit the life sciences to make the individual warfighter stronger, more alert, more endurant, and better able to heal." Yes, what now captivates DARPA researchers once captivated comic-book readers -- the dream of creating a real-life Captain America, that weakling-turned-Axis-smashing-super-patriot by way of "super soldier serum."

Just Say "No" to No Doze

The U.S. military has long plied its fighting men with uppers. In Vietnam, medics sated soldiers' need for speed by doling out government-issue amphetamines. In 2002, U.S. pilots under the influence of Air Force "go-pills" (which Air Force spokeswoman Lt. Jennifer Ferrau calls a "fatigue management tool") killed four Canadian soldiers and injured eight others when they dropped a laser-guided bomb on a Canadian military training exercise in Afghanistan. Today, DARPA's Continuous Assisted Performance (CAP) program is aimed at creating a 24-7 trooper by "investigating ways to prevent fatigue and enable soldiers to stay awake, alert, and effective for up to seven days straight without suffering any deleterious mental or physical effects and without using any of the current generation of stimulants."

This is your brain on DARPA

DARPA researchers are also at work on the "Brain Machine Interface" ("neuromics") project, designed as a mind/machine interface, allowing mechanical devices to be controlled via thought-power. Thus far, researchers have taught a monkey to move a computer mouse and a telerobotic arm simply by thinking about it. With arrays of up to 96 electrodes implanted in their brains, the animals are able to reach for food with a robotic arm. Researchers even transmitted the signals over the internet, allowing remote control of an robotic arm 600 miles away. In the future they hope to develop a "non-invasive interface" for human use. Says DARPA, "The long-term Defense implications of finding ways to turn thoughts into acts, if it can be developed, are enormous: imagine U.S. warfighters that only need use the power of their thoughts to do things at great distances." For years, the U.S. military has been improving its ability to reach out and kill someone. What's the mantra of the future? Maybe, if you think it, they will die.

Life (and Death) Sciences

Leonard J. Buckley, a program manager in materials chemistry at DARPA's Defense Science Office, has said, in regard to insect-inspired optics research, "Inspiration from nature... will allow more life-like qualities in the system." And, says DARPA spokeswoman Jan Walker, "We're interested in investigating biological organisms because they have evolved over many, many years to be particularly good at surviving in the environment. ...and we hope to learn from some of those strategies that Mother Nature has developed."

Poor Mother Nature! What hope has she when faced with an over 0 billion dollar defense budget. What can she do when the most powerful impetus for free-thinking scientists to consider her is in the urge to weaponize her offspring. Under DARPA, the life sciences have become a fertile area to further the science of death and destruction in an effort, in the words of the DARPA Defense Sciences Office, to overcome the "Frailties of Life" to achieve "Super Physiological Performance." How wonderfully Nietzschean!

Such is the state of government-sponsored innovation in our land. If you're a researcher in crucial fields and want the time, funding, and latitude to be creative, your work must benefit the Pentagon in its race to make sure that the next Saddam can be, in the words of Maj. Gen. Raymond Odierno, "caught like a rat" by Capt. Ben Willard of the Army's rat patrol.

Other than finding new ways of circumventing international law (e.g. bypassing violations of national airspace with space-launched weapons) which the U.S. already does quite well with current technology or the mountain climber's mantra "because its there," it's hard to fathom why the government is still locked in a Cold War-style arms race in a single hyperpower world. The only explanation available lies in the driving will of the ever-expanding military-industrial complex, first named by President Eisenhower back in 1961. This would certainly help explain why we have no educational or environmental DARPAs. For today's researchers, DARPA is, both intellectually and financially, a fabulous and alluring gravy train, the only agency that puts real money into and rewards creative and maverick thinking. The freedom to dream and create, DARPA's mandate, is seductive and exceptional and, as such, so dangerous that we have to ask ourselves whether war-making isn't now America's most advanced product.

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_201.html
 
There has also been attempts at making cyber-roaches which can be used to find survivors in rubbles after earth-quakes.

I also don't feel very good at involving animals in our wars. I know we have used horses and dogs in wars, but dolphins with bombs strapped to them is not very nice. I`m sure the DARPA people loved the Batman Returns movie.

The article mentioned itself that movie Willard, about some guy who can control rats. And then they mentioned some guy called cpt Ben Willard talking about rats, was that for real?

Sealions and dolphins might not kill each other for ideological reasons, but they do kill each other over territorial disputes and kill children of the wrong father and such. They aren't organised enough to have real wars, but I think they would if they could.
 
I ran across an earlier example in William B. Breuer's (2000) "Top Secret Tales of World War II" (page 12-125) which describes Dr. Lytle E. Adams' plans to use bats to firebomb Tokyo - it was less than successful ;)

PB:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471078409/

HB:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471353825/

Also author of "Unexplained Mysteries of World War II":

PB:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471291072/

HB:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0783888597/

------------
Some stuff on this:

October 1990, Vol. 73, No. 10


-----------------------------------------------------------

After the bats set fire to a hangar and a general's car, the Army Air Forces had seen enough of the experiment.

The Bat Bombers

By C. V. Glines

Illustrations by Chris Fauver

DR. Lytle S. Adams, a dental surgeon from Irwin, Pa., was vacationing in the southwestern US on December 7, 1941. Like millions of Americans, he was shocked at the news from Pearl Harbor and couldn't believe Japan had been able to mount such an attack. In those days, "Made in Japan" meant cheap, shabby, and inferior. Americans' image of Japan was of crowded cities filled with paper-and-wood houses and factories.

Dr. Adams pondered how the US could fight back. In a 1948 interview with the Bulletin of the National Speleological Society, Dr. Adams recalled: "I had just been to Carlsbad Caverns, N. M., and had been tremendously impressed by the bat flight. . . . Couldn't those millions of bats be fitted with incendiary bombs and dropped from planes? What could be more devastating than such a firebomb attack?"

Dr. Adams went back to Carlsbad and captured some bats. At home, he read everything he could find about the tiny flyers. He learned that there are nearly 1,000 species around the world and that each bat lives up to thirty years. The most common bat in North America is the free-tailed, or guano, bat, a small brown mammal that may catch more than 1,000 mosquitoes or gnat-sized insects--a load twelve times its own size--in a single night. Weighing about nine grams, it can carry an external load nearly three times its own weight.

On January 12, 1942, Dr. Adams sent to the White House a proposal to investigate the possible use of bats as bombers. In those days, well-meaning citizens were proposing all kinds of warfare ideas, most of them impractical. However, this idea, after being sifted through a top-level scientific review, became one of the very few given the green light. It was passed to the Army Chemical Warfare Service (CWS) for further inquiry in conjunction with Army Air Forces. The official CWS history states simply: "President Roosevelt OK'd it and the project was on."

Dr. Adams and a team of field naturalists from the Hancock Foundation, University of California, immediately set to work and visited a number of likely sites where bats would be available in large quantities. Bats are found mostly in caves, though great numbers roost in attics, barns, and houses, under bridges, and in piles of rubbish. "We visited a thousand caves and three thousand mines," Dr. Adams later related. "Speed was so imperative that we generally drove all day and night when we weren't exploring caves. We slept in the cars, taking turns at driving. One car in our search team covered 350,000 miles."

A Choice of Bats

The largest bat found was the mastiff, which has a twenty-inch wingspan and could carry a one-pound stick of dynamite. However, the team found there weren't sufficient numbers available. The more common mule-eared, or pallid, bat could carry three ounces, but naturalists determined it wasn't hardy enough for the project.

Finally, the team selected the free-tailed bat. Though it weighed but one third of an ounce, it could fly fairly well with a one-ounce bomb. The largest colony of freetailed bats found by Dr. Adams' naturalists, some twenty to thirty million, was in Ney Cave near Bandera, Tex. The colony was so large, according to a report by CWS Capt. Wiley W. Carr, that "five hours' time is required for these animals to leave the cave while flying out in a dense stream fifteen feet in diameter and so closely packed they can barely fly."

Collection of the bats was not difficult. Three nets, about three feet in diameter, on ten-foot poles were passed back and forth across the cave entrance as the bats flew out. As many as 100 could be caught on three passes. They were removed from the nets and placed in cages in a refrigeration truck. Dr. Adams took some to Washington, releasing them in the War Department building to show Army officials how they could each carry a dummy bomb.

In March 1943, authority to proceed with the experiment came from Hq. USAAF. Subject: "Test of Method to Scatter Incendiaries." Purpose: "Determine the feasibility of using bats to carry small incendiary bombs into enemy targets."

The bats' habits were studied intently. Meanwhile, Dr. L. F. Fisser, a special investigator for the National Defense Research Committee, began to design bombs light enough to be carried by bats. He did not find it difficult, because there was a precedent for miniature incendiaries. England's principal firebombs, used in World War I, were called "baby incendiaries." Filled with a special thermite mixture, these bombs weighed 6.4 ounces each.

Arming the Bats

Dr. Fisser designed two sizes of incendiary bombs for the bomber-bat experiments. One weighed seventeen grams and would bum four minutes with a ten-inch flame. The other weighed twenty-eight grams and would burn six minutes with a twelve-inch flame. They were oblong, nitrocellulose cases filled with thickened kerosene. A small time-delay igniter was cemented to the case along one side.

The time-delay igniter consisted of a firing pin held in tension against a spring by a thin steel wire. When the bombs were ready to use, a copper chloride solution was injected into the cavity through which the steel wire passed. The copper chloride would corrode the wire; when the wire was completely corroded, the firing pin snapped forward, striking the igniter head and lighting the kerosene. Small time-delay smokebombs were also designed so test flights of bats could be traced by ground observers. They burned for thirty minutes with a yellowish flame that could be seen several hundred yards away at night; white smoke was also emitted.

To load a bomb aboard a bat, technicians attached the case to the loose skin on the bat's chest by a surgical clip and a piece of string. Groups of 180 were released from a cardboard container that opened automatically in midair at about 1,000 feet, after which, says the CWS history, "bats were supposed to fly into hiding in dwelling and other structures, gnaw through the string, and leave the bombs behind."

In May 1943, about 3,500 bats were collected at Carlsbad Caverns, flown to Muroc Lake, Calif., and placed in refrigerators to force them to hibernate. On May 21, 1943, five drops with bats outfitted with dummy bombs were made from a B-25 flying at 5,000 feet. The tests were not successful; most of the bats, not fully recovered from hibernation, did not fly and died on impact. The bat-bomber research team was transferred a few days later to an Army Air Forces auxiliary airfield at Carlsbad, N. M.

Newly recruited bats were placed in ice cube trays and cooled to force them into hibernation. They were then transported to the airfield to await test mission assignments. Captain Carr explains how the test cartons were prepared for the drop tests: "Bats were taken from the refrigeration truck in a hibernated state in lots of approximately fifty. They were taken individually by a biologist, and about a one-half inch of loose chest skin was pinched away from the flesh. While this operation was being done, another group was preparing the incendiaries. One operator injected the solution in the delay [mechanism], another sealed the hole with wax, and another placed the surgical clip that was fastened to the incendiary by a short string. . . . The incendiary was then handed to a trained helper who fastened it to the chest skin of the bat." Drops were made from a North American B-25 and a Piper L-4 Cub.

Complications Arise

There were many complications. Many bats didn't wake up in time for the drops. The cardboard cartons did not function properly, and the surgical clips proved difficult to attach to the bats without tearing the delicate skin. When these problems were somewhat resolved, new bats were taken up for drop tests with dummy bombs attached. Many simply took advantage of their freedom to escape or refused to cooperate and plummeted to earth.

The Army tests were called off on May 29, 1943, and Captain Carr prepared a final report. "The bats used at Carlsbad weighed an average of nine grams," he wrote. They could carry eleven grams without any trouble and eighteen grams satisfactorily, but twenty-two grams appeared to be excessive. The ones released with twenty-two-gram dummies didn't fly very far, and three returned in a few minutes to the building where we were working. One flew underneath, one landed on the roof, and one attached itself to the wall. The ones with eleven- gram dummies flew out of sight. The next day an examination of the grounds around a ranch house about two miles away from the point of release disclosed two dummies inside the porch, one beside the house, and one inside the barn."

More than 6,000 bats were used in the Army experiments. In his secret report, dated June 8, 1943, Captain Carr concluded that a better time-delay parachute type container, new clips, and a simplified time-delay igniter should be designed if further tests were to be carried out. He also recommended a six-week controlled study of bats during artificial hibernation. After this, he said, another test should be conducted with 5,000 bats.

Captain Carr reported tersely that "testing was concluded . . . when a fire destroyed a large portion of the test material." He did not mention that, in one test, a village simulating Japanese structures burned to the ground. Nor did he state that a careless handler had left a door open and some bats escaped with live incendiaries aboard and set fire to a hangar and a general's car. Records do not reflect the general's reaction, but he could not have been pleased. Shortly thereafter, in August 1943, the Army passed the project to the Navy, which renamed it Project X-Ray.

The Sea Services Take Over

In October 1943, the Navy leased four caves in Texas and assigned Marines to guard them. Dr. Adams designed screened enclosures that were prefabricated at Hondo Army Air Field and placed over the cave entrances to capture the bats. A million could be collected in one night if necessary. By that time, the Navy had handed the project off to the Marine Corps.

The first Marine Corps bomber-bat experiments began on December 13, 1943. In subsequent tests, thirty fires were started. Twenty-two went out, but, according to Robert Sherrod's History of Marine Corps Aviation in World War II, "four of them would have required the services of professional firefighters. A new and more powerful incendiary was ordered."

Full-scale bomber-bat tests were planned for August 1944. However, when Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King, Chief of Naval Operations, found that the bats would not be combat-ready until mid-1945, he abruptly canceled the operation. By that time, Project X-Ray had cost an estimated million.

Dr. Adams was disappointed. He maintained that fires generated by bomber bats could have been more destructive than the atomic bombs that leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki and ended the war. He found that bats scattered up to twenty miles from the point where they were released. "Think of thousands of fires breaking out simultaneously over a circle of forty miles in diameter for every bomb dropped," he said. "Japan could have been devastated, yet with small loss of life."

http://www.afa.org/magazine/1990/1090bat.asp

See also:

http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/batbombs/

http://www.news-journalonline.com/column/cshock/CULT053001.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/WolfFiles/wolffiles182.html

http://www2.taylor.edu/upland/magazine/article.asp?volume=0&number=0&page=BestOf143

Emps
 
Maybe the assasination squads of the future will come via Interflora!!

' He was stabbed in the throat, Sir, by a weapons grade tulip.'
 
Lo tech solution

And you don't need anything fancy like...... live animals:

Iraq 'dog bombs' targeting troops

Bombs hidden in dead dogs are the latest danger facing UK troops in Iraq.

A dog's body was used recently as cover for a radio-controlled device detonated by the roadside in the city of Basra.

Ammunition technical officer Adrian Craddock, of the Royal Logistics Corps (RLC), said "the dog was put on top of it so the device was covered".

Military experts fear that the same tactic could be repeated, with explosive devices hidden inside other animal carcasses, such as goats.

Mr Craddock said: "It's not a common tactic but we have to be aware of it."

Fifty bombs have been found and defused since April by two British four-man disposal teams from the RLC.

The people making these are very skilled at what they do and they go to great lengths to hide the devices
Captain Wayne Davidson

Most of them have been uncovered on one of Basra's three main roads.

Many of the devices are set off with remote controls the bombers improvise from pagers or electronic car key systems.

Bombs usually consist of a metal container filled with ball bearings, nails and plastic explosives.

As well as dead dogs, bombs have been hidden in bin liners, hessian sacks, concrete blocks, drain pipes and roadside ditches - they are then detonated as British patrols pass by.

Captain Wayne Davidson, an RLC ammunition technical officer, said: "The people making these are very skilled at what they do and they go to great lengths to hide the devices.

"This really kicked off in October and the pace has been consistent since then. We can have four or five incidents in a week."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/3515934.stm

Published: 2004/03/16 12:11:00 GMT

© BBC MMIV
 
BBC News Online: Cold war bomb warmed by chickens
Thursday, 1 April, 2004

Plans to fill a nuclear landmine with chickens to regulate its temperature were seriously considered during the Cold War.

Civil servants at the National Archives say it is a coincidence the secret plan is being revealed on 1 April.

The Army planned to detonate the seven-tonne device on the German plains in the event of Soviet forces retreating.

Operation Blue Peacock forms part of an exhibition for the National Archives, in Kew, London, on Friday.

Professor Peter Hennessy, curator of the Secret State exhibition, told the Times: "It is not an April Fool. These documents come straight from the archives at Aldermaston. Why and how would we forge them?"

The bomb was designed to stop the Red Army advancing across West Germany during the height of the Cold War.

But nuclear physicists at the Aldermaston nuclear research station in Berkshire. were worried about how to keep the landmine at the correct temperature when buried underground.

In a 1957 document they proposed live chickens would generate enough heat to ensure the bomb worked when buried for a week.

The birds would be put inside the casing of the bomb, given seed to keep them alive and stopped from pecking at the wiring.

The landmine would be remotely detonated.

Tom O'Leary, head of education and interpretation at the National Archives, told the paper: "It does seem like an April Fool but it most certainly is not. The Civil Service does not do jokes."
 
Well the landmine part of the story isn't an April fool, there was an article about it in New Scientist some weeks ago. As for the chickens, well, people will try anything... ;)
 
But I do think they should have been a `little` more `stratageric` about this story....
 
Well, I've done my research

I checked the web to confirm the existence of a Tom O'Leary at the National Archives. Result: Yes.

I checked the "Times" website to confirm that they did investigate this story. Result: Yes.

It is a subscription only website, but here is the search result No. 1:

"91% Is today the day to reveal the chicken-powered nuke? 01 Apr 2004
For those with an eye for an April Fool this morning, the tale of a chicken-powered nuclear bomb appears too good to be true but the secret plans disclosure today was pure coincidence"

I think we can preclude a BBC April Fool's Day prank, although they are rightly known for pulling some brilliant pranks in the past.

Next question: Does the "Times" prank?
 
Originally posted by littleblackduck
Next question: Does the "Times" prank?

Well, they've been claiming to be a serious newspaper for years.

Can't help throwing in a jab at Murdoch controlled press whenever the opportunity presents itself.
 
UK pondered suicide pigeon attacks

British spy chiefs secretly considered training pigeons to fly into enemy targets carrying explosives or biological weapons, it has been revealed.

British intelligence set up a "pigeon committee" at the end of World War II to ensure expertise gained in the use of the birds to carry messages was not lost.

Documents now released to the National Archives reveal that the War Office intelligence section, MI14, warned: "Pigeon research will not stand still; if we do not experiment, other powers will."

Among MI14's proposals was the training of pigeons carrying explosives to fly into enemy searchlights.

ASK THE ARCHIVIST
Put your questions to Howard Davies from the National Archives, in a LIVE interactive forum at 1300 GMT / 1400 BST.


Meanwhile, pigeon enthusiast Wing Commander WDL Rayner suggested a "bacteriological warfare agent" could be combined with the explosive.

'Revolutionary' tactics

"A thousand pigeons each with a two ounce explosive capsule, landed at intervals on a specific target, might be a seriously inconvenient surprise," Mr Rayner wrote.

He believed his "revolutionary" ideas could change the way wars were fought, and had the tentative backing of wartime MI6 chief Sir Stewart Menzies.

However the internal security service MI5 branded Rayner a "menace in pigeon affairs".

MI5's Lieutenant Colonel Tommy Robertson wrote: "I thought that some time ago it had been made clear that Rayner should finish writing his manual and then have nothing further to do with this committee officially."

Rayner's plan for a 400-pigeon loft where tests would be carried out was abandoned due to wrangling among the intelligence agencies over funding.

Members of the public can view the 280 newly-released files at the National Archives, Kew, west London.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/3732755.stm

Published: 2004/05/21 09:34:40 GMT

© BBC MMIV
 
On a tangent, the Russians did deploy "dog soldiers" during WW2, with disappointing results. Several dogs were trained to run under tanks to get food, when they were released in battle they were equipped with back-pack magnetic-trigger mines. The dogs had been trained to run under Russian tanks... if you can see the immediate problem with this scheme, move to the front of the class, comrade.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently, and therein lies the problem.

http://www.soviet-empire.com/arsenal/ar ... g_mine.php

The dogs had been trained with Russian tanks such as the T-34, and so naturally were familiar with T-34s. Although in the photograph in the article above, perhaps some effort was made to make the T-34 look a bit more like a Panzer 3 (ie the narrow "main gun"), but evidently to little avail.
 
Back
Top