SecurityDriver News

This article was written by Gordon Mitchell, PhD, CPP.  Dr. Mitchell operates Future Focus, a Seattle based company which provides electronic eavesdropping.  The article was written more than ten years ago but still has some valid points.

 A good chauffeur is concerned about not spilling the boss’s coffee and avoiding bumps. Generally chauffeurs can handle routine emergencies if they happen slowly. This has nothing in common with the skills needed for a trained security driver.

 Security drivers are very aware of the environment and are always prepared to drive out of a problem using the full potential of the vehicle. This is guaranteed to spill coffee. It also saves lives.

Good Security Driver

In no particular order – security

 The most critical skill is learning to recognize trouble and stay out of threatening situations. The most critical thing to recognize is the presence of surveillance.

 Security skills of course include defensive driving but the most memorable training involves offensive driving. Even though few security drivers use their training in ramming or pursuit driving these sort of high adrenaline activities make an impression. In fact making an impression on a student is what a good driving school must do.

Out of Control

A security driver has absolutely no control over several critical factors in executive security. The first is where the executive lives. Only in unusual cases such as high threat overseas assignments will the executive home be chosen by security personnel. The executive’s neighborhood may be on a dead end street, an apartment building or near a busy highway. All require different approaches to avoid the problems that threaten the executive.

 Weather and traffic are also out of the control of the security driver. They affect the general security environment and may allow threats such as ambushes to become more of a problem than they would be on “normal” days. These variables must be part of a security driver’s thinking and need to be part of overall contingency planning.

Ex-cops make good Security Drivers

Because they are naturally suspicious of people and circumstances, former police officers make good security drivers. They have been trained and conditioned to observe their environment and have generally been prepared for some of the driving situations that security drivers may encounter.

 A significant change of strategy is necessary in the transition from ” To Protect and Serve” to being concerned about the person in the back seat. Good security drivers do not think about apprehending anyone; they are expected to drive away from dangers, not confront them. Police officers that are able to leave their egos behind do well in the driver’s seat.

 All drivers must have good driving skills and physical capabilities. Since physiological changes occur with age, which can make drivers less effective, it is critical that basic vision, hearing and reactions are tested for all security drivers. Additionally, over the age of forty, night vision should be measured. At the age of fifty-five, peripheral vision should be added to the annual physical.

 Even a driver in good physical condition can become a liability if fatigue is present. This is especially a factor in city driving. Overtime pay may lure drivers into working longer than they should but eight-hour shifts should be the rule. A tired driver may only be able to operate the vehicle missing all of the security aspects of his job. A very tired driver may not even be able to handle the basic driving tasks.

Knowing the Threat is Key

Even though it makes sense to avoid danger by understanding the threat, many drivers do not employ effective surveillance detection skills or have a basic knowledge of threats. It is critical to begin the security driver’s work well before getting behind the wheel. This includes working closely with corporate security and executive assistants to keep updated on threats to the executive, changes in the corporation, and the general image of the organization.

Background work to identify and contain threats is much more effective than last minute offensive driving to get out of a tight spot. If a driver spends significant amounts of time with the executive she bears an even greater responsibility for the executive’s welfare. This situation requires even more work with security to define threats and avoid them.

Medical Emergencies

Most executives won’t be kidnapped but many will face medical emergencies of some sort while traveling. The obvious requirement for security drivers is knowledge of medical facilities along any given route. This does not just involve knowing the address of a hospital. Specific information on the nearest trauma centers, emergency rooms, fire stations, and outpatient facilities should be at hand. Knowing the direct line to an emergency room can save valuable minutes for a seriously ill or wounded executive.

A sensitive issue that is not normally addressed involves medical background information for the executive. Sharing medical history information with security drivers improves the survival probability for an executive but it is not common for “just a driver” to know about the boss’s chronic illness. If a medical emergency does occur or if an accident threatens the life of an executive a driver’s knowledge can be a lifesaver.

 Watch out for the TaxMan

The Internal Revenue Service look for opportunities to tax corporate compensation and executive protection can become a problem in this area if it is not handled properly. Imagine the difficulties associated with an unexpected $100,000 tax bill for the CEO. It is possible if the salary of a security driver and other related expenses are considered executive compensation. In a 40% tax bracket the personal income tax on several years protection can easily reach astronomical amounts.

 To avoid this problem it is crucial to employ an independent professional to study the corporate security needs. The study should be based on objective facts and circumstances. If security threats require a trained driver and security car for the benefit of the company the IRS should not tax the individual executive who also benefits.

 Dealing with Executive Objections

Whenever a change of executive lifestyle is involved, expect a problem. This is especially true for security where there is no direct link to corporate profits. If the CEO must have a security driver expect that the change will be resisted. The same security survey that was done to justify the expenses to the IRS may be helpful in convincing management of the need.

 One approach to the subject might be to explain the need for a proactive approach in terms of the other parts of the organization. No good manager would wait for a disaster to make changes in manufacturing, accounting or marketing. The same is true in security. Spending an effort and some money up front can produce significant results in the future.

We have developed an iPhone Application on Distracted Driving. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) driver distractions are the leading cause of most vehicle crashes and near-crashes.  The App came about when we looked at a study released by the NHTSA and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI).  The study discovered that 80% of crashes and 65% of near-crashes involve some form of driver distraction – and the distraction occurred within three seconds before the vehicle crash!   For those in High Risk Security that number “three seconds” is familiar. It is the “Kill Zone”.

The Kill Zone Concept is used to train our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to avoid a vehicle ambush. Our iPhone Application uses the same theory to explain and avoid the dangers of Distracted Driving.

The theory is simple; a Kill Zone is a time-distance relationship. How much time does the driver have and how close is the problem (distance)?  The Kill Zone is directly related to the speed of the vehicle when the incident occurs.

An example of how Kill Zones relate to Distracted Driving look at the following scenario – You are 300 feet from a traffic light moving at 40 mph which is 60 feet per second. You get a text message; it takes 3 seconds to read the message – that means you drove 180 feet (3 seconds x 60 fps) without looking at the road. 

You were 300 feet from the traffic light, but as you were reading the text message, you moved 180 feet. When you looked up from the text message, you are 120 feet (300 -180) from the traffic light that has now changed from yellow to red.

You are 120 feet in front of the red light and closing in at 60 fps.  You are in the Kill Zone, a time distance relationship, the distance is 120 feet and some quick arithmetic tells you that you have two seconds to react. And you are driving deeper into the kill zone.

If you can get you foot on the brake in a half-second (that’s fast), you will travel 30 feet (half of 60 fps).  So at the point of applying your brakes, you are 90 feet from the traffic light (the initial 120 feet minus the 30 feet it took to reach for the brake). 

You will have to stop a car moving at 40 MPH (60 feet a sec) in 1.5 seconds. Life is going to get terribly exciting.

Our App uses case studies in the form of presentations, similar to the one above, and offers lessons learned.  The objective is to keep you out of the kill zone. 

You can direct any questions or comments to

tonyscotti@securitydriver.com

lawrence.snow@sjcwebdesign.com

By Joe Autera

One of the many challenges that corporate security professionals face is maintaining adequate security for their executives and other key personnel as they go about their daily business. Often times, these challenges are far greater when those folks are traveling beyond the umbrella of protection that has been established for them in and around their residence, their workplace and while moving between these familiar locations. But what happens when they are visiting an out-of state (or overseas) facility? Or attending a meeting in a city where the company has no presence? We’ve all heard the stories of executives getting in the wrong car at some unfamiliar airport or, worse yet, hailing a cab when they can’t seem to find the driver hired to take them to that meeting and, on more than one occasion, listened as a corporate pilot or personal assistant recounts how some executive was picked-up ramp side by some nefarious looking character in a vehicle that was better suited for the scrap pile than carrying passengers.

When issues like this arise, they aren’t necessarily the fault of the person who was responsible for arranging the transportation, though they often bear the brunt of it. Larger transportation companies often boast of how many cities they cover, when in reality they sub-contract a large portion of their work out to independent operators, especially in cities with low volumes of business. Now, with the advent of the internet and pre-packaged web sites it’s all too easy for someone, say the independent driver with a single twelve year old sedan, to portray themselves as something other than what they are, like a high end, professional car service with modern cars and equipment. Complacency also plays a part in some of the problems that arise with ground transportation, particularly in smaller companies as they tend to rely on vendors simply because they’re the ones they have always used, even though the company’s needs may have changed dramatically.

Today, finding the right transportation provider is becoming even more complicated as a shifting economy and negative media attention have raised the profile and increased the security risks for many corporations and their executives while, at the same time, budgets are being cut and cost saving measures are being implemented across the board. All of this places an even greater importance on ensuring that contract ground transportation providers are not the weak link in your security program and that your company is getting what it pays for.

Regardless of whether risk management (security) or cost effectiveness is the driving factor in the decision making process, given what’s at stake – the safety and security of some of the company’s valuable assets – the need for a formal vetting process for transportation providers has never been greater. When properly documented, the results of such a process will prove useful in identifying which provider truly offers the better value, as opposed to the best price.

The framework for a ground transportation provider vetting process, that has proven to be useful for corporate security decision makers and satisfies most basic due diligence requirements is outlined below.

1. Verify vendors financial standing through third party service (Dunn & Bradstreet, Hoover’s, etc.)
2. Verify vendor holds proper operating licenses – transportation, security or both – for all locales they will be providing service in.  
3. Verify insurance (require that their broker provide ACORD certificates of insurance directly to you).
4. Establish contractual requirements for minimum coverage levels, require notification of any change in status or coverage
5. Check for and review current and past civil or criminal case filings in all locales where vendor operates – not just those where they will be servicing your account (use data mining service such as LexisNexis, Choicepoint, etc.)
6. Check with Better Business Bureau, or similar agency, for complaints in all locales where vendor operates – not just those where they will be servicing your account
7. Review vendors hiring practices (minimum qualifications, requisite experience etc. Require proof of compliance (i.e. sampling of documentation/credentials of new or recent hires as well as long term employees).
8. Review vendors training requirements (type of programs, frequency of training). Require proof of compliance (again, a sampling of documentation pertaining to current employees)
9. Review vendor’s maintenance and vehicle replacement program or policies, require proof of compliance (i.e. sampling of documentation for specific vehicles). For example, we are aware of at least one transportation provider that replaces all vehicles at 30K miles and has a strict maintenance schedule
10. Ensure vendor  has capability to fully support your security needs (i.e. drivers with specialized security training – not just off-duty police officers) through client references and review of appropriate documentation

As with any other vetting process the operative phrase is “trust, but verify”. When it comes to documentation and references, you want to take every step possible to ensure the accuracy and legitimacy of the information provided by contacting references directly, getting documentation directly from the source (i.e. the insurance broker), and establishing a contractual right to request further documentation, updated information or to perform periodic inspections, at your discretion.

While there is a lot to be said for dealing with larger, more established vendors there are some downsides as well (high turnover, less clout for your company, less emphasis on customer service, etc.) and if you happen to be in need of more specialized services – like experienced security drivers or drivers with BLS/AED certification, specially-equipped vehicles or the like – dealing with a smaller company with a shorter track record may be the only option available. If security is the deciding factor you may be best served by dealing with one of the few local or regional companies that provide a bona fide secure ground transportation service. Of course, regardless of how large or small the service providers business may be, a thorough vetting process will help guard against costly and embarrassing problems further down the road.

Depending on your occupation, there is no doubt there are scenarios where one may need to drive fast. The difficulty associated with driving fast depends on three issues, the skill of the driver, the vehicle they are driving and the environment they are driving through. On an ice covered road 30 MPH can be exciting, on a four lane highway with the sun shining, 80 MPH could go unnoticed. In a three vehicle motorcade, the driver of the lead vehicle may not think 70 MPH is a problem, but the driver of the third vehicle may disagree with that assessment.

Driving fast is a complicated issue. Let’s be clear that driving fast in a straight line is not difficult, unless you are sitting in a Dragster that consists of a metal tube with a 6000 HP engine behind you, and you are planning on going 300 MPH in a quarter mile. Driving fast becomes difficult when you need to operate one of the other controls (brake – steering) of the vehicle. In a non racing scenario it makes little difference how fast you’re traveling in a straight line, the skill (and excitement) comes in when you need to do something with the car, like driving around a corner or making an avoidance maneuver, at that point it becomes not an exercise in high speed straight line driving, but an exercises in high speed braking or turning. All this requires training and practice, and there is an enormous difference between driving around a corner fast, and driving out of an emergency.

SOME BASIC THOUGHTS ON DRIVING FAST

As speed increases, drivers’ eye tends to focus on objects just a short distance in front of the car’s hood. Common sense says that the faster you drive the further ahead of the car your attention should be focused. In a high risk environment you need the eyes of everyone in the vehicle coupled with a method of communicating what they see to the driver, or drivers, this requires training and practice.

The faster you drive, the more often you should consult your speedometer. You cannot rely on your own judgment; the faster you drive, the more your perception of speed becomes distorted.

Don’t drive faster than you can see. If you are driving at 60 MPH you are moving approximately 90 Feet a Second, most researchers say that you need 2.5 seconds to react to what you see, that means at 60 mph you would need 225 feet to react to what is happening. It is my opinion that training considerably cuts down those 2.5 seconds.This is the most important issue and training point – When you increase speed, you are suddenly driving a very different car from the one you were in control of a few moments ago. If you double your speed from 40 mph to 80 mph, the forces acting on the vehicle, has been increased by a factor of four. Turning the steering wheel at 80 mph will put four times as much stress on the car as the same maneuver at 40 mph. And no matter what braking method you use, it will take you four times longer to stop the vehicle.

 It may be difficult to think of a 10,000 lb armored Suburban as “sensitive”, but a car’s controls are extremely sensitive to speed, the faster you go, the more sensitive the vehicles braking and steering become. Small changes in speed (as little as 2 MPH) will dramatically change the vehicles response to the drivers input. Controlling a vehicle while driving into a corner or through an emergency maneuver is a skill that needs to be learned, practiced, and measured.

To give an example of how sensitive vehicles are to speed; A competent driver can drive through our slalom exercise at 30 MPH with little or no problems; at 32 life will start to become exciting; at 35, doable but very exciting; at 37.5 the car will be sliding, but again doable; at 40 MPH the driver will not be able to complete the exercise. A change of about 2 MPH will be the difference between successes and failure. How this translates to the real world is that you can be driving 100 MPH in a straight line (easy to teach, it’s the pedal on the right – press on it) but if you need to make an emergency maneuver or drive around a corner you will have to slow the car down from 100 MPH to a speed that the driver – vehicle – environment can handle, and that is not easy to teach or master.

We tend to think about vehicle ambush as something that happens someplace other than the US. But recently one of our former students got involved in a problem that is worth talking about.

George TZ was driving his principals 250K Bentley Turbo (Minus the principal) though the streets of one of the New York Burroughs.

George noticed a SUV, with a tinted windshield, Connecticut plates behind him; tinted windshields are illegal in New York. He didn’t pay much attention to the vehicle until he noticed the SUV still behind him a few miles down the road. At that point George decided to drive a surveillance detection route, and at the completion of the route the SUV was still there. George called 911 told the dispatcher the scenario, the decision was made to have a police vehicle meet George at a particular intersection. On his way to the rendezvous point, while waiting at a stop light, the SUV pulled around George and blocked his path. Two young gentlemen got out of the SUV with their hands inside their jackets and started to approach the Bentley.

George ran the options through his mind, ram (a $250,000 vehicle) or drive around the blocking SUV. He determined there was enough space to drive around the SUV, driving away from the would be bad guys. All this happening in seconds, he got back to the dispatcher and had the police meet him at the place of the almost ambush.

The police felt the description fit that of a group doing bad things in the New York area.

Lessons Learned

• George was alert and saw the SUV
• He understood the concept of Surveillance Detection
• Once the ambush started George went through his options and executed the selected option
• George has been involved in Security Driving for many years, but is constantly updating his driving and security skills.

From an article by Joe Autera  jautera@vehicledynamics.net 

and Tony Scotti  tonyscotti@securitydriver.com

1 – Surveillance Detection is Critical

The most import issue is Surveillance Detection. In both the attacks it is apparent that surveillance of the target and the route played a critical role in the attack planning process. My 35+ years working in the armpit places of the world tells me that in many situations surveillance detection is not just the best protection; it may be the only protection. That is why it has become essential for security providers to learn how, when and where an attacker is likely to conduct surveillance as well as how to plan, manage and conduct effective surveillance detection operations.

2 – You Need the Right Tools for the Job

You need to have the right equipment – in our world that usually means a vehicle that can do the job. In a high risk environment doing the job is defined as an armored vehicle that will stop whatever rounds it is they are going to shoot at you. If you are in a Level 4 vehicle and they are firing Level 7 rounds, it’s is like taking a knife to a gunfight.

3 – The Attack Begins Long Before the First Gunshot

If your day is interrupted by the pitter patter of rounds hitting the windshield, it is not the first time the bad guys have had eyes on the target (that’s you). In one of the scenarios the attack was carried out by a large group with most of the rounds directed at the principal’s vehicle, this is an indication that the attackers had done their homework. More than likely they had surveillance in place up to the moment of the attack. Refer to Point 1.

4 – Training, Training, Training

In a recent vehicle ambush in Mexico, which lasted for minutes, not seconds, the principal’s vehicle was hit multiple times, at least once by grenade fragments, and was partially disabled due to a flat tire. Despite all of this, the drivers of both vehicles did exactly what needed to be done to ensure the principal’s survival, indicating excellent training. Your training must (not should) include Surveillance Detection.

5 – If the Vehicle Stops You Lose.

Time and time again we have seen that in a vehicle ambush the worst possible scenario is for the vehicle to come to a stop in the kill zone. Getting back to point 3 – training must include the “Science of the Kill Zone”. Even in attacks against an armored vehicle, once the vehicle is immobilized the attackers have control over the movement of the target, and that is not a good thing.

The complete article   http://www.vehicledynamics.net/articles/taleoftwo.html