THE PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN FOR ARMY ENGINEERS 

Hcadqwrtm,Department of the Army 

Information 

Delivery 

STRAC 

Personal Viewpoint 

MISSION TRAINING PLANS RESULT IN 


BETTER TRAINING 


by CPT Warren R. WaIdorff 

ariations in existing ARTEPs 

Vallow too much room for subjective interpretation in training and 

evaluation. They also have inconsistent standards in other ARTEPs for 

the same task. Generally, engineers 

should have to meet the same standards in accomplishing the mission 

or task regardless of how they get 

there, who they support, or who is 

training and/or evaluating. Of 

course, the methods, techniques 

and procedures will differ with the 

ingenuity and innovation of the leader, but the standards remain the 

same. These problems and others 

are being resolved in the development of ARTEP mission training 

plans (MTPs). MTPs will replace existing ARTEP manuals over the 

next several years. Some of the 

characteristics of the MTPs include 

objective standards, standardized 

tasks, situationaVfield training exercises (STXFTXs), and an improved 

development process. 

Subjective evaluation of ARTEP 

standards also causes training to be 

conducted subjectively. Trainers 

and evaluators alike rely on their 

own experiences, beliefs, and "the 

way we did it in my last unit" to establish standards. This results in 

conflict and inconsistencies in training and evaluating to these standards. MTP standards are more 

quantitative, measurable, observable, and objective. The intent of objective standards is for anyone, 

regardless of experience or expertise, to read the words on the page 

and interpret, unequivocally, the 

same meaning. MTP standards are 

not subject to broad interpretation, 

A second problem is standardition. Currently, the same task 

appears in diflerent ARTEPs with 

diierent standards. A soldier, previously assigned to a divisional engineer unit, must perform collective 

tasks to different standards in a 

corps engineer unit. Although the 

means by which they get to the battlcfield may bc different, the standards to which they perform the task 

should he (he same. MTPs redify 

this probbm through horizontal 

alignment. Where ARTEPs address 

the battalion, company, and platoon 

in one book MTPs address only 

one echelon in each book.Additionally, the MTP applies to all engineer units with a similar organization and mission; thus the horizontal alignment. For example, the 

MTP for the heavy division engineer platoon also applies to corps 

and armorcd cavalry regiment engineer platoons. 01 course, there 

are a few differing tasks, and they 

will be included, However, the 

majority of' the tasks, once the unit 

arriws at its destination, are parformed to the same standards. 

Another feature of the lMTP is 

more "how to train" material. Situational and field training exercise examples are given in each book to illustrate conducting training exercises frcm "A to Z." Each example 

contains a detailed plan, scenario, 

sequence of events, support, and 

OPFOR requirements. 

Additionally? the quality of the 

MTF was improved by means of a 

development process involving maximum fieid input and a "top-down" 

approach. Recently, we invited 

several battalion commanders from 

lit engineer units to develop the 

framework for their MTPs. The 

commanders7 Brst-hand experience, 

expertise, and frustration with existing ARTEPs were largely responsible for the development of practical, usable MTPs. The "topdown" 

approach involves conducting a 

Directors' Executive Committee 

Meeting (DEXCOM),heacled by 

the Assistant Commandant and attended by all colonels at (he Engineer School, to develop the task 

list and framework for each MTP. 

Both quality assurance metho& 

provide for heiter MTPs, produed 

more quickly. 

Other strategies used lo hwtm 

development are crealivc swiping 

and skunkworks. In creative swiping, MTPs are collected from all the 

other schools and analyzed. The 

bcst parts of each book are modified and included in engineer 

MTPs. This "best of the rest" drategy enables engineer MTPs b be 

of the highest quality without "rcinventing the wheel." In skunkworks, a 

assets and resources are consolidated in one location Lo perform 

the majority (approximately 90 percent) of the development. This 

strategy circumvents the red tape of 

bureacracy and facilitates direct and 

timely coordination between functions. 

As the MTPs reach field units, it 

is imperative for those seeking to 

gain an advantage in training tcr 

read, understand, and implement 

the revolutionary impravemenls provided by mission training plans. The 

units whose leaders quickly embrace MTP concepts will sland high 

above the rest. 

CPT Wam~zR. Waldofl is a leanz 

chief it1 tlze Directomre of Training 

and Doctn'ttc a1 fire U.S.A17tty Engiriccr Scltool. His assigvtlenls &-

clrrde plafootz lead~~ assisfaftt 83, 

and aecutive opcer iit the ~7$1Engineer Battalion, Hcilhro~t~t,FRG 

He was also #33 on llte fl.Itiro/t at 

West P0ittl. 
w Enaineer
 -

w 


November 1988 

UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER AND 

FORT LEONARD WOOD 

COMMANDER/COMMANDANT 

MG Daniel R. Schroeder 

MANAGING EDITOR 

Teresa C. Sutter 

DESIGNERS 

Beatrice McDonald 

Jennifer C. Bolyard 

By Order of the Secretary of the Army: 

CARL E. VUONO 

General, United States Army 

Chief of Staff 

Official: 

WILLIAM J. MEEHAN I1 

Brigadier General, United States Army 

The Adjutant General 

About the cover 

The Electronic Information Delivery 

System (EIDS) is the latest in training 

devices. Soldiers can gain current 

Army doctrinal procedures for their 

branch/MOS by calling up training 

situations on the videodisc computer. 

Volume 19 PB 5-88-2 

FEATURES 

4 EIDS Brings Interactive Training to Engineers 

by Margaret C. White 

9 STRAC 

by Saundra L. Smith 

11 Reserve Component Configured Courseware (RC3) 

by CPT Thomas Round 

14 Department of Topography Established 

by LTC Russell 0. Reich, Jr. 

16 Camouflage and Concealment 

by MAJ John M. Luchak 

18 Engineer School Move 

by COL John P. Carey and 1LT(P) Jamie White 

21 Whatever Happened to Assault Boat Crossing? 

by CPT Frank S. Weston, Jr. 

22 Conducting a Staff Ride 

by CPT Donald D. Jacobovitz 

24 Realidic Training on a Budget: The Device Solution 

by LTC Arthur A. Marubbio 

30 Building Strong Roads 

by CPT Roy W. Rieder 

32 The Importance of Practicing Battle Drills 

by CPT Edward C. Cardon 

DEPARTMENTS 

Inside Front Cover: Personal Viewpoint 

2 Clear the Way 17 Engineer Problem 

3 Engineer Update 27 Engineer Solution 

ENGINEER (ISSN 0046-19890) is prepared quatterly by the U.S Army Engineer CORRESPONDENCE, letters to the editor, manuscripts, photographs, official unit reSchool. AlTN: ATSE-TDM-P, Fod Leonard Wood, A40 65473-5895. This. publlcat~olr quests to receive copies, and unit address changes should be sent to ENGINEER, at 

presents professional information, it docs not necessarily reflect the official Army posi- the preceding address. Telephone: (314) 368.381 1, AV 581.381 1. 

tion, and it does not change or supersede any information presented in other official PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS are available by contacting the Superintendent of Docu- Army publications. Unless otherwise stated, whenever the masculine gender is used, ments, ASTN: Chief, Mail List Branch, Stop SSOM, Washington. D. C. 20402. Address both men and women are included. changes for personal subscrlptlons should also be sent to the Superintendent of DocuCONTENT is not copyrighted. Material may be reprinted if credit is given to ENGINEER ments. Second Class postage is paid at Fort Leonard Wood. MO, and additional mailand to the author. ing offices. 

OFFICIAL DiSTRiBUTiON is targeted to all engineer and engineer-related units. 	 POSTMASTER: Send address change to ENGINEER PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN. ATSETDM-P, Fott Leonard Wood, MO 65473-5895. 
by MG Daniel R. Schroeder 

Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School 

ON WARFIGHTING 

"No method of education, no system of promotions, 

no amount of common sense or ability is of value unless the leader has in him the root of the matter- The 

Fighting Spirit. "-Fieid Marshall Earl Wavei 

Members of our profession hardly need reminding to 

focus on warfighting -that is our business. Yet over 

time, imperceptible and seemingly insignificant shifts In 

focus can occur, resulting in a posture far different 

from that intended. in our business, such a failing portends the worst possible consequences. 

As we engineers begin a new era at an Engineer 

Center unified in command, location, and spirit, it is appropriate to review where we are and where we are 

going, and to ensure we are truly focused on warfightIng in three key areas: combat developments, doctrine 

and training literature, and training. 

COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS 

Implementation of E-Force is the single most important force structure contribution engineers can make to 

the Army's warfighting capability. ENGINEER featured 

an E-Force update in the last issue (July 1988). Testing 

and proof of the concept will occur soon at the task 

force and brigade levels in CONUS and at division and 

corps levels In USAREUR. We will then be a step closer 

to becoming the most effective engineer fighting organization ever. 

Engineer equipment modernization efforts continue 

apace. The SEE is here and the M9 ACE is coming. 

Development of other systems essential to the fightVOLCANO, TEXS, and CMV- continues. We are on the 

threshold of exciting new capabilities and challenges. 

DOCTRINE AND TRAINING LITERATURE 

We have a new capstone doctrinal manual: FM 

5-100, Engineer Combat Operations, has been through 

rigorous reviews and is ready for publication. You wiil 

receive R with these obligations: Study the principles of 

how we support the combined arms fight in the AirLand Battle, learn it, apply it, and teach It to subordinates and our brothers in arms. See to it, and then 

do the same for the following doctrinal manuals: FM 

5-1 16, Engineer Operations: Echelons Above Corps; 

FM 5-71-100, Engineer Support to Close Combat 

Heavy Forces; and FM 5-71-101, Engineer Support to 

Close Combat Light Forces. 

Training literature development progressed equally. 

The old ARTEP manuals are being replaced by ARTEP 

Mission Training Plans (MTP). Final MTPs for heavy engineer units are being readied for distribution. MTPs for 

combat heavy elements are being written now for publication by the end of FY89. in every case, the emphasis is on key combat tasks and standards relevant 

to the desired effect on the enemy. 

New Soldier's Manuals are coming. The logical outgrowth of MTPs, they are concise sets of Individual 

tasks that enable units to accomplish their collective 

combat missions. You will receive them in FY90. 

Battle drills, an essential bridge between individuai 

and collective training, are a high priority. A set of drills 

limited to key warfighting missions are planned for distribution by the end of 1988. 

Other training literature, such as Reserve Component Configured Courseware and the STRAC manual 

(see "STRAC," page 9) contribute to the warfighting 

focus. 

TRAINING 

Structure changes, equipment modernization, doctrine, training requirements, and standards are integrated and synchronized through individual and coliective training. The School and Center consolidation 

enables us to alter individuai training dramatically. 

My predecessor, MG Bill Reno, embarked on an ambitious review of EOBC, EOAC, and ANCOC training. 

His objective was to ensure the right kinds and proportions of warfighting training in those courses while ensuring training among ail courses was horizontally and 

vertically integrated. We wiil follow through on those 

changes not already implemented. Further, we will 

continue to find more (and better) ways to enhance the 

technical competence and tactical proficiency of ail enyineer soldiers. Fort Leonard Wood's greater availability of ranges and close-In areas for realistic training 

provide that long-sought opportunity. 

Much of the success in training is tied to the doctrine 

and training literature already discussed. Still more is 

dependent on the availability of adequate training 

devices, such as Placed Training Mines (see "Realistic 

Training on a Budget: The Device Solution," page 24). 

But perhaps the most important element of ail is our 

ability, as leaders, to ensure we train well wRh the right 

fight focus- WARFIGHTING. 
SCHOOL NEWS 


Directorate of Combat 


Developments (DCA) 


New TOE ranger slots Headquarters TRADOC 

has recently approved coding several officer positions in the Engineer Battalion, Light infantry 

Division (TOE 05-155L) to be filled by rangerqualified officers (AS1 5R). Though no additional 

positions in the HHC were authorized, the company 

commander, company executive officer, and both 

platoon leader slots in the engineer company are 

coded for rangers. 

This change is the result of a USAES effort, ap 

proved by TRADOC and DA DCSOPS, to gain additional ranger training quotas and provide Light 

Division engineer officers with training on a par with 

that received by their maneuver battalion counterparts. 

DCD point of contact for this TOC change is Mr. 

John Leinenbach. ATZT-CDO, Fort Leonard Wood, 

MO 65473. He can be reached at AV 581 -6924. 

CAREER NOTES 


Sapper Leader Course Grads 

Seeking airbornelranger volunteers Looking for 

a challenge, something that automatically identifies 

you as a cut above? Why not try to win the coveted 

ranger tab and/or airborne wings? 

Many of the 126 SAPPER positions in the Light Infantry Division now require ranger qualification and 

volunteers for this arduous and exciting training are 

being accepted. There is also a continuous requirement for airborne qualified soldiers in most of the engineer MOSS to provide the rotation base for airborne units. 

Apply through command/personnel channels following the procedures outlined in Chapter 6, AR 614- 

200 and DA Pam 600-8. Successful graduates can 

look forward to challenging assignments in the light 

divisions or with the airborne engineers. 

Survival, evasion, resistance, and escape 

(SERE) training course Senior NCOs who enjoy excitement may find the SERE training course may be 

just what they're looking for. SERE is a difficult 18- 

day course emphasizing survival situations and 

needs; escape and evasion techniques; and methods of resistance to enemy interrogation, indoctrination, and exploitation. The course involves high 

levels of physical and mental stress that require a 

great personal commitment by each partcipant for 

successful completion. 

Senior NCOs who anticipate assignment to a battalion or higher S2 position will find this a good TDY 

enroute course to take. Interested NCOs can call 

their TAPA career advisor, AV 325-77101771 1, for additional information. 
EIDS BRINGS 

INTERACTIVE 

TRAINING TO 

ENGINEERS 

by Margaret C:. White 

L lStandarclizcd computer and 

,7m video training will soon become a reality for cngincers and 

other branches of thc U. S. Army. 

The long-awaited Elcclronic Information Dclivcry System (EIDS) 

training devices are now being distril>utcd lo TRADOC schools and 

will be fielded to learning centers 

I'or iictivc and reserve units. 

With the fielding ol' EIDS, engineer inter:rctive courseware (ICW) is 

also being developed. Numerous 

videodisc programs and computerbasecl instruction materials will soon 

Ix available to the Engineer School 

for supplemental training and to 

units for refresher training. 

T he Ta.~kForc:cr E~zgirzecr 112 Dcforzsivc 017c!ru!iolrs is a simulation of 

the T:tctical Exercise Without 

Troops (TEWT) of the Manassas 

B:tltlelield tcrrain. It gives the student a chance to practice land 

navigation skills and preparation of 

engineer plans i~nclwork esliniatcs. 

The Minc.jii~ld Bn!aching But-

/IcciliN Erwlrrnfiolr also employs the 

Cull cal~ithility of ElDS by displaying 

a video scenario and mission, and 

then allowing the squad leader student to makc decisions to breach :I 

niinelielcl. If the student responds incorrectly, the consequences are 

shown ;IS an unsuccessful Iweach; 

with the correct response, a succcssful I7reach is displayed. 

1nter;tctive courscwarc on Nons/mrriartl ,4 11 r i S/urirla/yl Fikeri BlirigDelivery 


System 


ilig may he available Summer 1089. 

This courseware includes training 

on 14 bridging tasks from classirication to construction and supervision 

of v;trious bridges. The courseware 

will consist of three videodiscs and 

will display vicleo segments and still 

photos of construction and bridging 

components and provide practical 

cxcrciscs itnd immediate Feedback 

to the stuclcnt. Similarly, Roari,s and 

Aitfic~I~I,~ coursewart: trains 16 construction and planning tasks that 

will supplement existing courses 

using the multimetlia characteristics 

available with EIDS. The table on 

page 7 gives the projected 

availability dates for plannccl ElDS 

training programs. 

While other TRADOC schools 

havc geared thcir interactive courseware to the training needs of the 

AIT and BNCOC sludents, the Engineer School's focus was originally 

with the Engineer Officer Basic 

Clourse, training important decisionmaking and planning skills required 

of the platoon leader. However, 

with ElDS c:tpabilities and with 

carclul planning in the design of the 

courscwarc, we can develop onc 

tritining effort that meets the needs 

of multiple groups. An excellent exitmplc of this is our proposccl use of 

an existing vicleoclisc ~rainlng program developed hy ~hc Infantry 

School, Militar!) 0/7ern/ions 11r Urban 

Tcl~,air~. Thc Engineer School is adding computer text and overlaying 

graphics to this video (which displays reconnaissance of a (;crnli~n 

village) Lo incorporatc engineer roleplaying, obstacle planning, and 

other engineer tasks. 

Coniputcr-based instruction, wilhout interactive videodiscs to store 

video and audio information, can 

also be run on EIDS. The Engineer 

School is currently converling selected PLATO lessons to MicroPLATO and hen to MS-DOS and 

EIDS. These lessons are now cxportahlc Lo users in the field who havc 

access to ElDS or to an MS-DOS 

compatible computer. 

To manage ElDS and associa~ed 

ICW effectively, the Arniy ancl proponent service schools must develop 

souncl strategies and implcmentation plans before developing coursewitre. The Engineer School is dcdicaled to providing requircd courseware for the entire engineer community (ha1 will meet short ancl longterm training goals. 

The following exccrpl from 77re 

EIDS Pli~ncr; reprinted with pertnission I'rom TRADOC', will ztnswcr 

most questions ahout the new system's features and distribution plan: 

The electronic inl'ormation clelivcry systcni (EIDS) introduces an 

innovative system that will have a 

profound impact throughout the 

Arniy. ElDS was devclopcd lo 

reriicdy clearly icien~ificd shortconiings in the current Army systcni for 
storing and delivering technical, 

doctrinal, and training information. 

Now we must develop strategies to 

use its capabilities for both fesident 

and nonresident training most effectively and efficiently. 

This arlicle provides an overview 

of the system's components, capabilities, operations, maintenance, and 

applications for training. 

EIDS is a general-purpose training system. The basic system is used 

as a personal workstation to train individual soldiers. It can be used in a 

classroom by adding a large projection screen or additional monitors. 

Workstations can also be linked in a 

network of students and instructors. 

The system is a totally new ap 

proach to delivering Army doctrinal, training, and technical information. Using interactive videodiscs 

(IVDs), EIDS takes advantage of 

recent state-of-the-art advances in 

microcomputer and visual information. The basic system consists of a 

videodisc player (VDP) and microcomputer subsystem (MS), monitor, 

and user input devices. 

EIDS is fully compatible with all 

MS-DOS software packages and 

with all IBM-compatible PC expansion boards. The system design uses 

standards to ensure compatibility 

and to enable future upgrading. 

In a compact, low-cost package, 

EIDS is an interactive computerbased training system with the enhanced audio and video capabilities 

of conventional videodiscs. It also 

has the tremendous data storage 

capabilities offered by hybrid videodisc technology. 

EIDS can solve many problems 

existing in current training systems. 

It is a table of distribution and allowances (TDA) item, managed 

through the training and audiovisual 

support center/visual information 

(TASCIVI) activitiessystem. 

Development 

During EIDS' development, two 

alternative IVD systems were built 

using off-the-shelf componentsA student usesa light pento mark his responsesto a training 

programat an EIDS workstation. 

The Apple 11 microcomputer 

with floppy disk drives, Sony 

PYM-120Q monitor, Pioneer 

videodisc player, and Allen communications VMI interface. 

The Sony SMC-70 microcomputer, Sony PVM-1270Q monitor, Sony LDP-10000 or lOOOOA 

videodisc, and Sony floppy disk 

drives. 

The videodisc player and microcomputer subsystem include16-bit microprocessor (expandable). 

MS-DOS 3.2 operating system. 

512K expandable random access 

memory (RAM). 

&inch or 12-inchlaser videodisc, 

Still-frame audio and digital data 

recovery unit. 

Both hardware systems confirmed ~uilt-in-dual3 112-inch auto shutthe value of this method of courseter floppy disk drive. 

ware delivery. Both proved that 

IVD systems, in general, are valuable, cost-effective resources. However, hardware and software compatibility problems existed. For 

large scale dissemination of information, the Army found standardization to be the only alternative. 

After these initial efforts, the 

Army awarded three parallel contracts to incorporate compressed 

audio and to improve system design. 

After delivery and testing of the advanced development models, the 

Army chose the Matrox model and 

decided to field EIDS. 

Components 

EIDS consists of the videodisc 

player and microcomputer subsystem, display subsystem IDS), standard peripheral devices, and other 

components described below. 

It uses high-level languages such 

as Pascal, BASIC, FORTRAN, and 

Ada. It is compatible with PC AT 

hardware and software. It is also 

capable of extended graphics (720 

by 480 pixels) by using an enhanced 

graphics adapter (EGA). 

The overall dimensions of the 

unit are 17 inches long by 17.25 inches in diameter by 10 inches high. 

It weighs 48.5 pounds. 

The display subsystem consists of 

a composite red, green, blue (RGB) 

color video monitor and an internal 

audio amplifier. Its dimensions are 

14 inches long (front) by 12 inches 

in diameter by 13 inches high. It 

weighs 28 pounds. 

Standard peripheral devices for 

the student station are a light pen 

and a keypad. Other components 

may includeTransit case, VDP and MS, 

reusable. 
Transit case, depot support, reus- presentation ~~~~~~~~~t 

able. 

19-inch rack vehicle mount kit EIDS will - for VDP and MS. 

Printer. 

Modem. 

Cables. 

Standard (QWERTY) keyboard 

for development system. 

Joystick. 

Mouse. 

Trackball. 

Remote control for videodisc 

player. 

Headphones. 

External magnetic mass storage 

device. 

5 114-inchdual floppy disk drives. 

NTSC monitor with touch panel 

(infrared type). 

Additional items may be added 

via standard RS-232C port. 

Capabilities 

Self-Diagtosis. The system master 

power switch, located on the front 

of the VDP and MS, turns the system on. It automatically performs 

self-tests to verify that all components are functional, including a 

test to detect defective memory, and 

identifies any failures to the user. 

The self-tests take about a minute, 

after which the operator follows the 

computer text instructions appearing on the screen. Controls and commands are entered with peripherals 

such as a light pen or keypad. 

User irttetface. EIDS is built using 

specially designed AT microcomputer bus components. Its operation 

is similar to that of an embedded 

AT microcomputer with additional 

functions for training and simulation applications. Its software is 

"menu-driven." 

Record keepirig. The system can 

register students and other users. It 

can generate electronic records with 

various levels of access, depending 

on the user's status. In the training 

mode, it can calculate and preserve 

test scores and performance records based on student responses, 

providing feedback when required. 

Process responses entered from 

a keypad, light pen, standard 

QWERTY keyboard, mouse, joystick, track ball, or a touch panel 

screen when available. 

Present feedback messages to 

users. These messages tell users 

how to proceed through the 

program. 

Manage the time and order of 

presentation, instruction, and test 

sequences. 

Load all computer programs, including the operating system, 

from the videodisc. 

Play back video images (motion 

or still frame), computer-genDisplaying stationary images of a 

particular image, with a minimum of 65 seconds of compressed audio per framc. 

Displaying programmed information in forbard or reverse in a 

fast-search mode, one frame advance mode, or in variable slowmotion mode. 

Switching between videodisc and 

computer graphics and superimposing computer-generated text 

and graphics on video images 

from the videodisc. 

Generating and displaying fullcolor, high-resolution computer 

graphics to support computer-assisted instruction (CAI), using 

floppy disk, disk drive, or videodisc and keyboard peripheral. 

erated text and graphics, -and Mass storage. The system is 

digital audio simultaneously on capable ofcommand. 

Control microcomputer linear or 

branched program function. 

Operate the VDP with the associated monitor in its operational mode independent of computer control. 

Graplzics. The system will have 

computer graphics capability with a 

minimum resolution of 720 by 480 

pixels and at least 16 colors. The 

videodisc player is a frontloading 

model, able to display frame numbers, as well as inform the central 

processing unit (CPU) which frame 

is accessed, via a bidirectional communication link between the player 

and the microprocessor. This provides the player status, which includes but is not limited to, player 

initializelready, audio channel used, 

and frame display. EIDS can play 

uninterrupted audio segments as 

short as 10 milliseconds and as long 

as 65 seconds. 

EIDS is capable of -

Intermixing programs containing 

still frames, still frames with compressed audio, full motion sequences, and digital text. 

Randomly accessing any single 

frame or a programmed series of 

frames by using system software. 

Storing up to 54,000 frames on 

one side of the videodisc. 

Storing digital data equivalent to 

4,200 standard 5 114-inch floppy 

disks on one side of the videodisc. 

Storing over 60 hours of audio on 

one side of the videodisc. 

User martiial. Matrox will provide 

an operator's technical manual to 

explain how to operate and maintain EIDS. A videotape and ICW 

prcduct are also being developed to 

explain how the training delivery system can support various types of 

training. 

Expandability 

EIDS was specifically designed 

for expansion. Three vacant board 

positions can host a varicty of 

products. The following is a list of 

expansion capabilities to considcr 

for developmentMicrocomputer bus architecture. 

Memory boards (2 megabytes 

plus). 

RS-232C aad IEEE 488 reccptables. 

Alternative alphanumeric displays (character sets, symbols). 

Programmable coprocessor and 

memory. 
Network interface and protocol 

boards. 

Extra serial and parallel ports. 

Voice synthesis and recognition 

capabilities. 

Interface boards for CD, ROM, 

DRAW, bubble, and other technologies. 

TrainingApplications 

EIDS can integrate the delivery 

of all existing visual information 

such as print, film, videotape, transparencies, and sound and slide products. The system hardware and its 

supporting courseware allow individual interactive training and twodimentional simulation, thereby extending training dollars. By allowing 

more simulated hands-on training, 

EIDS reduces the reliance on costly, low-density equipment or fullscale, high-fidelity simulators. It 

also reduces spare parts use and 

maintenance requirements. It can 

provide challenging surrogate travel 

simulations, leadership scenarios 

and realistic tactical exercises 

without troops. 

Service schools, other government agencies, and private industry 

have developed many cost-effective 

training techniques for interactive 

instruction to help resolve specific 

training deficiencies. EIDS will 

standardize this training. Courseware developed for resident training 

can also be used for distributed 

training. This concept requires that 

both resident and nonresident training materials be developed concurrently. Using this concept allows 

developers to further trainiag standardization by exporting instruction 

and training techniques to the field. 

Training developers may find that 

developing courseware for EIDS is 

more challenging and sophisticated 

than preparing traditional linear 

training materials. However, the 

design and developmtat of both use 

similar procedures. A broad knowledge of instructional techniques, design processes, and Army training 

development policy is necessary to 

understand the procedures for developing ICW. Interactive courseware, like traditional training materials, must be prepared according 

to TRADOC Regulation 350-7, 

which delineates policies, requirements, and responsibilities for developing instructional materials. 

To help schools develop courseware for EIDS, TRADOC designed, developed, and validated several 

ongoing workshops covering the 

skills and knowledge needed to 

produce videodisc training materials. 

MaintenanceSupport 

EIDS is a modified nondevelopmental item that will rely on government and limited contractor support throughout its life cycle. The 

system production contract will contain a total performance warranty 

covering system operation for at 

least one year. Warranty actions will 

be processed through the TASCIVI 

activity to the supportingcontractor. 

Initial spares will be procured 

and delivered with the initial 

production contract. A planned warranty program will minimize the 

number of government-supplied 

spares required for the first year of 

operation. However, out-of-warranty failure of spares caused by the 

user will still require support during 

the first year of operation. 

The proposed maintenance concept is to return EIDS for maintenance through the local TASCIVI 

activity to the depot. Users will not 

require special maintenance skills. 

Users will report nonfunctioning systems to the TASCIVI activity. The 

TASC/VI activity will troubleshoot 

only down to a major assembly by 

using on-hand test, measuremcnl, 

and diagnostic equipment. TASCIVI activity personnel currcnlly possess the skills required to perform 

organizational maintenance of EIDS. 

If (he local TASCIVI activity cannot repair the item, it will ship the 

end item or assembly to the Army 

depot for repair and requisition a 

replacement item through the Army 

supply system. The Army depot will 

either repair the item in-house or 
use a contractor repair facility. 

TASCIVI activities and depots will 

stock spare major end items, assemblies, accessories, and cables. 

Users will requisition replacement 

items through the Army supply system, using assigned NSN for each 

major EIDS component. 

Distribution 

EIDS will be distributed to 

TRADOC and FORSCOM schools, 

Army learning centers for Active 

and Reserve Components, field 

units, and Reserve Forces schools, 

National Guard academies and armories, consolidated training activities, and regional training sitesmaintenance. The TASCIVI activities will manage and account for 

EIDS, ensuring that the precepts 

below are followedHardware procurement is based 

on validated requirements. 

EIDS fielding is based on courseware availability and implementation strategy. 

Appropriate maintenance procedures are followed. 

Usage data is collected and 

reported. 

Replacement equipment is adequately programmed. 

Hardware is redistributed based 

on usage and training needs. 

To manage EIDS effectively, the 

Army and proponent service 

schools must develop both sound 

strategies and implementation plans 

before deploying both hardware 

and courseware. 

Hardware Fielding Plan 

When EIDS' hardware is distributed, it must be protected from 

moisture, excessive temperature, 

and fluctuation of electrical power. 

Therefore, required upgrading of 

facilities for space, cooiing, and 

electrical power must occur prior to 

distribution. 

The initial distribution began 

second quarter FY88. EIDS distribution is based on courseware 

availability, the proponent's implementation plan, and the total Army 

EIDS strategy. To convert existing 

interactive courseware to develop 

other programmed interactive-ware 

and to use for resident instruction, 

TRADOC service schools will receive the majority of the first shipment. Selected field units will 

receive a limited number of EIDS 

from subsequent distributions to 

support a test and evaluation of the 

total Army EIDS strategy. Operational fielding to units will benefit 

from the lessons learned during this 

evaluation. 

Courseware Fielding Plan 

The determination of who is to 

be trained, at which locations, and 

in what numbers will drive ICW 

replication and distribution. Joint 

Visual Information Service (JVIS), 

Tobyhanna, PA, will initially distribute (push) ICW through 

TASCWI activities to users. Active 

and Reserve Component users may 

request additional copies of lCW, 

through pull distribution, after they 

evaluate the applicability and use of 

the material. 

JVIS will label and package all 

ICW. The package will include instructions on how to use EIDS and 

a description of the subject or tasks 

taught in the courseware. The ICW 

distribution plan will cite individual 

and collective tasks supported by 

the courseware, which will help 

determine the specific ICW recipients. 

ICW Developments and Authoring 

Systems 

The Production Management System (PMS) was iritially developed 

to meet the specific needs of ICW 

development. PMS is a software system designed as an automated 

management program to keep track 

of large quantities of storyboards. 

During the evolution of the software 

system, user-requested enhancements moved it out of the realm of 

its production orientation. As more 

authoring capabilities were incorporated into the software, a name 

change became necessary. PMS became EIDS ASSIST (electronic information delivery system authoring 

software system for interactive simulation and training). 

As the name implies, ElDS ASSIST goes beyond PMS. It supports 

limited simulation capabilities as 

well as more complete authoring 

capabilities. Its user-friendly system 

provides on-line, content-sensitive 

help prompts that are available at 

any time during the courseware 

development process. Written in a 

higher order language, its efficient 

management functions and program 

speed provide tremendous cost savings in all phases of ICW development. Using EIDS ASSIST, ICW 

developers can now program their 

own training materials using a system specifically designed for the unique capabilities of EIDS and the 

training developer's nceds. Thii 

authoring system will enable the 

ICW developer to generate scripts 

and reports, electronic storyboards, 

records of video and audio elements, and production schedules 

and data bases. It provides access to 

a full range of programming functions. 

EIDS ASSIST was developed by 

the government which retains the 

right to change, modify, or expand 

the software for in-house development or use by government contractors. EIDS ASSIST eliminates the 

requirement for a computer programmer because it generates complete player, computer, and user interface control software. Still an 

evolving system, EIDS will be continually improved and updated to 

meet computer-assisted inslruction 

training developer needs. 

Margarcl C, Wiitc is C'lticJ 4 Trairiirlg Techrtolo~~will1 the Urtilc~d 

Slates A~nlijErtgittecr Scltool's Directorate 01Trairtiltg and Doctrirrc, Fort 

Bclrjoir; VA. 
evaluation of 

ammunition 

requirements 

by Saundra L. Smith 

his article provides an introduction to the background, current 

issues and future initiatives in the 

STRAC program. 

The STRAC program evolved 

from findings of the Army Training 

Support Center (ATSC) Weapons 

Crew Training Study Group 

(WCTSG) which determined that 

there were no standards across the 

Army for weapons qualification; 

nonstandard methods were used to 

determine the ammunition requirements; that many fielded devices 

and simulators were not being integrated into units' training programs; that costs of replacement ammunition and particularly ammunition for new weapon systems were 

increasing and that a credibility gap 

was growing between what the 

Army said it needed for training 

and what it was actually getting. 

Despite this discrepancy, the Army 

was reporting it was "ready." The 

STRAC Program Directorate 

(SPD) was established in 1982to develop weapons programs for all weapons systems. 

The Department of the Army 

STRAC program began in 1982 as a 

management initiative of the Vice 

Chief of Staff, Army (VCSA) and it 

continues to evolve. The engineer 

portion of the program was com-

...a credibility gap was 

growing between what 

the A~Gsaid it needed 

for training and what it 

was actually getting. 

pletely revised and involved significant changes in training standards 

and requirements from the old program contained in DA Cir 350-85-4, 

16 September 1985. The new document, DA Pamphlet 350-38, 1 July 

1987, provides DA requirements for 

weapons and weapon systems used 

throughout the force by both Active 

and Reserve Components. The new 

program appeals to commanders by 

providing the following features: 

suggested weapons training strategies that will lead to the attainment and sustainment of standards. 

measurable standards for evaluaring a portion of their overall 

training readiness. 

a common set of weapons and 

weapon system qualification standards. 

Training programs were developed by school weapons committees, comprised of the school commandant or assistant commandant 

and representatives from the 

MACOMs, National Guard (NG), 

and Reserve (USAR). The committee developed the base programs 
for each weapon system along with 

a training program that, when executed, will lead to attainment and 

sustainment of the standards. Ammunition requirements to support 

the training programs were determined and devices and simulators 

integrated into the program. Training Readiness Conditions (TRC) 

were considered to account for the 

constrained training time available 

to the NG and USAR units. The 

training programs were developed 

based on the Army Training and 

Evaluation Program (ARTEP) missions, field manual (FM), soldier's 

manual (SM) and field circular 

(FC) tasks; required tasks for each 

firing level; field input and integration of training devices. 

After a major engineer program 

rewrite, DA Pam 350-38, 1 July 

1987, contains the current training 

standards, strategies, and resource 

requirements to conduct training 

with engineer systems, mines and 

demolitions. Each program has 

been tied directly to soldier's 

manual and ARTEP taskslmissions 

at the different TRCs and includes 

frequencies for live fire, subcaliber 

fire, and device usage. Commanders 

should be made aware that the suggested training programs allow 

them to use allocated ammunition 

as deemed necessary, based on individual analysis of the strengths 

and weaknesses of the unit. 

Mirle wafare. In response to 

recent concerns on safety, the CG 

rescinded all STRAC live mine 

training requirements. This decision 

was based on the lack of research 

data on the safety of multiple arming and disarming of live mines 

(as required in STRAC). This rescission will remain in effect until the 

USAES reviews the data received 

recently from the Army Materiel 

Command. New live mine training 

restrictions are as follows: 

a No live mine training will be conducted on antipersonnelmines. 

Live mine training on MI5 and 

M21 antitank mines is permitted 

at the discretion of commanders 

subject to these restrictions. 

a Tilt rods/extension and/or extension rod adapters will not be installed. 

Antihandling devices and trip 

wires will not be used. 

Neither mine will be armedldisarmed more than 50 times before 

destruction. 

a Live mine training is not permitted on any other mine. + 

FY88 evalziatiort. The FY88 

evaluation is on-going. The focus of 

this effort is to evaluate the revised 

STRAC programs contained in the 

Unit commanders 

indicate that they cannot 

get engineer munitions 

in amounts appropriate 

to ensure individual and 

collectiveweapons 

proficiency. 

new DA Pam 350-38, effective 1 

Oct 87. The new engineer program 

was revised based on the FY86 

evaluation, new or revised training 

strategies, increased incorporation 

of devices/simulations and historical 

ammunition usage. 

Unit commanders indicate that 

they cannot get engineer munitions 

in amounts appropriate to ensure individual and collective weapons proficiency. On the other hand, ammunition usage data shows that all 

allocated munitions are not being expended. The STRAC Program Directorate recognizes that a dichotomy exists and has formulated a 

HQDA team to assess ammunition 

management. However, units share 

a role in the solution of this problem and should designak knowledgeable people to participate in 

the ongoing evaluation. 

This evaluation is the vehicle by 

which changes are made to existing 

programs. Units should also ensure 

that local ammunition managers are 

requesting \he appropriate amounts 

of munitions and are allocating 

those munitions for their use. This 

effort should help close the expenditure gap through well-planned, managed and executed training programs. The Engineer Schtml will 

continue its efforts to ensure that 

DA allocates the ammunition required by STRAC. 

STRAC weaporw progrant reviews. The CG, TRADOC has instructed the proponent schools to 

validate the training programs because so many units were reporting 

not meeting the standards. To support this effort, the Engineer School 

will reexamine all weapon system 

design capabilities and their relation 

to current standards; reevaluate percentage requirements for altainment of standards as they equatc to 

combat readiness; and review training regulations, POIs, lessons 

learned, devices/simulators and all 

other components affecting training. 

STRAC continues to be a dynamic program. The addition of new 

weapon systems, incorporalion of 

new and improved devices/-simulators as well as changes in training 

strategies require that our systems 

be continually updated. Because we 

are using STRAC to determine our 

training ammunition requiremenls, 

it is important that units give the ongoing evaluation and the program 

its fullest support. 

Salirtdra L. Srttillt is att edz~catiotl 

specialist ill the Collectirle Trairtirtg 

Brarrclz, Directorate of Trairtirtg artd 

Doctrine, Ft Bek~oir;VA. Fontterly, 

slte senled as art edzicafiort senices 

specialist at HQ TRADOC, Ft Mortroe, VA. Slte itas art MA. Degree irt 

Edzicatiorl (Hz~nrarl Resozirce Der~elopntstt)fmtl Geoqp Wasizirtgtort Urtiawni@,Wasl~irrglu~t, D.C 
RESERVE COMPONENT 


CONFIGURED COURSEWARE (RC3) 


NCOES and reclassification training for the Reserves 

by CPT Thomas Round 

nyone involved with MOS re- Aclassification training in the 

Reserve Components (RC) knows 

that this has been a long-standing 

problem. The solution now lies within reach if we implement the training strategies and methods proposed by the Engineer School. Reserve Component Configured Courseware (RC3) will reduce the burden of reclassification training and 

NCOES as well. Let us examine the 

various training standards, RC-unique situations, and the RC3 program. 

The operating standard for training Active and Reserve Components (AC & RC) for each MOS 

and skill code is completion of the 

appropriate resident course. This 

standard is met for all soldiers during initial entry training. For MOS 

reclassification or professional development training, only those RC 

soldiers electing to attend an AC 

resident course will be trained to 

the AC operating standard. 

A resident course trains each 

critical task to a level of proficiency. 

That level may be one of knowledge, skill, or both. Knowledge proficiency is measured by written evaluation; skill proficiency by a performance test. When the minimum 

standard during an evaluation is 

met, proficiency has been achieved 

at that level of learning. 

A resident course trains a critical 

task to at least knowledge proficiency, often referred to in soldier's 

manuals as "familiarization." A critical task trained to the knowledge 

level leaves training to the skill level 

to the soldier's assigned unit. 

Time restraints placed upon the 

RC soldier may preclude attending 

an AC resident course beyond entrySee listing of available 

and planned Reserve 

Component courses on 

page 12. 

level training. Therefore, the operating standard for RC training beyond 

entry level must become threetiered: 

(1) The opfirlrurtt standard is 

what a resident course is training. 

The RC soldier becomes as proficient as an AC counterpart. 

(2) The RC typical standard 

covers the majority of the courses 

developed for the RC. The RC soldier is as skill proficient after training as the AC counterpart in 

selected critical tasks, but is only 

knowledge proficient on the remaining tasks. Skill proficiency will be 

achieved at the unit if it is necessary 

to support the unit's mission. 

(3) The nri~ti~ttuntstandard would 

train an RC soldier to be as proficient in knowledge as the AC 

counterpart, and skill proficiency 

would be achieved in the unit as required by the unit mission. 

Some situations which impact on 

reclassification training are unique 

to the RC. A unit may be reorganized suddenly. A soldier may 

need to reclassify for upward mobility out of a "dead end" MOS. A 

soldier may change residence to an 

entirely different geographic region 

which has no unit similar to the one 

being left. A prior service AC soldier may wish to join a hometown 

RC unit and must be reclassified if 

the unit does not have that MOS. 

An RC soldier is a "part-time" 

soldier and therefore has primary 

responsibility to a civilian employer 

and secondary responsibility to the 

unit. After initial entry training, an 

employer has a statutory obligation 

to grant only fifteen calcndar days 

of military leave each year. The 

length of AC courses precludes the 

RC soldier from being ablc to attend and necessitates reconfiguration of RC courses for MOS reclassification and NCOES. 

Reserve Component Configured 

Courseware (RC3) are adapted 

from resident courses and "mirror" 

the resident course as closely as possible. These courses include thc 

same critical tasks as the rcsident 

course and train to the maximum extent possible. The objective is to 

train to the same level of proficiency as would be attained in the AC 

resident course. Noncritical and 

unit-trained critical tasks may not 

be included in an RC course. 

RC configured courses may be 

taught by Army National Guard 

Academies, and U.S. Army Reserve 

Forces (USARF) Schcu)ls, Rcgional Training Sites-Maintenance 

(RTS-M). The courses are taught 

during active and inactivc duty training (ADT & IDT). 
Available RC Courses 

MOSISL 

62E10 

62F10 

51810 

62J10 

81 81 0120 

82810 

12B10112C10 

1 2BlClF30 

12BlClF40 

51K10 

51 R10 

TITLE 

Hvy Const Equip Oper 

Crane Operator 

CarpentryIMasonry Spec 

Gen Const Equip Oper 

Tech Drafting Spec 

Construction Surveyor 

Combat EngrIBridge Crewman 

Combat Engr CMF12 BNCOC 

Combat Engr CMF12 ANCOC 

Plumber 

Interior Electrician 

AVAILABILITY 


DATE 


Aug 82 

Aug 82 

Aug 83 

Apr 84 

Aug 82 

Nov 83 

Jun 88 

Jun 88 

Jun 88 

Jun 88 

Jun 88 

Courses To Be Completed by End of FY88 

AVAILABILITY 

MOSISL TITLE DATE 

62830 Const Equip Repairer BNCOC Sep 88 

51 81 0 CarpentryIMasonry Spec (Revision) Sep 88 

51 H30 Const Engr Supv BNCOC Oct 88 

51M10 Fireftg hter Oct 88 

Courses Planned for Completion in FY89 

MOS 

6281 0 

12F10 

62810 RTSM-S 

51H40 

52G10 

62830 RTSM-S 

62H10 

62G 10 

62N40 

62E10 

628 RTSM-T 

62N30 

62J10 

62F10 

210A * 

213A * 

TITLE 

Const Equip Repairer 

Engr Tracked Veh Crewman 

Constr Equip Rep RTSM Sustainment 

Construction Engr Supv ANCOC 

Transmission and Distribution Spec 

Const Equip Rep RTSM Sustainment 

ConcreteIAsphalt Equip Operator 

Quarrying Specialist 

Const Equip Supv ANCOC 

Hvy Const Equip Operator (Revision) 

Const Equip Rep RTSM Transition 

Const Equip Supv BNCOC 

General Const Equip Operator (Revision) 

Crane Operator (Revision) 

Utility Operations and Maint Tech 

Engr Equip Repair Tech 

* Warrant Officer Technical Certification Course 

12 Engineer 
The RC3 program goals are: 

(1) To produce exportable training support packages for the RC 

that will train the critical tasks required for MOS qualification and 

provide for professional development programs. 

(2) To develop a course management plan (CMP) and program of 

instruction (POI) for inclusion in 

each package that will provide detailed guidance for instructors. 

(3) To provide resources to develop or revise RC courseware concurrently with resident courses at 

proponent service schools. 

Guidance on new Reserve Component Configured Courseware is 

provided in TRADOC Regulation 

351-1, TRADOC Pam 351-1, and 

TRADOC Regulation 351-13. The 

RC3 effort to complete all courseware has been programmed through 

the first quarter of FY90. The Engineer School effort is targeted at 

supporting MOS reclassification, 

NCOES, Warrant Officer Technical 

Certification Courses (WOTCC) 

and RTS-M. 

TRADOC guidance provides that 

MOS reclassification and NCOES 

courses should be structured to allow completion in one training year: 

(a) An MOS reclassification 

course, SL1, may consist of an IDT 

phase of %-I28 hours and an ADT 

phase of 80-120 hours (may be up 

to 130 hours with a 24-hour FI'X). 

Because of class preparation and 

administrative requirements on RF 

school instructors, the "rule" for 

IDT phase is % hours maximum. 

This equates to a maximum of 216 

hours (226 with FI'X) or 27 days of 

training. 

(b) An RC BNCOC (SL3) includes 47 hours of IDT common 

leader training (CLT) which is 

Phase 1 and MOS-specific training 

which is Phase 11. TRADOC guidance encourages proponents to 

structure Phase I1 for ADT only. 

Student population and time and 

distance factors may make Phase I1 

IDT impracticable for certain 

MOSs. ADT length may be up to 

120 hours or 130 hours with a 24- 

hour FTX. 

(c) An RC ANCOC (SL4) includes % hours of IDT CLT as 

Phase I. Phase I1 is to be configured 

for ADT only. ADT length may be 

up to 120 hours, or 130 hours with a 

24-hour FI'X. 

The RF schools, ARNG academies, and RTS-M all have restraints 

on accomplishment of RC soldier 

training: 

(1) RC course inslructors must 

be instructor-qualified and MOSqualified for the course being taught. 

(2) RF school instructors are obligated to perform 48 unit training 

assemblies (UTA) plus annual training (AT) each year. A UTA is four 

hours long and is usually accomplished in multiples of four (MUTA4). A MUTA-4 equates to an IDT 

weekend training assembly (drill). 

Twenty-four UTAs are allowed the 

instructor for preparation and 24 

for instruction. Twenty-four instruction UTAs equal %hours of instruction and six MUTA-4s. 

(3) An RF school has no resources except people and its officelclassroom facility to support RC 

training. Equipment and materials 

required must be requested from 

supported units or other sources. Instructors travel to the students at a 

unit or central training location; this 

requires satellite training facilities. 

(4) A minimum of 10 students are 

required for an RF school to teach 

a course (waivers may be requested). This is less critical at skill level 

one (SL1) than at SL3 and SL4 because density of potential trainees is 

greater. The normal instructor to 

student ratio during IDT is 1-10. 

RC population density of an 

MOS and skill level is an important 

consideration when determining if a 

training need exists for MOS reclassification or NCOES. Other factors 

may also contribute to RC course 

requirements: 

(a) The general rule is that an 

MOS skill level density of 500 is the 

minimum to warrant configuration 

of a course, unless directed by 

TRADOC. TRADOC has directcd 

that all designated MOS, NCOES 

and RC Warrant Officer Technical 

Certification cburses (WOTCCRC) be configured by end of FY89. 

(b) The proponent may develop 

an RC course for an MOS with density less than 500, especially if a critical need is identified. For engineer 

MOSS a critical need exists because 

of RC mobilization training and requirements for formal school training to award the MOSs. 

A Reserve Component course 

must be developed to minimize 

learning decay during the IDT 

phase. Training and testing of 

task(s) should be achievable during 

the 16-hour IDT. The available 

equipment, facilities, and training 

environment will impact when and 

where a task is trained. Performance-oriented or hands-on training may best be accomplished during ADT, while classroom lecture 

and written evaluations may casily 

be accomplished during IDT. 

All equipment and materials to 

train the course must be idcntificd 

in the Program of Instruction 

(POI). Special consideration must 

be given to the actual requirements 

of the course and the availability of 

the equipment in the supported 

units. Since the NG Academies and 

USARF Schools do not have equipment, the supported units must 

make it available. 

CPT Tltorttas Rofind is u~t Aclirle 

Guard Resenre officer assigted to tlte 

Directorale of Trairtirtg and Doctri~te 

at tlte U~tited States Anty E~tgi~teer 

Scltool, Fort Belrioir, VA, as a Trairtirtg Der~eloprttctzf Stag OJ37er. He is 

art Ertgiiteer Officer Adria~lccd 

Cofirse (EOAC) graduate and Itas 

sented as art E~tgirteer corltparly co~ttrtta~tder irt tlte USAR. His AGR assigtmertts irtchlde Assista~tt Brigade 

E~tgitteer for a Mechu~tizcd Separate 

I~flarttty Brigade and rlte Cir~il Ettgirteer for a Cortrbat Heary Ertgirteer 

Batlaliort. 
DEPA 


by LTC Russell 

the formation of the 

izense Mapping Agency 

(DMA) in 1972 from the Mapping, 

Charting, and Geodesy (MCStG) 

elements of the four armed services, 

Army topography has suffered. 

With DMA as program manager of 

all MC&G activities, engineers did 

not maintain a control element to 

ensure topography maintained pace 

to provide essential terrain information to supported commanders in 

the field. Without planning and 

direction and with advances in technology, many agencies entered the 

topography field, contributing to the 

fragmentation of this essential combat support. 

The criticality of this organizational oversight became more apparent 

over time. In November 1987, the 

Engineer School reestablished the 

Department of Topography to 

regain control of its responsibilities 

to provide for organizing, training, 

developing malerial, and establishing doctrine for Army topographic forces. (A Department of 

Topography had been an essential 

element of the Engineer School 

until the formation of DMA, when 

this department became the Defense Mapping School [DMS].) 

While neat and tidy on an organization chart, topography ceased to be 

functionally effective. The Department of Topography must serve as 

the Engineer School's focal point 

for topography and integrate and 

focus the efforts of the other Engineer School directorates and academic departments, each with essential roles to play as topography 

moves toward a modernization master plan. 

As we approach the decade of 

the 90s, Army topography is making 

While neat and tidy on 

an organization 

topography ceased to be 

functionally effective. 

a transition. Traditional 1:50,m 

scale topographic line maps and 

other standard paper products are 

no longer produced by the Army. 

Although the era of the paper or 

mylar product is ending, special 

products tailored to meet a particular need of a supported commander will remain for several 

years to come. Army topography 

is moving toward an era of information management and away 

from the era of product management. Digital data bases will eventually replace the present 

voluminous data base 

structure of litera-

-

ture, paper products, and miscellaneous materials 

collected by terrain analysts. Digital 

information will be maintained to 

reflect up-to-date battlclield conditions. This information will fced 

directly into various command, control, wmmunicatians, and intclligence (C3I) systems and tactical 

decision aides will synthesize this information with other data to 

provide commanders with instantaneous analyses of battlcficld options. 

The Topographic Support System 

(TSS), a modular system of 22 large 

vans that provide traditional topographic services (cartography, survey, reprodudion, and terrain analysis) is being replaced, in Part, by 

the Digital Topographic Support 

System (DTSS) and Quick 

Response Multicolor Printer 

(QRMP). DTSS and ORMP 

will be located with each AllSource Analysis System 

(ASAS) enclave at Division, 

Corps, and Echelons above 

Corps (EAC). The new digital system will automate 

much of the labor-intensive efforts of 

the tcrrain 

Position-navigationsystems will establish 24 

precise positioning on the battlefield. 
analysts and cartographers. QRMP 

will reduce reproduction equipment 

needs on the battlefield. The Army 

may require bulk printing capability 

at EAC to provide standard paper 

products that DMA cannot provide 

in sufficient quantities or in time to 

meet theater needs. 

Topographic survey appears to 

be almost obsolete as technology 

may provide advanced systems with 

the means to establish its own 

geodetic control and precise positioning. The surveyor may be relegated to a back-up role on the battlefield of the future, once positionnavigation systems have been fielded and accepted. What the force 

structure will be, what topographic 

skills, new and old, will be required, 

and how some of the traditional 

topographic equipment not replaced by DTSS and QRMP will be 

distributed on the battlefield are issues to be solved by the new Department of Topography over the next 

few years. 

Perhaps the topography force 

structure should be considered as 

part of E-Force? Certainly, it is the 

intent to have topographic engineers supporting each division, each 

corps, and back-up support at EAC. 

The digital data to support DTSS 

is a DMA production responsibility 

and satisfaction of the full Army 

need may not be until in the late 

1990s. During the interim period 

several off-the-shelf digital systems 

will provide transitional support. 

MICROFIX is the present interim 

system and is supported by DMAproduced Digital Terrain Elevation 

Data (DTED). Engineer Topographic Laboratories format DTED 

for Army use. Other systems may require the Army to meet its own interim digital requirements until sufficient Tactical Terrain Data (TTD), 

the Army's future digital data requirement, are available. 

The enlisted strength of Career 

Management Field (CMF) 81, 

Topographic Engineering, is approximately 2,000 soldiers distributed 

throughout the total Army- roughly 

1,200 in the active force. These 

Digital data bases will reflect up-to-date battlefield conditions. 

figures are misleading because approximately one-fourth of the photolithographers (MOSS 83E and 83F) 

are truly in the topographic force 

structure; the remainder are with 

Adjutant General and Psychological 

Operations units. Terrain Analysts 

(MOS 81Q) make up over onefourth of the CMF. As the Department of Topography takes the lead 

in developing force structure and 

Army topography 

programs have 

deteriorated because the 

Army lost the 

responsibility to conduct 

its own training. 

doctrine for the future, this CMF 

will undergo major revisions. 

Topography training for skill 

levels 1and 3 (AIT and the technical track of BNCOC) are not integrated into the TRADOC system 

because they are taught by DMS 

and not the Engineer School. Since 

the Army has the only topographic 

force structure on the battlefield 

(USMC has one topographic platoon with plans for two more), perhaps topography training should 

revert back to the Army and the engineers. Fort Leonard Wood would 

be the true center of expertise for 

engineers if the topography AIT 

and BNCOC could be relocated to 

again become part of the Engineer 

School. The Army has the responsibility for land combat doctrinc for 

all forces and the engineers have 

the responsibility for topographic 

doctrine to support land combat. 

Army topography programs have 

deteriorated because the Army lost 

the responsibility to conduct its own 

training. The training and doctrine 

developers are without equipment 

and necessary expertise to ensure 

that correspondence courses, technical lessons, graphic training aids, 

soldier training publications, and 

other TRADOC and Army programs keep pace with requirements 

and parallel skill with training. 

The new Department of Topography holds the key to the future 

of Army topography. A ncw department organizational structure with 

increased emphasis on technical 

skills goes into effect in FY89. Engineers at all levels are the special 

staff experts and advisors to commanders on the effective use of terrain. The Department of Topography will make this happen. 

LTC Rllssell 0. Rciclr, Jr., a I984 

grad~iatc of CGSC, ltolds a Masters 

degree irt Geodetic Sciertcc mtd 

Pltotogrur~ir~tetr-~~ porn Iowa State 

Urtiversity. He senvd as rlte Maly~irtg, 

Cltartirtg, and Geodesy Reqlrirenrertls 

Oflcer for CINCLANT urtd JSTPS. 

Before bberg desigrtated as tlre Director; De/~arfniatt of Tol~ogrcl~l~?, LTC 

Reiclt served as CltieJ Ojjjce of 

Acaderlrics and Clriej; Del?altrtratt 

Corrst17ictiori Ert@teerirtg, DMS, FOII 

Beh~oir: 
by MAJ John M. Luchak 

n 1 October 1987, the pro- 0ponency for camouflage returned to the U.S. Army Engineer 

School after a long absence of several years. A provisional camouflage and concealment office was established to manage the transition 

and to chart a strategy for the future development of doctrine, training, and materiel. 

Current camouflage doctrine 

does not reflect the realities of the 

AirLand environmcnt of the late 

20th century. Indeed, the current 

field manual, FM 5-28, was published in 1968 and is a product of 

the Second World War and the 

Korean War. Today, however, the 

battlefield is replete with technologically advanced sensors and weapons 

unimagined in wars past: strategic 

reconnaissance platforms, smart muitions, and multispectral target acquisition/intelligence systems (UV, 

IR, acoustic, and radar). 

Current training, doctrine, and 

materiel are no longer effective in 

adequately countering these systems. Camouflage and concealment 

doctrine and training must adapt to 

current realities on the modern battlefield and materiel developments 

and exploit the technological advances of the past twenty years. They 

can provide economical, cost-effective solutions which will enable us 

to neutralize some of these highcost weapons systems and sensors. 

The payoff is a significant increase 

in the survivability of the individual 

soldier, his equally high-cost weapons systems, and his unit. 

he upgrading of camouflage 

requires a two-pronged, 

short and long-term approach. In 

the short term, the Engineer School 

is currently in the process of fielding an updated manual on Army 

camouflage operations, FM 90-7, 

Carttotiflage and Corzcealrtte~tt irt 

Antty Operatiorzs. The manual is 

being written in the Department of 

Military Engineering at the U.S. 

Army Engineer School and will 

provide current doctrine on camouflage. The manual is currently 

scheduled for publication in FY89. 

The USAES, in conjunction with 

the Fort Belvoir Research, Development, and Engineering Center 

(BRDEC), plan to conduct a series 

of briefings to inform TRADOC 

schools and centers about current 

materiel available to meet the acquisition threat. 

Over the long-term, however, a 

more thorough study of the Army's 

camouflage requirements is needed. 

To accomplish this task, the 

USAES has initiated a study under 

the support of AR 5-5 to evaluate 

future camouflage and concealment 

doctrine, training, materiel, and 

force structure, based on current 

threat analysis. The results of this 

study will necessitate revision of FM 

90-7. Doctrinal changes will, result 

in adjustments to training and, if required, will spur further materiel 

development to counter the acquisition threat. 

MAJ Joltrt M. Llichak is a graduate 

of tlte U.S. Military Acadertt.y. Cornrtzissiorted irt tlte Field Arfilleqi, Ite 

Itas senjed irz corlrrtrarzd artd staff 

positiorrs irr (iennarzy artd irt Korea. 

MRI Luchak ltolds a Master's 

Degree frorlt tlte Urziversiy of Mirtrtcsota artd a P1t.D irt Politicul 

Sciertce fro171 llre Urtirvrsily of Vierznu, Austria. Prior to his reassiptrtterrt 

to ODCSOPS irt tlte Perttapt, Ite 

was tltc Cantotlflage artd Corrccal-

~tterrt Coordirrutor at Fort Belvoir. 

Example of an appropriate camouflage net covering a camouflaged 

item Of equipment-
- Engineer Problem 


You are a pliatoon lea der in a c !avy battallon deployed in HOnduras. You tlave been tasked tc I CMP culvert to accommodate -- ....-. the runoff of an area measuring - so acres and composed of GMd soil (with 

tur. f). The roc ad which 'the culver t is to be placed ur 10-

Iane military I'oad with t he followi~ ig specific :ations: 

Ad1jitional inf ormation: 

There will be no headwall on the downstream end of the culvert. Assume 

the )f water (V ) is 4 feet per secor id. The ba ttalion S4 has adviss ed 

YO! stable CM P pipe aw lilable: 

Lenath Available 

Your missior, tu "+sign a CMP culvert using thl S4's const n 

Engineer Solution on page 27. 
recent developments at Ft. Leonard Wood 


by COL John P. Carey and 1LT(P) 

Jamie White 

66The Engineer School is 

moving! The Engineer 

School is moving!" has been the cry 

at the school since 1977. And, not 

unlike the boy who cried "wolf!" 

once too often, we have many skeptics who have fallen asleep. On 15 

August 1987, a boo~nwas heard 

throughout the engineer corps that 

awoke those skeptics. On that day, 

General Thurman, Commander of 

TRADOC; Lieutenant General 

Hieberg, Chief of Engineers; Major 

General Reno, Commandant, Engineer School; Major General van 

Loben Sels, Commander, Fort 

Leonard Wood, and many other 

military and civilian dignitaries 

detonated two large explosive charges that marked the spots of the 

new Academic Building and Post 

Headquarters. 

The first question everyone asks 

is "Why would the school want to 

leave Fort Belvoir for Fort Leonard 

Wood?" The answer is simply to improve engineer training and reduce 

costs. It is TRADOC's intention to 

make the United States Army Engineer School and Fort Leonard 

Wood the mecca for Army engineer 

training similar to the Armor 

School at Fort Knox, KY and the Infantry School at Fort Benning, GA. 

MG Reno recently stated "Integrated training is the future for 

Army engineers". Integrated training combines the training of all skill 

levels. Instead ol BNCOC students 

supervising each other to build a 

bridge, they will supervise AIT students. This gives the BNCOC student more realistic leadership experience and the AIT student more 

realistic training while both are 

training to the same standards. In 

the long run this will eliminate confusion in the units caused by the officers learning one standard, the 

NCOs another, and the AIT soldiers a third. Additional syncrgism 

will also be gained by collocating all 

instructors and doctrinc writers. 

This ensures every engineer regardless of rank or position will bc 

trained Lo the same standard as 

determined by the subject matter experts who are writing and updating 

the doctrine. 

Fort Leonard Wood was the obvious choice to become the single 

home of the Engineer School because of its abundant natural training areas and cstablishccl training 

facilities. Fort Leonard Wood recently became the Army's recipient, 

for the second time in three years, 

of the Department of Defense "Installation of Excellence Award" for 

1987. With the completion of the 

new construction projects, Fort 

Leonard Wood will undeniably be 

the model training installation within the Army. 

The idea that Army engineers require "hands-on field training" is 

not a new one and is causing history 

to again repeat itself. Over 70 ycars 

ago, Fort Belvoir was chosen as thc 

location for the Engineer School because of its natural engineer training sites. The home of the Engineer 

School was then located at Washington Barracks (now Fort McNair). 

As metropolitan Washington D.C. 

grew and the training requirements 

for engineers increased it was deemed necessary to move ~hc Engineer 

School to Camp Humphreys (now 

Fort Belvoir). As Fort Belvoir can 

no longer meet the training 

The new Post Headquarters 

Building under construction at 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 
requirements of the Engineer 

School because of the urbanization 

in northern Virginia and the increased training requirements for 

modern Army engineers, the school 

must again pack up and move. At 

present, most of the field training 

for the Engineer Officer Basic 

Coursc is conducted at Fort A. P. 

Hill, 35 miles away. 

Besides reducing the costs of 

training engineers, there will be an 

additional cost savings to the government by back-filling Fort Belvoir 

with DOD organizations that presently pay exorbitant rent for leased 

office buildings in the D.C. area. 

The land and facilities at Fort Belvoir have already been requested 

for use by several DOD agencies 

(INSCOM, TAPA, AMC, and the 

Chief of Engineers Office) that are 

required to be located in the Washington D.C. area. lNSCOM has already started construction of a new 

Central Office on Fort Belvoir 

where over 1,lW INSCOM personnel will work. At this time, the 

Secretary of the Army has not 

decided what other activities will 

move to Fort Belvoir. 

The Commandant of the Engineer School has taken advantage 

of the transition phase of the school 

to restructure it to make optimum 

use of improved training areas and 

facilities at Fort Leonard Wood. 

The changes most notable to stndents will be within the Directorates 

of Military Engineering and of Combined Arms. Both organizations will 

be restructured to accommodate 

more hands-on and field training 

rather than classroom instruction. 

A "Military Operations Short of 

War" Division is being established 

as part of the Department ol Military Engineering. The focus on this 

division will be on the doctrine, 

training, organization, and equipment needed during in low-intensity 

conflicts. 

The Department of Topography 

was recently established to help the 

Engineer School more effectively 

pull together the topographic functions ol the Army. It will oversee all 

topographic training and doctrine 

within the Engineer School. 

The Directorate of Combat 

Developments, Engineer Personnel 

Proponency Office, Directorate of 

Evaluation and Standardization, 

and the Engineer School Secretary 

will reorganize to take advantage of 

modern facilities with state-ol-theart automation and communication 

systems. 

Many new facilities are being constructed to accommodate the Engineer School at Fort Leonard 

Wood. The Academic Center (Gen. 

George Lincoln Hall), is being constructed with offices for all instructors and staff, 35 state-of-the-art 

classrooms, and a Battle Command 

Training Center which will incorporate the latest technology on battlefield simulation. It will be ready 

for occupancy by FY89. 

The Headquarters Building ((;en. 

William M. Hoge Hall), will also be 

completed by October 1989. It will 

be a modern office building with 

modular systems furniture. This will 

allow future commanders great flexibility in reorganizing and restructuring the office. The walls will be 

prewired for the latest automation 

and communication equipment. 

The General Bruce C. Clarke 

Library will be completed in November 1989 and will be used as a community library and the Engineer 

School technical reference library. 

The 346 Unaccompanied Officer 

Quarters (UOOs) will be completed 

in March 1990. The four-building 

complex will be known as the 

General Morelli housing area. The 

buildings will be named after engineer officers who served gallantly 

in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. 

They will be hard-wired lor coniputers which will be tied into thc 

main frame in Lincoln Hall 

(academic center). Once the terminals are installed, the students 

will have the opportunity to work on 

projects or computer-aided instruction at any time. 

The transition of the U.S. Army 

Engineer School has been an exciting challenge for the many civilian 

and military personnel who now 

work there. We believe that the 

school will have an even more exciting future at Fort Leonard Wood in 

the nexl few years. 

It is said that a school is judged 

by the products of its students. The 

Engineer School at Fort Belvoir has 

certainly distinguished ilsclf in the 

past 70 years as its graduates have 

gone on to distinguish themselves in 

battle, as well as constructing many 

impressive civil works projects such 

as the Panama Canal, Hoover Dam, 

and the Manhattan Project. 

With the improvcd training areas, 

facilities, and organization found at 

The United Slates Army En&' rlnecr

Center and Fort Leonard Wood the 

future of the United States Army 

Corps of Engineers looks brightcr 

than ever. 

(See page 20 for a chronology of 

events for the Enginccr School 

move to Fort Leonard Wood.) 

COL Joltrt P. Curq wus tire Direclor 

of rite Engiiicer Scltool Tra~rsiliolr Office (ESTO) flor7t Jirly 1987 ro 

A~rglsr IYM. He is i>reserrl!v llte 

Deprrty Corirr7turrder of tlte Lower 

Mississippi Eltgiiteer Disrricr ill kicksbrog, Mississippi. COL Curg ' 8 :s rcccrll 

ussi&~rlirollsirtchrde: Co17rr71urrti1,r of 

file 8Wt11 Erlgi,ieer Bulluliurr artd ilie 

Director of E~~ultrulio~r uld Slu~tdu~ 

rlizutiort prior lo cor7ri1rg to ESTO. 

He lius a B.S. in Civil Ertgi~reeririg 

fro171 TCYU.~ Teclt, UII~ u Master's ill

Civil E~igirteerirtg flor71 George 

Wusltir~gfori Urtiversily. 

ILT(P) Jur71ie Wrile was iite Oi~eroIioris Officer of EST0 florir Jirl,, 

1987 lo Jtr!v lYX8. Hi,s recell1 us.sih.,r111er11sirtchr~le: E.vecltli~>e Oflicer of D 

Cor7zl>urn: 1st but tali or^, Mui~rterrurrce Officer of llle .70lIr Ertgirzr(~r Brrltuliort, urtd Atislu~rl O/~cruliorrs Officer. of lhe 4111 Er~giiteer B~iguil(<. He! 

l~re,sei~li)r worl<s us u Cor~slrili~lg EIIgirieer ill r~orllren~ Vir~irtiu. He ltns u 

B.S. irt Mecllu~ricui Elth?rleel',Utg ]>om 

Rose-Hrrl171urr lrislilrtle of Tecl~rrolo~w. 
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS TRANSlTlONlNG THE U.S. ARMY ENGINEER SCHOOL FROM 

FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA TO FORT LEONARD WOOD, MISSOURI 


Feb 1985 

Summer 1987 

Apr 1988 

1 Jun 1988 

Summer 1988 

29 JuI 1988 

Fall 1988 

Jun 1989 

-Jan 1990 

Jan 1990 

Feb 1990 

TRADOC prepared several feasiblilty studies that consistently supported 

the concept of moving the school to improve the quality of training while 

reducing costs. 

Secretary of the Army announced the approval of the plan to relocate the 

United States Army Engineer School from Fort Belvoir, VA to Fort 

Leonard Wood, MO. 

BNCOC was moved to the NCO Academy at Fort Leonard Wood. 

All Engineer NCO courses were realigned and located with the NCO 

Academy at Fort Leonard Wood. 

The United States Army Engineer School was officially relocated from 

Fort Belvoir, VA to Fort Leonard Wood, MO. However, all of the Engineer 

Officer Courses will still be conducted at Fort Belvoir. Fort Belvoir is officially designated United Slates Army Fort Belvoir. 

DCD and EPPO as well as parts of DOTD and ESS will relocate to Fort 

Leonard Wood. 

All DML courses (52 series) are redesignated as Ordnance MOSS (Military 

Organization Skills) and come under control of the U.S. Army Ordnance 

School and Aberdeen Proving Ground. All courses will continue to be 

taught at Fort Belvoir. 

United States Army Fort Belvoir is officially transferred to the command 

of the Commanding General, U.S. Army Military District of Washington, 

Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. 

818 and 828 MOS (constmction surveyors and drafters) enlisted courses 

will move to Leonard Wood. 

The remaining staff and faculty will relocate to Fort Leonard Wood 

depending on their position. Instructors will move after their last class 

has been taugM at Fort Belvolr. However, every effort will be made to 

move families with school age children during the summer. 

The first Engineer Officer Advanced Course wlll start at Fort Leonard 

Wood. 

The first Engineer Officer Basic Course will start at Fort Leonard Wood. 
Whatever happened to assault boat crossing ? 


by CPT Frank S. Weston, Jr. 

when a brigade or division executes a deliberate river crossing, thc first phase is an assault 

across the river. The preferred 

forms of transportation for the assault troops are helicopters and amphibious vehicles (while not true amphibians, M113, MU3, and the ACE 

arc included). What if these are not 

available? At night or in bad weather conditions, helicopters are often grounded. Tracked vehicles are 

slow, noisy and vulnerable while ir 

the water, and hard to get out of the 

water on the far bank. Problems 

with swimming tracks are also well 

documcntcd in safety buUctins and 

regulations prohibiting tracks from 

swimming during training. If we 

can't swim tracks during training, 

how do we train for the assault crossing? The only back-up for helicoptcrs or amphibious vehicles is the 

old reliable 15-man assault boat 

(RB-15). 

To execute the RB-15 assault 

crossing successfully, the crossing 

unit must make a detailed plan and 

conduct good rehearsals. The Egyptians, during their assault crossing 

of the Suez Canal in the 1973 ArabIsraeli War, had planned their operation for several years and rehearsed hundreds of times. They divided their assault force into waves, 

while maintaining unit integrity. 

Commanders were with each wave. 

So dctailcd was their plan, that 

they'd stretched colored ropes across the Canal to ensure that each 

assaulting unit landed at the right 

spot on the far bank. They were successful. Because of this need for 

detailed planning to ensure success, 

we cannot perform the assault boat 

crossing as an afterthought, once 

the helicopters are grounded or the 

tracks cannot swim. Engineers are 

the experts in assault boat crossing 

and should have the training and expertise to plan the operation. But 

what has happened to the assault 

boat crossing in current Army doctrine? We seem to have forgotten to 

include it in our "how to" manuals. 

FM 90-13, River Crossirtg Operatiorts; TM 5-210, Military Float 

Bridge Eqniyrrtenr; and FC 90-13, 

Courtterobslacle and River Crossirtg 

Operatiorts, tell us to expect to do 

an RB-15 crossing, but not how to 

sucessfnlly execute it. 

When presented with the task of 

writing how to organize and execute 

an assault boat crossing, rather than 

"reinventing the wheel", we decidcd 

to find historical examples of successful assault crossings, using 

World War I1 as the primary 

source. ST 5-260-lB, Military River 

Crossirtg Eqirip~rtertt, 1959, found in 

the U.S. Army Engineer School Library, provided this excerpt: 

Boats are tirtloaded fmrn transporratio~r by tlte ertgirteer crews and locared eitlter in llte attack posiriort or 

at art irrtenitediate boat area bemeert 

rhe attack positio~~ and ilte river. 77te 

ideal attack positiort will be accessible to tnrcks or ca17yirtg parties 

bringing tip tlze assatiN boats, concealed Jrorrt husrile ground jire and 

at.rial obsen'ariort, cortrtected lo rlte 

river's edge b.y rr~rrrterotis clearly deFled foot rattles, close to rite river to 

reduce Irarrd-canyi~tg b.v irtfarttry lo a 

rr~irtirirtrrrt, arrd easy to identiJy at 

rtigla. 

C;rrides Jrorit tltc engineer ussatrN 

boat reants rrteet irtfarrrry rrrtits as 

tltey enter tlte attack yosiliorts arrd 

griide tlterrt to tlteir respecrive boats. 

Assatilt boats are Irartd-cam'cd by tlte 

irzfarttry-ertgiiteer tearits to /Ire river 

over corrcealed routes. 

Ar rhe designated tinze, rlte first assauN wave rttotvs forward to cross 

tlte line of depamire at H-ltotir. Assartit bourr l~ro~nl?t/vrelttnt to tltc 

near bank wltot euclt 1r;p is cornpicfed, and tlte crmsi~~g of strbseqriertt waves l?roceeds as so011 as ilte 

boal.~ arc lourled. Boat.r 1eul.e frorrt 

tlte sarite near-bunk area and pmceed to the sarite Jar-bank area or1 

eaclt /lip. 

Clo.~e cooperatiort betweert i~tfa~rtry and ertgineers ill the assairlt i.7 cssertrial. Tlte senior irtfartl1)11iturt irt 

each bout lcarrt is res/)ortsible Jar aN 

rhe rccltrtical aspects of loadi~tg, 

crossi~tg, artd t~rrloadirtg Iris boar. He 

is also r(~.~l~ortsible for as.ristirtg the 

boat corttritandcr in rlrese ol?eratio~ts. 

Wtmr tlte Jar bank i.r reached, infarttry boat learit.~ di.rerrrburl< prorrt/)r1~1, deplo?: artd ~ttot'e Jo~ward irtto Ole 

attack or lo a rol/virtg area wltere 

tt1ti1.r quick& reorga~tize and advance 

to their ubjec1ir.e. 

Another manual, ROTC ST 4.5-5, 

River Crossirrg Oyerutiorr, 1053, fcatured diagrams showing how companies move from the battalion assembly area into attack positions, 

where they are separated into waves. 

All of the in~ormation from the 

1953 and 1959 manuals still applies 

to the modern day AirLand battlefield. To get this inrormation back 

into our manuals, we need make 

only small changes to reflect modern organizations. In bringing back 

the "how to" for assault boat crossings, we have looked to the past to 

provide for the future. 

CPT Frartk S. Westcn, Jr. is or! instnictor irr the Deyarintertl of Corrtbirted Amrs, U.S. Anrtv Engineer 

Scltool. He lras also senjed as 

platoort leado; co~tt/)ar~y cvecttlivec$-

fice~; artd battaliort S2 wirlt rlte 4/11 

E/t@.rteer Batlaliort, 4111 111Jartr1v 

Division (Mec1r.J. CPT Wcstort gradtiated front USMA in 1982, and is a 

gradtiale oJEODAC and C4S.j. 
CONDUCTING A STAFF RIDE 


by CPT Donald D. Jacobovilz 

taff rides arc detailed analyses s of histortcal . battles or campaigns with the intention of allowing 

the participant to evaluate the actions and decisions of the units involved. They are becoming more 

popular as an important part of 

professional development programs 

throughout the Army. Often, someone is tasked to plan and execute a 

staff ride with little experience or 

guidance. The Department of Combined Arms at the Engineer School 

at Fort Belvoir has been conducting 

staff rides for the staff and faculty 

for many years. 

This article is presented as a 

guide to thosc conducting their first 

staff ride-those who have already 

dircctcd a staff ride may also 

benefit from this article. The first 

qucstion someone asks is, "What is 

a staff ride?" Next, they want to 

know what to do. Asking other unih 

what they have done a1 their staff 

rides is a good place to begin. William G. Robertson's nte SluffRide, 

published by the United States 

Army Center of Military History, is 

a valuable reference to guide the 

staff ride planner through the steps 

involved in conducting a successful 

ride. This articlc starts whcre that 

booklet ends, namely in describing 

the nuts-and-bolts of the staff ride. 

As Robertson's booklet points 

out, picking the proper place for a 

staff ride is important. It should 

have the historical elements which 

you need for instruction, and must 

be logistically supportable. Choose 

a site that meets your needs. 

When the location for the staff 

ride is determined, contact the National Park Service (NPS) or local 

officials at the battlefield and arrange a visit. This should be done 

no later than ten to twelve weeks 

prior to the date of the staff ride. 

Visit the site to get an understanding of the extent of the battle. 

Visit the local military or public 

library and get material on the battle or campaign. Read these refcrences to get a basic knowledge of the 

battle, and gather references for the 

participants to read. Consider sources other than the libraries such as 

local Civil War Roundtable groups, 

the Center of Military Histo~y or 

the historians at the Office of the 

Chief of Engineers. 

Next, choose one book for all the 

staff ride participants to read. This 

will provide a common basis from 

which to discuss the events of the 

battle. Order the books in suflicient 

quantities so that all participants 

will be able to read them prior to 

the event. 

Maps of the battlefield may be ordered through local map supply 

channels or locally purchased 

through the U.S. Geological Survey 

or NPS. Maps of 1:25,000 scale or 

smallcr arc preferred for these historical studies. Order these maps 

and any other booklets, folders, etc. 

far enough in advance so they arrive 

in time for use on the staff ride. 

Choose the date for the staff ride 

at least eight weeks before it is 

scheduled. Select dates for prebriefs 

before the actual staff ride. Coordinate with all those involved with 

the ride so a date can be selected 

that will allow maximum participation. Transportation requests should 

be submitted no later than four 

weeks prior to the event. 

After researching the battle, write 

a proposed itinerary consisting of 

the events on the day of the staff 

ride and the prebriefs. Thege should 

be shown to the NPS or othcr historians for approval to rnsurc that 

your itineraries are meaningful, complete, and able to hc complctcd to 

the extent desired and in time allotted. Reserve classroonis or 

auditoriums (including audiovisual 

equipment) in advance of your 

prcbriefs. 

Coordinate with members of the 

chain of command on the staff ride 

proposals. Once you have approved 

dales for your prebriefs and for the 

staff ride itself, makc up a flycr and 

send it to all prospective participants and post it on bullctin 

boards. Make sure it contains all 

pertinent information such as the 

time, place, sign-up information and 

point of contact for the trip. Make 

announcements in thc local daily 

bulletin and post and unit ncwspapers. 

Prepare information packets 

(folders) for the staff ride participants containing material such as 

a letter of introduction, maps, battlefield brochures, bibliography list, 

a battle analysis format and articles 

about the battle to be studied. 

Local dignildries or other officers 

outside of your organization may he 

invited to attend the event. Scnd letters of invitation to them no later 

than four weeks before your first 

meeting. 

At this time, arrange for gucst 

speakers to speak at your prebriefs. 

Post, local or branch historii~ns 

usually do this quite well when requested. Obtain slides and films of 

some of the more wcll-known battlefields that can be shown during 

the prebriefs. 

When conducting the recunnaissance, coordinatc with the oflicials 

at the site for access to the site, 
your itinerary, and site prcparalions. During one of our staff rides, 

wc had the NPS work together with 

a colonial reenactor to portray a 

Continental soldier. He told the 

group about thc life and times of 

the soldiers during the Revolutionary War. We have also had an actor 

portray President Lincoln at Gcttysburg, PA, during our after-action 

review. 

Write a final letter of instruction 

for cach of the staff ride participants, spelling out their responsibilities and giving them all the administrative instructions they need 

to know. Distribute this information 

as soon as possible. Each participant should be asked to prepare a 

short talk or presentation about a 

topic concerning the battle. This 

gets everyone involved and eliminates the need to study the whole battle in detail. 

Compile a list of the participants 

including their names, ranks, SSNs 

(if aircraft flights are involved), olfice phone numbers and distribution 

stop numbers or office designations. 

This will help in getting information 

out to all participants in a timely 

manner. Assign group leaders and 

divide the participants into smaller 

groups (5-15 members) in which 

they will study the battle. When the 

staff ride bcgins, these smaller 

groups can rejoin the main group. 

They can then share their research 

with the other participants. 

Conduct the prebriefs at one a 

week for three or four weeks before 

the trip. This gives the participants 

timc to prepare for the discussions 

they will be leading. When possible, 

the individual group leaders should 

attend the reconnaissance of the battlefield. This will enable them to better lead their group's discussions. 

End the sign-up for the staff ride at 

the first prebrief because after this 

point, participants may not have 

enough time lo adequately prepare. 

Organize the supplies needed. 

Collect and have readily available 

two or three days before the trip the 

following items: water cans or jugs, 

paper cups, trash bags, binoculars, 

radios, etc. Assign responsibility for 

all items to preclude loss or damage. 

The staff ride should start at the 

visitor center with a general orientation of the terrain and an overview 

of the battle in the form of a short 

lecture, slide show, or film. 

The staff ride itself can be 

walked, ridden in buses, or flown in 

helicopters with equal success. However, the participants will get the 

most out of the staff ride if they 

walk it as much as possible. When 

using helicopters, ensure that there 

are enough headsets for each participant to hear the leader's presentation. Helicopters should not be 

used as a replacement for other 

vehicles, but should be used as a 

resourse to give them a perspective 

they would otherwise not receive. 

Design the stands around the battlefield so that the participants see 

all major terrain covered during the 

battle. Plan the sequence of stands 

so they follow the sequence of the battle. Also, someone 

possible. 

After the staff ridc is complete, 

wrap up discussion of the battle and 

of the events on the bat~lelield 

before leaving. This keeps everything fresh in the minds of the parthere on the 

staff ride even better. 

Once the trip is complete, 

collect the books which you purchased that can bc used again. Collect other materials that the participants do not want to keep, which 

can be used again, thus saving on 

copying costs. Collect and return all 

borrowed materiais such as water 

cans, binoculars and maps. Write an 

after-action rcporl al)out thc lrip 

that can bc uscd by the next staff 

ridc coordinator. 

Thcrc arc niany personnel and 

agencies to assist you in organizing 

a staff ridc. Each stall' ridc you conduct will improve over thosc hcfore 

it. The rides will w)ntrihutc immeasurably to thc prolessional developmcnt of those involved. If you 

rollow thcse guidelines and have a 

good time, you will have a successful staff ride. 

CPT Dorrold D. Jucohot~iiz, wus u~r 

i~lslrrtclor it1 lire Leudenhip Bru11c11 

of llrc E~~@reer Sclrool uf For1 Be/- 

vuir. He is a 1977 grutlriare oj Wesl 

Poi~rl, u~td lras scnvd in C;~I~~IUII~~ 

arid Korea, u~rd co~~u~~orrd(~d a[ Fotf 

Carso~l,CO. Wrile ul rlrc Ellfiir~eer 

School, /le lras led ille ,stu~u~rdjuatl- 

!y of ilre Etrgirreer Sclrool (111 sruf 

~icl(:,s lo A~~lielu~n, <ieli!'sbrifg Yorktown, Mar~assas, and Frede~ickshu~g 
REALISTIC TRAlNlNG ON A BUDGET: 


by LTC Arthur A. Marubbio, Jr. 

You would be hard pressed to 

find a Department of Defense 

employcc unaffected by the current 

round of budgetary cutbacks. Although everyone can relate to reduced cxpcnditures within the services, the one person who is most 

severely affected is the soldier on 

the ground. Ultimately, they are the 

recipients of our successes and 

failures, and their level of training 

can make the difference between 

winning and losing on the battlefield 

of the future. The real question becomes "How can we best train our 

soldiers with the least resources and 

still achieve a level of training that 

will allow them to survive and win 

on the battlelield of the future?" 

Engineers have not historically 

bccn major consumers of resources 

in the training environment as compared to other Combined Arms 

team members. Unfortunately, this 

can be directly related to a reduced 

level of realism in the conduct of 

many of our engineer missions. 

Even today, it is not uncommon to 

go to the National Training Center 

and find slices of logs representing 

mines in a minefield. Additionally, 

since we must compete for training 

ammunition and dollars, we have 

never bccn able to achieve the level 

of demolition training needed to 

truly train and sustain our engineers 

to a level ot proficiency necessary 

for total mission success. 

If we are to achieve success on 

the AirLand battlefield, all soldiers 

must have the pniper training in not 

only the "tools of their trade" but 

also in the effects that those tools 

will ultimately produce. Unfortunately, these tools cost money which 

is becoming increasingly difficult to 

...we have never been 

able to achieve the level 

of demolition training 

needed to truly train and 

sustain our engineers to 

a level of proficiency 

necessary for total 

mission success. 

obtain. The only apparent solution 

to this dilemma is the prudent use 

of training aids or devices that provide effective training, produce realistic effects and cost substantially 

less than the items they are intended to replicate. Engineer training 

devices are necessary for the accomplishment of our training mission. 

Training Devices For Use In 

Landmine Warfare 

The Engineer School developed a 

training mine strategy in 1982 

and refined that strategy in 19%. 

This strategy encompassed training 

from the individual soldier level 

through the force-on-force, combined arms exercise. Although our 

doctrinal strategy for the emplacement of mines has been updated, 

thc hardware used to support this 

strategy has not changed substantially since World War I!. Additionally, 

the devices used to train mine warfare skills are also of World War I1 

vintage and have been all but depleted. Based on this shortfall, a 

total revamping of the mine warfare 

device inventory was required. After careful evaluation of thc training 

needs of our soldiers, it was dctermined that realistic rcplicas of current service mines were rcquircd to 

teach and sustain placcmcnt, arming and disarming skills associated 

with hand-emplaced mincficlds. 

This was considered to be Levcl I of 

the overall stralegy and the solution 

was the development of the Placed 

Training Mine Kit (PTM). 

The PTM consists of plastic 

replicas of six U.S. service mines 

and five antihandling devices, packaged in a reinforced container used 

for storage and shipping. Thcsc reusable mines arc specifically designed to teach all soldier skills associated with the emplacement, arming 

and disarming of current landmines. 

Additionally, a safc, audible response will be provided to the soldier in the event that inipropcr 

procedures are used in the 
THE DEWCE SQbi'JT/rl)ihl 


arming/disarming sequence. This kit 

is intended for both institutional 

and unit training, but is not for use 

in the emplacement of training mine 

fields. The PTM is currently being 

produced and will be fielded to all 

units requiring landmine training. 

Additional kits will be available, 

through supporting TASCs, for use 

by units not designated on the current distribution list. 

Level I1 of the mine warfare 

strategy includes collective training 

at both local training areas and at 

major training centers such as NTC 

and the CTC. At this level of training, the effects of a mine detonation 

must be realistically replicated so as 

to achieve a level of training which 

will allow for the successful breaching of a threat minefield. These effects must be rcalistic and incorporate both the visual cues of flash 

and smoke as well as an appropriate interface which will disable vehicles and personnel through 

the MILES system. In response to 

this need, the Jet Propulsion 

Laboratories (JPL) developed the 

Mine Elfects Simulator (MES), a 

systcm related to the Field Artillery 

School's program known as the 

Simulation 01 Area Weapons Effccts (SAWE). The MES consists oC 

two generic mines (antitank and antipersonnel) which closely resemble 

the size, weight and arming sequence of current service mines. 

Both mines will produce a warning 

whistle prior to detonation, as well 

as smoke and flash. Additionally, 

the mines, when detonated, will produce a high frequency signal which 

interacts, through a PlayeriVehicle 

Detector Device (PDD or VDD), 

with the MILES system. "Probabilities of kill" will be incorporated 

into the PDDIVDD to match the 

level of survivability of the affected 

person or system. The actual 

development of the mines themselves has been completed and the 

Both mines will vroduce 

a warning whistie prior 

to detonation, as well as 

smoke and flash. 

PDDIVDD is currently entering the 

initial development stages. Actual 

fielding of the MES is expected in 

the early 1Ws with priority to the 

MTCs. 

The Level I11 portion of the training mine strategy is the development of other training rninesltraining mine systems which support the 

family of scatterable mincs and 

other special applications. Although 

training mines have been dcveloped to support both MOPMS and 

Volcano, these training mines are 

far too expensive to support combined arms exercises and they do not 

produce desired hdttleficld effccts. 

Additionally, an effort was initiated to determine the feasibility 

of developing a cost-effective, realistic device to replicate, at a rninimum, the effects of FASCAM and 

if possible, the delivery of this type 

of minefield. Based on rccent 

cutbacks in the funding of Army 

Training Devices, this entire program has becn eliminated. Thc 

good news is that the replication ol 

FASCAM-type minefields has a 

potential solution in two other ongoing initiatives. The first, and most 

timely, solution is the upgrade to 

the current instrumentation system 

at the National Training Center. Incorporated into this system will be 

the ability to designate mincfields 

electronically on the ground with 

basic "kill data" being provided 

back to the control facility hased on 

entry into the minefield. The obvious drawback to this approach is 

the lack of any audiolvisual cucs to 

enhance realism on the ground. 

The second initiative involvcs the 

SAWE program. Although still in 

development, this system can rcplicate area-type mincfields, similar to 

a FASCAM, and provide rcalistic 

feedback Lhrough MILES intcrfacc. 

The type and degrce of audioivisual 

cues is still being discussed 

and the acceptance of this system 

for other than ficld artillery use is 
The Placed Training Mine Kit contains plastic replicas of six U.S. 

service mines and five antihandling devices, packaged in a reinforced 

container. 

yet to be resolved. Although a Level 

I11 solution is on the horizon, substantial follow-up coordination will 

bc required to solidify this solution. 

Other Engineer Training Devices 

The Combat Engineer Vehicle 

(CEV) has always posed a gunnery 

training problem for the cngineer 

community due to both expense and 

availability of ranges. Two support 

systems, that have been under 

development for several years, 

should increase CEV gunner proficiency. The first device is the 

videodisc Gtirtrter)~ Truirter (CEV 

VIGS). This trainer will allow gunncrs to train, without the CEV, in 

the skills necessary to identify and 

properly engage a typical demolition target. The contract for this system has been awarded and the first 

trainers are expected to be on the 

ground by the end of FY88. 

The second phase of this CEV 

gunnery training system is the CEV 

Subcaliber Device. This device uses 

an exact replica of the 165mm demolition round and houses a firing 

mechanism for a 40mm round. This 

device will teach both crew and individual gunnery skills, at a reduced 

cost, and on smaller ranges. The 

combination of these two systems 

will increase crew proficiency, reduce ammunition and maintenance 

expenditures and provide the training necessary to achieve qualification standards for CEV gunners. 

The last training device currently 

in production is the M270, Cratering Munition, which replicates the 

size, shape, weight, and emplacement characteristics of the M-180 

Cratering Munition. This device is 

an Army-developed and-produced 

system, which went from concept to 

production in under 6 months, using 

TASC-available technology. Once 

completed, the system will allow unrestricted training of emplacement, 

wiring and firing of this munition, at 

any location, and without the safety 

risks of the live system. This device 

will not only save the Army moneyit will also save lives. 

Training in a constrained cnvironmen1 requires dctailcd planning, 

dedicated leadership, and training 

devices that can replicate the charactcristics and effects of the system 

to he trained. The current strategy 

for training mine warfare and demolition skills is realistic and will support the needs of both the Army 

leadership and the soldiers in the 

field. This mullilevel approach will 

not only enhance cnginccr training, 

but, more importantly, will realistically train the total combined arms 

community. 

LTC ArIAlrr A. Mantbbio, Jr., senled 

as Cliief of the Engirteer Scl~ool's 

New Equil?rrten/ S!~~/erttsDi~*i.sio!t 

beJore u.~.stoi~irrgtlie dlrfies of the 

Depttg Diwctor of tlte Direc1orafe of 

Trainirtg and Doctrine, Urtited Slulcs 

Army Errg.rteer Scltool, Forl Belrroir; 

VA. 
~n~ineer Solution -

wnere u = Peak volume or runorr in cuoic reetlsecond 

2 = A constant 

A = Area in acres (56 acres) 

= Design rainfall int~?nsity(Honduras = 2.5" per hour) Page 

FM 5-335 

n....-P 4.- --:-'-fin ,.--a,-,--. ,fl*"A .-a, ..,*..a -. 

Therefore. 	 30) 

second 

Apply the Continuit! EquatiorI, Q = VAw where V = 4 feet per second to 

,.,.+.tr n uwautnw. 

- --84 cfs - e feet 

4 fps 

VDtaln Adesign; Ades 

Ades --,-. .if) 

Ades 

From the road specifications. Fminimum is 5.6 feet (62.266.6). The rnaximum pipesize diarneter is (21: 

Dmi 

feet 

In inches: 3.73 (12 incheslfoot inches 
~n~ineer Solution 
Engineer Solution 


.,., 


r 

,,.~ulate the Order Length (OL) of the culverts Multiply the LIP hv 

the Npipes;and add ; nal 15% tcIallow for loss: 

-- = LIP x Npipe x 1.15 

Round up 8 to the ne; srest even number: 

= 358' 

Looking ;a the Battalion S4 s, there is not enough 42 culvert .. . avallable. Since the 42" pipe IS tne maximum pipe size, the 48" pip€! cannot be cc msidered. Calculate the 011'or the ne available pipe, 

36" (Note:the LIP d oes not GIiange): 

.. - . -

Round up to the net srest even number: 

= 428' 

The S4 ha 36" CMP; therefore, this is the solution. 

- ..-- ..- .- This prob /em was :wbrnilted by CPT C:a1 S. Mat: surnoco ano CPT Ec iward 

P. Boyajizjn, instruc:tors with the Horizt ontal Con struction Section, Kloads 

and Airfie .. - :h, Dept. of Military , Engineel.ins, U.S. Army Enc rineer 

-
BUILDING STRONG ROADS 


hands-on training in Fuertes Caminos-'88 Honduras 

by CPT Roy W. Rieder 

66 entlemcn, this is not a training exercise. This is an 

operation as real as any operation 

ever performed in combat." These 

were the first words heard by the 

staff of the U.S. Army, Fort Meadc, 

MD, in connection with Fuertes 

Caminos-'88 Honduras, the successor to the Blazing Trails exercises. 

About 7,5(Kl Reserve Component 

soldiers worked on the road from 

November 1987 to June 1988, both 

in engineering and support roles. 

The road was constructed in a 

mountainous region between the 

town of Yoro and the village of 

Jacon. The elevation varied from 

400 meters at Jacon to ll(W1 meters 

at the quarry, three kilometers from 

the start of the new road. 

The mission, at first, was to construct 5.5 kilometers of new road in 

the Yoro province in northerncentral Honduras. This was later expanded to 11.5 kilometers and the 

rcconstrudion of 2.5 kilometers of 

road from Blazing Trails '87. 

As originally designed by 

SECOPT, the Honduran equivalent 

of our Department of Transportslion, the road would have followed a ridge line passing 

north of the village of Jacon 

where it was to join the 

Cabonis Trail. This route cuts 

through 30 meters of limestone 

in some areas. An alternate 

route was found, slightly longer than the SECOPT design, 

but was easier to construct because deep cuts through rock 

were avoided. 

The road was divided into 

nine worksites; seven on the 

worked simultaneously beginning 

with the '87 road. The last two sites 

on the new road near Jacon were 

considered to be easily done and 

would be saved for last. 

Task Force 111, West Virginia 

National Guard, was s-lected to 

The - terrain ~ -~~ was ~- so ~ ~ 

dificu't9 the Honduran 

sergeants major argued 

over who would get the 

honor of making the 

first, and most 

dangerous cut. 

oversee the project. It was required 

to establish and opciate a quarry 

which would produce over 29,000 

cubic meters of approximately twoinch stone. 

A base camp, to house and support the engineers during the road 

construction, and six access roads to 

the worksites and the quarry were 

also built. 

The construction of the road had 

some unique characteristics. The 

terrain was steep, with drops of 1.50 

meters in several areas. Some GI1 

slopes had to be modified ti) avoid 

placing the toe of the slope more 

than 1,000 meters out Crom the centcrline. 

At one culvert site, the fill on the 

right loe was 37 mders. The Honduran engineers made the largest 

cut-a sidehill cut of about 4) 

meters. The terrain was so diflicult, 

the Honduran sergeants major argued over who would get the honor 

of making the first, and most 

dangerous cut. Two active component enginccr 

battalions and one engineer company were selected to assist the task 

force. The 52d Enginccr Battalion 

from Fort Carson, CO, constructed 

the base camp and the access roads 

prior to the arrival of the main body 

of Task Force 111. The 92d Engineer Battalion, from Forts Stewart 

and Gordon, (;A, worked with the 

task force on the road itself. 

The 13th Engineer Conipany 

(Construction Support), from Fort 

Knox, KY, established and ran the 

quarry and provided technical expertise and supervision for ell 

demolition operations. Thc 

Honduran Armcd Forces 

provided soldiers from their 

1st Engineer Batlalion to work 

on the road. 

Another aspect of the construction was thc integrated 

composition of the task force. 

Because of the disiancc from 

the United States to Honduras, it became clear ihat the 

task force could not afford the 

loss of construction time it 

new road and two on the '87 First Amy engineers construct a stone ma- would experience every two 

road. Seven sites would be sonry headwall at culvert #38 of the road. weeks-as all National 
Guardsmen and reservists rotated 

in ior annual training. 

Not only were American National 

Guard and Reserves working with 

active component soldiers as one 

Army, but the Honduran soldiers 

worked alongside the Americans. 

During the planning of the road, 

serious consideration was given to 

the types oi equipment used. The 

task force decided to use D8 dozers 

extensively. Previously, D7 dozers 

wcre used and wcre required to do 

extensive blasting in the schist 

which lies bclow the surface. With 

their greatest drawbar pull, the D8s 

were able to rip the schist avoiding 

a great deal of blasting. 

Despite using the heavy dozers, 

thc task force knew that a significant amount of drilling and blasting would still be required. The 

starf estimated that 12 rock drills 

were needed in view of the long 

lead time to obtain repair parts. 

After contacting the Engineer 

School and the Quarry Operator's 

Course at For1 Leonard Wood, 

MO, the staff determined that relying on the standard military rock 

drill was unwise and obtained approval to leasc five self-contained 

rock drills from a commercial vendor. The task force leased a 200 

TPH crusher and used two 75 TPH 

sets as backups. 

Another unique aspect in the construction of the road was the use of 

Army aviation. Due to the isolation 

of somc of the work sites, it was difficult to bring in water and construction materials. 

Thc Colorado National Guard assisted by lending a 200-gallon water 

bucket used to fight iorest fires. A 

UH-lH helicopter used the bucket 

to drop water on remote areas of 

the road ivr compaction where 

water distributors had a difficult 

time gaining access. 

The UH-lH was also used to 

haul 24-inch reinforced concrete 

pipe with a long sling to the 

worksites where access was difficult. 

Transporting thc 60- and &-inch 

culvert sections on fivc-ton dumps 

proved to bc dangerous, and larger 

Facing the headwall of the quany site, material is moved from one 

place to another. About 29,000 cubic meters of stone was crushed for 

the road-building. 

trucks could not negotiate the winding ~raiis leading to the worksite. 

The the larger sections were transported by CH-47s irom Joint Task 

Force Bravo at Palmerola Air Base. 

Another unique aspect of the cxercise was going through a new 

Not only were there 

~mericanNational 

Guard and Reserves 

working with active 

component soldiers as 

one Army, but the 

Honduran soldiers 

worked side by side the 

Americans. 

learning curve with every rotation. 

By the time the soldiers actually 

learned their jobs, there were only a 

few days remaining in country 

before their annual training was 

over. This is where the active component soldiers and Honduran engineers became the key to success 

since thcy only ncedcd to learn thc 

standards one timc. 

The 92d Enginecr Battalion took 

advantage of the rotation weekends 

by using the equipment allocated to 

the Reserve Component engineers. 

Every operator available manned 

a piece of equipment-rrom the 

newest soldier just out of AIT to 

the platoon sergeant. The results obtained in these two days wcrc staggering-up to 3,oW cubic nictcrs of 

soil were excavated, hauled and 

compacted in one day. 

Fucrtcs Caminos was truly an 

operation and a training exercisc on 

the largest scale. Soldiers rcccived 

intensive hands-on training in their 

MOS, officers and NCOs saw the 

results of proper planning and tack 

organization for their missions. 

Lcadcrs learned how to coordinate 

with support activities, and soldiers 

of all ranks developed a better understanding and appreciation (or 

the people of Honduras. 

The local Hondurans bcnefitcd 

most of all. The farm-to-market 

road reduced a four-day journey. on 

foot, to two days, giving thcm access 

to markets, medical care and a hctter way or life. 

CPT Roy Rieder is crrr~c~rrl!~ us.sigr~crl 

us or1 Errgineer Slafl Ojjico; Heurtqrrurrer:y, 1.~1 U.S. A1711s, FI. MPU~C, 

MD. Pri*viorrs usri~rriter~ls irrcl~f(te: 

0 1 1 1 t O J A, .(l/l Ellgirreer Ba~~aliorr, Fl. Leonard M'ood, 

MO, and Corirr1rurrrte,; HHC 44111 

Er~girreer Bulluliorr, Coiirp A4crcer; 

Korea. Hc lzolls (I BS irr civil eftg;rieerirtg fior11 U~~i~,ersi!\~ oJ PII~~III~ 

arrd is (I b~u~lrlaleo/ EOBC arrd 

EOAC 
THE IMPORTANCE OF PRACTICING 

BATTLE DRILLS 

by CPT Edward C. Cardon 

Ire followirtg arf icle, yr iblislred irr 

(he hrrre I%%, issrre of Army 

Magaline is rcprirrted here wit12 pc~-

nrissiort. It is esserrtial reudirrg for 

olery crtgirteer leader; artd NII evcellcrrt mficrrlatiorr of wltut rttury ofj~ou 

irtrriitite(),krtow: (ltal battle drillsrlzc hridgc~herweerr irtdir7idrralarrd collectirv tasks -are r~italt~ bat~lcJieM 

srrccess. Marcv ert~irtc~errrttits Itave 

wriltcrr dills for Ihcir owtr rise, artd I 

cortutrerrd rlrcrtt for it. We ar /Ire 

Sdtool Irmpe collccfcd rtrrrclr of tlrat 

wor.l<to aid in /~r.q?arirrgdrills startdard Iltrorrglrotil (Ire A17try. I attr COIIIrtrirrcd to ~~lndrlcittga sel of p.orlerr 

(frills, as c/riick()?as possible, tlrat 

Jocrrs or! srr/?/~orfirrgrlte corlrhirrcd 

ar~ttslearn ~~c~ll~wwurd irr tltc hanle. 

MG Datiiel R. Scltroeder 

Cor~rrttartdattt 

While no one is so naive as to 

believe a football team in league 

competition is anything like a combined arnis team in a combat environment, certain analogies can be 

drawn. 

Like combat, the mission of a 

footl,all team is to win. Mcmhers of 

professional Cootball teanis are fulltime players. Little time is allowecl 

in the hudclle to organize a play. To 

niinimi7e timc spent in the huddle, 

each team enters the playing lield 

with a game plan, a set of plays. 

Each play has been carefully rehearsed and is, in effect, a drill. At 

the beginning of tlie season, a player is assigner1 a position or positions 

and a playbook. Each player is expccted to know what he has to do 

on evcry play in the playl~ook.Foothall prl~ctice is orientcd toward 

practicing clirferent plays. 

The concept behind hattlc drills 

is siniilar to that of professional football. For every mission at the srnallunit level, there is an infinite variety 

of tactical situations; however, sonic 

tasks within each mission are the 

same for any situa~ion.These tasks 

are best rehearsed and exccutecl 

using battle tlrills. Each battle drill, 

or task, is made up of suhtasks. 

Like rootball, cach subtask must I3c 

accomplished for the drill to work. 

In a battle drill, every squad mcniber knows exactly which suhtasks lie 

must accomplish at each moment. 

Why use l?attle drills? The n.'I t urc 

of combat, especially first hat~lc,is 

that units do well only those things 

that have been ingrained into their 

activities. Therc is little tinic to plan 

a play in thc huddle or train soldiers on each subtask. Drills arc 

ideal and essential in surmounting 

the nature of combat operations. 

Do battle drills work? During :I 

recent exercise at Wildflcckcn 

Training Area, West <icrniany, 2 1 

combat engineer squ,'I ds were CValuated using standard drills. Each 

squad was graded using stanclard 

drill procedures with a sliding time 

scale. The standard drills cvalu:~tccl 

were as follows: 

Install a hasty road cratcr. 

Install a wire roadblock. 

Install a hasty row mineficlcl. 

Install a point minefield. 

Breach a Warsaw Pact minefielcl. 

As expected, tlie squacls wlio 

traincd using tlrills dirl much I>ct~cr 

than squads wlio "triccl to put the 

play together on the grc~~nd."For 

example, some squads installed a 

five-hole hasty road cratcr with live 

explosives in less than 30 minutes; 

some squads took more than 60 

minutes. What made the difference? 

Squads that trained using standard 

drills only needed the obstacle or 

breach location. Once the location 

was determined, the squad knew 

what to do. Squads that trained 

without using standard drills spent a 

significant portion of the allotted 

time figuring out how they were 

going to complete the specific subtasks of the mission. 

Drills affect the time available to a 

squad leader. The leader of a squad 

trained in battle drills has time for 

troop-leading procedures, caring for 

soldiers and planning for the next 

mission. The leader of a squad not 

trained in battle drills seems to 

spend most of his time organizing, 

directing and supervising the squad 

on each subtask within the drill. 

That drills are important is easily 

stated, but we suffer from a lack of 

momentum, because some people 

think drills inhibit the initiative of 

leaders. This is not true. A quarterback, the leader of a football team, 

assesses the situation and reads the 

defense. A squad leader assesses the 

tactical situation. The quarterback 

calls the play and executes it with 

precision. If a play beconies 

"broken," the quarterback uses his 

initiative to get the job done. Thc 

squad leader must do the same. 

Executing a hattle drill requiring 

seven soldiers demands initiative if 

the squad leader has onl!? four. Actually, a battle drill does not rob the 

squad leader of initiative: it saves the 

squad leader's energies and time for 

troop leading tasks. Leaders need 

to ensure that equipment is 

.I2Engineer. *u.s. Government Prlntiny Off~ce1988 655-368 
operational. rehearsals have been 

conducted, sufficient sleep and 

nourishment have been provided, 

supplics are on hand and that soldiers get to the right spot at the right 

time-trained, fit and motivated rr~ 

succeed-even in the face of injury 

or death. 

Battle drills are obviously needed. 

.lust as a football team develops 

plays for its playbook. an army unit 

must develop drills for its playbook. 

Before developing battle drills, the 

following questions must he addressed. Which tasks should be bartle drills? What is thc standard 

squad'? What is the minimum number of soldiers required for the drill 

to work? What assumptions will be 

made for security' What is the 

standard load plan for the squad 

vehicle? The answers to these and 

otlier queslions can be used to develop drills at the squad level. 

Alter squad-levcl drills are 

developed, each unit should devclop plah)oti-level drills, companylevel drills and battalion-level drills. 

Hence, each unit will have a 

playhook for each level of command. 

Developing drills is not moueh. 

Some lootball trams have great plays 

hut poor execution. Great football 

teams execute their plays perfectly. 

Why? Practice. This same logic applies to the Army. 

For drills to serve their intended 

purpose. they must be practiced. 

This applies to drills at each level in 

the chain of command. The drills 

must be in such detail that each soldier or unit knows exactly what to do 

As expected, the squads 

who trained using drills 

did much betteLthan 

squads who "tried to put 

the play together on the 

eround." 

at what time. A niatrix [ormat that 

shows each element's subtask for 

each step of the drill works best. It is 

iniportant that each lc\.el of drill be 

trained before advancing to the next 

level. For ex;~mple. at> :Irmc.r com. 

pan! practicing maneuver drills at 

[hc company level is wastiiig time if 

the platoons have not mastered their 

nlnneurer drills. 

Football teams have special teams 

for special events. The Army also 

needs special teams or combined 

arms drills. Complex obstacle 

breaching and river crossings are 

t examples of combined arms 

drills. Once again, it is important 

that each unit in the operation be 

proficient in its drill before auempting il combined arms drill. 

In combat, there will be little time 

in the huddle to design a play or put 

the parts together to accomplish the 

mission. The winner \vill be the unit 

that can execute each play of the 

game plan better and faster than its 

opponent. 

If we have a playbook for tasks at 

each level of command and we train 

using the playbook, we will win. 

There will be no need for a long 

huddle. Each soldier or unit will 

know exactly what to do and when to 

do it. Hence, drills can make every 

soldier and unit a better combat 

multiplier for the combined arms 

team. 

CPT Edward C. Cardort, corir~irirsiorted in 1982 fro111 flte U.S. i\iilitur!~ 

Acadenc, it! flte Corys of Ertgirteers, is 

operariorrs artd rrairrirrg officer. lo [he 

23rd Batfaliort irt U'i.sl Genrtarry. He 

lrns also ser1,ed as n platoon leader 

artd battaliort rirairttertartce officer in 

the 17tlt Ertgineer Battaliort af Ft. 

Hood, TX,artd ar assisfarrf trairri~tp 

officc~rfor tire 1.70tIr E~tgirrecr Brigade 

irr West Genttarry. 
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SECOND-CLASS MAIL 

EblQiNkER PROFE&6lONAL BULLETIN POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

US MIMY ENQlWEER SCHOOL EPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

ATTR:' AT&E=TDM*P 

FORT LEONARD wma, ~o 8til~ 

To our readers. .. 


The Engineer Professional Bulletin has moved to its new 

home in Building 1492 at Fort Leonard Wood. Please 

forward all articles and correspondence to us at our new 

address: 

Engineer Professional Bullet~n 

U.S. Army Engineer School 

ATTN: ATSE-TDM-P 

Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473-5895 

Thank you for your continued support and watch for 

our next issue--"Engineers in the 21st Century."