The Bomb-Sniffing Gadget That’s (Definitely Not) Saving Iraq

The Bomb-Sniffing Gadget That’s (Definitely Not) Saving Iraq

The promise of the ADE 651 is seductive: a handheld detector which susses out bombs, guns, drugs and human bodies from up to a kilometre away. And the Iraqi military swears by it! One problem: It doesn’t seem to work.

To be able to instantly detect contraband like this would be a game-changer in Iraq, where the (effectively) free transit of roadside bombs and IEDs is a constant threat, so the Iraqi government is willing to pay a premium for devices that promise as much — they’ve already bought 1500 of the detectors at a price of $US16,500 to $US60,000 each. Despite the steep price and fierce user loyalty though, US government officials say the devices don’t work at all:

Dale Murray, head of the National Explosive Engineering Sciences Security centre at Sandia Labs, which does testing for the Department of defence, said the centre had “tested several devices in this category, and none have ever performed better than random chance.”

Capital “S” Sceptical organisations like the James Randi Educational Foundation have joined the cause too, flagging the ADE 651’s manufacturer’s claims that the device works with spooky-sounding “electrostatic magnetic ion attraction” and offering a (rhetorical) bounty to anyone who can prove they actually work.

ATSC, the company that manufactures the device out of the UK, wouldn’t even talk to the New York Times, cementing an already obvious conclusion: This is a case of a bogus company taking advantage of credulous, vulnerable consumers by selling a device that seems like it works by virtue of being many users’ only means of bomb detection, meaning that they never notice when it doesn’t work — it’s just another car passing through a checkpoint; who knows if the bombing later that afternoon had anything to do with it!— and always notice when it does, even if by pure chance.

You may have failed miserably at designing a universal contraband detector, ATSC, but hey, at least your scam was well engineered. [NYT]