-

THE MAGAZINE FOR ARMY ENGINEERS FALL 198 
T7 Soldiers First, ~ngineersSecond 

by nilG John H. Moclleri 

J? Tave you ever met a soldier who ..couldn't remember his drill ser~ 

geant in basic training or AIT? Prohably not. 

Moreover, I've never met one who 

couldn't remember his drill sergeant's 

name! 

Why is that? 

It's because the drill sergeant is the 

soldier's first glimpse of the Army. 

He's the role model. 

He helped the soldier make the tran. 

sition from being a civilian to becoming a soldier and assuming the responsibilities inherent to our profession. He 

taught him to march, to tire a rifle, to 

don a protective mask, to move under 

direct fire, and more. He taught him to 

discipline himself and function as part 

of a team. 

The drill sergeant set the pace and 

made the soldier adhere to high standards of performance. And that soldier 

will judge the competence of every officer and NCO he encounters in his 

career by how well they measure up to 

his drill sergeant's standards. 

That's why our focus at Fort Leonard 

Wood is on excellence. The effectiveness 

of Army operational units is crucially 

affected by the habits and techniques 

soldiers learn in the training base. It 

is the job of TOE units to create 

cohesive squads, platoons, and companies. But without fundamentals and 

discipline, soldiers would never be 

molded into effective fighting teams. 

For years there has been a perception 

among "up and coming" Army people 

that an assignment to a training post 

was a "kiss of death:' TOE units were 

where the action was. Training base 

assignments were to be avoided at all 

costs. 

Fortunately, today there is a growing 

awareness by the senior leadership of 

the Army that assignments in the 

training base are critically 

important-in fact, it is not an exaggeration to say that many now realize 

that training base assignments are as 

important as TOE jobs. 

I've been in command at Fort Leonard Wood for four months now, and I 

must tell you that I am terrifically 

impressed by the quality of the officers 

and NCOs in training units here. The 

drill sergeants assigned here are some 

of the best NCOs I've seen in the Army. 

The commanders-all of whom have 

been centrally selected just like TOE 

commanders-can hold up their head 

with any group I've seen in the Army. 

There is an electric atmosphere here, 

one in which standards are high, 

enthusiasm is rampant and professional excellence is the norm. 

If you've never been to a training center before, you ought to come to Fort 

Leonard Wood and see for yourself. See 

the confidence of the young enlistee, 

the raw material that we are receiving 

into the Army today. See the desire and 

emotion that he exhibits as he negotiates the most difficult aspects of basic 

training: bayonet training, the obstacle 

course, physical training, basic rifle 

marksmanship, NBC training, and all 

those basic essentials that comprise 

soldiership. 

See the motivation and enthusiasm 

with which he approaches everything 

he does, and experience the thrill of fulfillment with him and his parents on 

graduation day. If you've ever thought 

that the quality of American youth has 

diminished or that patriotism is dead, 

then just come and sit through a basic 

training graduation. It will sendchills 

down your spine. I guarantee it. 

But Fort Leonard Wood is not just for 

basic trainees. Some years ago when I 

was commanding the 326th Engineer 

Battalion of the lOlst Airborne Division, I arranged to bring two of my line 

companies to Fort Leonard Wood for 

much-needed float and fixed bridge 

training because ofthe facilities, equipment and expertise available. It was 

outstanding training which I could not 

have duplicated at home station. A 

week after I assumed command at Fort 

Leonard Wood, I stood on one of our 

drop zones and watched a company of 

the 307th Engineer Battalion, 82d Airborne Division, jump into Fort Leonard 

Wood for a week's worth of nearly identical training to that which I arranged 

for my people years ago. 

There is a very actlve and growing 

partnership program between active 

Army FORSCOM units and Fort Leonard Wood We want you to come here 

and take advantage of the great training facility we have. We want you to 

come and see where the basics are 

taught. We want you to experience the 

motivation and enthusiasm of young 

soldiers and drill sergeants. 

Why should basic training and 

advanced individual training mean so 

(Continued onpage 35) 
UNITED STATES ARMY FEATURES 


ENGINEER CENTER 

AND FORT BELVOIR, VA 

COMMANDERICOMMANDANT 

MG Richard S. Kern 

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

COL Ralph T Rundle 

CHIEF OF STAFFIDEPUTY 

INSTALLATION COMMANDER 

COL Peter D. Stearns 

COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM O~illeW. Troesh Jr 

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING 

AND DOCTRINE 

LIC William E. Tyson 

CHIEF OF PUBLICATIONS 

Sranlw Ceorges 

EDITOR 

1LT Louis J. Leto 

ASSISTANT EDITORS 

Ellen D. Shiclds 

Donald Schmoldt 

DESIGN DIRECTOR 

Thomas Davis 

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 

SP4 lean Tare 

On the Cover In 17-ioot rubber assault boats, an advance 

party of Combat Engineer recruits cross the Big 

Piney River at For1 Leonard Wood, MO. (Photo 

by SP5 Vicky A. Lippr.) 

8 The 12 Bush Combat Engineer 

by SCTDebbie Drew 

10 New Tracked Vehicle Course Makes Better NCOs 

by 1LT John P Chagaris 

12 PLDC: The First Step for NCOs 

by SFC Danny L. Bussey Sr. 

14 Command of An Initial Entry Training Company: 

An Alternate Path to Success 

by LTCBarry W Levine 

16 Engineers Training for Excellence 

Photo Essay 

18 High Water, Hard Decisions 

by MC William E. Read (REV and Dr Michael C Robinson 

23 Developing Our Junior Officers 

by COL Samuel .IAdy 

26 A New Way to Breach Minefields 

by Mr. Harry N Hambric and MAJ Edwin L. Booth 

30 Another Side of Authority 

by MAJLawrence R. Sadoff 

33 Let BTMS Work for You 

by CPT Bryan L. Page 

DEPARTMENTS 

Inside Front Cover: A Personal Viewpoint 

2 News &Notes 

3 Engineer People 

4 Clear the Way 

5 Bridge the Cap 

6 SchoolNews 

15 Engineer Problem 

34 Hotline Q&A 

35 Engineer Solution 

36 Career Notes 

ENGINEER is an authorized publication of lhe U S Army Engineer Canfpr and Fort Belvo~rVA. Unlear rpeciRcally stated. mater~ai appearing herein doer cuar neessarily reflect 

DOI~CXthinking nor endorsement by any dthc US.AF~Y.~h~ wordr he,him or hip am to p~lsonne~ either AII phatasraphs mntained hemln 

ape aKlclal US. Armi ohotoe~aohs unless otherwbse credited. The use of hzndr for ortnrine this ouhlication was aooraved bv Headouarteis. Department of ihr Army, on Julv 22. .. -. . - . .. l9Ml Materra! herein may be reprinted idcredlt is qiven tolENGINEER and tu Lhe nuthor ENGINEER'S objectives are to provide a forum for the exchange ofldeas. to inform and 

- .. .1'. .8.,1 lh prrln .lz ih ilrtfrslonal Jer mom. - i I n. ,n?er: crt?. Arm, ;ne,~wcr?,,r,>>8#j,, t !..r. .,. ?-~,.,~<~:~-:. , .,:\c.lSFk:R #> ~.#tnor.z~J %no <,, m..r...

I :r . I h l m P . 8 . I p h l . 8 r .,#>i.- E\CI\Ltk i!r..l,tn.. Kl%r\'l'l>.P5top !F.F 1'1.: $4.. n r 

\ \22>1 :r'll I'hnn. 101 6C$ <?A 4Y !54 5,). .7~88 ~,t:\ .~ISb'ER8r~8~a~.~hl~ tvmm~:,,h 81.. -. , ,.#.? ."$ ?< 2,w~$n-::3 ('7 <;v.runen~ Pr,! h#nuOii..c \\,~.l. r.: ,
-

I News 6 Notes 

Lake Allatoona: 

attracted eight million visitors last 

year. It is one of more than 420 Corps' Project of the Year lakes nation-wide, and the fourth most 

visited. 

In addition to its 12,000-acre expanse 

of water, the Allatoona project also 

encompasses 25,000 acres of adjoining 

land, much of it devoted to recreation, 

wildlife management and nature 

preservation. 

David G. Grabensteder, resource 

manager at Allatoona, said he is "extremely pleased with the recognition 

given to the project and feels that it is 

a tribute to the hard work of the staff 

here and the excellent support given to 

us by the Mobile District.'' 

The Chief of Engineers' Annual Project award was created in 1978 to 

recognize exceptional managerial 

achievement at one of the Corps' recreational resource projects. This is the 

second year that a project managed by 

a district in the South Atlantic Division has been selected for the award. 

Last year Hartwell Lake in the South 

Atlantic Division's Savannah District 

was selected. 

information onto existing maps and 

copy photographs. 

ETL scientists began acceptance 

tests for the QRMP prototype in late 

March 1984. Current plans call for 

fielding the printer early in the next 

decade. 

Paint Test 

U.S. Army-CERL has fielded a prototype Paint Test Kit for testing. The 

paint test will evaluate drying time, 

hiding power, appearance, gloss, adhewon, cleanahility, and other basics. The 

kits were tested at Forts Sheridan, 

Campbell, Polk, Gordon, Devens, and 

Leonard Wood. Installation personnel 

used these kits this past summer to 

provide feedback necessary to develop 

the final paint test kit in FY85. 

f'rglect of the r eat: IClS ..Irnzr ,,llo/r,.) 

Lake Allatoona, located 40 miles 

north of Atlanta, GA, and one of the 

most visited lakes in the United States, 

was selected by the Corps of Engineers 

as its "Project of the Year." 

The selection of the 12.000-acre lake 

and its recreational and nature facilities was announced by LTG Joseph K. 

Bratton, then the Corps Chief of 

Engineers. 

Field Printer 


A new electrostatic color printer has 

been developed to meet the Army's 

need for a fast, cost effective way to 

reproduce maps in the field, according 

.to Engineers at the Topographic 

Laboratories, Ft. Belvoir, VA. 

The advanced model of this Quick 

Response Multicolor Printer (QRMP) 

developed in Pasadena, CA, is being 

tested by the Army to produce fullcolor, full-size (24x 30-inch) maps from 

both paper originals and digital data 

files. 

The QRMP matches the print quality achieved by the lithogaphic presses 

used in the field today This new equip. 

ment, however, eliminates much of the 

set-up and production time associated 

with offset lithograph-and cuts hours 

off the map reproduction process. 

Unlike conventional lithographic 

Bratton cited the lake's personnel 

and Mobile District for exceptional 

efforts in "public involvement, safety 

education programs, natural resources 

and environmental protection, and 

leadership in establishingjoint recreation progams with other federal, state 

and local agencies." 

Allatoona, which was completed by 

the Corps' Mobile District in 1950, 

Completed 

presses, the QRMP uses a dry printing 

process similar to that found in commercial color copiers. The addition of 

a laser scanner improves the dry copying process and provides the high resolution for reproducing maps. 

This combination of color xerography 

techniques and laser technology allows 

the QRMP to print maps and other 

graphic products with the speed and accuracy needed to support combat operations. The printer produces 75 full-color 

maps per hour. 

The QRMP. however. won't be limited 

to copying maps from paper originals. 

A digital interface planned for the 

printer will allow troops in the field to 

produce maps directly from digital data 

recorded on tapes or disks. Soldiers will 

also be able to use the equipment to 

make quick overlays, overprint new 
W j I Engineer People 

Marine Explorer Jacques Cousteau 


Visits Vicksburg Engineer District 


COL Dennis J. York explains construction of articulated concrete 


mat5 to Jacques Cousteau at the Delta Mat Casting Field. 


(Photo b,y Gar,v Dill.) 


Deputy Chief 

MG Norman G. Delbridge Jr., hecame the new Deputy Commander and 

Deputy Chief of Engineers of the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers in September 

1984. 

Delhridge, who had been serving as 

Assistant Chief of Engineers at the 

Pentagon since September 1980, succeeded MG Richard M. Wells, who 

retired from military service on August 

31. 	 M(; Norman G. Delhridge, Deputy 

As the new Deputy Commander and Commander and Deputy Chief of 

Deputy Chief of Engineers, Delbridge Engineers. (US.Army photo.) 

is the principal assistant and advisor ects. He also assists in management of 

to the Chief of Engineers for the Corps' the military engineering and conwater resource development and man- struction progams for both the U.S. 

agement activities which include navi- Army and the U.S. Air Force in the 

gation, flood control, hydroelectric United States as well as overseas. 

power generation, water supply for Delbridge is a registered professional 

municipalities and industries, and engineer in the State of Iowa, and is a 

recreation at Corps of Engineers proj- native of Detroit, MI. 

COL Dennis J. York, district commander, and LTC Stephen Shepard, 

deputy commander, Vicksburg, MS, 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, greeted 

Jacques-Ives Cousteau, international 

marine explorer, on a recent filming 

expedition. 

York hosted Cousteau and members 

of his expedition aboard the Corps' 

patrol boat, Lipscomb, for a tour of the 

Delta Point mat casting fields, various 

river works, and a briefing session. The 

Lipsmmb was undergoing engine tests 

in the area and participating in the 

"load-out" of mats in the casting field. 

York briefed Cousteau on the role of the 

Army Engineers on the Mississippi 

River, explaining the methods used and 

need for the annual revetment and 

hank stabilization program. 

Cousteau appeared impressed with 

the mat field and other Corps works, 

according to York. "He about ran us to 

death. You really had to hustle to keep 

up with him. He walked up close to 

where the work was being done on the 

casting field and was interested in 

every detail of the job," York said. 

The casting field is used in construction of articulated concrete mats for 

use in the Corps of Engineers annual 

revetment and bank stabilization program along the Mississippi River. 

Following the trip to Delta Point, 

Cousteau went to the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station to 

film the model of the Mississippi River 

Lock and Dam 26, which is north of St. 

Louis. He also filmed the reconstructed 

Civil War gunboat, Cairo, at the Vicksburg National Military Park and the 

Corps' 200-acre model of the Mississippi in Clinton, MS. 

The purpose of Cousteau's expedition 

was to understand the river and its role 

in people's lives and the ecology. The 

documentary is expected to be broadcasted in nearly 100 nations, in addi. 

tion to its showing at the World's Fair. 
by MG R~chardS. Kern, Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School 

Enaineer - Commandant Stresses Training 

Training Our Soldiers is a 

Top Priority 

In assuming command of the Engineer Center and 

School, I look forward to the opportunity of working 

with each of you to ensure the effectiveness of the 

Combat Engineers as members of the combined arms 

team on the AirLand Battlefield. Training in the 

Army, and more particularly training Engineers, will 

form the cornerstone of this effort. 

When the Army Policy Council approved the Army 

Training Rules and Responsibilities Study recommendation on July 24, 1984,training officially became a 

total Army goal. Although the importance of training to individual proficiency and unit readiness have 

long been recognized, this significant decision 

highlights Army leadership commitment to quality 

training. It formally restates the fundamental role of 

training in the accomplishment of the Army mission. 

As soldiers we must train to mobilize, deploy, fight 

and win anywhere in the world. Much of what we do 

through the day is, in fact, training. However, it is the 

manner in which our officers and NCOs conduct this 

training, the attitudes displayed, and examples set 

that spell the difference between ineffectual training 

and good training. 

Two essential characteristics in our approach to this 

challenge must be interest and professionalism. Interest simply means that we must continually search for 

ways to make full use of our training opportunities. 

Leaders must stress performance-oriented training 

and effective use of resources. Interest implies commitment to a satisfactory level of training 365 days 

a year to ensure that we will be able to meet the challenges of the modern battlefield. Interest means that 

the entire leadership cadre participates in the training effort. Although officers focus a greater portion 

of their time on collective missions and tactical training while the NCOs teach individual training, training at all levels is the business of all. 

The second characteristic, professionalism, demands 

that each officer and NCO constantly improves his 

level of military awareness and technical skills. The 

art of military engineering has not changed much 

over time. The criticality of the tasks themselves 

remains constant. However, the conditions under 

which the job must be performed and the standards 

that must be met have, indeed, changed. 

Complex issues such as force modernization, the 

integrated battlefield, and the Army's new AirLand 

Battle Doctrine present unique challenges to the 

Engineer's ability to perform his traditional role. In 

addition to keeping skills and knowledge current, professionalism also means that trainers present the best 

possible instruction. 

Today's troops are far past the "gee-whiz" stage. 

They expect training to be challenging and realistic 

in order to prepare them for critical field situations. 

All training, at Fort Belvoir, Fort Leonard Wood, and 

in Engineer units armywide, must concentrate on 

"Excellence." All of us are responsible for providing 

the training which will result in mission success both 

in peacetime and in emergency situations. It is a 

demanding, full-time, but rewarding job. 

The future of our Army depends on how well we 

develop our junior leaders. These young leaders, both 

officer and NCO, must be allowed to make mistakes 

and to learn from them. Effective training is best accomplished in a no-fault environment. Assess each 

person's capabilities, assign challenging tasks, and 

then demand more. Today's soldier, more than ever 

before, looks for competence in his leaders. Young 

leaders must be allowed to grow in a tactical and 

technical sense in order to meet the challenge of 

future years. 

This year will see a new emphasis on training. I 

expect each of you to develop your own training 

goals-for self-development, for the growth of those 

you are charged to lead, and for the mission you are 

expected to accomplish. The effective training and 

development of the Army's most precious resource, its 

soldiers, is a top priority. 
by CSM Orville W. Troesh Jr., U.S. Army Eng~neer Center & School 

~ Q U O Wknkimg ~ ~ 

"or FKOs 

CSM Urges NCOs to Take 

Advantage of New Engineer 

Courses 

With much reluctance, I now write my final chapter 

as the Engineer School and Fort Belvoir Command 

Sergeant Major. By the time this article is published, 

I will have relocated to Fort Sam Houston, TX, 

assuming the duties of CSM of the 5th U.S. Army. 

In this final article, I urge each soldier to continue 

the dialogue that has been established with the Engineer School in an effort to further improve the training of our Engineer noncommissioned officers and 

soldiers. Now as I reflect on the past, present and 

future of the Engineer School, I feel we should be 

aware of the changes that have taken place and those 

still to come. Let us begin with the Engineer Noncommissioned Officer Advanced Course. 

In August we began an entirely revised ENCOA 

Course, structured to produce a more complete and 

hard-hitting Engineer platoon sergeant. The course 

consists of a five-week block of common NCO subjects 

and five weeks of common Engineer NCO subjects 

before branching off into various lengths of MOS 

specific technical training. With the exception of CMF 

81 students, most of the ENCOA students will be 

returned to their units in less time and thus help their 

unit's readiness. 

Our Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course 

(BNCOC) continues to teach the most current material. An annual instructor's seminar is held each 

April to update the program of instruction, lesson 

reference, and support material. In addition, CONUS 

units will have a new 12F BNCOC available to them 

at Fort Leonard Wood, MO starting in January 1985. 

This will ease the training workload on the other 12F 

BNCOC conducted at Hohenfels, Germany, 

In the area of Basic Technical Courses, the Directorate of Training and Doctrine has implemented a 

51H30 Construction Supervisor Course which will be 

held at Fort Leonard Wood in November and December 1984, and wlll implement a 62N30 BTC for the 

Engineer Equipment Supervisors Thls will provide 

the much needed training - for our sk~ll level 3 CMF 

51 NCOS who had not received this type of training 

at AIT. Attendance is through unit command identification, placement on an order of merit list and suhmission of a DA Form 4187 to NCO Training Branch 

at MILPERCEN. 

Our Primary Technical Courses are still in operation. The 12C Bridge Section Sergeant Course and 

52D20130 Power Generation Mechanics Courses are 

conducted at Fort Belvoir. The same procedures for 

attendance as BE applies, however, I encourage you 

to send E5s or even some promotable E4s to the 

12Cl52D20 course. It is imperative that we train the 

right NCO at the 12C20152D20 skill level. In addition, we have added 52D30 BTC at Fort Belvoir 

available for our more senior generator mechanics 

(E6s and promotable E5s). 

Overall, the Engineer School has made great strides 

toward enhancing the professional development of our 

Engineer noncommissioned officers during the past 

two years. Not only have we developed new courses, 

we have also improved POIs in existing courses. 

Instructor quality has been upgraded, and soldier and 

Army standards are taught and enforced. 

You, the field noncommissioned officer, have also 

contributed. The quality, appearance, knowledge, and 

physical fitness of students have improved dramatically. You have provided not only constructive criticism hut also sound ideas on what is needed in NCO 

training and how the School could support it. I commend all of you for your efforts and encourage you to 

provide the same fine support to CSM Charles T. 

Tucker as he assumes this position, responsibilities 

and duties. 

CSM Tucker comes to you from the U.S. Army 

Chemical School at Fort McClellan, AL, where he 

served as Command Sergeant Major. 

Together, as a solid Engineer noncommissioned officer support channel, we have constructed the bridge 

to lessen the gap between the school house and the 

field and have improved our Corps. To all of you, a fond 

farewell. I look forward to seeing and serving you 

again. 
School News 


Department of 

Combined Arms (DCA) 

ENCOA Course Revision: The curriculum for the Engineer Noncommissioned Officer Advanced 

Course (ENCOA)has been revised, and instruction has begun using it. 

Both the 12 and the 51 series courses have been redesigned to include 

common core subjects developed by the Sergeant Major's Academy followed by MOSICMF USAES-developed specific training. These new 

courses should prove to be challenging, exciting and professionally 

rewarding and should prepare the Engineer NCO for increased 

responsibilities. 

Directorate of 

Evaluation and Standardization (DOES) 

Follow-up Evaluations: The Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization (DOES) has been 

conducting graduate follow-up evaluations of Engineer training. The purpose of these evaluations is to determine if the Engineer School (Ft. 

Belvoir) and the Engineer Training Center (Ft. Leonard Wood) are training soldiers to perform the critical tasks to an acceptable standard meeting the needs of the field units. The initial evaluation conducted was 

of the 12BlO (Combat Engineer) One Station Unit Training (OSUT) 

course. The mail-out evaluation was conducted from January 1984 to 

June 1984.The results of this evaluation indicated that the 12B10 soldier 

can accomplish those tasks trained in OSUT and that those tasks are 

important to the unit's mission. The trainers and training developers 

are commended for their efforts with this course. 

DOES is completing the reports from our evaluations of the 52C10 

(Utilities Equipment Repairman), 12C10 (Bridge Crewman) and 52D10 

(Power Generation Equipment Repairman) courses. These evaluations 

are providing valuable feedback to both the trainers and training 

developers concerning the utility of these courses. DOES would like to 

thank the soldiers who have supported this evaluation program and 

encourages support in the future. This program is designed to help 

provide the best training to Engineer soldiers. 

Department of 


Military Logistics (DML) 


Name Change: The Department of Maintenance (DOM), established as an academic 

department on Jan. 4, 1984, has been officially redesignated as the 

Department of Military Logistics (DML). In addition, the Maintenance 

Management Branch has been redesignated as the Logistics Branch. 

These changes were made to better convey the overall mission of the 

training department and to reduce confusion with other Engineer Center 

maintenance activities. 
Directorate of 


Training and Doctrine (DOTD) 


Warrant Officer Training: Warrant Officer Training Branch is revising and updating all Engineer 

Warrant Officer training to coincide with TRADOC's Warrant Officer 

Training System. New courses, depending on the MOS, will vary in 

length from 7 to 16 weeks and are scheduled to be implemented in June 

1985. POC is Officer Training Branch, AV 354-116614994. 

The Army's keystone "How to Fight" manual for Combat Engineers, 

FM 5-100 was published in May. It presents basic Engineer doctrine and 

implements the AirLand Battle Doctrine described in FM 100-5. 

Together, these manuals set forth the concepts for winning the battles 

and campaigns in modern warfare. 

Department of 


Military Engineering (DME) 


SC23 Training: Officers who are en route to, or assigned to, Directorate of Engineering and Housing positions at military installations or Corps of Engineer 

District positions will he interested in the FacilitiesIContract Construction Management Course being taught by the Department of Military 

Engineering at Ft. Belvoir, VA. Officers with SC23 should make every 

effort to attend this course en route to their next assignment. 

The FY 85 classes are scheduled to begin January 18, May 24, and 

Aug. 16, 1985. The course is nine weeks long and is divided into two 

parts. The first part includes horizontal and vertical construction design, 

quality assurance, project management, procurement and contract 

management. The second part is dependent on the officer's assignment. 

Officers en route to Engineer Districts will attend local training conducted by the Corps' Huntsville Training Division, while those en route 

to DEH assignments will attend the Engineer School's Facility Engineering Management Course. Requests to attend the course are made 

through channels to MLLPERCEN Education Branch, ATTN: DAPCOPA-E. Additional information on the course is available from the SC23 

training coordinator, MAJ David White, at AV 354-2628 or 354-3998, 

Commercial (703) 664-2628 or 664-3998. Correspondence should be 

directed to the Department of Military Engineering, A'I"l'N: MAJ David 

White, Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-5331. 
by SGT Debbie Drew 

With a mighty shove the 17-foot rubber assault boat is on its way 

acrosq the narrow Big Piney River. The Combat Engineers are on 

the move. 

12B Combat Engineers perform simulated combat tasks during field exercises. (Photo by Marilyn F1emrmrng.) 

8 ENGINEERIFall 1984 
Learning about the 17-foot rubber 

assault boat is only one aspect of 

the challengiug and physically 

demanding training that Combat 

Engineers receive during their 13week 

One Station Unit Training (OSUT) at 

Fort Leonard Wood, MO. 

OSUT is a program which enables 

prospective Engineers to complete 

their basic training and 12B AIT 

training at the same installation. 

Soldiers who are male and obtain a 

score of 85 in CO (combat) may qualify 

as Combat Engineers. 

After seven weeks of basic training, 

12Bs participate in an "Essayons" 

ceremony, similar to a basic training 

graduation cere~nony YEssayons," a 

French term for "Let us try," is the 

Corps of Engineers' motto.) The ceremony is conducted by the students 

themselves with permanent party 

cadre as spectators. The only exceptions are a host commander and a 

reviewing officer who participate in the 

ceremony. 

The next six weeks are extremely 

fast-paced; soldiers now learn to be 

Combat Engineers. The soldiers first 

learn how to build non-explosive obstacles such as barbed wire barricades. 

They study rigging, learn various knots 

and how to use pulleys, and also help 

to build a three-rope bridge using the 

knots they have been taught to tie. 

The next subject is land-mine warfare. The soldiers are taught how to 

arm and disarm antitank and anti per^ 

sonnel mines and are shown mine 

detection techniques. 

The proper use of carpentry tools and 

power tools is also taught at the 12B 

OSUT. Every Engineer squad and platoon is issued a tool box (called a 

pioneer tool box). Besides carpentry 

tools, the box contains other essential 

Combat Ensneer tools such as shovels, 

sledge hammers and axes. 

Two days of demolition follow the 

carpentry phase. Here, trainees learn 

to prime and detonate explosives. Students are shown a demonstration in 

various special purpose demolitions 

such as bangalore torpedoes, which are 

used to create paths through wire 

obstacles and minefields. A week of 

training is then devoted to float and 

fixed bridges. 

A highlight of Engineer training is 

a five-day, four-night tactical training 

field exercise called "Engineer Week." 

Soldiers can learn teamwork in applying individual skills they've acquired. 

They strive to complete missions which 

they will be required to perform as 

members of a Combat Engineer 

company. 

During this tactical exercise trainees 

install and remove minefields, construct wire obstacles, use explosives to 

create a road crater which is 30 feet 

long, 10 feet wide and eight feet deep, 

and learn to rappel. Testing is held 

after each phase and at the end of the 

cycle. 

Engineer units are located at installations throughout the United States 

and overseas in Europe, Korea and 

Panama. They participate in field 

training exercises to enable them to 

efficiently perform their mission. 

When they are not in the field, their 

specific job depends on the unit to 

which they are assigned. Combat Engineers frequently help with post construction projects and spend a lot of 

time maintaining their equipment. 

MOS 12B is a large, challengingand 

rewarding career field for soldiers. 

Advancement opportunities abound for 

Combat Engineers because it is a 

diversified career field and noncommissioned officers are in high demand. 

Adapted from an article appearing in the May 1984 issue of 

Recruiter Journal. 

SGT Debbie Drew is /he editor of 

Guidon, the newspaper for the US. 

Arn[v Engineer Troining Center and 

For1 Leonard Wood. She has a bochelor's degree i7z journalism from Southern Illir~nis Uniuersily. 

PFC Scott Shephard, Company B, 

307th Engineer Battalion, 82nd 

Airborne Division, packs his 

parachute after a successful jump 

at Fort Leonard Wood, MO. (Photo 

h.v.SP4 Thomas Copeland.) 

SP5 James Stevens and SP4 Jean Holrnnn, iTIEDD-AC. search their 

"prisoner," SP4 William Hays, Military Police Con~mand. (US. Army 

Photo.) 

9 
New 


Makes 0 I

. d e NCOs 

by ILT John P. Chagaris 

1LT Thomas ,M. Thanos, project officer ol'thc ('El' Lridco 1)isk (;unnc.r:r. 'I'r;rin<.r: ~spl:iins the new-der.icr to SG?' 

John G. Kappell, section sergeant of SPED platoon, track srction. I10211dl?nginc.r.r Con1pan.y (AFB)(R).(Photo 

by ILT L. J. Leto.) 

The Engineer School is helping 12F dents are given a diagnostic test at the total physical fitness; preparing a 

NCOs to become better trained beg~nning of the course to determine rater's section of an Enlisted Evaluasoldiers. The way they're trying to their proficiency in skill levels I and 11, tion Report: the Geneva Convention; 

achieve it is through a six-week Com- and those who are found deficient in drug and alcohol abuse prevention; 

hat Engineer Racked Vehicle Super- these areas are given additional equal opportunity and prevention of 

visor's Course. training sexual harassment; and the Multiple 

Although the first 12F BNCOC NCOA instructors teach students the Integrated Laser Engagement System. 

started in West Germany in 1982, it non-technical portion of the course. Other subjects, such as communicawasn't until last October that it was During the first week, students are tions, are taught by 12F instructors. 

initiated at Fort Leonard Wood. The taught the Battalion Training Man- Students learn how to prepare and 

course, designed for E4s through E6s, agement System, an NCO's general operate an FM radio set, call for and 

stresses hands-on training. The stu- duties and responsibilities; counseling; 
adjust indirect fire, connect a CEV to 

a CEV hot loop using the external telephones, and to communicate with an 

automated CEO1 and KTC-600. 

Students are also shown how to prepare and submit an NBC-1 (Initial) 

Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical 

report during the Nuclear, Biological 

and Chemical portion of the course. 

They also study detection and protection from NBC hazards. 

During the vehicle maintenance portion, students learn how to inspect 

organizational maintenance historical 

records. They also perform daily pre~ 

ventative maintenance on the gunner's 

and commander's station of the CEV, 

supervise daily preventative maintenance on a CEV, and learn how to 

supervise daily preventative maintenance on an AVLB and launching 

system. 

In studying land navigation, students are taught how to interpret a 

route reconnaissance overlay, conduct 

a map reconnaissance and participate 

in a land navigation exercise. 

The gunnery phase of the course 

gives students the opportunity to issue 

a fire command; prepare a circular 

range card and a sketch range card; 

remove, install and operate the M36 

periscope; sight and zero the .50 caliber 

M85 machine gun; sight and zero the 

main gun; and sight and zero the 7.60 

coax machine gun in addition to other 

gunnery functions. 

During the non-gunnery CEV crew 

functions phase, students supervise 

various tracked vehicle operations during nuclear warning drills for a CEV. 

They also learn to supervise abandon 

tank drills, moving material with the 

winch and hoom, self-recovery tank 

drills, and towing a disabled CEV 

using the tow cable. 

While also learning about AVLB 

crew functions, students learn to supervise other soldiers bridging a gap using 

an AVLB launcher, self-recovery of an 

AVLB launcher and a nuclear warning 

drill for an AVLB. 

The course is designed to place each 

soldier into stressful, realistic situations. For example, while supervising 

an "evade missile drill," a student, as 

a CEV commander, takes his vehicle 

onto a live fire move-out range. Within 

10 seconds after seeing a smoke cloud, 

he designates the firing position of an 

antitank missile, issues correct fire 

commands enabling the gunner and 

himself to bring suppressive fire onto 

the enemy position with their machine 

guns, and directs the driver to take 

evasive action. 

At the end of this fast-paced six 

weeks, students take a comprehensive 

examination covering all of the subjects 

taught during the course. This is in 

addition to the tests given after each 

block of instruction. 

The course helps soldiers to become 

more familiar with the duties of a CEV 

commander and an AVLB section sergeant. This knowledge will help the 

soldier when he returns to his unit to 

lead and train his subordinates and to 

fulfill the missions assigned to him. 

The result is a professional, wellrounded NCO who is an asset to his 

unit and to the Corps. 

1LT John P Chagaris is chief; 12 

BNCOC-12F-TRACK at Fort Leonard 

Wood, MO. He is a 1982 Junior Ofiicer 

Maintenance Course graduate and has 

a bachelor's degree from Georgia 

College. 

The new tracked vehicle crew supervisor course helps all Engineers to hecome more proficient with their tracked 

wheel equipment. (US. Army Photo.) 

ENGINEERIFall 1984 11 
m'- nt-m 1. J d d d b n

Ete First Step for NCOs 


by SFC Danny L. Busse)) Sr. 

If NCOs are the "backbone of the United 


States Army," then Engineer NCOs must be 


the stronghold of the Corps of Engineers 

H-ow do Engineer soldiers develop 

lnto noncommissioned officers? 

How do they learn the necessary skills 

needed to lead troops? And how do they 

learn to train other troops? 

The first step is the Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC), 

which was started at Fort Leonard 

Wood in December 1983. It is a fourweek resident course conducted at 

NCO academies worldwide. Replacing 

the Primary Noncommissioned Officer 

Course (PNCOC) and the Primary 

Leadership Course (PLC), PLDC provides NCO training to newly appointed 

or prospective sergeants at skill level 

11. 

The goal of PLDC is to teach these 

junior leaders to lead others and to 

build confidence in themselves. It 

emphasizes leadership in combat situations by placing the students in stressful situations. The course curriculum 

includes six different areas: leadership, 

resource management, communications, training management, professional skills, and military studies. 

Finally, in a 72-hour field exercise, 

students demonstrate and practice 

what they have learned throughout the 

course. 

The defensiveioffensive operations 

field exercise is divided into two 

phases. During the initial phase, students concentrate on establishing a 

defensive position while preparing for 

offensive operations. Many tasks 

throughout the course are taught by 

the students themselves and are followed by a practical exercise. 

Phase I1 is designed to be a stressful, 

fast-paced leadership exercise. Students are placed in leadership positions 

such as first sergeant, platoon sergeant, or squad leader on either the 

defensive or offensive force. They are 

evaluated by the cadre for their ingenuity, leadership ability, and overall 

performance. 

Small group instruction is a key feature of PLDC. These groups, consisting 

of 12 students and two instructors, 

allow students to give and receive feedback and to share personal experiences 

with each other. It fosters teamwork 

and allows collective reasoning in pmblem solving. 

The most current leadership doctrine 

in FM 22-100,Militmy leaders hi^ and 

FM 100.1, The Army, is the basis for 

the leadership instruction at PLDC. 

Problems and Decision Making, and 

Responsibilities and Authority of 

NCOs. The Battalion Training Management System (BTMS) also requires 

students to present at least one training session during the field training 

exercise. 

The primary goal during the communication block is to teachjunior leaders 

the necessary skills to better communicate as small unit leaders. They are 

taught different communication techniques to ensure information is properly exchanged within an organization. 

The tactical communication instruc~ 

tion during military studies teaches 

students how to operate an FM radio 

set and how to use an automated 

CEOI. They learn to code and to decode 

messages such as grid coordinates and 

how to transmit NBC reports. 

Also during the military studies, students participate in a practical land 

navigation exercise and performance 

examination. Any student who does 

not receive a "Go" must be retained 

and retested. 

PLDC works on a merit system. Students are given merits for volunteering 

for details as well as for exceeding uniform standards. They are, however, also 

given demerits for failing to meet 

standards. Then, after all of the testing, 

after all of the field exercises, after all 

of the physical training, a soldier has 

taken the first step. He is on his way 

to becoming a leader, an NCO. 

SFC Dnnr1.y L. Bussey S,: is the operations NCO nt Fort Leonard WoodDrill 

Sergeant School He served with the4th 

Infantry Division in Vietnam, the 72nd 

Engineer Company at Fort Benning. 

and the 237th Engineer Battalion and 

15th Ordnance Battalior1 in Germany 

SFC Bussq. also has an assoc~ate's 

degree in general studies 

-

The training block includes Principles PLDC .students rautiously exit a box culvert during their 72-hour field 

of Leadership, Character of a Leader, exercise. (Photo by SGT Debbie Drew.) 
FnifiaO Entry 


An Alternate Path to Success 


Not many company grade officers 

have as much opportunity to 

directly affect the lives of young soldiers as do Initial Entry Training (IET) 

company commanders. Because many 

more command positions exist in TOE 

units than in IET, the opportunities 

and the challenges of IET remain hidden from the majority of young officers. 

Some of these challenges are different 

from those found in a TOE unit. 

Since most junior officers serve in a 

TOE company at some time, there is a 

general knowledge and appreciation 

for this duty. By comparing the challenges and the desirable traits of the 

IET company commander with those of 

his counterpart in TOE units, a better 

understanding of the training company 

and its path to success can be reached. 

Listing the challenges of company 

command-any company commandis a formidable task. In TOE units the 

commander must personally set standards for the company. He must mativate his unit in all of its varied 

activities-from maintenance to field 

duty to physical training. He must be 

a leader for his troops, an advisor and 

a subordinate for the battalion commander, a trainer for the officers in his 

company, and the Engineer to sup. 

ported units. Just as important, he 

must be a member of the community 

and a good citizen. 

The IET commander has all ofthese 

same challenges to varying degrees. 

The standards he sets for his company 

must he extremely high, but attainby LTC Barry W. Levine 

able. These are the standards first 

encountered by new recruits and, since 

these standards affect these soldiers 

throughout their careers, the impact on 

all other Army units is significant. 

Because it is easier Lo begin and maintain high standards than to attempt to 

raise them later, IET companies must 

rigorously establish and enforce the 

highest standards to ensure TOE units 

receive quality soldiers. 

The challenges in motivating cadre 

and trainees are different from those 

in a TOE unit. An IET unit operates 

in cycles. All of the work, time and 

effort that made the last cycle great are 

gone with each new cycle. There is a 

new group of civilians to turn into 

soldiers, and they may not respond to 

the same techniques as did the last 

group of trainees. 

The compnny cadre-the drill sergeants-must also remain highly 

motivated cycle after cycle. These 

highly trained, professional NCOs look 

to the company commander for direction. After a few cycles, even the most 

professional NCO or officer might 

hecome a hit complacent and may not 

put the same enthusiasm and extra 

effort into training as he did in the 

beginning. It rests with the company 

commander to avoid this trap and to 

motivate his subordinates so that 

training does not suffer. 

In IET, training is the only mission. 

Instead of taking ARTEPs, there are 

frequent tests to ensure that the 

trainees meet Army standards in every 

phase of training. These tests are 

graded and the results carefully scrutinized at all levels of command. Because 

of this, much time and effort goes into 

preparing trainees for the tests and 

into analyzing the results. 

The traits of a soldier taken for 

granted in TOE units (saluting, shining shoes, recognizing rank, wearing 

the uniform) are all taught in IET. As 

in TOE units, there never seems to be 

enough time to completely prepare. 

Two major challenges in TOE units, 

which are much less formidahle in IET 

units, are maintenance and logistics. 

On the other hand, there is a very 

small company staff which is provided 

to deal with maintenance and logistics. 

But the requirements for sound leadership are the same wherever one is 

assigned. Soldiers are soldiers. They 

have a right to expect professional 

leadership regardless of the mission. 

In a TOE unit one seldom has a 

chance to profit from earlier mistakes. 

Any company commander embarking 

on a mission relies on his own experience on similar missions aswell as the 

experiences of his key personnel. The 

cyclic nature of IET allows a company 

commander to perfect his company's 

actions in a particular area. To be able 

to profit from one's own successes and 

mistakes and not merely write an after 

action report for one's successor is 

satisfying. 

Another difference seen in IET is the 

profound change which occurs during 

each cycle in a group of soldiers for 
I 

whom one has responsibility. The 

change from civilian to soldier is 

significant and is always a source of 

immense job satisfaction. 

Even though the challenges of IET 

and TOE command sometimes may 

differ, the traits required of all commanders regardless of the type of company are identical. While there can he 

no finite and definitive list of traits 

which make a commander, some must 

he present in any good commander. 

The first, and perhaps the most 

important, is integrity. An IET comfor the soldiers who will comprise the 

Army of the future. Other traits which 

produce successful IET company commanders are initiative, attention to 

detail, moral and physical courage, selfconfidence, humility, adaptability, 

sound judgment, and maturity. 

Of course, these same traits produce 

good TOE company commanders, good 

general officers, good bank presidents 

and good U.S. Congressmen. Each trait 

is applied a hit differently in the IET 

environment, but the requirement is 

the same as in any field of endeavor. 

Considering the challenges which 

exist in IET and the traits which produce successful commanders, it is evident that experiences gained in an IET 

assignment are in some ways different 

hut in most ways similar to that available in a TOE unit. Both paths can lead 

to success for those who deserve it. 

Officers who have had experience in 

TOE units are hetter able to produce 

properly trained soldiers when assigned in IET. Officers who have had experience in IETcan better understand 

the soldiers coming to their TOE units 

and thus can quickly make them productive soldiers. As always, success is 

.not a function of which unit an officer 

is in, hut how he performs in that unit. 

LTC Barry W Leuine commands the 

4th Battalion, 2nd Training Brigade at 

Fort Leonard Wood MO. Among other 

assignments, he has serued as a company commander in the 65th Engineer 

Battalion in Vietnam; Director of 

Engineering and Housing at Grafenwoehr and Garmisch, Germany; ereewtiue officer of the 237th Engineer 

Battalion; and as a faculty member at 

the Defense Systems Management College LTC Leuine is a graduate of the 

United States Military Academy, the 

Command General Staff Collegc: and 

the Defense S.ystem.s Management Col- engineeringphys~cs form the UniuersiQ 

lege He also has a rnasler'.? degree in of California-Davis. 

Engineer Problem 

You are located in a remote part of a developing country. Pit priviesand 

latrines are currently the only provisions for handling human waste. 

Your unit was just tasked to build a 2,500-man base camp for 

continuous operations in this remote area. Since facilities are not 

available, your commander decided that a sewage lagoon will be a 

simple and economical solution to the water-treatment requirements. 

Sufficient land and construction capabilitiesareavailablefor a sewage 

lagoon construction. The soil absorption rate is 30 min/inch and the 

water table level is 14.7 feet. 

Based on the following information supplied by Army Medical Services 

and general Army standards, design a lagoon for a 2,500-man base 

camp. 

a. Water flow from supported population 

0, = 40 gal'day 

man 

b. Pipe infiltration 


2 gal/rnin 
 o,= 

1,000 ft of pipe 

c. Flow due to rainfall (4).evaporation (0,). and seepage (0,) are 

negligible. 

d. Pipe length within the base camp 4 = 1250ft 

e. Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) 


BOD = 0.20 lbs -

O,/man 


day 

f. Design BOD, Surface Loading Factor 


LF = 60 lbs -

O,/acre 


day 

g. Retention time 


T, = 60 days 

FOR 


. -

Combat Support Boat (ahorre) carries hri~lg,. huildi,,gequipment to soldiers (t~rlo~r-), Troops launch an M4T6 Float. 

who prepare to launch the M4T6 Pontoon. (Photos by SFC D~nnis0.Lindsc.,~.) (Photo by SFC Dennis 0. Lindsey. 
EXCELLENCE 


.~ ~~~~ .

Helicooter (above)de1ivc.r~a Rridee Erection Hoat. 

(~hoto'bySFC Dennis 0.~inds) 
High Water, ard Decisions 


The 1983 Bonnet Carre Spillway Operation 

by MG William E. Read (RET) and Dr. Michael C. Robinson 

ENGINEERIFall 1984 
The Bonnet Carre Spillway was 

opened by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers for the seventh time in its 

52-year history, on May 20,1983. To the 

spectators who observed the event, the 

operation seemed a simple, routine process. Once again water was diverted 

from the Mississippi River into Lake 

Pontchartrain to protect New Orleans 

and downstream parishes from undue 

risk of flooding. 

The fact is, though, the Bonnet Carre 

operation entailed a complex, highly 

disciplined public works management 

process. The decision-making scenario 

involved Corps officials and other professionals pooling their talents to arrive at a tough decision. Will predicted 

Mississippi River stages and 

discharges subject the main flood protection system to unacceptable stress 

and require the relief Bonnet Carre 

provides? 

Louisiana is far from the Mississippi 

River's source that trickles out of Lake 

Itasca in Minnesota. However, on its 

way to the Gulf of Mexico, North America's greatest river gathers the runoff 

of 31 states-a drainage basin that 

ranges from the Continental Divide, 

northward to Canada, and as far east 

as the Appalachians. 

The Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, and 

Arkansas rivers as well as hundreds of 

smaller streams directly or indirectly 

discharge into the Mississippi. Lower 

Louisiana forms the spout of this 

1,246,000-square mile, funnel-shaped 

drainage basin that encompasses 41 

percent of the continental United 

States. Therefore, during major floods, 

such as the 1983 event, the river's en or^ 

mous hydraulic forces severely test this 

area's flood control works as well as the 

skills and ingenuity of Corps and other 

professional emergency managers. 

The Bonnet Carre spillway is but one 

important feature of the Mississippi 

River and Tributaries Project (MR&T) 

which was authorized by Congress in 

1928. This still incomplete system of 

levees, floodways, channel improvements, and other elements provides 

flood protection along the Mississippi's 

main stem, as well as to portions of 

tributary basins in the Lower Mississippi Valley The main stem features of 

the MR&T project are designed to safely convey the project flood to the Gulf. 

The entire MR&T project is under the 

direction of the Mississippi River commission (MRC) located at Vicksburg, 

MS. Operational responsibility for Bonnet Carre rests with the Corps' New 

ENGlNEERlFall 1984 

$0bays to Lake Pontchartrain to protect New Orleans and downstream 

ouisiana parishes from flooding. (U.S. Army photo.) 
Orleans District (NOD). However, the 

decision of whether to open the spillway is the responsibility of the MRC 

president, after consultation with the 

Chief of Engineers in Washington, D.C. 

The spillway is located on the east 

bank of the Mississippi Rivet; 32 river 

miles north of New Orleans. The structure was built by the Corps following 

the disastrous record flood of 1927. It 

is designed to protect New Orleans and 

other downstream areas by diverting 

Mississippi River flows from upstream 

New Orleans into Lake Pontchartrain 

and finally into the Gulf of Mexico. 

The spillway was completed in 1931 

and its guide levees were finished the 

following year. The 7,000-foot long 

structure contains 350 bays or openings separated by concrete piers. Each 

bay is closed by twenty 8 x llL/z-inch 

l 

timbers called "needles." They are 

either 10 or 12 feet long depending on 

the elevation of the weir crest. Cranes 

atop the spillway lift the individual 

timbers during operations. Guide 

levees confine the flow along the 5.7 

miles from the Mississippi River to 

Lake Pontchartrain. The floodway 

gradually widens from 7,700 feet at the 

river to 12,400 feet at the confluence 

with the lake. 

As flows began to approach project 

flood magnitude in the main stem below Old River during April, the possibility of a Bonnet Carre operation 

became a major concern of the MRC, 

the NOD, and non-Federal interests. 

During the first two weeks of May, 

Corps employees monitored weather 

and stage predictions, evaluated New 

Orleans' need for temporary flood pro- 

.-, .. . . . 

tection at certain locations, considered 

the affects of Bonnet Carre flows on 

shellfish in Lakes Pontchartrain and 

Borgne and studied the probable 

impacts of storm surges from the Gulf 

on river stages at New Orleans. They 

also poured over laws and regulations 

governing the spillway's use, and consulted with local interests on levee 

conditions and the influence of high 

stages on navigation activities. 

These activities took place as other 

floodfighting efforts were underway 

throughout the Lower Mississippi 

Valley. 

The prospect of a Bonnet Carre operation weighed heavily on Corps of& 

cials' minds because of environmental 

considerations. Diverting a great deal 

of fresh water into Lakes Pontchartrain 

I 

and Borgne would reduce salinity 

Water pours tlrr'ough one of Bonnct Carre's 350 bays. (US. Army photo.) 
A crane atop Bonnet Car,? Spillway pulls an 8 x JJ'z-inch ti,nl,cr. "t,~~~~rllc' ' liol11 a hay ICS. Army photo.)

levels and further damage the shellfish During the 1983 flood, permanent Thus, after considering a host of 

harvest already seriously affected by protection through the entire New hydrologic, structural, navigational, 

record spring rains. In the long run, Orleans reach existed only for a river legal and other factors, the need and 

nutrients from the Mississippi River elevation of 19 feet on the Carrollton schedule for operation of the Bonnet 

water would improve the shellfish gage. Above that elevation, reaches of Carre Spillway was decided. Discussion 

indushy, hut the immediate impact increasing lengths for higher stages between the MRC and NOD ensured 

would he largely adverse. require temporary construction to pro- that all factors were considered and 

On May 12, a meeting was held at vide the authorized freeboard. appropriate alternatives weighed. 

the New Orleans District between Temporary flood control works were On May 18, the MRC President, after 

Corps officials and representatives of being added at areas with deficient consulting with the Chief of Engineers, 

various federal and state agencies that grade that would provide the city pro- accepted the District Engineer's recommanaee fishem resources in Louisiana tection for a river stage of 21 feet on mendation to open Bonnet Carre on 

and Mississippi. All parties agreed that the Carrollton gage Relying on hastily May 20 when the river was expected to 

if Bonnet Carre had to he opened the constructed temporary protection to reach a flow of 1.25 million cuhic feet 

Corps would provide ample notice so convey long duration floods through per second (cfs) and to limit the river 

that the agencies could lessen the metropolitan New Orleans is at best discharge to no more than 1.30 million 

impact, prepare to conduct samplings, very risky. cuhic feet past New Orleans during the 

and monitor the affects of the event. To further assess conditions, the flood. This range in discharges (1.25to 

By May 15, the National Weather MFX President and various MRC and 1.30 million cfs) was considered a pracService predicted a peak stage of 18.0 NOD staff and local levee hoard offi- tical necessity due to inability to prefeet for May 29 for the main stem at cials inspected the temporary pro- cisely measure river flows or control 

the Carrollton gage in New Orleans. tection on May 16and consulted with the spillway discharge. 

(The authorized grade for the flood con- local officials on navigation-related and 

trol system is about 25 feet there.) other issues. 
This flow corresponded to a 17-foot 

stage on the Carrollton gage, basedon 

the stage-discharge relationship ofthat 

time. Subsequently, the stage at New 

Orleans never exceeded 17.2 feet but 

would have exceeded 19 feet without 

the spillway's operation. 

Two weeks prior to the decision to 

operate the spillway, the New Orleans 

District began to implement a compre~ 

hensive plan to ensure that the spillway was ready. Test hay openings were 

performed to familiarize work crews 

with proper procedures and verify that 

all equipment was in good working 

condition. 

A general reconnaissance of the 

guide levees was made and roadways 

along their crests were judged capable 

of facilitating inspection during the 

spillway's operation. Contacts were 

made with the Louisiana Office of 

Emergency Preparedness as well as the 

Red Cross, and all interests with property in the floodway were advised to 

remove it. 

Furthermore, liaison was established 

with owners of pipelines, bridges, and 

powerlines that cross the floodway. 

Finally, the U.S. Coast Guard was 

asked to close a ship anchorage area 

near the spillway, and the Corps' picket 

boat, Beinville, was stationed near the 

site to prevent wayward tows from 

being drawn into it. 

Thus, by the middle of May most preparations had been already made for 

the spillway operation. The first "needles" were removed from 70 bays on 

May 20 and by May 24 all 350 bays 

were in full operation. Based on the 

preliminary stage-discharge relationship, the maximum flow through the 

structure was approximately 260,000 

cfs, which corresponded to about a 

Zfoot stage reduction at and below 

New Orleans. (Subsequent detailed 

analysis of the stage-discharge relaCorps Writers Assistance Program 

"High Water, Hard Decisions: The 1983 Bonnet 

Carre Spillway Operation" was published in the 

December 1983 Louisiana Engineer, the publication 

of the Louisiana Engineering Society, located in 

Baton Rouge, LA. This story was brought to the 

attention of ENGINEER through the Corps Writers 

Assistance Program (CWAP), a newly formed program in the Headquarters, United States Army 

Chief of Engineers office. 

The program gives Corps employees encouragement, assistance and recognition for writing articles 

centered around the Corps, and helps by placing 

their articles in magazines as well as by discussing 

book publishing opportunities. HQUSACE Chief of 

Public Affairs awards a Certificate of Merit for 

Journalistic Achievement to those who have articles 

published. 

Although submission of Corps-based articles is 

not required before publication, authors (both published and unpublished) are encouraged to contact 

the CWAP office for assistance. For further information, anyone interested should call Ms. Lu Christie 

DuCharme, Public Affairs Specialist, Public Affairs 

Office, Department of the Army, Office of the Chief 

of Engineers, DAEN-PAI, Washington, DC 20314. 

Her phone number is (202) 272-0011, AV 285-0011. 

tionship could result in minor revision.) 

Once the Mississippi began to fall, 

bay closings commenced on June 13 

and the process was completed 10 days 

later. Corps officials determined that 

the closings operation shoold achieve 

a gradual decrease in the main stem 

stages to allow the levees and river 

banks to dry more slowly and help preclude the possibility of slides and crack- 

,ing. Follow-up inspections of the spillway structure and guide levees revealed little damage or scouring. However, some minor seepage was observed 

in several areas along the guide levees 

near Lake Pontchartrain. 

Once again Bonnet Carre did its job 

and reinforced public confidence in the 

flood control system. The foresight of 

those leaders who founded the project 

more than a half century ago, and the 

cooperative efforts of the local levee 

boards, the State of Louisiana, and the 

Corps of Engineers have resulted in 

saving hundreds of lives and thousands 

of dollars in property. 

MG William E. Read (RETj is the 

former Diuision Engineer of the Army 

Corps of Engineers Lower Mississippi 

Valley Division. From 1980 to 1984 he 

was the president of the Mississippi 

River Commission. He is a graduate of 

the United Stales Military Academy, 

and is currently engaged in private 

practice as a civil engineer He resides 

in Gulfport, MI. 

Michael C. Robinson, the division historian fir the Lower Mississippi Valley 

Division and Mississippi River Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, 

Vicksburg haspublished widely in the 

field ofpublic works history In 1984he 

was the weditor of The US.Army 

Corps ofEngimers and Environmental 

Issues in the Twentieth Century: A 

Bibliography, as well as having written 

or cu-written a number ofother books 

earlier 
occupation of position), others find 

themselves totally isolated from their 

Rober? Gntz, Commandel: E Cornpz?~r.v,2nd Hattalion, 3rd L(lig:>de discuss 

thc Junior Officer Skill Sustainment Progr.;~~~. (Photo h~rSP4 Thomas 

Copeland.) 

Developing Our 

Junior cers 

by COL Samuel J. Ady 

Haw yorr everfi,imd yortr.s:.plf as the only ofi~r~,fyour branch assigned 

to your irrcit? That being the cast: haee you ever tried to get adeyunte branch 

training? Nor so easy, is it? Esperially fir a junior officer. 

unless their training center is co- skills as do their contemporaries who 

located wlth a service school or are assigned to line companies. While 

has tenant TOE units, many junior offi- some officers lead infantry platoons, 

cers who are assigned to training units tacticnlly ~mploytanks, or conduct 

often cannot practice their branch RSOPs (reconnaissance, selection, and 

branch. 

Rut in order to make amends, the 3rd 

Basic Traininr - Brigade - at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, is introducing a new 

program which provides junior officers 

the opportunity to practice their 

branch skills. The program is called the 

Junior Officer Skill Sustainment and 

Development Program and it has three 

major goals: 

to develop and sustain war-fighting 

capability amongjunior officers during their tours with the training 

base: 

to developjunior officers using technical equipment and resources 

beyond the capability of training 

battalion commanders; 

Lo keep junior officers, serving with 

the training base, reasonably competitive with their contemporaries in 

TOE units. 

To meet these objectives, two subprograms were instituted. These programs are in addition to the normal 

battalion professional developmentprograms and systems for cornlnon skills 

testing. These are the Branch Connselor Program and a cross-fertilization 

program for company commanders. 

Currently, there are 47 junior officers 

(excluding chaplains) in the 3rd Brigade. They are represented by several 

branches: Infantry with 23 officers; 

Armor and Field Artillery each hove 

8; Engineer is represented by 1;Quartermaster has 1;Air Defense Artillery 

has 4, and AdjutanL General Corps has 

2 officers. 

In order to give each junior officer 

access to a senior, knowledgeable 

branch officer, five field grade branch 

counselors have been appointed, one 

from each of the first four branches and 

a fifth officer to be responsible for all 

others. 

It is critical that the counselor be an 

experienced, branch qualified field 

grade officer. Battalion commanders 

often have neither the time to devote 

to the intensive management nor the 

experience and expertise to advise 

officers of other branches on branch 

related skill development or appropriate career management. 

Within the 3rd Brigade the five battalion commanders represent Militnry 

Intelligence, Engineer (two), Field 

Artillery, and Armor branches; yet the 

greatest number of junior offlcers are 

Infantry. Fortunately, there are some^ 
times field grade infantry officers in 

battalion executive officer and brigade 

staff positions u~ho can he called upon 

to serve as branch counselors. 

Counselors are formally appointed by 

letter from the brigade commander and 

operate across battalion boundaries. 

They are required, however, to keep 

each battalion commander advised of 

the branch skill development plan 

which is devised by each of his junior 

officers, problems encountered, and the 

progress of each officee They are also 

required to brief the brigade commander semiannually on the status of 

each of these junior officers. Shortly 

after arrival to the brigade, each junior 

officer receives a letter from the hrigade commander advising him of the 

Branch Counselor Program and the 

name of his counselor. 

The Branch Counselor Program has 

two primary objectives. The first objective is to maintain and increase officers' branch proficiency while assigned 

to the training base. In close coordination with each officer, counselors formulate a specific program tailored to 

the needs of the officer. 

The program includes hands-on 

training with branch units, which normally involves temporary duty. It may 

also involve association with reserve 

components, enrollment in correspondence courses, use of Fort Leonard 

Wood resources, and some in-house 

unit development. 

The major problems associated with 

the program are the lack of time and, 

as always, TDY funding. Funding is 

particularly important because TDY is 

one of the few ways to obtain hands-on 

training (particularly, collective training) with TOE units. 

The second objective is to educate the 

offrcer on planning his career and to 

assist him in the effort. He is informed 

of his next promotion window, the officer educational system through senior 

service college (including the time of 

his eligibility), the alternate specialty 

program, the requirement for branch 

qualification as a junior officer, the 

necessity for submitting periodic preference statements, and other matters 

related to career progression and 

development. 

In early 1984, LTG Charles W. 

Bagnal, the TRADOC Deputy Commanding General for Training, and 

MG Maurice 0. Edmonds, TRADOC 

Deputy Chief of Staff for Training, were 

briefed on this program. They agreed 

to provide funds exclusively for junior 

officer TDY to gain practical field 

experience with TOE units. 

Since the program started, nine lieutenants have participated in field exercises with TOE units for 12 to 28 days 

and another seven are scheduled during the next several months. Because 

each TDY is carefully planned, the 

average cost has been about $350 per 

trip. 

Two armor lieutenants recently participated in tank gunnery with the 4th 

and 1st Engineer Battalions at Fort 

Riley. Four other infantry, armor, and 

field artillery lieutenants served with 

the 1st Engineer Battalion as scout 

platoon leaders, tank platoon leaders, 

and as members of a fire support team. 

These officers gained experience that 

was impossible to obtain at Fort Leonard Wood. 

The 1st Infantry Division has been 

especially helpful in this program by 

publishing a policy directive Their 

directive assigns internal staff responsibility to ensure that the program is 

administered effectively and that junior officers gain the maximum benefit 

from the training. The 4th and 5th 

Engineer Battalions at Fort Knox as 

well as other units at Forts Sill and 

Hood are also making significant 

contributions. 

Our officers are eager for this training They want to learn and practice 

their branch skills. It is a credit to 

TRADOC that this need has been 

recognized and that funds have 

been provided. Equally important, 

FORSCOM units have done a superb 

job in providing rigorous field training 

during each trip. 

In addition to the branch-related 

TDY trips, more than 85percent of the 

junior officers are enrolled in a rigomus 

series of correspondence courses, as 

well as taking advantage of branch^ 

related, hands-on training. A sizeable 

number are enrolled in advanced courses of either their branch or another 

branch to sharpen their combined arms 

skills, and almost all are enrolled in 

tactical refresher and maintenance 

courses. Branch counselors provide 

advice and assistance in the selection 

of these courses and monitor each officer's progress. 

The second major brigade-level sub. 

component inthe programencourages 

cross-training among company commanders. The rationale for the program is that junior officers can often 

become so involved in the daily bnsiness of running their units that they 

fail to see and learn what is happening in other units. In some cases they 

work hard, thinking they are meeting 

high standards, however, their standards are only mediocre. 

The program forces them out of the 

small universe of their own companies 

and teaches them how to profit from 

the ideas and practices (both good and 

bad) of their contemporaries. 

In order to accomplish this goal, five 

ENGINEER HOTLINE 

Problems, questions, and comments relating to Engineer doctrine, 

training, organization, and equipment can be addressed by telephone to the U.S. Army Engineer School's,"Engineer Hotline."The 

Hotline's auto-answer recorder operates 24 hours a day, seven 

days a week. Callers should state their names, addresses and 

telephone numbers, followed by a concise question or comment. 

You'll receive a reply within three to 15 days. The Hotline is not a 

receiving agency for formal requests. 

Call commercial (703) 664-3646; WAlTS 800-336-3095, extension 

3646; or AV 354-3646. 
company commanders (one from each 

battalion) have lunch with the brigade 

commander every two or three weeks. 

These are working luncheons and last 

from 1%to two hours. They are relatively informal and included a healthy 

interchange among junior officers and 

between the company commanders and 

the brigade commander. 

Each company commander then vis~ 

its a specific company in another battalion for at least one-half day within 

a certain period. He is given a list of 

things to accomplish during the visit 

and a list of questions which may be 

useful to ask his fellow company commanders during the visit. 

The program forces the visiting commander out of his company, introduces 

him to standards in another company, 

allows for an exchange of ideas, and 

introduces him to other commanders 

on a professional basis. During the year 

each brigade company commander will 

have visited units five times and will 

have himself been visited approximately five times. 

The program's short-term objective is 

to increase professionalism within the 

brigade. The long term objective is to 

teach each junior officer the habit of 

profiting from the ideas, techniques 

and standards of contemporaries and, 

consequently, accelerating his own 

growth process as he advances in rank. 

The Junior Officer Skill Sustainment 

and Development Program is not a 

cure-all for sustaining officers in their 

branch skills while in the training 

hase, but does accomplish important 

objectives: 

it gives each junior officer 1% to four 

weeks of field training with a TOE 

unit of his branch; 

it forces the officer to devise a plan 

with a milestone schedule on how he 

is going to maintain his branch 

skills while stationed at the training base; 

it introduces him to the correspondence course system and forces him 

to take a fairly rigorous schedule of 

courses; 

it provides him with a field grade officer from his branch to advise him 

on career matters; 

it forces company commanders 

to begin acquiring the habit of 

profiting from the ideas of their 

contemporaries. 

The program has been successful and 

will continue to succeed in the future 

only through the collective efforts of 

the officers and NCOs in the 3rd Basic 

Training Brigade, TRADOC, and the 

FORSCOM units who provide such 

truly outstanding support. 

COL Samuel J Ady commands the 

3rd Basic Training Brigade at Fort 

Leonard Wood, MO He has served in 

Vietnam as an aduisor in 1963 and 

with the headquarters ofthe 1stInfantry 

Division from 1967 to 1968. Among 

other ussignments, COL Ady has also 

served as executiveofficerand S-3of the 

4th Battalion, 3rd Artillery, 1st 

Armored Division. and as G3 of the 

Southern European Task Force in 

Vicenza, Italy. He has a bachelor's 

degree in political science from Loyola 

College and a law degreefim Hurvard 

COL Ady is also a graduate ofthr Command and General Staff College and of 

the Army War College 
A New Way to Breach 

Minefields 

by: Harry N. Hambric and MAJ Edwin L. Booth 

he lack of viable counterobstacle Tdoctr~nehas long been a problem 

for an armed force desiring unimpeded 

battlefield maneuver. 

When we examine the U.S. Army's 

requirements in this area, we find that 

there are five basic missions: 

counterobstacle missions such as 

negotiating craters; 

countkrmine missions such as clearing or breaching minefields; 

gap crossings missions such as river 

crossings, tank ditches, and overbridging existing structures; 

force mobility tasks such as con^ 

structing combat roads and trails; 

forward aviation Combat Engineering tasks (FACE)to construct landing 

zones and strips, low altitude 

parachute extraction system (LAPES) 

sites and forward arming and refueling 

points (FARPS). 

In reviewing each of these missions 

we find that our capability to accomplish counterobstacle, gap crossing, 

mobility and FACE tasks are sufficient 

to provide U.S. forces with all the support necessary to operate on the AirLand Battlefield. Countermine missions, however, are another matter. 

For years, the methods we have used 

in breaching minefields have been so 

inefficient that they not only threatened the lives of our soldiers, but the 

success of important missions as well. 

Modern technology and knowledge of 

potential adversaries require that we 

base our countermine requirements on 

a threat that routinely employs current 

mint. d..Ii\.rrysystcrtw :I= part ul:r cor~~. 

bind :trnls rffurt. '1'11~ \Yar.;aw Part. :I-. 

well as other countries trained by 

them, have well learned the lessons of 

mine warfare from World War 11.They 

have continued to build on this 

knowledge by using information gained from the numerous conflicts and 

battles since then. 

A simple review of the mine and 

countermine equipment available to 

threat forces reveals that they have 

substantial amounts of current hardware to both install and breach minefields. Threat force commanders have 

combined this equipment with viable 

doctrine and tactics to allow either 

system to be located well fonvard in the 

battle area. Thev have " eone so far in

their development of doctrine, that 

special combined arms teams or 

detachments are formed to install 

minefields and obstacles, or to breach 

those in their path. 
The serious student of military 

science has little difficulty in recognizing that a U.S.-equipped force encountering a Warsaw Pact minefield on 

today's battlefield would experience 

serious difficulty. The mines by 

themselves would have a small impact 

and could be overcome with existing 

technology and doctrine. Combined, 

however, with the direct and indirect 

fires available to the defender, they 

would be capable of quickly and suhstantially degrading the combat effectiveness of an attacking U.S. force. 

The threat commander has the capabilitv . to auicklv . locate. . target - and mass

indirect fires anywhere within his sector This capability requires that an 

attacker must overcome minefields 

rapidly. Loss of momentum by the 

attacking force gives the defender an 

opportunity to catch it in a devastating 

"fire sac" as well as gaining time to call 

forward reinforcements. 

Current U.S. Army doctrine for overcoming minefields stresses "bypassing" the minefield. If bypassing is 

not possible, either a "hasty" or 

"deliberate" bseach must be conducted. 

If the defender has made the mistake 

of leaving a tactically sound hy-pass, 

there is no requirement for countermine activities and the assault can continue. When there is no alternative but 

to cross the minefield, a hreach is 

conducted. 

A "hasty" breach is defined as one 

which uses assets organic to the force 

and is accomplished without loss of 

momentum. Although a hasty breach 

is accomplished as fast as possible, it 

may take hours. 

A "deliberate" breach occurs when a 

hasty breach has failed or when the 

tactical situation dictates. The 

deliberate breach requires a build-up 

of substantial combat power and will 

usually be conducted by Combat Engineers brought forward for the mission. 

A deliberate hreach may take several 

hours or even days depending on the 

strength of the defenders and magnitude of the minefields and other 

obstacles. 

Because of the threat's ability to 

locate and target our forces quickly, a 

hasty hreach taking longer than 30 

minutes or a deliberate breach will 

receive severe opposition. The longer it 

takes to accomplish the breach, the 

greater the opposition-the greater the 

attacker's casualties. 

Current U.S.Army combined arms 

doctrine specifies that an attacking 

force be organized into three elements: 

a support force to suppress the 

defenders with direct and indirect fires 

and obscure the breaching mission; a 

breaching force to conduct the breach. 

mark the lanes and secure the far side; 

and an assault force to continue the 

attack against the objective. 

The hreaching force nil1 have tankmounted mine rollers for detection and 

proofing; line changes for hreaching 

lanes; or as most Engineers and infantrymen are aware, the mine detector 

and probe. 

Although there are other items such 

as plou~sand fuel air explosives, they 

are not available now and there is no 

assurance that they will be available 

in time for the next war. 

Some U.S. commanders, realizing 

that they cannot rely on a capability 

that does not exist, have developed 

expedient breaching methods such as 

pushing disabled vehicles through the 

minefield, aiming unmanned vehicles 

at the objective, using Engineer equipment to scrape the gsound, or employing indirect fires in an attempt to 

provide a safe lane. Some commanders 

have given serious thought to "hulling" through a minefield to maintain 

momentum and escape the effect of 

massed fires. 

Even with our current hardware and 

doctrine there is little doubt that crossing a defended minefield is a dangerous 

undertaking. There is also no doubt 

that until we provide a better means 

through ~~ equipment, ~ - techniques or doctrine, enemy minefields will dangerously impede mission accomplishment. 

As mentioned earlier there are items 

which are developed and waiting to be 

called forth. Other systems and concepts using special sensors and electronics to detect and neutralize 

minefields are being studied, but some 

require major technology breakthroughs before they can he wailable 

for actual battlefield use. 

Because of limited advances in the 

countermine arena we can expect that 

our force's capability to breach 

minefields on today's battlefield will be 

at or below what we had in World 

War II! 

Perhaps some relief to this problem 

can come from existing equipment or 

weapon systems. The question is: 

"Which ones, and how can we employ 

them to provide the capability we 

need?" 

One such proposal is to consider the 

combat power of attack helicopters. 

These helicopters can carry 76 

2.75-inch free flight rockets. 

There are currently two warhead 

options which may be suitable for 

hreaching a path through minefields. 

One is the 17-pound high explosive 

warhead, and the other is the flechette 

warhead. By launching the rockets at 

a predetermined air speed, altitude 

and aircraft attitude in quick sucession 

as specified in FM 17-40, Helicopter 

Gunnery, a narrow, hut long "beaten 

asea" is produced. Mines close to this 

path would be detonated or destroyed 

by the l7~poundwarhead explosion. 

Flechettes from the other warhead 

would penetrate the mine case and 

damage internal components hut may 

not detonate the mine. 

Perhaps with minor modifications 

flechettes colild be made even more 

effectiveby making them pyrophoric or 

capable of providing the flame necessary to initiate the mine's explosive 

charge. 

At this time we do not have the 

techniques or a doctrine, or for that 

matter, assurance that this concept 

would be effective. If it were proven 

effective, it would be the only system 

ever available which could provide U.S. 

forces with the capability to conduct a 

truly hasty hreach through a conventional or FASCAM minefield. 

Explosive Warhead Rockets 

In considering the results from 

actually using these proposals, we can 

see where they might be effective. The 

17-pound warhead rockets would be 

fired in pairs. The helicopter's firing 

attitude and altitude, its speed, and 

launch sequence of the rockets could be 

correlated to cause the rockets' path to 

form a clear lane of a specificwidth and 

length. 

Width of the lane would he based on 

the effective radius of the warhead to 

detonate, destroy or clear mines from 

the lane. The length of the lane provided by a single aircraft would depend 

on aircraft speed, launches per second 

and the number ofrocketsfired. The 

deeper the minefield depth, the greater 

the number of firing runs which would 

be required to hreach the entire depth. 

The effect of the rockets on the 

minefield could be as follows: 

Mines close enough for sympathetic 

detonation would, of course, explode. 

The combined force of the rocket and 
mine explosion may destroy or 

detonate other nearby mines. 

Through the forcestransmitted from 

the ground, mines not detonated may 

be displaced or crushed. By shiftingthe 

mine from the horizontal position, 

more force would be required to activate the fuze mechanism. In addition, 

the ground would be disturbed and 

could conceivably be so loose that the 

mine would sink into the ground 

without exploding. An undesirable fac~ 

tor resulting from this is that some 

mines may become sensitized. 

Mounds of debris covering the mine 

would also transfer a vehicle's weight 

over a greater area so that the fuze does 

not receive sufficient pressure to 

activate. 

Mounded dirt and debris would also 

expend some of the explosive force even 

if the mine did detonate, thereby 

decreasing the damage probability.

.Mines with anti-handling devices 

would be disturbed and might 

detonate. 

Magnetically fuzed mines might 

also explode when quickly shifted. 

They would be vulnerable to being 

displaced, detonated, covered by debris 

or rolled into craters resulting from 

explosions. 

The resulting path (lane) from 

warhead explosions would be readily 

visible because of the close proximity 

of the linear crater path. 

The entrance and end of the cleared 

path could be designated by using 

perhaps a "marking" rocket which 

emits a colored smoke. White Phosphorous (WP) would not be feasible 

heeause it would mask the clear lane. 

Resulting mounds and craters would 

preclude the effective use of proofing 

devices such as rollers, but the selfbridging capability of armored vehicles 

would allow them to stay on mounds 

and other debris. This practice would 

drastically reduce the probability of 

detonating a mine. 

Flechette Rockets 

Flechette rounds would be employed 

in the same manner as the explosive 

warhead. They would be employed at 

an airspeed, altitude, aircraft attitude 

and range which would create a thin, 

long, beaten area in which flechettes 

would cover the beaten area in any density desired. 

The current flechette would have a 

low probability of detonating a mine, 

but two or three of them hitting a mine 

could damage the fuze or firing chain. 

In addition to b~~eachingconventional 

or FASCAM minefields in a unit's path, 

this concept, if feasible, could be thc 

answer to a major problem which all 

armies have today-extricating 

friendly units from air or artillerydelivered mines which have been 

placed directly on them. A friendly 

force in this situation could button up 

and have attack helicopters fire 

directly onto them. Safe lanes could be 

quickly breached without damage to 

the force 

A warhead containing 2,500 flechettes could cover a 20-footx 20-foot area 

with six flechettes per square foot. Firing the rockets in pairs would place 

twelve flechettes in each square foot. 

This would allow a helicopter with 76 

rockets to breach a 20-foot x 760-foot 

lane with a high probability of damaging any mine in the lane. 

Combined High Explosive and 

Flechette Warheads 

An alternative concept would have 

each pair of rockets contain one high 

explosive (HE) warhead and one 

flechette warhead. This would provide 

a high probability that any mines in 

the lane would be damaged by the 

flechettes and exploding warhead. This 

concept would also provide an instant 

means for marking the cleared lane 

using the craters formed by the HE 

rounds. 

For this reason the concept of using 

a mix of one HE and one flechette 

appears to offer advantages over firing 

just flechettes. Not only will the lanes 

he marked by craters, but the craters 

and resulting spoil will provide loose 

soil in the same manner as using 

purely HE warheads. The possibility of 

affecting each individual mine, however, increases with each flechette 

round used. 

Certainly there is some question of 

the danger involved in a proposal such 

as this. However, when you compare it 

with our present breaching capability, 

it provides us with capabilities we have 

not had before. That is, the ability to 

maintain force momentum, the ability 

to safely counter air or artillerydelivered mines, and the ability to combine breaching and marking into a 

single operation without exposing 

soldiers. 

The important factor is that U.S 

forces would be able to plan for and 

cross large mined areas much quicker 

than the critical 30-minute time limit. 

This would prevent them from being 

exposed to the full force of the threat's 

direct and indirect fires. 

Doctrinal Implications 

Minefields would be breached in 

minutes rather than hours. This factor 

would allow the force commander to 

count on a much larger portion of his 

force to be intact when he reached the 

objective. 

In addition, the speed with which the 

objective could be reached would prevent enemy reinforcement. By the time 

enemy fires could be brought on the 

attacker, it would be too late. The two 

forces would he so close to each other 

that effective supporting fires would be 

difficult and dangerous to deliver. 

The use of air-delivered, free flight 

rockets in a minefield breaching role 

is just an idea; and there are certainly 

many who could argue against it. 

There are also many who may consider 

it to be a good idea, particularly since 

this method of delivering free flight 

rockets with a high degree of reliability can be trained on using existing 

techniques. Good or bad, it is an idea 

which may get other people thinking. 

U.S. forces have some ofthe best combat vehicle systems in the world. Their 

speed and survivability will be worthless if they spend valuable minutes or 

hours waiting for a minefield to be 

breached. 

Somewhere there is a better way to 

breach minefields and we need to find 

this technique before the next battle. 

The concept of using free flight rockets 

launched from attack helicopters, a 

system already available to the force, 

may be the answer. 

MI: Harry A? Hambric is a doctrine 

deurlopment analyst at the US. Army 

Engineer SchwL He has written several 

articles on mobility, as u'ell as participating in writing the hey engineer 

publications (FM 5.100, Engineer 

Combat Operations, FM 5-101, 

Mobility, and FM 5-103,Survivability. Mr Hambric is a retired Combat 

Engineer officer and is currently 

emplqyed with the Directorate of Training and Doctrine, US Army Engineer 

School. 

MAJ Edwin L. Booth is the ArmorAuiation representative at the US. 

Army Engineer SchooL His recent 

assignments include Aviation Advisor 

in Montana, and Armor and Infantry 

Company Commander: MAJBooth is a 

recent graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College 
Another Side of 


by MAJ Lawrence R. Sadoff 

Obedience to 

authority is essential 

to the system of 

military discipline 

as we know it todaY. 

CPT Robert Lentz, commander, E 

Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Brigade, stresses importance of personnel and weapons readiness. 

(Photo by SP4 Thomas Copeland.) 
0bedience is one of the basic tenets 

of our military heritage. It can 

often mean the difference between 

success or failure on the battlefield. 

Yet, obedience to authority can have 

another dimension, a dimension which 

all of us who carrv the baton of leadership must be aware of constantly. 

The concepts of responsibility and 

authority, the "Siamese twins" of command, have been the subject of many 

penetrating and incisively written 

analyses during the past several years. 

Generally, responsibility has been 

defined as the obligation to perform 

assigned activities, while authority has 

been described as the right to perform 

or command. 

We have all heard it said, "A commander is responsible for all his unit 

does or fails to do," which simply means 

that true responsibility cannot be delegated. It follows that if one is given 

responsibility for a mission, he must 

also be -given the authoritv to carrv it 

out. In the military, rank is bestowed 

upon those who are given more responsibility and more authority. 

Beginning with basic officer or enlisted training, obedience to authority 

is ingrained in our thought patterns 

and in our responses. Such Pavlovian 

reactions are reinforced throughout our 

careers. However, although obedience 

to authority (sometimes even blind 

obedience) is often required by our 

profession, there are potential pitfalls 

which mandate further analysis. 

In their bwk. In Search ofExcellence. 

Thomas J. ~etersand ~obekt H. Water: 

man, Jr. describe some experiments 

which Stanley Milgram conducted to 

illustrate how people can blindly obey 

those in positions of authority. 

"Milgram brought adult subjects off 

the street into a Yale lab and asked them 

to participate in experiments in which 

they were to administer electric shock to 

victims. (In fact, they were not doing sn 

The 'victims' were Milgram.conspirators and the electric shock devices were 

bogus.) Initially, Milgram had the 'vie 

tims'placed in one mom and the shock 

givers in another 

Following instrrrctions given to them 

by a white-coated experimenter (the 

authoriQfigure) the shock giver turned 

the dial which went from 'mild' to 

'extremely dangerous.' 011instruction 

shock giver,$ administered the electricity, and all went 'all the uiay' in 

administering shoch. One hundred percent follorued order.7, althorigh in earlier 

ujritten tests (where there was no 

authority figure present) over YO percent 

predicted they a,ould not adminislvr any 

shock u:hatsoeuer 

Milgram added embellishnzents. He 

connected the rooms uith a u~indour, so 

the shock giver could see the 'victin,' 

torithe in pain He added victim 

'screams' Still 80 percent went to 

Sntense' pn the dial and 65percent went 

to Ortremely dangerous'Ne.xt he made 

the victims appear to be 'homely 40-yearold female accountanls.' He took the 

cxperiment.9 out of the university and 

conducted them in o dreary downtown 

loft He had the shock giver hold the uie 

tim's hand on the electric charge plate 

All these steps were aimed at breaking 

down the subject$ acceptance of the 

white-coated experimenter's authori@ 

None ioorhed well. People still by and 

large accepted authority." 

Milgram's experiments have b~eat 

meaning to those of us in uniform. The 

results force us to examine the consequences of anthority from the perspective of both a subordinate and a 

superior. As superiors, we try to give 

clear and concise orders which we often 

expect to be followed without delay. 

Such obedience is essential to success 

on the battlefield. At other times, 

though, we simply may be doing no 

more than giving general direction, 

providing guidance or making policy. 

In our own minds we are delegating 

and decentralizing authority, while 

expecting our subordinate staff and 

commanders to develop and execute the 

specifics. We expect our subordinates 

to provide feedback if something is 

extremely dangerous, wrong, irregular, 

or even illegal or immoral. Still, we 

must remember that we are the 

"authority figurez'-Milgram's man in 

the white coat. 

We want our subordinates to provide 

feedback instead of being "yes men." 

This expectation by itself will not 

ensure that this goal is accomplished. 

The command climate we establish is 

the kev mechanism to ensure that our 

subordinates provide valuable and 

needed information. 

We can say we want feedback, hut our 

reactions when we receive it (especially 

if it is unfavorable) speak for themselves. Hour often have we heard our 

superiors say that they do not want 

"yes men" only to be subsequently 

scolded by these same superiors when 

we state our honest convictions. If we 

commanders do not establish a climate 

of genuine trust which allows feedback, 

we are little more than extensions of 

the rigid white coated authority figure 

in Milgram's experiments. 

As subordinates, we are trained for 

total response and obedience to our 

superiors. We must always be aware, 

though, of our internal clock that tells 

us right from wrong. During the post 

World War I1 Nuremberg Trials, many 

of the accused justified their actions 

hecause, they were simply "following 

orders of those in higher authority." 

The basic question then is, when do 

our internal controls override the 

actions that have their origin in hieher u 


authority? This is obviously a complex, 

not easily answered question. On one 

end of the spectrum we extol obedience 

to those in authority, but on the other 

end we see a need for a safety mechanism with internal controls, a sensitivity to what is right or morally correct. 

Obviously all of us will draw this line 

differentlv. We must differentiate rieht - from wrong and wrong from illegal or 

immoral. Many times, we as subordinates, receive orders which we feel are 

wrong-yet they are not illegal nor 

immoral. Remember that when we 

were in the role of superior, we expected 

our subordinates to tell us if the orders 

we gave them were dangerous or 

wrong. Now that we are in the role of 

subordinate, do we not owe our superiors that same consideration? 

What happens if these orders are 

illegal or immoral? We still owe our 

superiors the same feedback. Yet, failing to execute orders which we feel are 

wrong is far different from failing to 

carry out an illegal or immoral order. 
Obviously issues are not normally so Molloy conducted similar experi- the experiments because they were on 

simple or clearcut, nor will questions ments throughout the United States the verge of a psychotic breakdown. 

of legality or morality he solved here. and hypothesized that, "Warden" Zimbardo, afraid of his own 

The key point is that we are all '6 
 . . . Since raincoats were on intrinsic behavior as well as that of others, stopinvolved with complex issues involving 

the use of authority, as either a subordinate or superior. As Milgram's 

experiments imply, authority means 

power, and wealways must be aware of 

this and its potential for abuse or 

misuse. Whether as a leader or follower, each of us must use our internal 

balancing mech;~nis~ns. lest a.c ht.ctrrnc. 

real Ilfv players nclil~fi out h11lgr.1111 2 

experiments. 

One other aspect in Milgram's experiments warrants comment. When Milgram gave written tests (where the 

authority figure was not present) over 

90 percent of those tested predicted 

they would not administer any shock 

whatsoever. However, this obviously 

changed with the "appearance" of the 

white coat authoritarian figure who 

commanded obedience and respect. 

This respect for those who "appear" to 

be authoritative is evident in the 

following excerpt from John Molloy's 

well read hook, Dress for Success: 

"Take the raincoat for example Most 

raincoats sold in this country are either 

black or beige. . . Intuitiuelv" I. - felt that 

the beige raincoat was worn generally 

by the upper-middle class (authority fig 

ure) and black by the lower-middle 

class. 

First, I visited several Fifth Avenue 

stores that catered almost exclusiuely to 

the upper-middle class customers . . . The statistical breakdown was four to 

one in fauor of beige raincoats. I then 

checked stores in the lower-middle class 

level and found that almost the reverse 

statistic applied. They sold four black 

raincoats to each beige " raincoat. 

. . . On rainy days Ihired responsible 

college students to stand outside subway 

stations in determinable lower-middle 

class nei~hborhoods - and outside determinable upper-middle class suburban 

commuter stations. The students merely counted black and beige raincoats. 

My statistics held up four to one in fauor 

of beige in upper-middle class 

neighborhoods and exactly the opposite 

in lower-middle class neighborhoods." 

part of the American enuironment, they 

had in all probability conditioned pee 

ple by their predominance in certain 

classes and automatic (Pavlovian) reactions could be expected. 

In short, when someone met a man in 

a beige raincoat, he was likely to think 

of him as amember of the upper-middle 

class, and when he met a man in a 

black raincoat, he wns likelyto think of 

him as a man in the lower-middle 

class." 

We in the military also have our 

beige raincoats, he they the scrambled 

egg of a field grade officer's hat or the 

wide-brimmed hat of the drill instructor. Our raincoats indicate authority 

instead of socioeconomic standing. 

While symbols of rank, position and 

authority are not necessarily had, we 

must, however, recognize that they do 

exist, and the trappings of our authority can he used or abused, either intentionally or more often than not, 

unintentionally. 

In carrying out our responsibility, we 

are often required to play many roles, 

be that of a stern taskmaster, an allocator of resources, an arbitrator. As we 

carry out our varied responsihilities, 

we must he aware of potential problems 

that mieht - occur as we switch from one 

role to another. 

Such problems were graphically illustrated in experiments conducted by 

Philip Zimbardo at Stanford. Zimbardo 

advertised in a newspaper in Wlo Alto, 

CA, an upper-class community, for volunteers in a role-playing experiment. 

The volunteers were taken to a 

"wallboard" prison in the basement of 

the Stanford University psychology 

building and randomly assigned roles 

as "guards" or "prisoners." 

Within hours the randomly assigned 

"guards" were acting as guards and the 

randomly assigned "prisoners" were 

acting as prisoners. By the end of the 

first day the guards were behaving brutally-both physically and psychologically. By the end of the second day two 

of the prisoners had to he released hm 

ped the experiment four days into the 

ten-day protocol. 

We are all products of our environment and we all are required to play 

various roles in uniform. Once again, 

we must rely on our internal balancing 

mechanisms to control actions that 

have their origin in authority. 

The proper use of authority, as we 

carry out the myriad of complex functions associated with our responsibilities, cannot help hut make every one 

of us better leaders. Although our 

superiors are the ones who judge our 

leadershio abilities and our notential. 

we are often successful because of the 

actions of those whom we lead and 

exercise authority over. 

It has been said that, "No man is a 

leader until his appointment is ratified 

in the hearts and minds of his men." 

A conscientious effort by all of us on 

how we use our own authority with its 

explicit as well as implicit consequences cannot but help to make us 

better leaders not only in the hearts 

and minds of those for whom we work, 

but more importantly, in the hearts 

and minds of those who work for us. 

Everyone of us who carries the 

leadership baton must ensure that we 

understand the implications of our 

responsihilities and, more importantly, 

all the sides and dimensions of the 

authority that comes with it. 

MAJ Lawrence R. Sadoff is the execw 

tiue officer of the Office of the Chief of 

Engineers. Among other assignments, 

he was a company commander in the 

8th Engineer Battalion, 1st Cavalry 

Division, and in the 503rd Engineer 

Battalion. He was also the Deputy District Commander of the Corp of Engineers Albuquerque A graduate with the 

highest distinction at the Naval College 

of Command and Staff in 1981, MAJ 

Sadoffis also a US. MA. graduate and 

has master's degrees in civil engineering from the University of Illinois and 

in business administration from 

Southern Illinois Uniuersi& He is a 

registered engineer in Virginia 
- - 

Let 


Work For You 


The Battalion Training Management System (BTMS) and its implementation poses unique problems for 

all Training and Doctrine Command 

units. Due to its unique structure and 

mission, each unit has to develop a program to serve its own needs. 

As a commander of a Combat 

Engineer One Station Unit Training 

(OSUT) company, I was among the first 

to find a thousand reasons why BTMS 

should not apply to my company. However, after attending a Training 

Manager's workshop, I was surprised 

to discover that it was nothing more 

than "common sense training." 

Upon completing the workshop, I was 

eager to develop a system which would 

benefit both the noncommissioned officers and our training mission. The 

svstcm would have to tritin SC0.2 11,~center the FORSCO\I unit5 illllv ~>ro!icient in their respective MOS;\dditionally, the system needed to be easily 

manageable, self.generating, and capable of providing reliable feedback. 

The first step in developing our 

BTMS program was to determine training objectives and to ensure that they 

coincided with our ARTEP requirements. Since the company is in the only 

Comhat Eneineer Trainine Brigade in 

the Army, we used ARTEP5-35,Combat Engineer Battalion, Corps, as a 

basis to~develop these objectives and to 

establish the standards. 

Once these goals were established, 

we had to determine how we would 

make them work for our unit. But 

before accomplishing this,we had to 

determine our current combat readiness status. 

Unlike a TOE unit, the training company has no formal means of determinby CPT Bryan L. Page 

ing combat readiness such as ARTEF ations, and infantry operations. Each 

exercises, and, therefore, has to rely on major mission was further broken 

other forms of evaluation to find its down into sub-tasks, and classes were 

combat proficiency status. developed and given through the comSince BTMS in a training company pany's NCO professional development1 

is aimed at the permanent party cadre BTMS program. 

only, the system which determines our At the end of Phase I, an evaluation 

proficiency status had to be modified. was conducted to determine the effecFirst, we closely examined the indi- tiveness of the unit's training program 

vidual, and not the platoon or squad. while allowing modification or adjustA process of personal interviews, ments for future plans. This was conreviewing SQT results, and adminis- ducted during a five-day, four-night 

trating self assessment surveys was Engineer Week exercise in which the 

used, listing every sub-task of every drill sergeants removed their campaign 

mission established as a training or hats and assumed platoon sergeant 

ARTEP objective. It required individu- and squad leader roles. They were 

als to take stock of their own ability evaluated on their ability to perform 

and report proficiency as being either under pressure while completing varitrained, needing practice, or untrained ous missions, such as conducting an 

for each individual task. ambush patrol, establishing a tactical 

Special care was taken to define bivouac, performing defensive and 

standards for these three categories to offensive ooerations. and conducting 

ensure the survey was valid. After col- reconnaissance patrols. The sergeants 

lecting the data, the results were com- were also judged on their ability to care 

piled into one easily read chart. From for and motivate their soldiers. 

it, strengths and weaknesses could be The short-range plan for Phase I1 

identified and long-range BTMS plans called for continued reinforcement of 

were formulated. the basic survival skills, while focusThe long-range plan was broken into ing on mobility and countermobility 

four phases, with each phase covering missions. Second only to the ability to 

onr training cyclt, (norrn:~llv 15 weeks survive, these two missions are reof an Engineer - OSUT conloan!,. . . Once quired to enable a Comhat Engineer 

the major missions listed in ARTEP unit to fulfill its role. 

5-35 were broken down and listed in As in Phase I, the major missions 

the long-range plan, it was time to turn were broken into sub-tasks, and classes 

attention to the short-range plan for were developed and taught in such 

Phase I. areas as calculation and placement of 

This told us we needed to train and explosives and installation of tactical 

evaluate the basic skills necessary to minefields. Again, our evaluation was 

survive in a combat environment. With conducted during an Engineer Week 

that in mind, efforts were concentrated exercise. That week, however, marked 

on command and control procedures, a new awakening for the company. We 

unit movement and security opera- were no longer satisfied with just 

tions, intelligence gathering oper- meeting the standards, we were setting 
future standards for all Combat 

Engineers. 

To accomplish this, we planned a 

more realistic Engineer Week by locating existing unsafe bridges on Fort 

Leonard Wood. Permission was given 

from the Directorate of Engineering 

and Housing to remove three such 

bridges through demolition use. 

A target folder was developed for 

each of the bridges indicating the 

amount and placement of all demolition charges. These were placed accord^ 

ing to the target folder by soldiers-intraining under the careful supervision 

of their drill sergeant squad leaders. 

The realism involved provided one of 

the most effective means to train the 

company's NCOs while giving the 

trainees the "hands-on" experience 

they might never have had under normal training circumstances. 

At the conclusion of the Engineer 

Week, individual and company combat 

readiness was reevaluated, and we 

were surprised at the progress shown. 

From this it was determined that basic 

survival skills should never be taken 

for granted and must be constantly 

evaluated. 

The short-range plan was modified 

for Phase I11 to reflect the continued 

evaluation of all survival skills, while 

focusing the main emphasis on fixed 

bridging operation. As with the previous phases, the major mission was 

broken into snb-tasks. 

Classes were developed and given in 

such areas as erecting a Bailey crib 

pier, constructing a Bailey bridge, and 

constructing an M4T6 Dry Span. As 

before, it was the company's goal to provide the most realistic training 

possible. 

We elected to construct a 100-foot 

section of Bailey bridge on an unprepared site to meet this goal. This in 

itself was a major undertaking, since 

the transportation, construction, and 

disassembly of the Bailey bridge "in 

the wild" had never before been accomplished by a Combat Engineer training 

unit. A Bailey crib pier was also constructed under the existing hridge, 

upgrading its classification from class 

30 to class 65. This particular achievement had never before been accomplished on Fort Leonard Wood by any 

military unit, either training or TOE. 

The assets to transport the hridge on 

five-ton dump trucks were not available, thus requiring bridge trucks and 

pallets. Because cranes were not avail^ 

able, we were dependent on the trucks' 

own capabilities. Special tie-downs 

were designed and built by the company to secure the loads during the lifting and hauling operations. 

The pallets made loading and unloading the bridge easier, while allowing a greater load capacity than the 

standard five-ton dump truck. In bddition to the support it provided during 

the hauling operation, the bridge truck 

proved to be a highly versatile piece of 

equipment because of its boom and 

wrench, used during the Bailey crib 

pier construction. 

After careful examination of the 

Engineer Week evaluation results, we 

made minor adjustments to Phase IV, 

where we planned to place our emphasis an float bridging. Our short-range 

plan not only had to be constantly 

I I 

upgraded, but the long-range plan also 

had to be projected. For training units 

this can become very difficult due to 

the constant turnover of key personnel. 

However, if flexibility is built into this 

system, it can survive drastic changes. 

Our BTMS plan has shown us that 

the program will work in a TRADOC 

unit with slight modifications to allow 

training unit usage. 

CPT Bryan L. Page is Commander; 

Company E, 1st Engineer Battalion, 

2nd Engineer Training Brigade 

IOSUT). He has seroed as a platoon 

leader and executive officer with the 

237th Engineer Battalion ICBT) in * 

Hielbronn, Germany, and as Training 

Standards Oficer in Fort Leonard 

Wood, MO. He is an Engineer Basic 

Course and Advanced Course graduate 

nnd has a bachelor's degree from 

Missouri Southern State College 

Q. I would like to know when is the best time to seal asphalt? 

A. If there are no cracks in the pavement, a seal coat is not necessary, 

since the asphalt will provide waterproofing. Apply the seal coat if there 

are superficial cracks or tears in the pavement. 

Q. What isthedateof the Engineer Conferencethat is held each year in 

early December in Crystal City, Arlington, VA7 Are there any 

restrictions on attendance? 

A. Thedate for theconferenceis30Novemberthrough 2 December 1984. 

The Conference is limited to Commanders and CSMs/SGMsof Engineer 

Battalions, Groups, Brigades, and Commands. 

0.How can I obtain a subscription to ENGINEER for official use in my 

office7 

A. The U.S. Postal Service requires that yo!^ furnish ENGINEER with the 

following: 

a. A request in writing stating that you wish to receive ENGINEER (your 

official letterhead must appear on the request). 

b. A list of all duty positions for each copy requested. 

c. A signature at the bottom of the request. 

d. Specify number of copies. 

Once we receive this letter with the required information you will be 

placed on ENGINEER'S distribution list. 
MG John H Moellering commands the nam he was S-3 of the 937th Engineer 

US Army Engineer Training Center Group (Combat) in the Central 

and Fort Leonard Wood, MO.A 1959 Highlands. He later commanded the 

West Point gradual< he has com- 32fith Engineer Battalion, 1Olst Airmanded Engineer troops and serued in borne Diuision (Air Assnulti at Fort 

various staff positions with the 1st Campbell, KY He has also served as 

Caoalry Division in Korea and the 24th Assistant Diuision. Commander of the 

Infantry Division in Germany In Viet- 9th Infantry Diuision, Fort Lewis, WA. 

Engineer Solution 

r 

Reference: TM 5-1 63 

1. Pond Area (A,): I 

(2500 men) (0.20 lbs O,/man/day) A, = 

60 lbs O,/acre/day 

A, = 8.33 acres 

Convert acres to square feet (1acre = 43.560 ft2) 

As = 8.33 acres x 43,560 ft2= 362,854.80 ft2 [ acre ]

2. Pond Dimensions (L, W): 


Rule: L = 2.5W 


4 = (L)(W)= (2.5W) (W) = 2.5W2 

L = 2.5 (380.97 ft) = 952.44 ft 

3. Pond depth: 

a. Total flow (4): 


q = (40 gal/day/man) (2500 men) = 100.00 gpd 


Q 

Soldiers First, 


Engineers Second: 


A Personal Viewpoint 


(continued from inside 

front cover) 

much to a young man or woman who 

is experiencing it? Psychologists tell us 

that a trainee experiences more stress 

in basic training than he does in actual 

combat. Basic training is a "rite of passage" and a trainee knows when he 

finishes that he has been through 

something which is tough and demanding, and has provided him with skills 

and discipline, and earned him the 

title, soldier 

One of the things we're placing great 

stress on at Fort Leonard Wood is that 

Combat Engineers must be soldiers = (1250ft t3/s mile) x -

5280ft -2gpm 60 minx 

first and Engineers second. The tech- [ 
mi1eIx 1000 1: [T 3


nical training is extremely important, 

and drill sergeants who are assigned 4 = 0 gpd 24 = 9302.40 gal/day I
 here have much higher SQT scores 4 = 0 gpd day than average soldiers for their grade in C$ = 0 gpd the Amy at large. However, I have seen a,=%+Q+ 4-0.-q too many TOE Engineer units which 

were considered a "ragtag bunch of 

renegades." Too often we've used the 

excuse the Engineers don't ever understand how to move about the battle 

field tactically very well, hut they're 

technicians! 

We must change that perception in 

the Army. There is absolutely no reason why Engineer soldiers should not 

be the most disciplined and tactically 

proficient soldiers on the battlefield. 

Because of the complex nature of their 

assignments they, in fact, have an obligation to be the best soldiers available. 

One need only do a cursory study of 

military history to understand that 

Engineers have always led the way in 

combat. 

= 100,000 gpd + 9302.4 gpd + 0 - 0 - 0 


= 109,302.4 gpd 


Conversion: 1 ft3 = 7.48 gal 

0,= (109.302.4 gal/day) = 14.612.62 ft3/day 

b. Lagoon Capacity (LC) 

LC=qxT, 


= (14,612.62 ftJ/day) (60 days) 


= 876,757.20 ft' 


c. Pond Depth ID) 

D = LC/A = 876,757'2 ft3= 2.42 ft 

362.854.8 ft3 


Final Dimensions: 


L = 952.44 n 


W = 380.97 ft 


D = 2.42 ft 

-
j i Career Notes 

Warrant Officers' Branch 

Voluntary Indefinite In accordance with AR 135-215, "Oficer Periods of Service on Active 

Status: Duty," upon completion of initial tour of obligated service, the authority 

to apply for VI status is suspended for all warrant officers except those 

managed by the Surgeon General and the Judge Advocate General. 

Warrant officers managed by MILPERCEN will no longer be authorized to apply for VI status. However, this change in policy does not 

interfere with an officer's right to apply for integration into the Regular 

Army (RA). 

The policy and procedures were updated for warrant officers by 

MILPERCEN due to an upcoming change in the VI status policy for all 

officers. Officers other than RA will be considered for VI status during 

the third and seventh years of officer service. 

Warrant officers do not have to be in a VI status to apply for RA. They 

must have two years of warrant service on current tour, but may still 

be an obligated volunteer (OBV) at the time of application for RA. 

Centralized board selection of personnel applying for VI status will 

be part of the process. Since virtually all warrant officers apply, it has 

been determined that warrant records will be automatically reviewed, 

making the application process unnecessary. 

A yearly circular will be published announcing the names of all warrant officers who will be considered by the VI status selection board. 

Those who do not want to continue on active duty beyond their normal 

ETS will notify MILPERCEN and then will separate with no further 

action required. For those considered by the centralized selection board, 

a notification of selection or non-selection will be forwarded through the 

local commander to the individual officee 

The warrant officer's commander must concur before VI status is 

awarded. Commanders will be permitted to recommend disapproval of 

a board-selected VI status and return the action to MILPERCEN for final 

determination. Declination of VI status by the individual officer will 

constitute a request for voluntary separatiomat ETS. 

By going to a centralized selection process for VI status, the Army will 

assure that each officer is given fair, consistent, and equal consideration 

for career status. In addition, a large administrative workload of paperwork progressing through command channels and MILPOs will be eliminated. The Army will be able to select the best quality officers in the 

right numbers to meet its needs. 

Questions may be directed to CW4 Edward Cole at MILPERCEN, AV 

221-7839, commercial (202) 325-7839. 
NCO & Enlisted Soldiers' Branch 

Where Would YOU Isyour DA Form 2635 (Enlisted Preference Statement)up-to-date?Does 

Like to Go: it reflect your current desired area of assignment? Is the dependent data 

correct? Are personal considerations such as family requirements for 

special medical or educational facilities included in the remarks sections? 

While sometimes referred to as a "dream sheet," the Enlisted 

Preference Statement was developed to establish a direct line between 

the soldier and the career managers at MILPERCEN. This information 

helps the career manager consider the soldier's desire for assignments, 

schooling, types of duty, and areas of preference. 

Also, check your areas of preference on your DA Form 2 or 2A. Do they 

agree with your Enlisted Preference Statement? If they are in disagreement, or not submitted in the first place, your assignment manager 

cannot possibly anticipate your personal preferences. Unfortunately, the 

majority of soldier inquiries received by the Engineer Branch are 

assignment related and are received after an assignment has been completed, instead of before. 

By no means do current preference statements ensure you will get your 

"dream" assinnment. - The oriorities established bv the Armv often override personal preferences, however, when they are known they are always 

considered as an important part of the assignment process. CSMs should 

encourage members of their units to use these preference statements. 

Equal Opportunity 

Advisors: 

The Army needs Equal Opportunity advisors in PMOS 12B (Combat 

Engineer), 12C (Bridge Crewman), and 51H (Construction Foreman). 

NCOs may apply if they meet the following qualifications: 

currently serving in grade E-6 (PI or E-7 

have been selected to attend ANCOC or already graduated 

qualified in their PMOS 

eligible for worldwide assignment 

meet heighttweight standards 

passed the Army Physical Readiness Test 

Volunteers who are accepted will attend 16 weeks of training at the 

Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, Patrick Air Force 

Base, FLA. All graduates will be awarded Skill Qualification Identifier 

"Q" and will be assigned to Engineer units in CONUS or overseas. 

For more information, contact your local MILPO or personnel staff 

NCO. For MOS 12Band 12C,ask for SFC Richard Markle at AV 221-7710 

or commercial (703) 325-7710. For MOS 51H, ask for SFC John Lane 

at the same numbers.