Infantry Weapons

Tunnel-Entrance Booby-Trap Improvised Explosive Device

Also known as
  • booby-trapped tunnel entrance
  • booby-trapped tunnel shaft
  • tunnel entrance IED
  • tunnel-shaft booby trap
  • tunnel shaft IED

Hamas tunnel-entrance booby-trap IEDs in Gaza use explosives at shafts, entrances, or tunnel approaches to make underground access points dangerous choke points during the 2023 Israel-Hamas War. IDF, Reuters, Modern War Institute, and U.S. Army sources describe booby-trapped shafts, embedded IEDs, blast doors, and robotic or engineering checks as part of the tunnel-clearance hazard set.

Role in Conflicts

Profile / Specs

Profile

Origin
Gaza Strip
Built by
Hamas
Type
Improvised explosive device
Service note
2023-present
Designer
Hamas

Specifications

Construction
Field-improvised explosive charge or booby trap associated with a tunnel entrance, shaft, wall, or access route
Placement
Concealed at or near tunnel entrances and shafts in Gaza, including IDF-documented Khan Yunis and southern Gaza tunnel routes
Observed tunnel context
The IDF-described Khan Yunis route was about 830 meters long and about 20 meters deep
Clearance hazard
Reuters described tunnel-shaft searches for booby traps or IEDs before ground troops sealed or destroyed shafts; U.S. Army analysis notes cameras, dogs, and unmanned ground vehicles were used to reduce entry risk
Associated obstacles
Explosives, blast doors, sliding doors, ambush risk, and other underground obstacles
Timeline

Tunnel-Entrance Booby-Trap Improvised Explosive Device Key Events

  1. Reuters describes tunnel-shaft IED checks

    Reuters reported that Israeli tunnel-clearance work in Gaza involved uncovering shafts and checking for booby traps or IEDs before troops sealed or destroyed tunnel routes.

    Sources: Reuters Inside the Tunnels of Gaza

  2. Khan Yunis tunnel entrance is found booby-trapped

    The IDF said soldiers of the 98th Division found an about 830-meter tunnel in Khan Yunis about 20 meters underground, with a booby-trapped entrance, explosives, sliding doors, and blast doors.

    Sources: Behind Rigged Tunnel Shafts and Blast Doors

  3. Southern Gaza tunnel routes include booby-trapped shafts

    The IDF said combat engineers and the Southern Gaza Brigade dismantled a tunnel route stretching several hundred meters and found multiple exit shafts, some of which were booby-trapped.

    Sources: IDF Combat Engineers Dismantle an Offensive Underground Tunnel

  4. U.S. Army summarizes Gaza subterranean lessons

    A U.S. Army article on IDF lessons from Gaza described tunnel-entrance searches as dangerous because of booby traps and highlighted cameras, military working dogs, and unmanned ground vehicles as ways to reduce initial-entry risk.

    Sources: U.S. Army Subterranean Operations Gaza Lessons

Tunnel-Entry Hazard Pattern

This weapon functions as a tunnel-clearance hazard rather than a factory model: sources describe booby-trapped entrances, shafts, and tunnel walls that force engineers to inspect access points before soldiers enter or destroy a route.

Evidence laneWhat it documentsOperational meaning
Khan Yunis tunnelBooby-trapped entrance, internal explosives, sliding doors, and blast doors inside an IDF-described tunnel about 830 meters long and 20 meters deep.Direct example of an entrance used as an explosive choke point.
Southern Gaza routeMultiple exit shafts in a several-hundred-meter underground route, some described by the IDF as booby-trapped.Shows the shaft hazard recurring beyond a single tunnel complex.
Clearance sequenceReuters described Israeli forces uncovering shafts and locating booby traps or IEDs before ground troops sealed or destroyed tunnel routes.Explains why the device matters operationally during tunnel reduction.
Entry-risk mitigationModern War Institute and U.S. Army analyses describe booby traps outside and inside tunnels, embedded IEDs, and use of cameras, dogs, robots, or other unmanned systems before entry.Places the device inside the wider subterranean warfare problem set.
Media
Related Weapon Systems
Weaponized civilian bulldozer or front loader, Combat engineering bulldozer/front loader, Armored VehiclesArmored VehiclesWeaponized civilian bulldozer or front loaderCombat engineering bulldozer/front loaderWeaponized civilian bulldozers and front loaders are heavy construction machines adapted for combat engineering, barrier breaching, demolition, and protected route work. The Israeli Caterpillar D9 family is the best-documented armored example, appearing in Gaza operations in 2008, 2014, and 2023 and in the July 2023 Jenin operation, while Hamas-led attackers also used construction equipment for barrier breaching on October 7. Remote-control and autonomous conversions such as Panda and RobDozer reduce crew exposure during IED, obstacle, berm, and demolition tasks.
Door-breaching explosive charge, Explosive breaching charge, Infantry WeaponsInfantry WeaponsDoor-breaching explosive chargeExplosive breaching chargeA door-breaching explosive charge is a portable combat-engineering entry device used by assault teams and sappers to defeat doors, locks, hardware, walls, or light obstacles with a controlled blast. Military training sources describe task-specific charge patterns such as donut, linear, silhouette, and water-impulse charges, while conflict reporting documents explosive entry use in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gaza urban operations.
Magnetic or sticky anti-vehicle bomb, Improvised explosive device, Infantry WeaponsInfantry WeaponsMagnetic or sticky anti-vehicle bombImprovised explosive deviceMagnetic or sticky anti-vehicle bombs are close-placement explosive devices fixed to a vehicle with magnets, adhesive, or direct manual placement so the blast occurs against the hull, chassis, or wheel area. The modern conflict record is strongest for improvised sticky IEDs used against vehicles in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza, while the older British No. 74 sticky bomb shows the same attachment concept in a purpose-built anti-tank grenade.

Sources