mt 4/08 ibd 20.03.

2008 14:55 Uhr Seite 106

Meeting “Mr Armour”

Interview with Mr. Ulf Deisenroth, President and CEO Of IBD Deisenroth

IBD Deisenroth is widely acknowl- Ulf Deisenroth (left),

edged as one of the world’s leading President and CEO
of IBD Deisenroth
centres of excellence for the devel-
during the interview
opment of advanced armour solu- with Dr. Ezio
tions – a position that is apparently Bonsignore, Editor-
out of proportion with the com- in-Chief of MT.
pany’s small size. Given the sensi-
tiveness of the activities they are
engaged into, it is perhaps not sur- Deisenroth: It is ex-
prising that IDB is a rather public- tremely useful to un-
ity-shy company, and one that derstand the enemy,
the threat, and to have
under normal circumstances would
an in-depth knowl-
not wish to attract too much open edge of the working
attention. principles and behavi-
The Editor-in-Chief of MILITARY our of the different
TECHNOLOGY, Dr. Ezio Bonsig- threat technologies. It
nore recently had the rare opport- is only through an
unity of a long and frank discussion accurate analysis of
with “Mr. Armour” himself at the these aspects that the
company’s brand new R&D centre most appropriate type
oping activities. Very short afterwards we got of armour to counter a given threat can be
in Lohmar, near Bonn.
the first order from the German MoD in armour decided upon. Without such a basic scientific
technology development, and this turned out to and technological knowledge, it is very difficult
be a special niche for us – sort of between an to achieve something.
MT: Could you please provide a short history of armour manufacturing industry and a research
your company, and explain its exact nature? institute. MT: Would you be prepared to discuss the cur-
What are you – a manufacturing company, an From the very beginning it was our advan- rent ownership of the company and whether
R&D centre, an engineering think-tank, or tage to be very flexible and capable of reacting there are changes in the pipeline?
what? very quickly, and this led to this company Deisenroth: Well, in 2006 we had some major
Deisenroth: Well, the company was founded in enjoying a very, very fast growth in the armour changes. As you know, there were two compa-
1981. We came basically from the warhead de- development field. nies: IBD as a development, research and engi-
velopment sector. I am personally an explosive neering company, and Chempro as our pro-
chemist, and at that time I got in contact with MT: Based on this background and experience, duction company. The production company
the German MoD for the development of a very would you suggest that armour and anti-armour was sold – or you could say Rheinmetall Wea-
safe explosive for reactive armour. Through this development activities should run in parallel, or pons and Ammunition has bought a 51% stake
activity I found interfaces and points of contact rather a barrier should be set between the two in it. This was a strategic move as to get a
with armour itself, and thus with armour devel- lines? strong industrial partner in order to satisfy the
strong demand in the armour field, for which
we had to expand the company. IBD on the
other hand remains a completely independent
company, and nothing has changed on this
one.
We also founded ADS Gesellschaft für Aktive
Schutzsysteme mbH as the responsible com-
pany for final development and preparation for
series production of our active defence system.
Here again Rheinmetall bought a 25% stake.
The background for this decision was to accel-
erate and smooth the industrialisation process
of the system, because ADS has no series
manufacturing capabilities of its own. We were
looking for an industrial partner with a solid
competence in electronics, explosives and
other related aspects, and Rheinmetall is defi-
nitely a competent partner for this. 2008 will be
a decisive year for ADS, as we are working very
hard towards preparation for series production.

A LEOPARD 2 MBT fitted with IBD add-on

armour including the AMAP-R ultra-light
roof protection concept.
(All photos: IBD Deisenroth)

106 Military Technology · MILTECH · 4/2008

mt 4/08 ibd 20.03.2008 14:55 Uhr Seite 107

AMAP-R ultralight plus EFP-Protection. AMAP-R ultralight.

MT: So, could we say that you intend to focus cence production agreements as well, because Deisenroth: As I said before, our main strength
your activities on research and development, more and more in some countries we have a has always been our very nature as a very flex-
and then have series production implemented situation where the government insists that crit- ible and economic-working company, special-
through joint venture agreements such as with ical technologies such as armour have to be ising in R&D. We have a very good infrastruc-
Rheinmetall and possibly other companies as manufactured domestically. So, we have a total ture and design department. We are working in
well? of 35 licences around the world which are par- close cooperation with research institutes and
Deisenroth: Yes, that’s basically the idea. tially direct deliverers such as Krauss-Maffei universities, and we have very good specialists
However I would like to stress that while here in Wegmann and some other big vehicle manu- at our periphery who are working towards us.
our new Development Centre we definitely fo- facturers. And they have their own armour pro- All this is organised in a very economic and fast
cus on R&D, it was always our strength to bring ducing departments. way. We are fast, and we use our development
our products up to the pre-production status. money in a very efficient way. This is something
That means, here in our facilities we are build- MT: In the world of armour, there are some very which you cannot maintain in big organisations.
ing complete functional prototypes. And, we large AFV manufacturing companies investing They are slow, and have a lot of red tape and
perform complete tests including installation on considerable sums in their own R&D depart- bureaucracy. Thus, our unique organisation is
vehicles. Our engineering facilities and mecha- ments. Plus, most major armies maintain their what gives us an edge.
nical workshop are perfectly able to equip com- own R&D centres, which again benefit from Also, the base line of our work for the past 26
plete vehicles. It is only after having reached considerable investments through the courtesy years has been a very good material research
this maturity status that a product is handed of the taxpayer. How could it be that a small and development. Most of the larger compa-
over to the production people. company such as yours is so successful in this nies don’t have an own material R&D activity,
highly competitive field, to the point of having and rather rely on outside sources. This is a
MT: How many people work here? some of these major players themselves asking very big difference, especially here in critical
Deisenroth: Currently, there are 45 people at to buy your products? What is the secret of technologies and in the new advanced technol-
IBD and the same figure at ADS. This is a rela- your success? ogies.
tively small company compared to our compet- Another important advantage is the maturity
itors. At IBD we don’t see any real necessity of of our products. We have produced some
getting bigger. On the other hand ADS will grow 30,000 armour kits from light to very heavy over
considerably in the future. AMAP-IED is an “intelligent” passive the past 20 years, and these are in widespread
protection scheme which provides reliable service around the world. And, needless to say,
MT: Who are your customers? Are you selling protection against attacks by Improvised our technologies are competitive and deliver
to armoured vehicles manufacturers, or to end- Explosive Devices. unusual good performance.
users – i.e. armies and MoDs?
Deisenroth: We have a large number of cus-
tomers which are vehicle manufacturers. But –
and this is our strength – we also have many
governments with whom we are working in
R&D activities towards advanced technologies,
performing threat analysis, protection studies
and so on, whereby we get the relevant awards
directly from the governments. This has princi-
pally not changed over the years.

MT: So, it could be either an AFV manufacturer

offering their vehicles already incorporating
your armour solution, or an official procurement
agency specifying the adoption of a IBD design
for a new vehicle.
Deisenroth: This is normally not the direct way.
There are some governments which handle
their AFV programmes through their own arse-
nals or state-controlled plants, with their res-
pective production and integration depart-
ments. In such cases we will be delivering hard-
ware directly to the government. In other cases,
however, we have to work through local AFV
manufacturers and at least partially through li-

Military Technology · MILTECH · 4/2008 107

mt 4/08 ibd 20.03.2008 14:55 Uhr Seite 108

BISON with Heavy Blast-Fragments IED-Protection. CV 9040 C with IED-Mine-Protection.

MT: We understand that you normally prefer to Deisenroth: We are not involved in reactive activities consists in providing the complete
remain tight-lipped about your customers. Yet, armour, and thus I could not comment on that. underlying bureaucracy, that is, the safety anal-
could you provide some examples of particular- As regards passive armour solutions, progress ysis and everything that is necessary to intro-
ly significant contracts, as a demonstration of is slow now – actually much slower than what duce such a system into service.
what you can do? you could experience ten years ago. The Actually this is the time consuming part. Too
Deisenroth: We have to make a distinction required development time for advanced mate- many people underestimate what it means to
between conventional armour, i.e. passive ar- rials, nano-technologies and other such con- bring such automatic-reacting electronic
mour development, and the new active defence cepts keeps growing. Everything nowadays systems involving explosives and so on into
system. As regards the former, we are quite takes much more time, much larger investment service. It is definitely underestimated.
proud that our developments are produced in and much more diagnostics and highly sophis-
very large series. We are or have been involved ticated measuring equipment. Yet these efforts MT: Based on your experience and knowledge,
in some of the biggest AFV programmes which are fully justified, because the output is already do you feel that the vision of future AFV gener-
are running or have run in the world, including extremely encouraging. I’m confident that in ations relying solely on active protection
for instance the STRYKER family and the ASV the passive armour sector a technological systems to defend against specialised anti-
(Armoured Security Vehicle) in the US, both of breakthrough will be achieved within the next armour threats has any chance of ever becom-
which have proved to be very successful, cer- few years. This will bring us very much forward. ing feasible?
tainly to a significant extent due to our technol- As regards active defence, the prospects of Deisenroth: No, I think it will never be feasible.
ogies. Also we are very proud of our involve- potential outstanding performance against a If you are talking of a real full-spectrum active
ment in the new generation of AFVs for the wide range of threats are currently very promis- defence system, you will always have threats
Swedish Defence Forces, vehicles which are ing. What we experience in the development of like long-rod KE penetrators fired with tank
completely unique in their engineering and pro- active defence systems is that providing the guns which you can defeat to a certain point –
tection levels that are not reached by other performance of the system is basically the easi- you can break them, you can deflect them, you
solutions. This is especially true for the Strv- est and smallest portion of the total effort. A can do a lot of things. But you have to expect
MBT 122 Main Battle Tank which is the best much larger and difficult part of the required that the penetrator or what remains of it will
protected vehicle of its class, always hit your vehicle. That means the remain-
but also the CV-90 IFV family ing energy of the penetrator will be transferred
which we have equipped with to your vehicle, and you have to deal with it
advanced armour solutions. In even though penetration performance as such
addition to the Swedish Army’s has been defeated.
own vehicles, IBD technologies This situation creates some specific chal-
are incorporated in all CV90 lenges. On MBTs these can certainly be han-
vehicles sold so far to various dled, on some medium vehicles it is conceiv-
customers. able that they could be handled – but as re-
gards light vehicles, forget it. So, even a very
MT: You are or have been efficient, full-spectrum active defence system
exploring several different types will always need to be backed by a consider-
of armour technologies. What able amount of passive armour, depending on
technology you feel is moving the weight class. For instance, today we say
faster, and promises the best that STANAG Level 4 protection is the mini-
results in the near future? mum required for light vehicles, equipped with
an active defence system which will defeat
shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons and missiles.
For medium vehicles there are correspondingly
A Patria AMV 8x8 vehicle higher protection requirements, including
fitted with AMAP-ADS active against some type of IEDs and other threats,
defence system. The system which can only be met through an increase in
does not require launchers the amount of passive armour.
of any sort, and its impact The dream of a thin-walled vehicle with a
on the overall vehicle weight highly effective active defence system simply is
and silhouette is negligible. not realistic.

108 Military Technology · MILTECH · 4/2008

mt 4/08 ibd 20.03.2008 14:55 Uhr Seite 109

MT: Active protection systems for AFVs is a much endangered under the current operation- is definitely a very big change in armour devel-
new field, and many different approaches are al conditions, and while medium and heavy opment, a watershed in technology.
being proposed by various companies involving vehicles can rely on other survivability solu-
different kill mechanisms and engagement tions, active protection is absolutely critical for MT: Would you say the emphasis is now on
sequences. We understand that you would not light vehicles. We need a system which can obtaining lighter solutions for the same threat
wish to discuss the detail of your design at this work on light vehicle structures, and this is defeat performance, better performance for the
stage – but, are you confident that you have a another reason why I’m sceptical about launch- same weight, or optimal performance irrespec-
winning solution? er-based solutions. Launchers are quite heavy tive of weight?
Deisenroth: Actually, we have been studying and require a lot of energy, which light vehicles Deisenroth: No, it rather works in the way that
active defence systems for the past 20 years, cannot supply. This is where our system offers today we are creating vehicles, which can take
working under contracts from our Government an important advantage. threats that were completely inconceivable for
as well as other foreign governments. We start- platforms in their weight class ten years ago.
ed activities in this field at a very, very early MT: Over the past few years armour require- For instance take a look at the VML of the Ita-
stage, and we have assessed a lot of different ments have gone through a monumental pro- lian Army and several other customers. This ve-
concepts. We studied and analysed many pos- gress of change. We have been moving away hicle was designed together with IVECO from
sible solutions, and the output was to develop from the conditions of the conventional battle- the very beginning, and this is the key to its
this system what we have today. field, where KE penetrators are the main threat, success. It is a completely new vehicle con-
To be completely honest, when you really to a dramatically urgent need to protect origi- cept, with a massive and strong space frame.
see the disadvantages and the trade-offs of the nally light armoured or soft-skinned vehicles At the time development was started, nobody
different systems that are currently being pro- from non-specialised threats like IEDs, large thought about the threats we are facing today.
posed, you will see that some of them are def- mine traps and so on. What type of impact has But actual combat experience in Afghanistan
initely not suitable for the operational require- this situation had on your activities, and how and elsewhere has shown that a modern, well
ments and operating conditions of our time. have you been changing your development designed vehicle can take tremendous and not
They were developed basically for Cold War directions to adapt your products to the new originally foreseen loads.
scenarios, and now their designers and manu- environment? This is what we can do today with light vehi-
facturers are sticking with these systems even Deisenroth: We have customers who for many cles, which have system and protection levels
though they cannot be used in asymmetric years have been driving vehicles protected with that were definitely not been dreamed of a few
warfare scenarios. It is not a matter of details our technologies in wars and other conflict years ago. And this is the base line of the new
and refinements, but rather of basic operating areas. And we receive a lot of feedback from technologies. We are trying to convince AFV
concepts that cannot be changed. For them on what really happens there. It dawned manufacturers than when they are launching
instance, there are quite a few systems around to us very early that we had to change the very the development of a new advantage, it is in
based on fixed or trainable launchers, but I am survivability paradigms on these vehicles, their own and their customer’s interest to have
highly sceptical as to whether we will ever see because the threat range has increased so us in the boat from the very first moment. By
any such system being adopted for large-scale much. Today light vehicles with very thin ar- joining forces for the definition and optimisation
installation on AFVs. mour steel hulls, let’s say 6 to 8mm, are loaded of the right vehicle concept, we can create
We are quite confident that together with our with such high energies from blast/fragmenta- solutions that are much, much better than what
customers, we have developed a viable and tion devices and other threats, that the structu- can be obtained by first developing the vehicle
functioning system for all scenarios – not only ral component, i.e. the thin-walled hull, is most- and then adding armour to it.
conventional scenarios, but also asymmetric ly not able to take these loads and will collapse.
ones. So, to deal with these advanced threats we MT: To conclude, what is the best armour
have to generate and develop technologies material?
MT: What would you say is the critical factor for which at the same time are armour materials Deisenroth: There is no such thing. Armour
active defence system? The minimum engage- and very good structural components. And this solutions must be specifically tailored to the
ment range, or the reaction time? expected threats. Besides, there are many
Deisenroth: It is a combination of both, in the companies working in the light armour
sense that basically all depends on the sys- field and their solutions are relative-
tem’s reaction time. Working principle ly identical.
An important issue is compatibility with of the AMAP-ADS
light vehicles. Light vehicles are very active protection system. MT: Mr Deisenroth, thank
you very much.

Detection Interception Countermeasure effect

Military Technology · MILTECH · 4/2008 109