Soldier Armed Concertainers by Scott R

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Soldier Armed Concertainers By Scott R. Gourley percentage of its “as-constructed” vol- by 5 feet by 95 feet (Mil 10)—options. ume before expansion and is ready for With a 3-inch mesh size on all struc- idely used in a range of force- rapid filling at its final destination. tures, the galvanized steel-wire thick- Wprotection measures from Bosnia Hesco Bastion in Leeds, England, nesses are 4 millimeter (8 Gauge) on the to Afghanistan, Concertainer defense possesses an internationally recognized smaller products and 5 millimeter (6 walls, also known as Concertainers, design patent for Concertainers. Thom- Gauge) on the large Mil 7 and Mil 10 have helped to revolutionize the way as Redfern, marketing representative designs. The wall cells are connected at U.S. forces view earth-filled protective for Hesco, reiterated several of the ben- the corners with spiral wire hinges that measures. efits in a more technical description of allow rapid expansion from the com- As described by the Defense Logis- the product line. pact, folded-storage configuration. tics Agency (DLA), “The Concertainer “HESCO Bastion Concertainer is a All options feature the 2 millimeter defense wall is a rapidly built solid unique, patented multicellular defense heavy-duty nonwoven polypropylene blast-barrier wall built from heavy- wall system,” he said. “It is made from geotextile filler in either beige or duty galvanized wire mesh lined with prefabricated Galfan-coated mild steel- green that allows them to be filled a geotextile fabric designed as a substi- wire mesh and vertical coil joints that with a range of local earth materials. tute for sandbags. The wall can be filled are lined with a nonwoven material The material selection—optimized for with any available material such as called polypropylene geotextile. Once tactical considerations, availability, sand, mud, soil [or] rock using minimal erected, Concertainer units can be transport requirements and intended manpower and a mechanical digger. filled using almost any locally avail- structure duration—can include any- The wall has been tested using small- able material. By enhancing the mass thing from concrete, crushed rock and arms fire, machine guns, mortars and and characteristics of the fill material, various soil types to field-expedient 30 mm cannon. It will also protect Concertainer units are able to with- materials such as snow. against indirect artillery fire up to stand attack from a variety of weapons According to Redfern, the Concer- 155 mm caliber. Uses include aircraft and significantly reduce harmful frag- tainer system “was conceived in 1989 and headquarters location revetments, mentation.” initially to mitigate coastal erosion bunkers, observation posts, border The Concertainer product line in- and then was introduced into military crossings and fuel installations.” cludes multiple options, designated applications by the U.K. Ministry of In addition to its protective benefits, Mil 1 through Mil 10, with sizes rang- Defence. Since then, products have the wall design provides significant lo- ing from smaller—2 feet by 2 feet by 4 been developed and comprehensively gistics advantages through a collapsible feet (Mil 2)—to large—7 feet, 3 inches tested.” design that is transported as a small by 7 feet by 90 feet (Mil 7) and 7 feet Noting that “Concertainer units have been described as the most signif- icant development in field fortification since World War II,” he said that “since the Concertainer’s first use by the mili- tary in 1991, more than 15 of the world’s leading authorities in blast mitigation and effects have performed tests using a number of different weapon systems. Concertainer units have also been developed to meet spe- Albright cific requirements, such as bunkers with overhead protection and flood de- fenses in the mainland United States.” In the case of specialized needs, for example, the Concertainer structures have evolved from field-expedient tac- tical applications to specialized struc- Hesco Bastion/SGT Jimmy Concertainers are solid blast-barrier defense walls that can be filled with ture designs that have been “kitted” virtually any available material (including snow), can be erected rapidly, are by the DLA as U.S. Army Engineer Re- logistically efficient and are a great improvement over sandbag defenses. search and Development Center “ap- 76 ARMY I June 2010 proved fighting positions”—including The protective bar- the single-bay aboveground fighting riers are shipped flat then quickly position kit, two-bay aboveground opened and fighting position kit and aboveground rapidly filled. Origi- small observation-post kit—that come nally designed for complete with a set number of Mil 2- flood and erosion size Concertainers and plank struc- control, Concer- tural roof and roof membrane. tainers have pro- vided military force protection since esco has also developed some the 1991 Persian Hof its own structural package de- Gulf War. signs. One innovative approach in- volves personnel and material bunkers built around a standard sea container, with the entire “containerized bunker Hesco Bastion kit” packaged inside an International in which Concertainer walls are pack- tract with the DLA is in place and has Organization for Standardization con- aged to facilitate immediate deploy- been for more than five years, ensuring tainer that has already been modified ment. One recent test highlighted by that all our products are available with a prefabricated personnel door the company demonstrated the deploy- through the military logistics chain.” and emergency escape hatch. ment of 1,000 feet of 7-foot, 3 inch-high Looking toward the future, he ad- Another available company package Mil 7 wall structure that was ready for ded, “Hesco Bastion has been involved is the Hesco Accommodation Bunker filling in less than one minute. with supplying the Concertainer unit (HAB), which was developed “as a re- “Current mission requirements and force-protection systems to all ma- sult of the ever-increasing threat to de- have led to the design and develop- jor military forces throughout the ployed personnel from indirect-fire ment of a number of unique products world since 1991, and it has continually weapons.” Formed from Mil 6-size by Hesco,” Redfern said. “RAID, for taken the lead in providing solutions to Concertainer units with a specially en- example, is a delivery system that protect forces against the changing na- gineered roof structure, HAB is de- aids the end user in speed and ease of ture of the threats faced in today’s signed to provide safe living accommo- deployment of Concertainer units, asymmetric battlespace. Hesco contin- dation for up to eight individuals with with a massive reduction in the logis- ues to progressively test and develop protection levels against weapon sys- tics burden. HAB is a protective ac- its products in a diverse range of envi- tems “up to and including large mortar commodation unit for use in expedi- ronments across the world, keeping it rounds.” tionary missions. These products are at the forefront of engineered fortifica- In parallel with the protection pack- now beginning to filter into the opera- tions and protecting both military [per- ages, Hesco has also focused on the lo- tional theater with great feedback sonnel] and civilians across the globe. gistics elements of Concertainer em- from the soldier on the ground.” New force-protection products are al- placement through the development of In terms of current program activi- ready in the pipeline for 2011.” Rapid In-theatre Deployment (RAID), ties, Redfern said that “an ongoing con- Asked to reflect on the product’s and company’s significance to the warfighter, he concluded: “The Hes- co Bastion Concertainer is the pre- mier force-protection system, a user- friendly and adaptable product that is unrivaled in the role of providing forti- fications for expeditionary missions. The focus of the company is not only to provide the military with the best pos- sible product, but also with unprece- dented technical assistance and sup- port directly to the troops on the ground.” ( The barriers can be configured in different ways to provide various levels of protection for personnel, vehicles, equipment and fa- cilities against a variety of specific threats. Hesco Bastion June 2010 I ARMY 77.
Recommended publications
  • Cost-Effective Levee Design for Cases Along the Meuse River Including Uncertain- Ties in Hydraulic Loads

    Cost-Effective Levee Design for Cases Along the Meuse River Including Uncertain- Ties in Hydraulic Loads

    Cost-effective levee design for cases along the Meuse river including uncertain- ties in hydraulic loads B. Broers Delft University of Technology . Cost-effective levee design for cases along the Meuse river including uncertainties in hydraulic loads by Ing. B. Broers in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering at the Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences to be defended publicly on January 15, 2015 Student number: 4184408 Supervisor: Prof. dr. ir. M. Kok, TU Delft - Hydraulic Engineering section Thesis committee: Dr. ir. T. Schweckendiek, TU Delft - Hydraulic Engineering section Ir. drs. J. G. Verlaan, TU Delft - Construction Management and Engineering section Ir. S.A. van Lammeren, Royal HaskoningDHV Ir. drs. E. R. Kuipers, Waterschap Peel en Maasvallei An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Preface This MSc Thesis reflects the final part of the Master of Science degree in Hydraulic Engineering at the Civil Engineering and Geosciences Faculty of the Delft University of Technology. The research is per- formed under guidance of the Delft University of Technology in cooperation with Royal HaskoningDHV and Waterschap Peel & Maasvallei. I like to thank many people for their support and cooperation during my graduation thesis. In the first place I thank my direct supervisors: Timo Schweckendiek, Enno Kuipers and Bas van Lammeren for their helpful feedback, enthusiasm and guidance during the thesis. Many thanks to Prof. Matthijs Kok for his support and advice. My thanks to Jules Verlaan too, who helped me especially in the field of LCCA.
  • Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo, ND 2009," May 2009 Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo,ND 2009

    Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo, ND 2009," May 2009 Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo,ND 2009

    ENCLOSURE 2 Wenck Associates, Inc., "Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo, ND 2009," May 2009 Engineering Evaluation of Hesco Barriers Performance at Fargo,ND 2009 Wenck File #2283-01 Prepared for: Hesco Bastion, LLC 47152 Conrad E. Anderson Drive Hammond, LA 70401 Prepared by: WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. 3310 Fiechtner Drive; Suite 110 May 2009 Fargo, North Dakota (701) 297-9600 SWenck Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of Evaluation......................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 Background Information ...................................................................................... 1-3 2.0 CITY OF FARGO USES OF HESCO BARRIERS ......................... 2-1 2.1 Number of Miles Used Versus Total ................................................................... 2-1 2 .2 S izes ........................................................................................................ ............. 2 -1 2.3 Installation Rates .................................................................................................. 2-1 2.4 Complicating Factors .......................................................................................... 2-1 3.0 INTERVIEWS WITH CITY AND CITY REPRESENTATIVES ............................. 3-1 3.1 Issues Raised and Areas of Concern .................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Comments
  • Construction Guide V2 LR.Pdf

    Construction Guide V2 LR.Pdf

    1 Introduction – protect and survive 2 Basic construction guidelines 3 Design of Concertainer structures 4 Fill selection and characteristics 5 Preconfigured structures 6 Improvised structures 7 Maintenance and repair 8 Product technical information 9 Trial information 10 Packing and shipping 11 Conversion tables 12 Contacts 1 Introduction – protect and survive Introduction – protect and survive 1.01 HESCO® Concertainer® has Delivered flat-packed on standard been a key component in timber skids or pallets, units providing Force Protection since can be joined and extended the 1991 Gulf War. using the provided joining pins and filled using minimal Concertainer units are used manpower and commonly extensively in the protection of available equipment. personnel, vehicles, equipment and facilities in military, Concertainer units can be peacekeeping, humanitarian installed in various configurations and civilian operations. to provide effective and economical structures, tailored They are used by all major to the specific threat and level military organisations around of protection required. Protective the world, including the UK structures will normally be MOD and the US Military. designed to protect against ballistic penetration of direct fire It is a prefabricated, multi- projectiles, shaped charge cellular system, made of warheads and fragmentation. Alu-Zinc coated steel welded HESCO Guide Construction for Engineers mesh and lined with non-woven polypropylene geotextile. Introduction – protect and survive 1.02 Protection is afforded by the fill In constructing protective material of the structure as a structures, consideration must consequence of its mass and be given to normal structural physical properties, allied with design parameters. the proven dynamic properties of Concertainer units. The information included in this guide is given in good faith, Users must be aware that the however local conditions may protection afforded may vary affect the performance of HESCO Guide Construction for Engineers with different fill materials, and structures.
  • All Action MS502 Over USD100000

    All Action MS502 Over USD100000

    This report provides information about FAO’s vendors and their goods and services for 2013 where the value of the Purchase Order exceeds US$100,000. This data is presented to the best of FAO's knowledge as correct. If there are omissions, errors or comments please do contact FAO Vendors with procurement actions over USD100,000 for 2013 [email protected] Name of Vendor Vendor Country General Description of Goods or Services Sum of USD Total Net Value A.G. THOMAS (PTY) LTD Swaziland Construction of Ndlolowane dam and Irrigation scheme 329,722.81 A.G. THOMAS (PTY) LTD Total 329,722.81 A.K. Bhuiyan & Co. Bangladesh Measurement instruments 172,529.31 A.K. Bhuiyan & Co. Total 172,529.31 A.T.I. SANITAL-PIEMONTE-LATECNICA Italy Facility Support Services HQ 4,490,956.25 A.T.I. SANITAL-PIEMONTE-LATECNICA Total 4,490,956.25 AASTRA ITALIA SPA Italy Technical Support Services HQ 107,679.97 AASTRA ITALIA SPA Total 107,679.97 ABDEL AAL RAGHEB COMPANY Palestinian Territory,Occupied Procurement of sheep 239,095.24 ABDEL AAL RAGHEB COMPANY Total 239,095.24 ABID HUSSAIN SHAH CORPORATION Pakistan Breeding Goats 7,865.05 Feeding Kit, Milking Kit & Milk Collection Unit 39,408.72 Milk Collection units 3,212.94 Seeds Silos 27,124.00 Seed Silos & Tool Kits 42,607.67 ABID HUSSAIN SHAH CORPORATION Total 120,218.38 ACADEV COMPANY LIMITED Ghana Constuction and rehabilitation works RAF 75,813.31 Constuction and rehabilitation works RAF 96,702.27 ACADEV COMPANY LIMITED Total 172,515.58 ACEA ENERGIA SPA Italy Electricity - Utilities 2,559,681.70 Electricity - Utilities
  • A Strategic Planning Framework for Arverne East

    A Strategic Planning Framework for Arverne East

    Planning for a Resilient Rockaways: A Strategic Planning Framework for Arverne East Waterfront Solutions (NYU): Alda Chan, Sa Liu, Jon McGrath, Rossana Tudo, Kathleen Walczak Acknowledgements This project was made possible thanks to the support of many individuals and organizations. Waterfront Solutions would like to thank everyone at Rockaway Waterfront Alliance and NYU Wagner who contributed to this endeavor. We are grateful to a number of experts and individuals who provided participated in meetings and shared information to support this report. Thanks to Arjan Braamskamp and Robert Proos (Consulate General of the Netherlands in New York), David Bragdon (NYC Department of Parks and Recreation), John Boule, (Parsons Brinkerhoff), John Young and Barry Dinerstein (NYC Department of City Planning), Jonathan Gaska (Queens Community District 14); Gerry Romski (Arverne by the Sea), Michael Polo (NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development), Ron Schiffman (Pratt Institute); Ron Moelis and Rick Gropper (L+M Development), and Steven Bluestone (The Bluestone Organization). We would like to express our gratitude towards Robert Balder (Cornell Architecture, Art and Planning) and Walter Meyer (Local Office Landscape) for their guidance and insight during the research process. Our sincere thanks to faculty advisors Michael Keane and Claire Weisz for their feedback and support throughout this process. Front and back cover photo credit: Joe Mabel Table of Contents Executive Summary.........................................................02
  • Restoring Gulf Oyster Reefs: Opportunities for Innovation

    Restoring Gulf Oyster Reefs: Opportunities for Innovation

    RESTORING GULF OYSTER REEFS June 2012 Opportunities for Innovation Shawn Stokes Susan Wunderink Marcy Lowe Gary Gereffi Restoring Gulf Oyster Reefs This research was prepared on behalf of Environmental Defense Fund: http://www.edf.org/home.cfm Acknowledgments – The authors are grateful for valuable information and feedback from Patrick Banks, Todd Barber, Dennis Barkmeyer, Larry Beggs, Karim Belhadjali, Anne Birch, Seth Blitch, Rob Brumbaugh, Mark Bryer, Russ Burke, Rob Cook, Jeff DeQuattro, Blake Dwoskin, John Eckhoff, John Foret, Sherwood Gagliano, Kyle Graham, Timm Kroeger, Ben LeBlanc, Romuald Lipcius, John Lopez, Gus Lorber, Tom Mohrman, Tyler Ortego, Charles Peterson, George Ragazzo, Edwin Reardon, Dave Schulte, Todd Swannack, Mike Turley, and Lexia Weaver. Many thanks also to Jackie Roberts for comments on early drafts. None of the opinions or comments expressed in this study are endorsed by the companies mentioned or individuals interviewed. Errors of fact or interpretation remain exclusively with the authors. We welcome comments and suggestions. The lead author can be contacted at: [email protected] List of Abbreviations BLS Bureau of Labor and Statistics COSEE Centers for Oceans Sciences Education Excellence CWPPRA Coastal Wetlands Planning Protection and Restoration Act DEP Department of Environmental Protection DMR Mississippi Department of Marine Resources DNR Louisiana Department of Natural Resources EPA Environmental Protection Agency FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPCA National Precast Concrete Association NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council NSF National Science Foundation OBAR Oyster Break Artificial Reef OCPR Office of Coastal Protection and Restoration SBA Small Business Association TNC The Nature Conservancy TPWD Texas Parks and Wildlife Department USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers Cover Photo: © Erika Nortemann/The Nature Conservancy.
  • Melvin Jones Fellow

    Melvin Jones Fellow

    NORTH DAKOTA Volume 33, Number 12 | Offi LIONcial Publication of Lions Districts 5NE & 5NW | June 2011 Mandan Lions feed fl ood volunteers Submitted by 5NW VDG Pat Vannett On May 25, 2011, Lions Kevin and Pat Vannett of the Mandan Dacotah Lions approached Mandan Mayor Tim Helbling with the idea of organizing food for all of the volunteers that would be needed to fi ght the fl ood. He replied “that would be awesome.” Th e Mandan Dacotah Lions board of directors quickly acted to approve the project and Mandan Lions Club President; Jeff Erickson called his club for workers and within THREE hours Kevin and Pat had organized donations of water, food, and tents. Th e grills were lit and our journey began. Because of the working relationship that all of the Lions of Mandan have with business owners in our community, those businesses quickly got on board to support this project. Many businesses stepped up to the plate when asked to help. Others called us to ask “what do you need, we want to help.” Th is was truly a community wide eff ort where every church, organization, Setting up to feed the volunteers in the 2011 fl ood fi ght are Lion business and private person united in the fi ght to save our city. Bill Schott of the Mandan Lions and Lion Kevin Vannett along with Th e Red Cross soon came by and was quite impressed with his son Matt, and Lion Marcy Moore of the Mandan Dacotah the organization that was in place. Th ey soon were calling to see Lions.
  • Invitation to Bid

    Invitation to Bid

    INVITATION TO BID Civil Works at United Nations Common Compound (UNCC) in Garowe, Somalia ITB No.: 143259/21 Project: UNCC Country: Somalia Issued on: August 4, 2021 P a g e | 1 CONTENTS Section 1. Letter of Invitation ..................................................................................................................... 5 Section 2. Instruction to Bidders ................................................................................................................ 6 GENERAL PROVISIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 6 2. Fraud & Corruption, Gifts and Hospitality .................................................................................................................. 6 3. Eligibility ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4. Conflict of Interests ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 B. PREPARATION OF BIDS ............................................................................................................................................. 7 5. General Considerations
  • Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project Year 1 Monitoring Report Polk County, North Carolina

    Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project Year 1 Monitoring Report Polk County, North Carolina

    Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project Year 1 Monitoring Report Polk County, North Carolina Monitoring Firm: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) Monitoring Firm POC: Micky Clemmons Prepared for: North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) NCEEP Project Manager: Guy Pearce Report Prepared By: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. 797 Haywood Road, Suite 201 Asheville, NC 28806 Contract Number: D06027-A Date Submitted: November 2009 FINAL Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ IV 1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND............................................................................................. 1 1.1 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 PROJECT STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 5 1.5 MONITORING PLAN VIEW ............................................................................................................................. 8 2.0 YEAR 1 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS ....................... 10 2.1 VEGETATION
  • Deep Gallery Shelters : Translated at the Army War College from a French Study, July 1917

    Deep Gallery Shelters : Translated at the Army War College from a French Study, July 1917

    Deep gallery shelters : translated at the Army War College from a French study, July 1917. Washington, D.C. : G.P.O., 1917. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc2.ark:/13960/t8z89537n Public Domain http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#pd We have determined this work to be in the public domain, meaning that it is not subject to copyright. Users are free to copy, use, and redistribute the work in part or in whole. It is possible that current copyright holders, heirs or the estate of the authors of individual portions of the work, such as illustrations or photographs, assert copyrights over these portions. Depending on the nature of subsequent use that is made, additional rights may need to be obtained independently of anything we can address. CONFIDENTIAL! FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4 4 7 DEEP GALLERY SHELTERS Translated at the Army War College FROM A FRENCH STUDY U**\ JULY, 1917 of California n Regional WASHINGTON y Facility GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1917 i WAB DEPARTMENT, Document No. 632. General. Office of The Adjutant WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, July 18, 1917. The following notes on Deep Gallery Shelters are published for the information of all concerned. [661.1, A. G. O.] BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR : TASKER H. BLISS, Major General, Acting Chief of Staff. OFFICIAL : H. P. MCCAIN, The Adjutant General. WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, WASHINGTON, June 19, 1!H~. To all officers of the Army: You are advised that this and all subsequent documents of a similar character, which may be furnished to you from this office, are to be regarded as strictly confidential.
  • Infrastructure Defense Technologies

    Infrastructure Defense Technologies

    In the United States Court of Federal Claims (Filed April 7, 2008) (Originally Filed Under Seal March 14, 2008) INFRASTRUCTURE DEFENSE ) TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ) No. 07-582 C Plaintiff, ) (Consolidated Lead Case) ) v. ) Pre-award bid protest; subject matter ) jurisdiction; standing; prejudice; waiver; bridge THE UNITED STATES, ) contract; sole source supply contract; cross- Defendant, ) motions for judgment on the administrative ) record; motion to dismiss; one responsible and ) source exception to the Competition in ) Contracting Act; standard of review; national HESCO BASTION, LTD, ) defense and security. Defendant-Intervenor. ) ) INFRASTRUCTURE DEFENSE ) TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ) Plaintiff, ) ) No. 07-695 C v. ) (Consolidated Member Case) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) Defendant. ) C. Joël Van Over, McLean, VA, for plaintiff. Jack Y. Chu, of counsel. David A. Harrington and A. Bondurant Eley, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant, with whom were Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Brian M. Simkin, Assistant Director. Douglas C. Proxmire, Washington, D.C., for defendant-intervenor. Elizabeth Gill, of counsel. OPINION AND ORDER1/ Merow, Senior Judge In this pre-award procurement protest, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1), the protestor, Infrastructure Defense Technologies, LLC (hereinafter “IDT”), seeks injunctive and declaratory relief to preclude the Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”) from awarding a follow-on sole source Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (“IDIQ”) contract for collapsible force protection (“Concertainer”) units to Hesco Bastion, Ltd. (“Hesco”). Hesco has intervened in this action. Pursuant to RCFC 52.1, motions have been filed, by all parties, for judgment on the administrative record of this procurement which record was supplemented by the deposition of DLA official Thomas Lauersen and material submitted by plaintiff.
  • Guide De Construction Pour Les Opérateurs Version 2

    Guide De Construction Pour Les Opérateurs Version 2

    Guide de construction pour les opérateurs Version 2 1 Introduction - protéger et survivre 2 Instructions générales de construction 3 Conception de structures Concertainer 4 Matériau de remplissage 5 Structures préconfigurées 6 Structures improvisées 7 Maintenance et réparation 8 Informations techniques sur le produit 9 Informations sur les essais 10 Conditionnement et acheminement 11 Tableaux de conversion 12 Contacts 1 Introduction - protéger et survivre Introduction - protéger et survivre 1.01 HESCO® Concertainer® a joué Livrées à plat sur des palettes un rôle clé dans la protection de bois standards, les unités des forces depuis la Guerre du peuvent être assemblées et Golfe de 1991. Les produits étendues grâce aux goupilles Concertainer sont beaucoup fournies et remplies par un employés dans la protection des minimum de personnel au individus, des véhicules, des moyen d'équipements équipements et des installations communément disponibles. dans les opérations militaires, humanitaires, civiles et de Les unités Concertainer peuvent maintien de la paix. être installées dans différents types de configurations afin de Ils sont également utilisés par proposer des structures toutes les plus grandes économiques et efficaces, organisations militaires dans le adaptées à la menace monde, notamment le ministère spécifique et au niveau de de la Défense britannique et protection requis. Les structures l'armée américaine. protectrices seront normalement conçues pour assurer la Il s'agit d'un système multi- protection contre la pénétration cellulaire préfabriqué, constitué balistique des projectiles directs, d'un maillage d'acier enduit des ogives à charge creuse et d'alu-zinc et garni d'un géotextile des projectiles à fragmentation. en polypropylène non tissé.