Inquest on soldiers - concerns about 'flimsy' bomb detector (From Kidderminster Shuttle)

Inquest on soldiers - concerns about 'flimsy' bomb detector

9:42am Friday 5th March 2010

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)

SOLDIERS working with a Cookley SAS reservist who was killed in Afghanistan had serious concerns about the failure rate of the 'flimsy' Ebex bomb detector, an inquest heard.

Lance Corporal Richard Larkin, 39, was taking part in an operation east of Lashkar Gah when the Snatch Land Rover he was driving was hit by a mine.

The huge blast “devastated” the vehicle, killing L/Cpl Larkin, a nurse and father of three, of Castle Road, Cookley.

Also killed were the first female soldier to be killed in Afghanistan,Corporal Sarah Bryant, 26, of the Intelligence Corps and SAS reservists, Corporal Sean Reeve, 28 and Trooper Paul Stout, 31.

An inquest heard there were widespread concerns among troops about the Snatch Land Rovers - nicknamed 'mobile coffins' - and the lack of metal detecting devices to spot roadside bombs.

The inquest also heard frontline troops found the Ebex unreliable, prone to failure and had inadequate training in their use.

Soldier K was working as a top cover sentry on another vehicle in the convoy containing L/Cpl Larkin and his comrades on June 17 2008.

The former soldier, who was then serving as a Private in Afghanistan, said: ''About four months into the tour we were concerned with the lack of training on Ebex.

''We spoke to an explosives expert who was at the same camp as we were and he organised some training for us.

''We also arranged for some official training at Camp Bastion which we undertook about four months into the tour.

''We had to request training and it did not happen until April. It did not happen on our reception week.''

Soldier K also said that they received no training on how to detect the battery life of an Ebex metal detector and did not know how to monitor this.

On Tuesday, Soldier J had told the inquest that he had been refused training on the use of Ebex metal detectors while stationed at Camp Bastion in Helmand Province.

Major Harry Clark, of the 5th Royal Scots, was the officer commanding the Lashkar Gah Operations Company, which was working alongside the specialist unit to patrol the roads out of Lashkar Gah.

He told the inquest that he had concerns about the lack of Ebex metal detecting devices allocated to the group.

He said: ''I was not comfortable that we had the ideal number of Ebex metal detectors.

''In my view, two Ebex per manoeuvre group was ideal. Sometimes we had to resort to one Ebex per group and even then the equipment could fail.

''I do not believe that we had enough Ebex to commit Operation Barma as it was set out on the page.

''I had significant equipment failure with breakages across the stock. Ebex themselves are liable to break down. The equipment is not robust enough to manage being hauled in and out of vehicles.

''The equipment is difficult to put together and is cumbersome and difficult to put together. As it became prone to failure it did not encourage people to use them.''

Major Clark told the inquest that his operating group had both Snatch and Wimick vehicles but that Wimicks were more suited to the rural terrain around Lashkar Gah.

He said: ''The Wimick has increased mobility, firepower and the communications system was a much better fit for rural areas because it has a long-range radio system.''

Soldier I, a Corporal who had been working as a top cover sentry and later a driver for another vehicle in the same convoy containing L/Cpl Larkin, also criticised the use of Snatch vehicles during the operation.

He said: ''The Snatch is not a great vehicle. It is not mobile or agile enough. It is too heavy and for its size it is top heavy as well.

''As a top cover it is an unstable vehicle and an unstable platform. I had concerns and these were raised up the chain of command within the multiple.''

Asked if the Snatch had difficulties moving in and out of the irrigation ditch where the explosion took place, Soldier I said: ''I knew that the engine was being driven quite heavily. I could see the exhaust fumes.''

Asked if he would have taken the same route if he had been in the lead vehicle, in which L/Cpl Larkin and his comrades were killed, Soldier I said: ''I believe I would have taken the same route if I had been in the lead vehicle.

''I would not have been able to go either side of the path because the ground was too soft.

''If I had been in a Wimick or other vehicle then I could have taken another path because it is a lighter vehicle. I would have gone around the area.''

The Ebex has since been replaced by more substantial metal detecting devices and is no longer in operation in Afghanistan.

The Snatch is now being replaced by the Snatch Vixen which possesses more power and provides better protection for soldiers.

But this work is yet to be completed and older Snatch models are still in service in Afghanistan.

The inquest in Trowbridge, Wilts, continues.

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)