Features of the application of rapidly deployable security systems.

Features of using rapidly deployable security systems.

Alexander Ivanovich Larin,
Candidate of Technical Sciences

FEATURES OF USING RAPIDLY DEPLOYABLE SECURITY SYSTEMS.

The material presented to the readers' judgment is to some extent a continuation of the conversation started in the 4th issue of the magazine and is devoted to a special class of security equipment — rapidly deployable security systems (RDS). The conducted review of the Russian market showed that there are several types of such systems, both domestic and foreign, but the issue of using rapidly deployable security systems and their demand in modern conditions in Russia remained uncovered.

Certain experience gained in creating perimeter security systems for important and especially important objects of various affiliations showed that there is certainly a need for security systems of this class, but the main obstacles to their promotion on the Russian market are:

• relatively high cost of the equipment set;
• lack of understanding by security personnel and persons responsible for the security of facilities of what security tasks can be solved by rapidly deployable security systems.

At the same time, let me remind you of the main advantages of these systems over traditional ones:

• detection means for such systems are quickly installed on the ground;
• the ability to install and remove detection equipment several times during the system’s service life (some models – up to 1000 deployment-collapse cycles”);
• full or partial camouflage of detection equipment installed on the ground is ensured;
• in the most advanced systems, it is possible to use not only the standard radio channel of the traditional VHF range, but also GSM cellular communication channels (Classic2000, EMIDS) to collect information from detection equipment;
• classification of violators by armed-unarmed, single-group; classification of vehicles by wheeled-tracked and classification of the direction of movement of violators by the type “towards us – away from us”.

What security tasks can be solved with the help of BOS, considering their advantages over traditional perimeter security systems?

1.While conducting an inspection of one of the Facilities for the reconstruction of the perimeter security system together with the security service employees, a ladder was found leaning against a reinforced concrete fence from the outside, from which a trodden path went into the forest. The fence was monitored from the climb by a capacitive detection device of the “Radian” type in the form of a metal decorative canopy.

At the time of the inspection, the “Radian” was turned off in this area (the reason for the turn-off is not important in this case), and the decorative canopy seemed to be specially designed for comfortable overcoming of the fence by climbing with the help of a ladder.

Of course, there was a stable group of thieves operating in this area, against which the traditional perimeter security system was ineffective. The task of the security in this case is to neutralize this group, and the most effective way would be to catch them red-handed. In this case, the use of quickly deployable small-sized detectors with information transmission via a radio channel, which are covertly installed on the path used by the intruders, can solve this problem with the greatest efficiency. After the intruders are detained, the detection equipment can be removed from the protected line and transferred to another area depending on the developing situation.

Similar situations in various forms have been encountered before. Many heads of security services are familiar with the problem of various objects or materials being thrown over a barrier (fence). Preventing this method of theft is quite a difficult task, especially if the perimeter of the facility is long and the number of security personnel is insufficient for its complete control. In some facilities, in such cases, it is necessary to set up additional round-the-clock security posts in places where the probability of throwing over the fence is high. But even such a solution does not seem effective, since the location of this post is known, and the intruders are looking for other places to throw.

At the same time, the task of counteracting this method of theft has a cheaper and more elegant solution, which consists in using quickly deployable systems. At the same time, depending on the specifics of the object, it is possible to control both the approach of the intruder from one of the sides to the fence, and from both sides at once. Usually, the composition of the system kit allows you to control several such “throw-over” dangerous places at once. Moreover, the intruders do not know how they were discovered, since the detection means (detectors) of quickly deployable security systems are practically invisible after their installation. Thus, there is also a psychological effect for the intruders, forcing them to refuse similar actions in the future.

2. In recent years, such types of theft as cutting cables from cable routes and theft of oil and gas products from pipelines (inserts, etc.) have become widespread.

The task of timely detection of such facts should be solved with the help of a security system, however, traditional methods of constructing security alarm systems for perimeters and extended boundaries can hardly be used here: the technical difficulty is to supply the equipment with remote power supply and data retrieval. In addition, organizing the maintenance of extended security systems can present significant difficulties.

The capabilities of rapidly deployable systems can also be used to solve such problems.

As a rule, damage to cable routes or pipelines at any point of their passage is unlikely. The greatest danger is experienced by places (areas) of intersection with roads, paths, cable wells, etc., that is, places that have a small length, but a significant distance from the deployment points of security units.

Here, the significant advantages will be:

• autonomous power supply of the system elements installed on the ground (in some cases, the standard built-in power supply provides up to 6 months of continuous operation);
• exchange of information with the security post via radio channel, and, in particular, the possibility of using GSM standard cellular communication channels;
• the possibility of prompt installation of security alarm modules based on preliminary information about the possibility of theft of the specified materials.

3.Many enterprises and organizations face the problem of temporary protection of objects. Such tasks may arise when organizing and conducting various tests, holding closed events, temporary storage of any material assets, etc. To solve these problems, it is almost impossible to find an alternative to using quickly deployable systems.

4. And the last thing I would like to say about the use of BOS. Unfortunately, nowadays quite often there is a situation when the security service of the facility has reasons not to trust the security unit. Of course, modern systems for collecting and processing information, which are part of the security system, provide the ability to automatically record information, thereby ensuring control over the actions of the security unit. However, unscrupulous security will always find one or two “surefire” ways to “fool the system”: here and incomprehensible equipment malfunctions, and unclear actions on alarm signals. If such concerns have arisen, quickly deployable security systems, covertly installed on the ground, are very effective for checking the actions of the security.

A common misconception in the issue of using BOS is the assertion that such systems have a significantly lower probability of detecting intruders, therefore they are ineffective in use.

It should be noted that the issues of comparative effectiveness of traditional barrier security systems for the perimeters of important Facilities and rapidly deployable security systems have been the subject of quite serious research at various times.

Let us adopt for the assessment a frequently used private performance indicator characterizing the detection capabilities of the system, in the form

Pob=krPoPвc,

It is obvious that for traditional perimeter security systems, the probability of an intruder entering the detection zone when he crosses the protected boundary Pвс Ю 1, provided that the security system forms a closed perimeter. At the same time, we will keep in mind that in order to achieve the goal, the intruder does not always need to overcome the alarm fence, since the fence does not prevent transfer through the fence (transmission through the fence for mesh lattice and intentionally destroyed concrete fences).

Therefore, based on achieving the goal of the security system — preventing the actions of intruders, the value of Рвс < 1.

For rapidly deployable security systems, the value of the probability of an intruder entering the detection zone when he crosses the protected line Рвс can vary from 0 to 1, and significantly depends on the following factors:

• how tactically correct are the specific detection means;
• does the design of the detection equipment (detectors) ensure the ability to quickly change the location of sensitive zones on the ground when the situation changes;
• to what extent do the technical solutions of the system elements installed on the protected line ensure the camouflage of the installation and the stealth of operation.

If we denote by Pob1 the value of the particular efficiency indicator for a traditional perimeter security system that provides continuous alarm coverage of the protected boundary, and by Pob2 the value of the same indicator for a rapidly deployable security system, then we can determine the required value of the probability of an intruder meeting the detection zone of the BOS detectors, at which the use of both types of systems is equivalent in detection capabilities:

An assessment of the values ​​included in this expression shows that the value of Pvs2 lies within the range from 0.53 to 0.67. That is, if the security service determines the places where intruders may appear with the specified probability, then the detection capability of the BOS will be no worse than traditional perimeter security systems.

The results of the analysis of the security tasks outlined in this article allow us to say that achieving such values ​​is quite realistic. And, thus, the use of rapidly deployable security systems will not lead to a decrease in such an important characteristic of the system as the probability of detecting intruders.

Quickly deployable security systems on the Russian market certainly have everything ahead. The need for such systems is becoming more noticeable every day.

I hope that the presented material shows that there are certain groups of tasks in the field of protecting important and especially important objects, the solution of which is most effectively provided by such a class of security equipment as rapidly deployable security systems.