May
31
A Holistic Approach to Combat Identification by Maj Edward Ospital and Maj Adam Wojack
Filed Under Gadgets And Gizmos | Comments Off
Edward Ospital asked:
Combat Identification (CID) is the process of attaining an accurate characterization of detected objects (friendly, enemy or neutral) throughout the Joint battlespace to the extent that with high confidence, timely application of military options and weapons resources can occur. Combat Identification is achieved through proficient application of a family of situational awareness and target identification capabilities, and adherence to doctrine, unit tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP), and approved rules of engagement (ROE) that directly support a combatant’s shoot/don’t shoot decision for detected objects in their battlespace. The purpose of CID is to improve unit combat effectiveness while at the same time preventing fratricide and minimizing collateral damage. CID is the process that human shooters or sensors go through to identify entities on the battlefield prior to making shoot/don’t shoot decisions. To perform CID, the warfighter uses all available means at his disposal to sort the entities on the battlefield prior to applying combat power or fires effects. The whole point is to enable the warfighter to maximize the effects of lethal fires against the enemy, while at the same time reducing or eliminating the effects of fires on friendly or neutral personnel, equipment or facilities. While CID is a complex series of linked systems, procedures and doctrine—when it is effective, it is simple and transparent. When it is ineffective, its results can be tragic and disastrous. A recent example of the “links” in the CID chain (Family of Systems [“See” the entity] + Training [“Identify” the entity] + Doctrine/TTP/ROE [“Engage” the entity]) being broken in the Global War on Terrorism is the highly publicized Pat Tillman incident.
Fratricide in Afghanistan
While on patrol in a Taliban-infested sector of Afghanistan’s Patktia province, an element of the 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, became bogged down because of a broken HMMWV. The segment of the platoon with Corporal Pat Tillman, Serial 1, passed through a canyon and was near its north rim. The other segment, Serial 2, changed route plans because of poor road conditions that hindered the recovery of a broken HMMWV being towed by a locally acquired vehicle. Serial 2 entered the same canyon from the south. Serial 2 did not have the ability to communicate their situation and change of route to Serial 1 due to the rugged terrain. Upon entering the canyon, Serial 2 came under mortar and small arms fire from Afghan Taliban fighters. Rangers in Serial 1 heard the initial explosion that preceded the attack. CPL Tillman and two other fire team leaders were ordered to head toward the attackers. The canyon’s walls prevented them from radioing their positions to their colleagues, just as Serial 2 had not radioed its change in plans. CPL Tillman’s group moved toward the north-south ridge to face the canyon. The light was dimming. “It was like twilight,” one Ranger in the fight recalled. “You couldn’t see colors, but you could see silhouettes.” Another Ranger felt the light was “still pretty good.” A sergeant with Tillman on the ridge recalled he “could actually see the enemy from the high northern ridge line. I could see their muzzle flashes.” The presumed Taliban guerrillas were about half a mile away. Tillman took another Ranger and an Afghan ally down the slope “into a position where he could engage the enemy,” the sergeant recalled. A Ranger nearby watched Tillman take cover. “I remember not liking his position; I had just seen a red tracer come up over us…which immediately struck me as being an M240 tracer…at that time the issue of friendly fire began turning over in my mind.” As Serial 2 pulled alongside the ridge, the gunners poured an undisciplined barrage of hundreds of rounds into the area Tillman and the other members of Serial 1 had taken position. The first to die was the Afghan, whom the Rangers in Serial 2 mistook for a Taliban fighter. Under fire, Tillman and almost a dozen others on the ridge “shouted, they waved their arms, and they screamed some more.” Tillman then used a smoke grenade to mark their position and firing ceased for a few moments. The Rangers in Serial 1 thought the engagement was over and got up from their position. The HMMWV then moved to a position of advantage and resumed firing, killing Tillman in the second engagement. To use this tragic example to better explain CID, you must first understand its basic formula: Situational Awareness (SA) + Target Identification (TI) = Combat Identification (CID.)
Combat Identification: The process of attaining an accurate characterization of detected objects (friendly, enemy, neutral) in the Joint battlespace to the extent that with high confidence, timely application of military options and weapons resources can occur (CID MA ICD). Combat ID is achieved through proficient application of a family of situational awareness and target identification capabilities, and adherence to doctrine, unit TTP, and approved ROE that directly supports a combatant’s ”shoot/don’t shoot” decision for detected objects in his/her battlespace.
Combat Effectiveness: (as related to Combat ID) the ability of a friendly unit to rapidly and accurately sort and characterize detected objects within the battlespace in order to allow for the timely application of combat power and fires effects against an enemy force or target (to destroy, neutralize, suppress or disrupt), with the least risk of death, injury or damage to friendly and neutral forces, entities, facilities and equipment ((prevention of fratricide and collateral damage) definition by the TCM PBC/CID).
When CPL Tillman’s unit lost SA of where its subordinate elements were in relation to each other, the situation deteriorated: two friendly forces converged on one another without communications. Several systems could have prevented this loss of SA in Tillman’s Ranger element. A FBCB2 / Blue Force Tracker (GPS-fed, vehicle-mounted or hand held C2/SA system) capability would have given all elements involved a visual depiction of where mounted and dismounted friendly forces were located—assuming, of course, that all vehicles and dismounted elements involved were so equipped. Knowing where blue entities were in the battlespace in combination with the proper mix of target identification systems would of enabled vehicle’s commander to properly guide their element’s crew-served weapons gunners onto enemy targets—as well as to prevent them from engaging friendly forces.
Target Identification (TI): TI is the process of determining the affiliation (blue, red, neutral) of detected objects at the point of engagement in one’s immediate battlespace. This is normally conducted within line of sight visual range and is for the purpose of applying combat power or fires effects against enemy entities or targets, while preventing fratricide and minimizing collateral damage. There are two categories of TI – cooperative target identification (CTI) and non-cooperative target identification (NCTI). CTI includes any method or materiel solution that allows a human shooter/sensor to “interrogate or question” a potential target, and allows the same potential target to “respond or answer” the interrogator in a timely manner. Air to Air and Ground to Air systems use of IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) Mode 4, and Ground to Ground systems, in the near future, may use Battlefield Target Identification Device (BTID) and Radio Based Combat Identification (RBCI) CTI systems. Identify Friend or Foe (IFF) is a misnomer as none of the CTI technologies identify Foe, they only Identify Friend or Unknown (IFU) entities. NCTI involves methods or systems that exploit the physical characteristics of entities in the battlespace to help identify and determine affiliation, and does not require a cooperative response or answer from the target. NCTI systems include optics (forward-looking infrared [FLIR], NVGs and binoculars), vehicle and personnel markings (Joint Combat Identification Marking Systems [JCIMS], which include Combat ID Panels [CIPs], Thermal ID Panels [TIPs], Phoenix Beacons [infrared lights lights] and Dismounted Combat Identification Marking System [DCIMS- (TIP panel that is form fitted to a Kevlar helmet, giving a reverse polarity image through a FLIR device), and Automated Target Recognition (ATR) devices. JCIMS marking systems are used in conjunction with FLIR optics and Night Vision Goggles and assist in friendly identification at the point of engagement.
In this example, Serial 2 (or the Platoon for that matter) did not have adequate optics. Thermal sights for HMMWV-mounted crew served weapons (AN/PAS-13s or Enhanced Night Vision Goggles (ENVG), for example) combined with reverse-polarity markings and/or thermal ballistic helmet covers on all soldiers would have enabled turret gunners to identify the dismounted Rangers in Serial 1 as friendly entities. Technology combined with a rehearsed TTP to avoid fratricide and adherence to ROE could have prevented this occurrence. Each “link” of the CID chain was broken. Tillman’s group would have benefited from other NCTI devices such as infrared (IR) beacons for limited visibility operations (seen through AN/PVS-7B/D or PVS-14 night vision goggles that every soldier currently is issued) or a day-visible strobe light. A CTI technology that services Ground to Ground domains (“platform to platform,” “platform to soldier,” “soldier to soldier,” “soldier to platform”) would have been an additional tool at the point of engagement that would have enabled both serials to identify unknowns as friends. Unfortunately, the direct fire CTI technology [Battlefield Target Identification Device BTID)] currently being recommended for an acquisition strategy for the US Army and USMC services only one domain—“platform to platform”—and interrogates only targets from M1, M2/M3, and Stryker vehicles.
In the Tillman example, even if the HMMWVs are replaced by armored vehicles equipped with BTID, the fratricide still could have still occurred—since BTID does not work within the “platform to soldier” domain. This weakness in the CID “link” does not enable the firer to gain positive identification (PID) of the unknown dismounted entity. In the example, Serial 2 in turn broke both the second (“Identify”) and third links (“Shoot/Don’t Shoot”): ROE was not satisfied by the gunners manning the crew served weapons on the HMMWVs; and Positive Identification (PID) was not gained by the firing element. In addition, a TTP (i.e. smoke grenade signal), was not established or trained prior to the engagement (or not comprehended during the engagement) as a signal to cease fire in case of friendly fire situations. The Serial 2 firing platform could have used additional procedures to prevent the fratricide: transmitting the location of the unknown entity to another element (e.g. higher headquarters) to gain PID; by maneuvering to a position of advantage until PID could be acquired; or by using the proposed DIDEA (Detect, Identify, Decide, Engage, and Assess) Target Engagement Process (discussed later in this article).
In this highly publicized incident, very well trained Rangers were placed in a situation where they did not have the proper CID family of capabilities and in the heat of failed to correctly implement their training and ROE procedures. The end result was a costly decision that led to a fatal fratricide incident.
Better CID Capabilities The ability of a CTI technology to service multiple domains has gained importance since Operation Desert Storm (ODS). Fratricide studies have illustrated a 25% increase in “platform to soldier” incidents and an increase in “soldier to soldier” incidents by 10% during recent Major Combat Operations in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF.) The two CTI technologies recently approved for acquisition strategy do not address or fill this CID gap. BTID services only the “platform to platform” domain (M1, M2/M3, Stryker, and LRAS3) where as Radio Based Combat Identification (RBCI) addresses the Ground to Ground and Air to Ground domains from an indirect and Close Air Support perspective. None of these technologies directly address the “platform to soldier” and “soldier to soldier” domains. Regardless of what CTI technology is used, the combatant must still make the final determination whether to engage the unknown entity, based on blue, red or neutral status. Once determined, the combatant must incorporate the ROE criteria and restrictions into his “shoot/don’t shoot” decision. Positive visual identification (PID) of the entity to determine if it is a legitimate military target must also be ascertained. There does not exist a technology that identifies friend or foe (IFF). CTI technologies only identify friend or unknown (IFU). A CTI technology should not be used as the sole criteria for engagement due to its mechanical/electronic nature or due to enemy action (electronic countermeasures [ECM]) that might render the CTI technology inoperative. In addition, partial fielding (either through design or system failure) of CTI technology has been proven to increase fratricide, not decrease it, as crews rely on the technology as the sole criteria to engage or not engage an unknown entity.
A Comprehensive Targeting Process Within the Doctrine/TTP/ROE (“Shoot / Don’t Shoot”) link of CID is the proposed targeting process known as Detect, Identify, Decide, Engage, and Assess (DIDEA). A review of current doctrine indicates there are several engagement processes associated with targeting. Department of Defense Joint Publication 3-60 identifies a six step targeting process: “Detect, Locate, Identify, Decide, Strike, and Assess.” US Army FM 3-09.12 describes a generic four-step targeting process: “Detect, Decide, Deliver, and Assess.” A multi-service TTP for time sensitive targeting called Find, Fix, Track, Target, Engage, Assess was developed to support the prosecution of targets in Operation Iraqi Freedom. As was discovered in the 2004 Army-Marine Corps Board Ground to Ground (AMCB G-G) study, the problem with each of these processes is that CID and ROE application are implied tasks embedded within one of the performance steps. The “shoot/don’t shoot” decision incorporating ROE is not formally taught in professional military education courses—leading to another break in the “links” of the CID chain. As an overarching target engagement process, DIDEA would provide an iterative, standardized and systematic approach supporting the application of specific CID and ROE performance steps for lethal targeting across the user spectrum (from individual infantryman through indirect fire controllers and beyond). DIDEA is generic enough to be used as a systematic process for C2 node targeting planning as well as decision-making. Such a process incorporated into doctrine would serve as a baseline for professional military education. The individual actions of the DIDEA process are summarized below.
Detect – the acquisition and location of an object in the battlespace. This first step in the Target Engagement Process can entail the use of visual, RADAR, electronic signals measurement, or other means for detecting and locating objects in the battlespace. Identify – a systematic process supporting the characterization of detected objects as friend, enemy, or neutral. This is the primary step where specified CID tasks are accomplished. It commences after an object is detected and located and provides a systematic process whereby the attributes of a detected object are systematically processed to support a friend, enemy, or neutral determination. Decide – determination of appropriate application of military options and weapons resources on identified objects. This is the most generic step within the process and is the primary step where specified ROE application takes place. Specific sub-steps within the Decide phase will vary depending on the weapon system/platform and mission application. (Bursting radius of indirect fire/CAS delivered munitions as well as ground platform surface danger areas must be taken into account in this step due to proximity of friendly or neutral entities). In some cases the decision may be made to employ military options other than weapons systems (i.e. the repositioning of ISR assets for further monitoring of identified objects, etc). In those cases where a weapons resource application is being considered, this phase would primarily address the following questions: 1) Can I engage (ROE application)? 2) If multiple targets, what to engage first (Severity of threat, commander’s intent/high pay-off targets, high value targets.)? 3) What is the best weapons system to engage with (Lethal/non-lethal, munitions effect, co-lateral damage assessment)? Engage – specific application of military options/weapons resources. In this step the mechanical process of carrying out the decision made in the previous step takes place. Assess – did the applied weapons resources bring about the desired effect. In this step we assess the effects of the engagement phase (battle damage assessment) against desired outcomes. If the desired outcome was not achieved, a decision to re-engage the target could be made.
DIDEA would serve as a Target Engagement Process requirement and support the insertion of specified CID and ROE tasks into service training standards and programs of instruction. Individual platforms and mission applications would have specific sub-sets within the DIDEA process that would account for the specific processes and mission applications of that platform.vi]
A Holistic CID Solution Progress has been made since the Tillman incident. Per the recommendation of the AMCB G-G CID Study, the Training, Doctrine and Combat Development Division at Fort Knox, Kentucky, assisted by the TRADOC Capability Manager Platform Battle Command/Combat Identification (TCM PBC / CID) and the TRADOC Centers, selected a vendor in March 2006 to address issues associated with the incorporation of CID into Army doctrine. Comprehensive CID doctrine will be developed for inclusion into US Army FM 3.90, Tactics (publication date: 4 July 2001) that explains how to increase combat effectiveness in relation to combat identification requirements, including but not limited to SA, TI, TTP and ROE. The CID input will address the Ground to Ground (“platform to platform,” “platform to soldier,” “soldier to soldier,” “soldier to platform”), Air to Ground (rotary-wing aircraft-platform to soldier and UAV-platform to soldier), and Ground to Air mission areas.
Gunnery doctrine will be updated to incorporate Combat Identification requirements, to include but not limited to, insertion of friendly, allied/coalition and neutral targets, and refinement of direct fire target engagement processes. Existing gunnery manuals for Armor/Cavalry, Infantry, Artillery, Air Defense, and Aviation will be reviewed to identify deficiencies in addressing CID-related tasks. This doctrine shall be for the entire Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT), including Armor, Infantry, mortar gunnery, Engineers, and CASCOM and should be used as a template for the Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) and Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) manuals. The doctrinal effort will take approximately 12 months to complete following initiation in March 2006. This effort will strengthen the Doctrine/TTP/ROE (“Engage or Do Not Engage”) “link” of the SA + TI chain.
Improvements in the current family of systems (FBCB2/JBC-P, Optics, 2/3 GENFLIR, JCIMS) enabling the “sensor-to-shooter kill-chain” to better see the targeted entity can be enhanced through the acquisition of a CTI that services all of the Ground to Ground domains and one that addresses the Air to Ground Mission Area, such as RBCI. Future CTI systems that enter into an acquisition strategy should service as many domains as possible to fully address our CID gaps.
Fratricide incidents are still occurring during stability operations in Iraq and are being committed by platforms other than armored. A system like BTID would have no positive impact on these incidents. Acquisition of a CTI technology that services all domains will strengthen the family of systems (“See the entity”) link in the CID equation. Until that occurs and the doctrinal/facility gap mitigation measures are in place (identified and funded by the AMCB G-G study), fratricides in full spectrum operations will likely continue to occur.
The fog of war and the human factor makes total elimination of fratricide impossible. Marksmanship and “muscle memory” (the ability to conduct crew drills/battle drills under stressful conditions, i.e. fire commands, fire control systems switch manipulation) training remains a “must” in order to maintain lethal crews and soldiers, and is necessary to simultaneously protect the force from fratricide. The contemporary operating environment drives the need for a target discrimination skill-set for all soldiers, trained within the context of the DIDEA shoot / don’t shoot targeting process. This standard of training grounded in solid doctrinal principles will hone the warfighter’s judgment at the point of engagement. Family of system and doctrinal improvements coupled with improved training devices (Recognition of Combat Vehicles (ROC-V), simulations, and realistic ranges with blue, red and neutral targetry incorporating shoot/don’t shoot decision making) will enable the soldier to make better decisions on whether or not to engage an unknown entity. The combatant must be able to ask themselves the question if unsure whether to shoot or not: (1) Am I or my friends in mortal danger? (2) What is the worse thing that can happen if I pull the trigger? (3) Am I positive that my target is hostile?
There is no “silver bullet” solution to end all fratricide incidents. The emphasis should be placed upon improving density of SA and TI systems in the Army inventory, preparing the combatant for full spectrum operations and acquiring a CTI technology to service all domains in the Ground to Ground mission area. This can only be accomplished by looking at CID through a holistic lens and by strengthening every link of the CID (SA+TI [Family of Systems + Training + Doctrine/TTP/ROE]) chain. It is imperative that we do everything possible to prevent unfortunate incidents like the Tillman fratricide from occurring in the future.
ANTON
Combat Identification (CID) is the process of attaining an accurate characterization of detected objects (friendly, enemy or neutral) throughout the Joint battlespace to the extent that with high confidence, timely application of military options and weapons resources can occur. Combat Identification is achieved through proficient application of a family of situational awareness and target identification capabilities, and adherence to doctrine, unit tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP), and approved rules of engagement (ROE) that directly support a combatant’s shoot/don’t shoot decision for detected objects in their battlespace. The purpose of CID is to improve unit combat effectiveness while at the same time preventing fratricide and minimizing collateral damage. CID is the process that human shooters or sensors go through to identify entities on the battlefield prior to making shoot/don’t shoot decisions. To perform CID, the warfighter uses all available means at his disposal to sort the entities on the battlefield prior to applying combat power or fires effects. The whole point is to enable the warfighter to maximize the effects of lethal fires against the enemy, while at the same time reducing or eliminating the effects of fires on friendly or neutral personnel, equipment or facilities. While CID is a complex series of linked systems, procedures and doctrine—when it is effective, it is simple and transparent. When it is ineffective, its results can be tragic and disastrous. A recent example of the “links” in the CID chain (Family of Systems [“See” the entity] + Training [“Identify” the entity] + Doctrine/TTP/ROE [“Engage” the entity]) being broken in the Global War on Terrorism is the highly publicized Pat Tillman incident.
Fratricide in Afghanistan
While on patrol in a Taliban-infested sector of Afghanistan’s Patktia province, an element of the 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, became bogged down because of a broken HMMWV. The segment of the platoon with Corporal Pat Tillman, Serial 1, passed through a canyon and was near its north rim. The other segment, Serial 2, changed route plans because of poor road conditions that hindered the recovery of a broken HMMWV being towed by a locally acquired vehicle. Serial 2 entered the same canyon from the south. Serial 2 did not have the ability to communicate their situation and change of route to Serial 1 due to the rugged terrain. Upon entering the canyon, Serial 2 came under mortar and small arms fire from Afghan Taliban fighters. Rangers in Serial 1 heard the initial explosion that preceded the attack. CPL Tillman and two other fire team leaders were ordered to head toward the attackers. The canyon’s walls prevented them from radioing their positions to their colleagues, just as Serial 2 had not radioed its change in plans. CPL Tillman’s group moved toward the north-south ridge to face the canyon. The light was dimming. “It was like twilight,” one Ranger in the fight recalled. “You couldn’t see colors, but you could see silhouettes.” Another Ranger felt the light was “still pretty good.” A sergeant with Tillman on the ridge recalled he “could actually see the enemy from the high northern ridge line. I could see their muzzle flashes.” The presumed Taliban guerrillas were about half a mile away. Tillman took another Ranger and an Afghan ally down the slope “into a position where he could engage the enemy,” the sergeant recalled. A Ranger nearby watched Tillman take cover. “I remember not liking his position; I had just seen a red tracer come up over us…which immediately struck me as being an M240 tracer…at that time the issue of friendly fire began turning over in my mind.” As Serial 2 pulled alongside the ridge, the gunners poured an undisciplined barrage of hundreds of rounds into the area Tillman and the other members of Serial 1 had taken position. The first to die was the Afghan, whom the Rangers in Serial 2 mistook for a Taliban fighter. Under fire, Tillman and almost a dozen others on the ridge “shouted, they waved their arms, and they screamed some more.” Tillman then used a smoke grenade to mark their position and firing ceased for a few moments. The Rangers in Serial 1 thought the engagement was over and got up from their position. The HMMWV then moved to a position of advantage and resumed firing, killing Tillman in the second engagement. To use this tragic example to better explain CID, you must first understand its basic formula: Situational Awareness (SA) + Target Identification (TI) = Combat Identification (CID.)
Combat Identification: The process of attaining an accurate characterization of detected objects (friendly, enemy, neutral) in the Joint battlespace to the extent that with high confidence, timely application of military options and weapons resources can occur (CID MA ICD). Combat ID is achieved through proficient application of a family of situational awareness and target identification capabilities, and adherence to doctrine, unit TTP, and approved ROE that directly supports a combatant’s ”shoot/don’t shoot” decision for detected objects in his/her battlespace.
Combat Effectiveness: (as related to Combat ID) the ability of a friendly unit to rapidly and accurately sort and characterize detected objects within the battlespace in order to allow for the timely application of combat power and fires effects against an enemy force or target (to destroy, neutralize, suppress or disrupt), with the least risk of death, injury or damage to friendly and neutral forces, entities, facilities and equipment ((prevention of fratricide and collateral damage) definition by the TCM PBC/CID).
___________________________________________________________________
When CPL Tillman’s unit lost SA of where its subordinate elements were in relation to each other, the situation deteriorated: two friendly forces converged on one another without communications. Several systems could have prevented this loss of SA in Tillman’s Ranger element. A FBCB2 / Blue Force Tracker (GPS-fed, vehicle-mounted or hand held C2/SA system) capability would have given all elements involved a visual depiction of where mounted and dismounted friendly forces were located—assuming, of course, that all vehicles and dismounted elements involved were so equipped. Knowing where blue entities were in the battlespace in combination with the proper mix of target identification systems would of enabled vehicle’s commander to properly guide their element’s crew-served weapons gunners onto enemy targets—as well as to prevent them from engaging friendly forces.
Target Identification (TI): TI is the process of determining the affiliation (blue, red, neutral) of detected objects at the point of engagement in one’s immediate battlespace. This is normally conducted within line of sight visual range and is for the purpose of applying combat power or fires effects against enemy entities or targets, while preventing fratricide and minimizing collateral damage. There are two categories of TI – cooperative target identification (CTI) and non-cooperative target identification (NCTI). CTI includes any method or materiel solution that allows a human shooter/sensor to “interrogate or question” a potential target, and allows the same potential target to “respond or answer” the interrogator in a timely manner. Air to Air and Ground to Air systems use of IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) Mode 4, and Ground to Ground systems, in the near future, may use Battlefield Target Identification Device (BTID) and Radio Based Combat Identification (RBCI) CTI systems. Identify Friend or Foe (IFF) is a misnomer as none of the CTI technologies identify Foe, they only Identify Friend or Unknown (IFU) entities. NCTI involves methods or systems that exploit the physical characteristics of entities in the battlespace to help identify and determine affiliation, and does not require a cooperative response or answer from the target. NCTI systems include optics (forward-looking infrared [FLIR], NVGs and binoculars), vehicle and personnel markings (Joint Combat Identification Marking Systems [JCIMS], which include Combat ID Panels [CIPs], Thermal ID Panels [TIPs], Phoenix Beacons [infrared lights lights] and Dismounted Combat Identification Marking System [DCIMS- (TIP panel that is form fitted to a Kevlar helmet, giving a reverse polarity image through a FLIR device), and Automated Target Recognition (ATR) devices. JCIMS marking systems are used in conjunction with FLIR optics and Night Vision Goggles and assist in friendly identification at the point of engagement.
In this example, Serial 2 (or the Platoon for that matter) did not have adequate optics. Thermal sights for HMMWV-mounted crew served weapons (AN/PAS-13s or Enhanced Night Vision Goggles (ENVG), for example) combined with reverse-polarity markings and/or thermal ballistic helmet covers on all soldiers would have enabled turret gunners to identify the dismounted Rangers in Serial 1 as friendly entities. Technology combined with a rehearsed TTP to avoid fratricide and adherence to ROE could have prevented this occurrence. Each “link” of the CID chain was broken. Tillman’s group would have benefited from other NCTI devices such as infrared (IR) beacons for limited visibility operations (seen through AN/PVS-7B/D or PVS-14 night vision goggles that every soldier currently is issued) or a day-visible strobe light. A CTI technology that services Ground to Ground domains (“platform to platform,” “platform to soldier,” “soldier to soldier,” “soldier to platform”) would have been an additional tool at the point of engagement that would have enabled both serials to identify unknowns as friends. Unfortunately, the direct fire CTI technology [Battlefield Target Identification Device BTID)] currently being recommended for an acquisition strategy for the US Army and USMC services only one domain—“platform to platform”—and interrogates only targets from M1, M2/M3, and Stryker vehicles.
In the Tillman example, even if the HMMWVs are replaced by armored vehicles equipped with BTID, the fratricide still could have still occurred—since BTID does not work within the “platform to soldier” domain. This weakness in the CID “link” does not enable the firer to gain positive identification (PID) of the unknown dismounted entity. In the example, Serial 2 in turn broke both the second (“Identify”) and third links (“Shoot/Don’t Shoot”): ROE was not satisfied by the gunners manning the crew served weapons on the HMMWVs; and Positive Identification (PID) was not gained by the firing element. In addition, a TTP (i.e. smoke grenade signal), was not established or trained prior to the engagement (or not comprehended during the engagement) as a signal to cease fire in case of friendly fire situations. The Serial 2 firing platform could have used additional procedures to prevent the fratricide: transmitting the location of the unknown entity to another element (e.g. higher headquarters) to gain PID; by maneuvering to a position of advantage until PID could be acquired; or by using the proposed DIDEA (Detect, Identify, Decide, Engage, and Assess) Target Engagement Process (discussed later in this article).
In this highly publicized incident, very well trained Rangers were placed in a situation where they did not have the proper CID family of capabilities and in the heat of failed to correctly implement their training and ROE procedures. The end result was a costly decision that led to a fatal fratricide incident.
Better CID Capabilities The ability of a CTI technology to service multiple domains has gained importance since Operation Desert Storm (ODS). Fratricide studies have illustrated a 25% increase in “platform to soldier” incidents and an increase in “soldier to soldier” incidents by 10% during recent Major Combat Operations in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF.) The two CTI technologies recently approved for acquisition strategy do not address or fill this CID gap. BTID services only the “platform to platform” domain (M1, M2/M3, Stryker, and LRAS3) where as Radio Based Combat Identification (RBCI) addresses the Ground to Ground and Air to Ground domains from an indirect and Close Air Support perspective. None of these technologies directly address the “platform to soldier” and “soldier to soldier” domains. Regardless of what CTI technology is used, the combatant must still make the final determination whether to engage the unknown entity, based on blue, red or neutral status. Once determined, the combatant must incorporate the ROE criteria and restrictions into his “shoot/don’t shoot” decision. Positive visual identification (PID) of the entity to determine if it is a legitimate military target must also be ascertained. There does not exist a technology that identifies friend or foe (IFF). CTI technologies only identify friend or unknown (IFU). A CTI technology should not be used as the sole criteria for engagement due to its mechanical/electronic nature or due to enemy action (electronic countermeasures [ECM]) that might render the CTI technology inoperative. In addition, partial fielding (either through design or system failure) of CTI technology has been proven to increase fratricide, not decrease it, as crews rely on the technology as the sole criteria to engage or not engage an unknown entity.
A Comprehensive Targeting Process Within the Doctrine/TTP/ROE (“Shoot / Don’t Shoot”) link of CID is the proposed targeting process known as Detect, Identify, Decide, Engage, and Assess (DIDEA). A review of current doctrine indicates there are several engagement processes associated with targeting. Department of Defense Joint Publication 3-60 identifies a six step targeting process: “Detect, Locate, Identify, Decide, Strike, and Assess.” US Army FM 3-09.12 describes a generic four-step targeting process: “Detect, Decide, Deliver, and Assess.” A multi-service TTP for time sensitive targeting called Find, Fix, Track, Target, Engage, Assess was developed to support the prosecution of targets in Operation Iraqi Freedom. As was discovered in the 2004 Army-Marine Corps Board Ground to Ground (AMCB G-G) study, the problem with each of these processes is that CID and ROE application are implied tasks embedded within one of the performance steps. The “shoot/don’t shoot” decision incorporating ROE is not formally taught in professional military education courses—leading to another break in the “links” of the CID chain. As an overarching target engagement process, DIDEA would provide an iterative, standardized and systematic approach supporting the application of specific CID and ROE performance steps for lethal targeting across the user spectrum (from individual infantryman through indirect fire controllers and beyond). DIDEA is generic enough to be used as a systematic process for C2 node targeting planning as well as decision-making. Such a process incorporated into doctrine would serve as a baseline for professional military education. The individual actions of the DIDEA process are summarized below.
Detect – the acquisition and location of an object in the battlespace. This first step in the Target Engagement Process can entail the use of visual, RADAR, electronic signals measurement, or other means for detecting and locating objects in the battlespace. Identify – a systematic process supporting the characterization of detected objects as friend, enemy, or neutral. This is the primary step where specified CID tasks are accomplished. It commences after an object is detected and located and provides a systematic process whereby the attributes of a detected object are systematically processed to support a friend, enemy, or neutral determination. Decide – determination of appropriate application of military options and weapons resources on identified objects. This is the most generic step within the process and is the primary step where specified ROE application takes place. Specific sub-steps within the Decide phase will vary depending on the weapon system/platform and mission application. (Bursting radius of indirect fire/CAS delivered munitions as well as ground platform surface danger areas must be taken into account in this step due to proximity of friendly or neutral entities). In some cases the decision may be made to employ military options other than weapons systems (i.e. the repositioning of ISR assets for further monitoring of identified objects, etc). In those cases where a weapons resource application is being considered, this phase would primarily address the following questions: 1) Can I engage (ROE application)? 2) If multiple targets, what to engage first (Severity of threat, commander’s intent/high pay-off targets, high value targets.)? 3) What is the best weapons system to engage with (Lethal/non-lethal, munitions effect, co-lateral damage assessment)? Engage – specific application of military options/weapons resources. In this step the mechanical process of carrying out the decision made in the previous step takes place. Assess – did the applied weapons resources bring about the desired effect. In this step we assess the effects of the engagement phase (battle damage assessment) against desired outcomes. If the desired outcome was not achieved, a decision to re-engage the target could be made.
DIDEA would serve as a Target Engagement Process requirement and support the insertion of specified CID and ROE tasks into service training standards and programs of instruction. Individual platforms and mission applications would have specific sub-sets within the DIDEA process that would account for the specific processes and mission applications of that platform.vi]
A Holistic CID Solution Progress has been made since the Tillman incident. Per the recommendation of the AMCB G-G CID Study, the Training, Doctrine and Combat Development Division at Fort Knox, Kentucky, assisted by the TRADOC Capability Manager Platform Battle Command/Combat Identification (TCM PBC / CID) and the TRADOC Centers, selected a vendor in March 2006 to address issues associated with the incorporation of CID into Army doctrine. Comprehensive CID doctrine will be developed for inclusion into US Army FM 3.90, Tactics (publication date: 4 July 2001) that explains how to increase combat effectiveness in relation to combat identification requirements, including but not limited to SA, TI, TTP and ROE. The CID input will address the Ground to Ground (“platform to platform,” “platform to soldier,” “soldier to soldier,” “soldier to platform”), Air to Ground (rotary-wing aircraft-platform to soldier and UAV-platform to soldier), and Ground to Air mission areas.
Gunnery doctrine will be updated to incorporate Combat Identification requirements, to include but not limited to, insertion of friendly, allied/coalition and neutral targets, and refinement of direct fire target engagement processes. Existing gunnery manuals for Armor/Cavalry, Infantry, Artillery, Air Defense, and Aviation will be reviewed to identify deficiencies in addressing CID-related tasks. This doctrine shall be for the entire Heavy Brigade Combat Team (HBCT), including Armor, Infantry, mortar gunnery, Engineers, and CASCOM and should be used as a template for the Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) and Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) manuals. The doctrinal effort will take approximately 12 months to complete following initiation in March 2006. This effort will strengthen the Doctrine/TTP/ROE (“Engage or Do Not Engage”) “link” of the SA + TI chain.
Improvements in the current family of systems (FBCB2/JBC-P, Optics, 2/3 GENFLIR, JCIMS) enabling the “sensor-to-shooter kill-chain” to better see the targeted entity can be enhanced through the acquisition of a CTI that services all of the Ground to Ground domains and one that addresses the Air to Ground Mission Area, such as RBCI. Future CTI systems that enter into an acquisition strategy should service as many domains as possible to fully address our CID gaps.
Fratricide incidents are still occurring during stability operations in Iraq and are being committed by platforms other than armored. A system like BTID would have no positive impact on these incidents. Acquisition of a CTI technology that services all domains will strengthen the family of systems (“See the entity”) link in the CID equation. Until that occurs and the doctrinal/facility gap mitigation measures are in place (identified and funded by the AMCB G-G study), fratricides in full spectrum operations will likely continue to occur.
The fog of war and the human factor makes total elimination of fratricide impossible. Marksmanship and “muscle memory” (the ability to conduct crew drills/battle drills under stressful conditions, i.e. fire commands, fire control systems switch manipulation) training remains a “must” in order to maintain lethal crews and soldiers, and is necessary to simultaneously protect the force from fratricide. The contemporary operating environment drives the need for a target discrimination skill-set for all soldiers, trained within the context of the DIDEA shoot / don’t shoot targeting process. This standard of training grounded in solid doctrinal principles will hone the warfighter’s judgment at the point of engagement. Family of system and doctrinal improvements coupled with improved training devices (Recognition of Combat Vehicles (ROC-V), simulations, and realistic ranges with blue, red and neutral targetry incorporating shoot/don’t shoot decision making) will enable the soldier to make better decisions on whether or not to engage an unknown entity. The combatant must be able to ask themselves the question if unsure whether to shoot or not: (1) Am I or my friends in mortal danger? (2) What is the worse thing that can happen if I pull the trigger? (3) Am I positive that my target is hostile?
There is no “silver bullet” solution to end all fratricide incidents. The emphasis should be placed upon improving density of SA and TI systems in the Army inventory, preparing the combatant for full spectrum operations and acquiring a CTI technology to service all domains in the Ground to Ground mission area. This can only be accomplished by looking at CID through a holistic lens and by strengthening every link of the CID (SA+TI [Family of Systems + Training + Doctrine/TTP/ROE]) chain. It is imperative that we do everything possible to prevent unfortunate incidents like the Tillman fratricide from occurring in the future.
ANTON
May
30
Save Flora And Fauna With Wildlife Posters
Filed Under Shopping | Comments Off
Patrick Arden asked:
The almighty has given us the beautiful nature that consists of spell bounding flora and fauna. The beauty of nature captures the heart of each and every individual living on the planet. Every day, we come across different aspects of nature. Early morning, you can see people watering their gardens and admiring beautiful flowers on the tree. The beauty of nature captivates our heart in all walks of life.
Some people are very much fond of wildlife diversities. They visit the famous wildlife sanctuaries to get a close glimpse of the amazing wildlife creatures. Some people purchase wildlife posters to express their love for the beautiful creatures of god. However, these-days people kill the biodiversities to meet their vested interests. Some people kill tigers and leopards to obtain their skin while some kill the rhinos to create ornaments from their horns.
Hence, we should take some steps to prevent the wildlife from such mean-minded individuals. We can do this, buy purchasing wildlife posters that spread the message of wildlife conservation. These posters have images of endangered species that are on the verge of extinction. The posters consist of a slogan or quote, that explains the pain the animals go through while fulfilling the everyday needs of a human being. You can also paste these posters in your school and college premises in order to discourage people from hearting or killing the innocent animals.
You can also gift these posters to young children\’s who have fascination for the wildlife. You can purchase these wildlife posters through various online portals that sell the posters at highly reasonable rates. You can also purchase bulk of wildlife posters and paste them in your locality to stop any ill happenings against stray and wild animals.
So, join hands and take a step forward to save the wildlife and respect this beautiful gift of nature.
EDDIE
The almighty has given us the beautiful nature that consists of spell bounding flora and fauna. The beauty of nature captures the heart of each and every individual living on the planet. Every day, we come across different aspects of nature. Early morning, you can see people watering their gardens and admiring beautiful flowers on the tree. The beauty of nature captivates our heart in all walks of life.
___________________________________________________________________
Some people are very much fond of wildlife diversities. They visit the famous wildlife sanctuaries to get a close glimpse of the amazing wildlife creatures. Some people purchase wildlife posters to express their love for the beautiful creatures of god. However, these-days people kill the biodiversities to meet their vested interests. Some people kill tigers and leopards to obtain their skin while some kill the rhinos to create ornaments from their horns.
Hence, we should take some steps to prevent the wildlife from such mean-minded individuals. We can do this, buy purchasing wildlife posters that spread the message of wildlife conservation. These posters have images of endangered species that are on the verge of extinction. The posters consist of a slogan or quote, that explains the pain the animals go through while fulfilling the everyday needs of a human being. You can also paste these posters in your school and college premises in order to discourage people from hearting or killing the innocent animals.
You can also gift these posters to young children\’s who have fascination for the wildlife. You can purchase these wildlife posters through various online portals that sell the posters at highly reasonable rates. You can also purchase bulk of wildlife posters and paste them in your locality to stop any ill happenings against stray and wild animals.
So, join hands and take a step forward to save the wildlife and respect this beautiful gift of nature.
EDDIE
May
29
Wildlife Posters: Welcome Tiger to Your House
Filed Under Gifts | Comments Off
Patrick Arden asked:
One valid reason for the popularity of these posters is that wildlife posters are quite elegant. These are very refined and tasteful in appearance and that is why you can decorate them in any place of your choice. Everyone adores wildlife so everyone like these posters also. Everyone finds glimpse of a wild animal quite exciting. A giant elephant, ferocious tiger, tall giraffe, fast leopard, sweet looking lion cub, or funny bear every wild animal is a beauty in itself. No one can make even a template of what nature has created. But these animals in their natural surroundings can be well photographed and be given a form of posters.
These posters reflect wildlife in its fullest beauty. The strength of animals, beauty of springs and colours of flowers can be felt easily by seeing wildlife posters. People are fascinated by these posters and they buy it from many places. Be it a gift shop or poster shop. This is also true that you can not get varieties of posters in general shops. If you need real varieties and if you want to shop with great comfort then choose online shops. Some poster websites have wide categories to suit the taste of buyers. On these poster websites you can watch, compare and choose to buy them on the most reasonable prices. No shopping platform can provide such comfort and value to your money.
Hence, visit poster websites and search for wildlife posters. Decorate them in your place and if you want gift them to your near and dear ones.
WARREN
___________________________________________________________________
One valid reason for the popularity of these posters is that wildlife posters are quite elegant. These are very refined and tasteful in appearance and that is why you can decorate them in any place of your choice. Everyone adores wildlife so everyone like these posters also. Everyone finds glimpse of a wild animal quite exciting. A giant elephant, ferocious tiger, tall giraffe, fast leopard, sweet looking lion cub, or funny bear every wild animal is a beauty in itself. No one can make even a template of what nature has created. But these animals in their natural surroundings can be well photographed and be given a form of posters.
These posters reflect wildlife in its fullest beauty. The strength of animals, beauty of springs and colours of flowers can be felt easily by seeing wildlife posters. People are fascinated by these posters and they buy it from many places. Be it a gift shop or poster shop. This is also true that you can not get varieties of posters in general shops. If you need real varieties and if you want to shop with great comfort then choose online shops. Some poster websites have wide categories to suit the taste of buyers. On these poster websites you can watch, compare and choose to buy them on the most reasonable prices. No shopping platform can provide such comfort and value to your money.
Hence, visit poster websites and search for wildlife posters. Decorate them in your place and if you want gift them to your near and dear ones.
WARREN
May
23
Rangers
Filed Under Music | 25 Comments
AFineFrenzy asked:
The debut video by A Fine Frenzy from the new album One Cell In The Sea. Directed by Caitlin Dahl.
BOYD
May
21
Texas Rangers Baseball Tickets Available
Filed Under Aerobics | Comments Off
Gen Wright asked:
Based in Arlington, Texas, United States - the Texas Rangers are a professional baseball team established in 1961. It started out in Washington D.C, and in 1972, they moved to Arlington and became the Rangers.
Accomplishments and important moments:
The Texas Rangers is one of the four teams to have never played in a World Series. Since its inception, the team has struggled to win games. Today, it still only has a lifetime average of less than .500, which means that the team loses more than it wins. For this reason, the Texas Rangers fan base is on a steady decline. The team is under intense pressure to perform.
Throughout the years, the team can only boast about the numerous achievements by various star players. In recent years, Alex Rodriguez has won numerous awards, including A.L. Home Run Champ, AL MVP, AL Gold Gloves, Hank Aaron Award and Silver Slugger Award.
Pitchers in the current roster:
-Scott Feldman
-Tommy Hunter
-Kameron Loe
-Doug Mathis
-Kevin Millwood
Texas Rangers recent news:
Recent news on Texas Rangers have centered on the team’s pitchers. Rangers owner Tom Hicks has an optimistic outlook on the team’s overall performance. He said that although the team has not enjoyed stunning success, it is a fact that progress is being made slowly but surely.
Texas Rangers has put up strong initiatives to strengthen its greatest shortcoming - pitching. For the past season, the team scored the lowest in pitching. And for the past 9 years, the team has continued to suffer from pitching woes.
In an effort to provide a long term solution, Tom Hicks has Ryan, the Hall of Famer hired as club president, to take charge of the organization’s overall pitching program. Hopefully, the program will show some positive results in the major league in time to come.
Already, Tom Hicks is already talking about the possibility of winning more, and expansion of the current fan base from the current 2 million fans to 3 or even 3.5 million.
For a change, things are looking good for the Texas Rangers.
WAYNE
Based in Arlington, Texas, United States - the Texas Rangers are a professional baseball team established in 1961. It started out in Washington D.C, and in 1972, they moved to Arlington and became the Rangers.
Accomplishments and important moments:
The Texas Rangers is one of the four teams to have never played in a World Series. Since its inception, the team has struggled to win games. Today, it still only has a lifetime average of less than .500, which means that the team loses more than it wins. For this reason, the Texas Rangers fan base is on a steady decline. The team is under intense pressure to perform.
Throughout the years, the team can only boast about the numerous achievements by various star players. In recent years, Alex Rodriguez has won numerous awards, including A.L. Home Run Champ, AL MVP, AL Gold Gloves, Hank Aaron Award and Silver Slugger Award.
Pitchers in the current roster:
-Scott Feldman
-Tommy Hunter
-Kameron Loe
-Doug Mathis
-Kevin Millwood
Texas Rangers recent news:
Recent news on Texas Rangers have centered on the team’s pitchers. Rangers owner Tom Hicks has an optimistic outlook on the team’s overall performance. He said that although the team has not enjoyed stunning success, it is a fact that progress is being made slowly but surely.
Texas Rangers has put up strong initiatives to strengthen its greatest shortcoming - pitching. For the past season, the team scored the lowest in pitching. And for the past 9 years, the team has continued to suffer from pitching woes.
In an effort to provide a long term solution, Tom Hicks has Ryan, the Hall of Famer hired as club president, to take charge of the organization’s overall pitching program. Hopefully, the program will show some positive results in the major league in time to come.
Already, Tom Hicks is already talking about the possibility of winning more, and expansion of the current fan base from the current 2 million fans to 3 or even 3.5 million.
For a change, things are looking good for the Texas Rangers.
WAYNE
May
21
angrytigerP asked:
MP3 Available! http://tigercomps.ucoz.com/load/ Go, go, Power Rangers.
VERNON
May
20
Wildlife Tour India: Come and Experience the Soul of India
Filed Under Vacation Rentals | Comments Off
rajendra sharma asked:
India, the land and her people, a mere mention of the word India takes one to heights of delight and compels people from other countries to pay a visit at least once. However, the fauna is something, which is unique to this land. The source of these exotic varieties is the jungles of India, which are scattered over the geographic landscape. Then there is a wide array of about 80 national parks and countless reserved forest areas. For the people from other countries, who want to savor the very best of the jungle life and yet can’t do without the luxuries, wildlife tour India is the answer. The package provides a unique, though refreshing experience for the people from other countries. Through this package, you can get the accommodation at the wildlife resorts which have been furnished with the modern gadgets.
India is a wildlife paradise for the nature seekers and can offer anybody a chance to take a peep at its fauna. For wildlife lovers, a number of wildlife tour India packages are there to be selected from. These wildlife tours take you to many wildlife parks and sanctuaries in India. Many wildlife safari options are available which include jeep safari in the Indian jungles and elephant safari. Tiger viewing on the back of an elephant is one of the favorite activities for the adventure seekers. During the wildlife tour India, you can experience the flavors of India while putting up at various accommodations in the resorts in the jungles. One of the famous places is the Corbett National Park, which is home to the Indian tiger. Others include Bandhavgarh National park, Kaziranga National Park, Gir wildlife sanctuary and others. For centuries, India has been famous for her flora too and the Indian jungles are a sight to see. It is a treat to see so much greenery which is missing in the concrete jungles of India.
Many wildlife resorts in India have been fitted with the modern gadgets. For the tourists, this type of experience proves to be very exciting as they can now savor the luxuries of life in the midst of a jungle. The resorts have been constructed right in the middle of the reserved sanctuaries, which at times, prove to be very distracting to the animals. Though you can watch them from your window, it amounts to disturbing their space which at times, proves to be fatal. A number of incidents in recent years prove that the conflict between the beast and the man is increasing. Yet everybody knows who is to be blamed for this sorry state of affairs. Provisions should be made to re-locate these luxurious resorts far from the jungle. Wildlife tour India will then serve its purpose if the people visit these resorts and leave the animals in peace.
Wildlife tour India includes much more. Some of the packages include the viewing of tribal dances and their culture. The tribes, which have been living since ages outside these forests possess a lot of local knowledge. This includes the knowledge about the unique medicinal value of the jungle plants. You can enrich yourself with their age-old wisdom in case you want to. One more thing here. Take a good pair of boots with yourself to withstand the rough terrain of the jungle and also the mosquito repellants. At night, these will protect you from the insect bites and the infection, which you might acquire form them.
DAVE
India, the land and her people, a mere mention of the word India takes one to heights of delight and compels people from other countries to pay a visit at least once. However, the fauna is something, which is unique to this land. The source of these exotic varieties is the jungles of India, which are scattered over the geographic landscape. Then there is a wide array of about 80 national parks and countless reserved forest areas. For the people from other countries, who want to savor the very best of the jungle life and yet can’t do without the luxuries, wildlife tour India is the answer. The package provides a unique, though refreshing experience for the people from other countries. Through this package, you can get the accommodation at the wildlife resorts which have been furnished with the modern gadgets.
India is a wildlife paradise for the nature seekers and can offer anybody a chance to take a peep at its fauna. For wildlife lovers, a number of wildlife tour India packages are there to be selected from. These wildlife tours take you to many wildlife parks and sanctuaries in India. Many wildlife safari options are available which include jeep safari in the Indian jungles and elephant safari. Tiger viewing on the back of an elephant is one of the favorite activities for the adventure seekers. During the wildlife tour India, you can experience the flavors of India while putting up at various accommodations in the resorts in the jungles. One of the famous places is the Corbett National Park, which is home to the Indian tiger. Others include Bandhavgarh National park, Kaziranga National Park, Gir wildlife sanctuary and others. For centuries, India has been famous for her flora too and the Indian jungles are a sight to see. It is a treat to see so much greenery which is missing in the concrete jungles of India.
Many wildlife resorts in India have been fitted with the modern gadgets. For the tourists, this type of experience proves to be very exciting as they can now savor the luxuries of life in the midst of a jungle. The resorts have been constructed right in the middle of the reserved sanctuaries, which at times, prove to be very distracting to the animals. Though you can watch them from your window, it amounts to disturbing their space which at times, proves to be fatal. A number of incidents in recent years prove that the conflict between the beast and the man is increasing. Yet everybody knows who is to be blamed for this sorry state of affairs. Provisions should be made to re-locate these luxurious resorts far from the jungle. Wildlife tour India will then serve its purpose if the people visit these resorts and leave the animals in peace.
Wildlife tour India includes much more. Some of the packages include the viewing of tribal dances and their culture. The tribes, which have been living since ages outside these forests possess a lot of local knowledge. This includes the knowledge about the unique medicinal value of the jungle plants. You can enrich yourself with their age-old wisdom in case you want to. One more thing here. Take a good pair of boots with yourself to withstand the rough terrain of the jungle and also the mosquito repellants. At night, these will protect you from the insect bites and the infection, which you might acquire form them.
DAVE
May
17
Oakland A’s vs. Texas Rangers
Filed Under Online Gambling | Comments Off
Steven Zoine asked:
Barry Zito from the A’s is looking now like in his best days back in 2002 when he won the Cy Young award. Zito allowed eight hits over seven scoreless innings and the A’s patiently battered Jamie Moyer in their third straight victory 7-2 over the Seattle Mariners last week.
“I just have a mentality where I’m going out there and not trying to be too fine, not thinking too much,” Zito said. “I’m just letting my stuff work for me. Just trust my stuff, trust myself.”
With five key players on the disabled list after a rash of injuries, the A’s are back above .500 at 20-19 and in a first-place tie with Texas in the AL West. Despite those injuries, they’re a team that has plenty of talent and will to get back to the winning side of the record. If they play good with all there key players injured imagine what they will play like once everybody is back and healthy.
Lineup
Mark Kotsay, CF. 2.Jason Kendall, C. 3.Eric Chavez, 3rd B. 4.Frank Thomas, DH. 5. Bobby Crosby, SS. 6.Nick Swisher, 1stB. 7. Jay Payton, LF. 8. Bobby Kielty, RF. 9.Marco Scutaro, 2nd B.
After an impressive game held on Tuesday against the Yankees in which the score was 14-13 in favor of the Yankees, the Rangers fell again on Tuesday 4-3. It wasn’t such an exciting game like the one on Tuesday but it still was good. It seems that the games between this two are becoming more and more interesting because both teams play really good against each other.
The Yankees were winning 4-1 in the in the seventh, but Gary Matthews Jr. hit a two-run homer in the eighth for Texas, cutting it to 4-3. Mariano Rivera worked a perfect ninth for his eighth save in nine chances.
“It’s tough to lose like that. I didn’t think they hit me very hard. They just found holes at opportune times,” Loe said. “I felt like I was making my pitches. I felt like I was in control. Maybe my pitch selection could have been better.”
In both games the Rangers were very close to get the victory but the powerful offense of the Yankees was better than theirs. Maybe they can change the story this week as they face the Oakland A’s, a team with a lot of injuries right now. That can give some advantage to the Rangers, so if you like sports betting this is a perfect opportunity to bet on a great game as I’m sure it will be between these two teams.
Lineup
Gary Matthews Jr., CF. 2.Michael Young, SS. 3.Mark Teixeira, 1st B. 4. Phil Nevin, DH. 5. Hank Blalock, 3rdB. 6. Kevin Mench, RF. 7.Brad Wilkerson, LF. 8. Mark DeRosa, 2nd B. 9. Gerald Laird, C.
HOWARD
Barry Zito from the A’s is looking now like in his best days back in 2002 when he won the Cy Young award. Zito allowed eight hits over seven scoreless innings and the A’s patiently battered Jamie Moyer in their third straight victory 7-2 over the Seattle Mariners last week.
“I just have a mentality where I’m going out there and not trying to be too fine, not thinking too much,” Zito said. “I’m just letting my stuff work for me. Just trust my stuff, trust myself.”
With five key players on the disabled list after a rash of injuries, the A’s are back above .500 at 20-19 and in a first-place tie with Texas in the AL West. Despite those injuries, they’re a team that has plenty of talent and will to get back to the winning side of the record. If they play good with all there key players injured imagine what they will play like once everybody is back and healthy.
Lineup
Mark Kotsay, CF. 2.Jason Kendall, C. 3.Eric Chavez, 3rd B. 4.Frank Thomas, DH. 5. Bobby Crosby, SS. 6.Nick Swisher, 1stB. 7. Jay Payton, LF. 8. Bobby Kielty, RF. 9.Marco Scutaro, 2nd B.
After an impressive game held on Tuesday against the Yankees in which the score was 14-13 in favor of the Yankees, the Rangers fell again on Tuesday 4-3. It wasn’t such an exciting game like the one on Tuesday but it still was good. It seems that the games between this two are becoming more and more interesting because both teams play really good against each other.
The Yankees were winning 4-1 in the in the seventh, but Gary Matthews Jr. hit a two-run homer in the eighth for Texas, cutting it to 4-3. Mariano Rivera worked a perfect ninth for his eighth save in nine chances.
“It’s tough to lose like that. I didn’t think they hit me very hard. They just found holes at opportune times,” Loe said. “I felt like I was making my pitches. I felt like I was in control. Maybe my pitch selection could have been better.”
In both games the Rangers were very close to get the victory but the powerful offense of the Yankees was better than theirs. Maybe they can change the story this week as they face the Oakland A’s, a team with a lot of injuries right now. That can give some advantage to the Rangers, so if you like sports betting this is a perfect opportunity to bet on a great game as I’m sure it will be between these two teams.
Lineup
Gary Matthews Jr., CF. 2.Michael Young, SS. 3.Mark Teixeira, 1st B. 4. Phil Nevin, DH. 5. Hank Blalock, 3rdB. 6. Kevin Mench, RF. 7.Brad Wilkerson, LF. 8. Mark DeRosa, 2nd B. 9. Gerald Laird, C.
HOWARD
May
17
Ford’s New Concept Vehicle for 2007
Filed Under Automotive | Comments Off
Jason Moore asked:
The Ford Motor Company, despite having had to go through financial trouble, is still trying to bring the auto world vehicles that may not be production vehicles but could still be one of the most amazing and even interesting ones there are. Just like any other auto maker, Ford also does create its own share of concept vehicles. And perhaps with just the right design, the company may have been able to create a concept vehicle that is a combination of Ford Ranger performance parts and car parts Ford Taurus.
For this year, the Ford Motor Company now comes with a new concept car which Ford followers, car aficionados, and simple consumers can gawk at, make a spectacle of, and eventually be a fan of. This new concept car that has joined the ranks of Ford concept cars like the Ford Aurora, Bronco Wildflower, Cougar, Econoline Apartment, Explorer Drifter, Fiera, FX-Atmos, Ghia, Indigo, Muroc, and Nucleon is actually named the 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept.
The 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept has been created with an interior made up of horse hide. It comes with a huge glass roof that would really get your attention. It has got fenders made using carbon fiber. The doors are even quite amazing. Imagine having a vehicle that are electrically operator and crisscross themselves just like scissors would do. Mustang may be the name attributed to this Ford concept car but it sure is not like an ordinary Mustang.
A combination of American power and Italian design and style. That is what the 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept car really is. After all, this one has got the design straight right out of the brilliant minds of people from Giugaro design works as well as Giogetto Giugaro and Fabrizio Giugaro themselves. According to Giugaro, they made sure that the body panels were as tight as possible so that the vehicle was given a new kind of look. However, despite such, the vehicle also had to go through a widening of the front and back.
Design was not the only thing this vehicle had to go through. The 2007 Mustang Giugiaro concept vehicle also comes with a new 4.6 liter V8 engine that has got an intercooled and twin-screw supercharger.
ELTON
The Ford Motor Company, despite having had to go through financial trouble, is still trying to bring the auto world vehicles that may not be production vehicles but could still be one of the most amazing and even interesting ones there are. Just like any other auto maker, Ford also does create its own share of concept vehicles. And perhaps with just the right design, the company may have been able to create a concept vehicle that is a combination of Ford Ranger performance parts and car parts Ford Taurus.
For this year, the Ford Motor Company now comes with a new concept car which Ford followers, car aficionados, and simple consumers can gawk at, make a spectacle of, and eventually be a fan of. This new concept car that has joined the ranks of Ford concept cars like the Ford Aurora, Bronco Wildflower, Cougar, Econoline Apartment, Explorer Drifter, Fiera, FX-Atmos, Ghia, Indigo, Muroc, and Nucleon is actually named the 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept.
The 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept has been created with an interior made up of horse hide. It comes with a huge glass roof that would really get your attention. It has got fenders made using carbon fiber. The doors are even quite amazing. Imagine having a vehicle that are electrically operator and crisscross themselves just like scissors would do. Mustang may be the name attributed to this Ford concept car but it sure is not like an ordinary Mustang.
A combination of American power and Italian design and style. That is what the 2007 Ford Mustang Giugiaro concept car really is. After all, this one has got the design straight right out of the brilliant minds of people from Giugaro design works as well as Giogetto Giugaro and Fabrizio Giugaro themselves. According to Giugaro, they made sure that the body panels were as tight as possible so that the vehicle was given a new kind of look. However, despite such, the vehicle also had to go through a widening of the front and back.
Design was not the only thing this vehicle had to go through. The 2007 Mustang Giugiaro concept vehicle also comes with a new 4.6 liter V8 engine that has got an intercooled and twin-screw supercharger.
ELTON
May
14
Man U v Queens Park Rangers (a.k.a QPR) 4-1 to the supahoops
Filed Under Sports | Comments Off
supahoopsa001 asked:
January 1, new years day, 1992 An underdog team of Queens Park Rangers ventured onto the city of Manchester to take on the Devils(I mean that term literally), and we, yes WE beat them 4-1. i was 1 in april of that year Enjoy! Say we are QPR! Say we are QPR!
THERON