Friday and throughout the weekend, our group continued to refine and develop more hypotheses for our problem. We reached out to a number of beneficiaries involved with EOD, route clearance, drone and radar technology development, and explosives detection.
We interviewed the following people below, helping us to flesh out our MVPs and find avenues of further research.
Beneficiary Interviews
| Name | Hypothesis | Experiments | Results | Actions |
| CPT Anne Blank Former Route Clearance PL | MVP 2.0 is superior to current methods (speed, detection area, cognitive overload) | Discussing the abilities and limitations of detectors that use GPR | MVP could work but should focus more on explosive detection rather than the detection of buried objects | Update MVP, look into further technology that is geared toward finding explosives rather than penetrating the ground |
| Mr. Kelly Foster C-IED instructor, 7th SFG | MVP 1.0 is superior to current methods (training, speed, cognitive overload) | Show picture, discussion of the possibilities in MVP | He said that the MVP is a great idea, may be loud, need to focus on the goals of the project-physical detection is still superior | Update MVP, find better technology for MVP |
| MAJ David Feltner | SOP discussion, MVP 1.0/2.0 is superior to current methods | Show picture, discussion | MVP is good idea, but it is limited by current technologies, what does the customer need? | Look into other MVP’s, update technology, focus on user needs |
| Dr. Derek Anderson | Information gathering; MVP is superior to current methods | Discussion of technology and MVP | Possibly combine GPR and EMI and thermal in MVP, switch modes | Look into combining various technologies into MVP |
| Mark Holden FLIR | Thermal and Spectral imaging can be used to detect and map out IEDs | Discussion of current technology developed by FLIR and MVPs | MVP 1 and 2 have great potential and FLIR imagers are currently able to detect minute changes in ground temps to detect change | Find how to integrate FLIR imagery with drones to ID and detect IED evidence |
| Name | Hypothesis | Experiments | Results | Actions |
| Mr. Charlie Richter (APOPO U.S. Director) | APOPO rats can be used mark IEDs as well as conventional landmines | Interview, discussion about how the rats are used and if they could be applied to IED detection | Both dogs and rats can be used for IED detection, but rats potentially have the upper hand due to cost, size, and better detection abilities | Better identify specific problems faced by EOD units, and interview beneficiaries with EOD experience to see if this solution set would benefit them |
| MSG Michael Brock | Rats could be used for more efficient route clearance and other EOD missions | Discussion of the pros and cons of animal use in explosive ordnance detection as well as a discussion of their history in the modern army | Dogs have already been used to some success, however they have many issues. Rats could feasibly be applied to both route clearance as well as when EOD teams are attached to maneuver units. | Interview more beneficiaries with EOD experience to see if MSG Brock’s comments are corroborated. Look into what would need to occur in order to implement them |
| Dr. Feodor Ivanov Dr. Traian Dogaru Radar Technology | Ground penetrating radar can accurately take readings from aerial drones or be miniaturized | Interview, discussion about radar tech and capabilities | Radar has the capability and GPRs operate at relatively low power levels, requiring less battery usage of the overall system | Reach out to other beneficiaries to see if this product, which is feasible, is practical for a platoon level unit |
Minimum Viable Products
| MINEHOUND | MVP 1.0 | MVP 2.0 | MVP 3.0 | MVP 4.0 | MVP 5.0 |
| Slow | Faster | Faster than minehound | -Speed unknown | -Faster | -Not faster |
| Heavy | Lighter: no physical contact with operator during use | Lighter: no physical contact with operator during use, possibly inflatable | -Lighter; little physical contact with operator | -Likely lighter than minehound, weight spread across formation | -Heavy, pounds added to operator |
| Training Intensive | Minimum training & skills required | Minimum training & skills required | -Minimum skills required | -Minimum skill requirement | -Minimum skill requirement |
| GPR | Multispectral bands, GPR, and Multiple wavelengths | GPR, metal detection | -Rat detection | -GPR, EMI, change detection/thermal | -EMI, thermal/change detection |
| Takes guns out of the fight | Keeps guns in the ground | Keeps guns in the ground | -Guns in the fight | -Guns in the fight | -Guns in the fight |
| Single scan type | Multiple scanning and sensing technologies | Multiple scanning and sensing technologies | -Single “scan” type | -Multiple scanning devices=redundancy | -Multiple scan types |
Deployment
When we began to consider deployment for our solutions, we looked at the DOTMLPF to provide a basis for implementation. So we considered doctrinal changes, organizational and training considerations, material acquisition, leadership changes that may be required, and potentially new or alternate personnel and facilities that would be needed.
5IVE 