PD1 _ engineer 

FALL 1979
 
UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER AND 

FORT BELVOIR 

Commander/Commandant 

MG James L. Kelly 

Assistant Commandant 

COL Robert S. Kubby 

Command Sergeant Major 

CSM Frederick I. Eisenbart, Jr. 

DIRECTORATES 

Directorate of Combat Developments 

COL Gene B. Welch 

Directorate of Training Developments 

COL Robert M. Bunker 

Directorate of Training 

COL Robert E. Conroy 

Directorate of Evaluation 

MAJ Terrance C. Ryan 

Defense Mapping School
 

COL Hector Wood
 

UNITS 

Engineer Center Brigade 

COL David O. Cooksey 

Engineer Training Brigade 

COL James H. King, Jr. 

EDITORIAL STAFF 

Public Affairs Officer
 

MAJ Sandor I. Ketzls
 

Editor
 

Jerome J. Hili
 

ILLUSTRATORS 

William Ruth 

PFC Barbara Stultz 

~!"gineer

THE COVER 

The concept of the "tooth-to-tail 

ratio" among our military ground 

forces is illustrated by PFC Barbara 

Stultz. Engineers, Infantry, Armor, 

Field Artillery, and Air Defense Artillery represent the teeth of the tiger, 

while all other forces have either a 

combat support or combat service 

support role, represented by the tail 

of the tiger. 
9&1 _

engineer 

\I0LUM€9 NUM~€R2

~ALL1979
 

~€~llIR€S

6 1979 READERSHIP SURVEY RESULTS 

9 CHALLENGES TO ENGINEER DOCTRINE 

by Major Stephen E. Draper 

15 MGB: MYTHS AND MISUNDERSTANDINGS 

by Captain Harry N. Hambric 

18 CONTINGENCY MISSIONS-A PREREQUISITE FOR EFFECTIVE 

RESERVE COMPONENTS TRAINING 

by Lt. Col. Everett R. Thomas 

20 THE "FIGHTIN FIFTH" IN REFORGER 79 

by Major Ronald D. Laux 

27 HOW TO BETTER SELL ENGINEER CAPABILITY TO THE 

MANEUVER COMMANDER 

by Major V. Paul Baerman 

30 TANK DITCHING IN THE DEFENSE 

by Lt. Col. Jerry A. Hubbard & Major John R. MuJlans 

34 SOVIET ENGINEER EQUIPMENT 

by Major Arthur J. Parr, Jr. 

D€P,4RTM€NTS 

2 NEWS & NOTES 40 ENLISTED CAREER INFO 

4 LETTERS 42 NCO CHANNELS 

5 ENGINEER PROBLEM 43 RESERVE COMPONENTS 

39 OFFICER CAREER INFO 44 THE SCHOOL SOLUTION 

page 15 

page 25 

page 30 

ENGINEER is an authorized publication of the U.S. Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir. Unless specifically stated , material appearing herein 

does not necessarily reflect official policy, Ihinking, or endor sement by any agency of the U.S. Army. All photographs contained herein are otficial U.S. Army photographs unless otherwise credited. Use of funds for printing this publication was approved by Headquarters, Department of 

the Army, on 23 February 1979. Matenal herein may be reprinted providing cred it is given to ENGINEER and the author. • The ENGINEER mission is to increase understand ing of the role and importance of engineers on the battlefield and to promote the professional development of all 

members of the Army engineer family. ENGINEER provides timely and authoritative information on Army engineering concepts, plans. policies, 

doctrine, procedures, operations, equipment, and developments 10 active Army units, the Reserve Components, training and education centers, 

facilities engineers, and other branch agencies and activities worldwide. • Direct correspondence with ENGINEER is authorized and encouraged. Inquiries, letters to the editor, manuscripts, photographs, and general correspondence should be sent to: Editor, ENGINEER 

Magazine , U.S. Army Engineer Center , Fort Belvoir, VA 22060. Telephon e AUTOVON 354-5001 or Commercial 703·664·4001/3082. If a return of 

manuscripts or matena l is desired, a eelt-aooressed. stamped envelope is required. • Controlled circulation postage is paid at Merrifield, VA. 

1 
News & Notesc=::::========= -= 
 

TOP DRILL SERGEANT 

Sergeant First Class Stanley Kolchins 

demons tr ates the proper technique of performing 

"inspection arm s" to a pair of femal e trainees. 

From among 500 drill sergeants assigned to Fort 

Leonard Wood . Kolchin s has been selected as th at 

installation' s Drill Sergeant of the Year, thu s 

qualifying him for DS of the Army competition. He 

is the senior drill sergeant of Company D. 5th Battalion, 3rd Basic T raining Brigade. 

GIVE AND TAKE 

An annu al exchange prog ra m between U.S. and British military forces
 

this year involved the 13th Engineer Battalion, 7th Infan try Division . and
 

the 11th Field Squ adr on. 38th Engineer Regiment . Ripon , England. Wh ile
 

members of Company 8 , 13th Engineers tr ained in Ripon . members of the
 

l Ith Field Squadron were training with the 13th Engineers at Fort Ord, Fort
 

Hunter Liggett. and Cam p Robert s. CA. Training at the U.S. sites included
 

mine field deplo yment, obstacle emplacement, M4T6 bridge construct ion ,
 

orienteering and rappelling , advanced demolitions. and weapons qu alifica­


tion.
 

DMS RELOCATION 

The results of a study to determine the feasibilit y of 

relocating the Defense Mapping School (OMS) are expected to be released this fall. OMS is a " modified 

ten ant activit y" of the U.S . Army Engineer Cent er 

and Fort Belvoir . 

The study was necessary because Bagley Hall, home 

of th e OMS. has deteriorated to th e point tha t 

repl acem ent within the next three years is essential. 

Colonel John J. Meara was chair man of the study 

grou p. 

TANK TRAILS UPGRADED 

Soldiers of the 563rd Engineer Battalion have upgraded 26 miles of ta nk 

trails in the Gr afenwoehr Training Area . Using more th an 100 pieces of 

heavy equipment. includ ing doze rs, scra pers, graders . dump trucks. and 

bu cket loaders, the 563rd enginee rs performed the work during a Comb at 

Engineer Major Training Area Program 22 April - 22 June . 

MG James A. Johnson 

KEY REASSIGNMENTS 

Major General James A. Johnson 

assumed th e du ties of Deputy Chief of 

Engineers on June 1. He is a former 

comma ndant of The Engineer School 

and served as the Corps' North Atlan ­

tic Division Engineer for two years 

prior to his recen t reassignm ent . . . 

New di vision eng ineers in clude 

Brigadier General Henry J. Hatch, 

Pacific Ocean Division, and Colonel 

Max B. Scheider, New Engl and Division . . . Colonel Ted E. Bishop took 

over as Director of the Army's Coastal 

Engineering Research Cente r in late 

April . .. Major General Elvin R. 

"Vald" Heiberg ill is the new Director of Civil Work s. U.S. Army Corps 

of Eng ineers. 

2 FALL 1979 
ARNG UNIT 

HONORED 

For its role in the cleanup operations following th e disastro us 

John stown Flood of 1977, th e Johnstown based 876th Engineer 

Battalion has be come the first Penn sylvan ia Army National 

Guard unit to receive the prestigious Governo r's Unit Citation . 

Comp an ies A (from John stown), B (Punxautawn ey), C 

(Hazleton ), and D (Finleyville), plu s battalion headquarters, 

assisted Johnstown residents in the afte rmath of the flood which 

swept th rough a nine-county area on July 20, 1977. after 

thunderstorm s dumped more than 10 inches of rain within a 

few hours. Personnel of the 876th rescued stra nded victims, 

hou sed th e homeless , and pr otected personal property from 

looters . With heavy equipment , they helped clear streams, 

remove debris, move earth, locat e casu alties, and construct 

temporary roads and bridges. Th e Govern or's Unit Citation was 

created in 1974 to honor outstanding Penn sylvani a Army Guard 

units, bu t the 876th was the first unit to receive the award . 

FORMER CHIEF DIES 

Lieutenant General (Ret) William C. Gribble, Jr. , 

62, a form er Army Chief of Engineers, died of cancer 

June 2 at DeWitt Army Hospital, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

While serving as dire ctor of reactor development with 

the old Atomi c Energy Commission in the mid 1950s, 

he developed the technical specifications for the Army's first nuclear power plant, which is located at 

Fort Belvoir. Lt. Gen . Gribble was director of the Army Nuclear Power Program in the earl y I960s. He 

later was the Army's deputy chief of research and 

development and then deputy chief of staff for force 

development. He commanded Fort Belvoir and the 

Army Engineer Center and School for two years 

before becoming chief of Army research and develop ­

ment in 1971. In 1973, he becam e Chief of Army 

Engin eers, a post he held until retiring in 1976. 

RECRUITERS NEEDED 

Qualified and motivated NCOs in 

grad es up to £ -7 are needed to fill twoyea r ADT jobs in the USAR recruiting 

force. Commanders are urged to encourage their top NCOs to apply for the 

positions to insure unit support of 

USAR EC' s recruiting mission. Readiness 

and strength maintenance depends on 

gettin g more good recruiters on board. 

MINE DETECTOR SYSTEM 

A $2.3 million contract for engineering 

development of the Vehicle Mounted Road 

Mine Detector System (VMRMDS) has been 

awarded to Cubic Corp oration. Eight units will 

be produced for testing under the initial contract , with th e first system set to arrive at the 

U.S. Army Mobilit y Equipment Research and 

Development Command (MERADCOM) in 

January . VMRMDS represen ts a major 

technological br eakthrough becau se it is the only system th at can reliabl y detect both metallic 

and pla stic anritank/ antiv ehicular land mines 

with a very low false alarm rate . Th e VMRMDS 

can clear a path up to II feet wide at eigh t miles 

an hour over unpaved roads or fla t. spa rsely 

vegetated terrain. 

ENGINEER 3 
Letters to the Editor _
 

MGB CONTROVERSY
 

In his article in the Winter 

1978-79 edition of THE 

ENGINEER, Major Harvey G. 

Ramsey sets out a comparison between Bailey Bridge and Medium 

Girder Bridge, which leads to a conclusion that inherent limitations of 

MGB mitigate against its extensive 

employment on the battlefield. It is 

felt that this conclusion is reached 

partIy because the full capabilities of 

MGB are not appreciated and 

because current procurement plans 

do not permit the deployment of sufficient bridges or any of the supplementary sets which greatly extend 

its flexib iIity. 

The full flexibility of MGB is well 

set out in an article in the MarchApril 1979 issue of The Military 

Engineer written by Derek L. 

Knight. who for several years headed 

the MGB design team at the Military 

Vehicles and Engineering Establishment (Christchurch). This article 

clearly shows that procurement of 

additional MGB equipment could 

offer the U.S. Army many advantages and would overcome many of 

the disadvantages listed by Major 

Ramsey. 

Major Ramsey's article is certainly 

a most valuable one. which 

highlights the overall problem of 

bridging, but it takes a somewhat 

pessimistic and short term view. 

Many of the problems can be solved 

very quickly by the provision of an 

adequate range of MGB . 

LTC (Ret} C. Hartington 

Sales Manager 

Military Products Division 

Fairey Engineering Limited 

MAB CAPABILITY 

In the article, "The Main River 

Crossing," Spring 1979 edition, it 

stated that" Prior to exercise Certain 

Shield, the ability of the MAB to 

handle a high volume of continuous 

traffic was questionable." This is incorrect. During V Corps exercise 

Laramie Golden Arrow in June 1973. 

a MAS bridge was constructed on 

the Rhine River and was in continuous operation for six hours 

(0600-1200 hours). Conditions, if not 

precisely similar, were equally 

challenging. If my memory does not 

fail me. the width of the river at the 

bridge location was 1100 feet and 42 

MAB units were needed to construct 

the bridge. The first MAB hit the 

water at 0100 hours and the actual 

bridge construction took one hour 

and 40 minutes. (Due to the German 

specified river closure time, the 

bridge construction had to be halted 

for three hours and 20 minutes.) 

This bridge was also constructed 

under radio silence and blackout 

conditions. My company-E Company, 23rd Engineer Battalion-and 

two others-E Companies of the 

10th and 12th Engineer Battalions-were needed to construct 

the bridge. THE ENGINEER 

Magazine, in late 1973 or early 1974, 

published an article on thi s exercise 

by CPT Bittamore, the commander 

of E Company, 12th Engineer Battalion at the time of the exercise. 

CPT Robert E. Jalette 

University of Virginia 

ENGINEER INGENUITY 

Uniform insignia manufacturers 

recently began producing Engineer 

buttons for the mess jackets. This 

action, in being responsive to this 

age-old desire of Corps of Engineer 

officers to outfit their uniforms with 

the proper buttons, created a new 

dilemma. The uniform regulation requires all buttons to match. 

Engineer buttons are not, to my 

knowledge, available for the 

shoulder knots. The Engineer cap 

buttons are the same size but the 

posts are a different size than those 

in the shoulder knots. The button 

screw posts have different diameters, 

which prevents interchange of the 

post and button, and the cap button. 

with post, is too short for the 

shoulder post. l would like to share 

my solution to this dilemma with 

your readers. 

I modified my shoulder knots 

slightly in order to conform to the 

regulation. I used two cap button 

devices per shoulder knot in order to 

comply. I forced a cap button under 

the knot in between the braid and 

backing of the knot which will permit screwing the post onto the button. This button is used to affix the 

shoulder knot to the jacket. I then 

forced the backing post of the 

Engineer cap button between the 

shoulder knot and cap button device 

previously placed under the knot. 

This permits screwing the Engineer 

button on the shoulder knot where it 

will be visible. The exposed Engineer 

button is then more or less permanently affixed to the shoulder 

knot. Thi s solution should help other 

Engineer officers end years of 

frustration until Engineer shoulder 

knot buttons are made available. 

LTC Leonard Hasse. Jr. 

Fort Belvoir. VA 

4 FALL 1979 
Engineer Problem _
 

You are the battalion S-3 of the 863rd Engineer 

Battalion in direct support of the IX Corps. Several 

motorized rifle divisions have broken through 

friendly defenses in the Corp s' western sector. 

Friendly forces have conducted a retrograde operation across the Eagle River to the east, while the 

20th Armored Cavalry Squadron acted as a covering force on the far bank. 

Unfortunately, the Brudenheim Bridge, intended as a withdrawal route for the covering force, has 

been destroyed by enemy tactical air support. The 

20th is stranded on the far bank of the river while 

in contact with enemy forces. The covering force 

must be extracted before being decisively engaged 

by superior enemy forces . 

The battalion commander has given you the mission to devise a plan of rescue for the 20th as quickly and effectively as possible. The commander 

wants your plan within two hours. 

From friendly reconnaissance of possible river 

crossing sites, intelligence reports , and your inspection of available maps, you select a river crossing site with the following pertinent data: 

-River width at crossing site is 170 feet 

-River depth (maximum) is 35 feet 

-Far bank height is approximately 4.5 feet 

-Near bank height is approximately 3.5 feet 

-Stream velocity is six feet per second 

-River bed composition is sand and gravel 

Cross Section of Eagle River at Crossing Site 

NEAR SHORE 

Since a rafting operation would be too time consuming and sufficient Mobile Assault Bridge components are not immediately available , the Ribbon 

Bridge is the most feasible alternative. Besides , 

your troops are well-trained in Ribbon Bridging. 

Bridge construction and crossing will be conducted 

at night, despite near freezing temperatures 

(35°F) , to maximize security and secrecy. A bridge 

FAR SHORE 

erection boat (BEB) temporary anchorage system 

will be used to reduce bridge erection time. Assume 

no preparation time for assembly site. 

You have just 35 minutes to calculate time, 

tr oop, and equipment requirements before briefing 

your commander. Crossing and disassembly times 

can be calculated later. FM 5-34 is your reference 

for calculations. 

See THE SCHOOL SOLUTION, page 44. 

ENGINEER 5 
1979 

Readership 

Survey 

Results III
 

As promised, the results of the 1979 Readership 

Survey are herein presented, along with some guarded 

editorial comments concerning their significance. 

Although this and similar surveys are subject to various 

interpretations by statistical experts, a few general conclusions are possible that most experts would accept. 

Approximately 7,500 copies of the Winter edition of 

THE ENGINEER, containing the Readership Survey, 

were distributed to active Army engineer units / activities, 

the Reserve Components, training and education 

centers, facilities engineers, and numerous other activities and agencies worldwide. 

As of 1 May, the cutoff date for purposes of evaluation 

and analysis, approximately 350 completed surveys had 

been returned, thus assuring at least a 90 percent confidence level. In other words, chances are nine out of ten 

that if we eventually receive another 350 returns, the 

results will be very similar, if not identical. 

Without further elaboration, here are the questions 

and responses to each. 

1. What is your present military status? 

Response No. Percent 

Active Army 186 55.0 

USAR 70 20.7 

National Guard 65 19.2 

Retired 3 0.8 

DAC 14 4.1 

EDITOR 'S COMMENT: These figures generally correlate to the magazine distribution pattern. 

II. What is your present grade? 

Response Act. Army Res. Compo % of Total 

Company Grade Officer 62 38 30.3 

Field Grade Officer 76 42 35.4 

Warrant Officer 3 4 2.0 

Junior Enlisted 12 10 6.8 

Senior Enlisted 32 41 22.0 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: Approximately two-thirds of 

the magazine readership is officer personnel. despite the 

fact that enlisted personnel outnumber officers within 

the Army and the Corps of Engineers. We 're not sure 

why more enlisted personnel do not read the magazine, 

but we want to encourage commanders at all levels to insure that all of their troops have an opportunity to read 

it. If commanders feel their units are not receiving a sufficient quantity of magazines, they should request additional copies. 

6 FALL 1979 
III. Whar is your present assignment?	 VI. How much of the maga zine do you usually read ? 

Response No. Percent 

Combat Engr. Unit 124 36.5 

Bridging Unit 9 2.6 

Topographic Unit 10 2.9 

Construction unit 34 10.0 

Facilities Engr. 20 5.B 

Staff Section 22 6.4 

School (ROTC, Service 57 16.8 

school, etc.) 

Other 63 18.5 

EDITOR'S 

ed- since ther

COMMENT: 

e are no construction 

The qu estion 

units, as such. 

was poorly wordand 

since readers who marked' 'school" may be assigned to 

th e staffandfaculty of the Engineer Sch ool, or they may 

be students attending one school or another. The only 

10Ricol conclusion, then, is that many of our readers are 

assigned to combat engineer units. But. by th e same 

token, many are assigned to other units/acti vities. 

IV. How much formal education do you hav e? 

Response No. Percent 

Less than High School 2 0.5 

graduate 

High School graduate or 46 13.6 

GED 

Some college 56 16.5 

Undergraduate degree 104 30.7 

Graduate degree 130 38.4 

V.	 How do you re ceive THE ENGINEER 

Magazin e? 

Response No. Percent 

Personal Subscription 19 5.5 

UnitlOfflce copy 295 86.7 

Dayroom 7 2.0 

Library 2 0.5 

Other 17 5.0 

EDITOR'S 

cess-to a unit

COMMENT: 

/office copy of 

Most 

th e 

of 

magazine

our read

. 

ers 

but 

have ac­we were 

surprised and disappointed that only two percent of 

respondents mentioned dayroom copies. It raises doubt 

that sufficient copies of the magazine are placed in 

dayroom racks where a majority of our junior enlisted 

troops should have the opportunity to read it. 

Response No. Percent 

All of It, from cover to 122 36.2 

cover 

Most of it	 190 56.3 

Less than half of it 25 7.4 

Seldom read any of it 0 0.0 

VII.	 What material do you enjoy most in' THE 

ENGINEER? 

Response Act. Army Res. Compo Total 

Feature Articles 28.9% 25.1% 28.0% 

News & Notes 18.3 15.8 17.4 

Officer Career Info 18.5 7.8 13.1 

Tactical Problem 8.9 13.7 10.8 

Reserve Components 4.3 17.0 10.0 

Enlisted Career Info 8.7 5.4 7.0 

Letters to the Editor 5.7 7.1 6.5 

NCO Channels 5.7 6.3 5.9 

Other 0.3 1.4 0.8 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: Based on the grade structure 

of our readership. we expected better response to 

"Enlisted Career Info" and "NCO Channels. " 

VIII.	 Rate the f ollowing maga zin e characteristics by 

placing a number beside each (1 = outstanding. 

2=average. 3=poor). 

Response	 Average Rating 

Reading ease	 1.4 

Layout and design	 1.5 

Photos and illustrations	 1.6 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: We agree that the magazine 

ti

b

needs 

oth 

ons. 

IX.	 

the 

but

improvem

Overall

quantity 

in m ost c

, 

ent 

and 

how do 

ases, we 

in 

quality 

the ar

must

you 

ea 

of

of 

ph

r

rat

ely

otos 

photos 

e 

on

the 

c

and 

ontributors f or 

and 

information 

artwork

illustra

. 

­ presented in THE ENGINEER? 

Response	 Percent of Total 

Highly useful 43.2 

Moderately useful 53.2 

Slightly useful 3.2 

Useless 0.0 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: A most gratifying response. 

Obviously, the magazine performs a usefulfunction . We 

hop e to make it even more useful in the future. 

ENGINEER 7 
X. How do 

parison 

Response	 

with sim 

you rat

ilar 

e THE 

military 

ENGINEER 

publ

Percent 

ications ? 

in comBetter than most I've seen 49.7 

About the same as others 42.3 

Not as good as others I've seen 7.9 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: Th ese responses indicate that 

we 're making progress in efforts to upgrade the 

magazine content and design . 

XI. Would you lik e to see more space devoted to: 

Response	 Percent 01 Total 

Equipment 20.8 

Tactics 17.5 

Foreign Armies and equipment 16.7 

Career management info 12.9 

General military subjects 12 .1 

History 9.6 

Photos and art 5.0 

Humor 2.5 

Other 2.5 

EDITOR'S 

spac

tion 

e 

in th

to th

e e

ose s

COMMENT: 

nt ire 

ubjec

survey. We will 

ts that 

Perhap

attract 

s 

strive 

the 

the m

most 

to 

ost 

devote 

useful 

interest. 

qu

more 

es­ XII. Aft er reading THE ENGINEER. do you: 

Percent of 

Response No. Total 

Pass iI on to someone 198 59.8 

else 

Keep it for reference 126 38.0 

Throw it away 7 2.1 

EDITOR'S COMMENT: Since distribution of the 

magazine is currently limited to a ratio of one maga zine 

per eight members of the entire Army engineer family. 

th ese responses were some what disappointing. Give 

oth ers an opportu nity to read the maga zin e before filing 

it away or throwing it in th e trash can. 

XIII.	 Would you be interested in contributing to THE 

ENGINEER? 

Response Percent 01 Total 

Feature material 33.4 

Short news items 29.7 

letters to the Editor 13.3 

Photos or illustrations 19.2 

Other 4.1 

EDITOR'S COM MENT: if you have something ins

teresting 

onal invitati

and 

on. 

useful 

Th ere c

to co

an b

ntribute. don 

e no monetary 

't wail 

reward

for a p

f

er­or 

your tim e and effort, j ust the satisfaction ofgetting your 

th oughts and ideas into print and. p erhaps . a pat on th e 

back f rom yo ur com mander. 

The final question on the survey was not a question at 

all, but simply a request for a dditional comments. 

Roughly one-third of those who completed the survey 

penciled in a suggestion, idea, constructive criticism , 

praise, etc. Some of the comments were published in the 

Spring edition of the magazine. 

There is no way we can respond to all of the comments, 

but rest assued that all have been read and studied with 

an open mind and that many of your ideas and suggestions have already been acted upon, while others are 

under consideration for action. 

A final word about the survey: Those readers who 

responded to the survey have taken an active role in 

establishing the editorial policy of their professional journal and we encourage their continued active participation. Readers who failed to respond for one reason or 

another may still do so, in any format desired. Pencil and 

scratch paper will do just fine. 

ENGINEER 

Magazine is now available by subscription. Requests for personal 

subscriptions should be forwarded to the Superintendent of 

Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 

20402, along with check or money order payable to the Superinten· 

dent of Documents. Subscription rates are $5.50 per year domestic 

(including FPO and APO) addresses and $6.90 for foreign addresses. Individual copies are available at $3.25 domestic and $4.10 

foreign. 

8 FALL 1979 
U.S. ARMY tactical doctrine has increased the 

importance of the Engineer in support of combat 

operations, resulting in the emergence of new 

Engineer doctrine . 

Innovations of the new tactics are based on the 

age-old partnership of fire and maneuver within 

the context of new weapons systems. The new 

weapons and the new tactics have envolved from 

the increasing imbalance between NATO and 

Warsaw Pact conventional forces. In Europe . 

NATO forces are outnumbred 2.6 to 1 in tanks 

and 2 to 1 in aircraft, and since Warsaw Pact 

forces can choose the time and place of attack, 

combat ratios as great as 8 to 1 could favor the 

enemy in the area of the main attack. 

An analysis of our new doctrine is necessary to 

describe the requirements for winning in such an 

environment. 

The doctrine of the Active Defense is ba sed on 

three facts of the modern battlefield. First, the 

new generation of weapon s systems has 

dramatically increased the defender's combat 

power and his ability to accurately deliver that 

power. If an enemy tank can be seen for a period 

of less than one minute , it can be hit with some 

sort of weapon . Once hit, the probability of a 

mobility " kill" is incredibly high, on the order of 

90 percent. 

Second, the growing imbalance between NATO 

forces and those of the Warsaw Pact may require 

NATO to fight against odds as great as 8 to 1. 

Third, future war in Europe is expected to be 

brief, with the enemy attempting to destroy 

NATO's ability to fight quickly , thus forcing 

political settlement rather than a protracted or 

nuclear war. 

SINCE WE do not have enough combat power 

to place sufficient combat power forward and 

also to maintain a strong reserve, the Active 

Defense concept of the new tactics calls for maximum forward deployment with minimum 

reserves. The intent is to slow the enemy advance . The scarcity of resources requires that sectors be occupied in a manner that accepts risk in 

all areas except likely avenues of approach. 

Challenges
 

to
 

Engineer
 

Doctrine
 

by MAJ Stephen E. Draper 

The enemy emphasizes momentum and is 

tank-oriented. The Active Defense seeks to 

disrupt enemy armor thrusts, slow him to a 

crawl, and provide enough time for reinforcement 

from CONUS . The bottom line is to kill tanks, 

and to kill them well forward on the battlefield. 

The new tactical doctrine is based on the 

following six maxims: 

(1) We must understand the enemy; 

(2) We must obtain accurate and timely battlefield intelligence, including information on terrain. weather, and climate as well as enemy order 

of battle; 

(3) We must concentrate our forces at the 

critical times and places and be willing to accept 

risk in other less critical areas; 

(4) We must fight as a combined arms team; 

(5) We must exploit inherent advantages of the 

defender; 

(6) We must use fire and maneuver to slow the 

enemy advance. 

ENGINEER 9 
. ~--

f"" I" //'_~ == 

Two new technical systems make the Active 

Defense feasible. One is the family of anti-armor 

missiles and the other is the family of scatterable 

mines (FASCAM). 

The most important of the anti-armor missiles 

is the TOW. It is described as " ... a vehiclemounted or crew portable, heavy anti-tank 

assault weapon ... tube launched, wirecommand link guided missile .. . capable of 

defeating any known vehicle on the 

battlefield ..." 

The TOW is complemented by the family of 

scatterable mines as a tank-killing system. These 

mines can be rapidly emplaced and programmed 

to self-destruct after a specified time period. 

FASCAM consists of six different systems, 

described briefly below. 

(1) The Helicopter Delivered Mine System, 

M-S6, employing the M-34 HE mine . Up to 160 

mines are carried by each UH·l H helicopter. 

(2) The Artillery Delivered Anti- Personnel 

Mine System (ADAM), employing the M-67 or 

M-76 mine. A large number of mines are carried 

by each ISS-mm projectile. 

(3) The Artillery Delivered Anti-Tank Mine 

System (ADATM), employing the XM-70 or 

XM-73 AT mines and delivered by ISS-mm projectile. 

(4) The Ground Emplaced Mine Scattering 

System, employing the XM-7S AT mine and the 

XM-74 AP mine . Mines are delivered by the 

XM·128 mine dispenser, which will scatter mines 

in one of several preplanned patterns. 

(S) The "Gator" Mine System employs BLU 

91/B AT and BLU 92/B AP mines which are 

delivered by high-performance Air Force , Navy, 

and Marine Corps aircraft. 

(6) The Modular Pack Mine System 

(MOPMS) , employing AT and AP mines similar 

to the GEMSS system. The mines are tubelaunched from a factory-set, disposable ejection 

tube. 

Of the six scatterable mine systems mentioned, 

only the Helicopter Delivered Mine System has 

10 FALL 1979 
,­--

__-._.

--­

_--

,.,

--

..._-

-_.,

,

._--

---

._­_.-:....::::..:--- ­

'. --="-====-===~~~~~

been fielded. Fielding of the other five systems is 

expected in the early 1980s. 

General conclusions may be drawn from the 

application of our new technology to a realistic 

combat scenario. The first conclusion is that the 

major constraint to TOW tank kills is the large 

time periods required between the firing of 

rounds to allow for tracking. 

THE SECOND conclusion is that any increase 

in the total number of kills is directly related to 

mobility and counterrnobility. By decreasing the 

amount of time required to move between TOW 

positions, more rounds can be fired in any given 

time period. By decreasing the enemy's approach 

speed , more rounds can be fired in the same time 

period. Mobility and counterrnobility are the keys 

to optimum TOW weapons use. 

Decreasing the enemy's mobility has traditionally been an engineer task , and it is accomplished by the creation of obstacles. In a 

"bowling alley" situation, the TOW squad's projected kills can be almost doubled by cutting the 

approach speed in half. In the case of a task 

force under suppressive fire, decreasing the 

enemy's speed of approach by one-half would increase projected kills substantially. 

The most effective way to decrease enemy approach speed is to create effective obstacles. The 

ability to provide effective obstacles at the right 

place at the right time will soon be possible with 

FASCAM, which gives the ability to rapidly 

emplace preplanned minefields or fire immediate 

obstacles as the enemy situation develops. 

The probability of success can also be enhanced by applying more combat power at a given 

location. Two TOW squads working as a team 

have almost twice the chance of success against 

an armored approach as one TOW squad working alone. The shifting of combat resources to 

critical sectors cannot rely solely on existing 

lateral transportation arteries. Engineer effort 

must also be directed to this task. 

The engineer must be concerned with three 

ENGINEER 11 
critical tasks. First, he must enh ance friend ly 

mobility and inhibit enemy mobility. Second. he 

must increase the effect of friendly firepower and 

decrease the effects of enemy firepower. The effectiveness of friendly firepower is increased by 

careful placement of obstacles within a 

designated killing zone , along with the placement 

of obstacles that channel the enemy to that zone . 

Enemy firepower effectiveness can be reduced by 

the construction of covered routes between positions and by fortifi cation of those positions . 

Third. the engineer must be prepared to fight 

as infantry, thus freeing maneuver forces to conduct an Active Defen se. The higher densities of 

combat power must be placed where the greatest 

threat exists. At critical points in the battle, such 

as when maneuver brigades have been backed up 

to their rear boundaries, engineer units might be 

used to replace maneuver units in risk are as so 

that more combat power can be applied again st 

the enemy's main attack. 

ENHANCEMENT of friendly mobilit y can be 

ach ieved on two levels. On the micro-level, construction of covered routes between weapons positions within a battle zone and construction of 

routes of movement to new batt le zones are an 

obvious means of increasing combat power for 

the company and battalion. On the macr o-level. 

avenues of maneuver to allow rapid lateral shifting of combat power between brigades will 

directly enh ance success at critical times in the 

battle. 

These routes should have the following 

characteristics: 

-They should be as short as possible within 

the constraints of the requirement for 300 meters 

between positions, allowing for minimum tra vel 

time between positions. 

-They should allow the maximum possible 

speed for the tank, APe, or truck. This will require, in some areas, grubbing, grading , and 

some rudimentary base work to provide better 

traction. 

- They should be covered and concealed. taking advantage of terrain masking, etc. 

- They should be constructed in such a man ­

ner as to facilitate the "o verwatch" tactics used 

by armored/mechanized forces. 

The construction of avenues of lateral reinforcement is an exteme ly important engineer 

t ask , second only to the creation of obstacles. 

Th e division commander will initially allocate 

combat power to counter the major threat. 

Therefore, those sectors with the greatest 

possibilit y of enemy attack will be assigned th e 

greatest combat power. 

Oth er areas will have a smaller density. The 

enemy will most likely attack in a configuration 

that makes the initial allocation sub-optimum. 

Lateral shifting of man euver units will be needed 

to achieve optimization. This can be done only if 

the avenue s are prepared so they are passable, 

12 FALL 1979 
easily maintained, and covered from enemy air 

observation. 

The enemy must be slowed and channelized into killin g zones that allow ma ximum effectiveness of weapons systems. Obstacles of every sort 

must be placed so that, upon reaching them, his 

momentum is reduced and he chooses the route 

that lead s to the killing zone. Once he is in that 

zone , he must be slowed further and held for 

short periods to allow our anti-armor weapons 

the time to fire as many rounds as possible. Th e 

obstacles must be pla ced so that the enemy vehicle remains in view of the friendly weapon s for as 

long as possible. 

FRIENDLY ANTI·ARMOR weapons must 

bear an increasing burden of enemy fire suppression as the battle pr ogresses. These weapons 

systems will require some sort of prot ection from 

coun ter' fire. The minimum essential protection is 

a position that allows exposure of only main gun 

or firing platform. A position with overhead 

cover is desire abl e. 

Add itional protective positions will have to be 

constructed that are not directly related to 

maneuver units, however. These will also require 

engineer resources. While the maneuver units can 

provide their own protective positions to some exten t, it will be entirely up to the engineer to provide positions for a variety of command posts, artillery emplacements, aviation assets, communications sites, and variou s logistical units and 

equ ipment parks needed by the division. 

All of the above require the engineer's attention and should be the first priority. There are, 

however, other tasks that must be accomplished 

and these will requ ire engineer assets. Such tasks 

will include supporting river crossings, water supply, rear area damage control, and rear ar ea 

security. 

To accomplish these tasks, a limited amount of 

divisional engineer resources exist. His obvious 

that the divisional commander mu st optimize 

these rsources just as he must optimize combat 

power. 

Current doctrine places an engineer company 

in direc t support to a maneuver brigade (FM 

5-100). Further distribution, such as the pra ctice 

of placing one engineer platoon in direct support 

of each maneuver battalion task force, has a 

tendency to be wasteful. The need for engineer 

resources is situation-dependent and varies with 

the expected threat , the terrain configuration , the 

defensive unit's organization, etc. Usually, the 

platoon is located with the supporte d battalion 

ENGINEER 

for the period of the battle, and there it stays, 

even if no work is required or if only a portion of 

the platoon's assets are used . 

The resource allocation problem in Europe is 

critical. Given 48 hours warning, the current 

divisional engineer organization permits each 

brig ade to receive the following: 

-36 " standard" minefields (lOOm X SOm) 

-1200 meters of "standard" anti-tank ditch 

(3m X 2m) 

-60 small bridges destroyed or 60 road cra ters 

-36 "vehicle pits" for anti-tank weapons positions 

-90 Abatis or other obstacles. 

The fourth company of the battalion will most 

likely be assigned to the covering force to provide 

the same sort of services, with more emphasis 

placed on the construction of covered withdrawal 

routes. Thus, the Corps engineer ba ttalion must 

provide the division with lateral avenues of reinforcement as well as the engineer work need ed by 

the artillery, aviat ion unit , DISCOM, etc. This 

battalion can construct approximately 14 

kilometers of new road if it does nothing else in 

the 48-hour period. With all other demands being filled, the end result is that lateral transportation work will be minimal. 

IN CONCLUSION, more effective use of our 

engineer units is possible if they are allocated on 

a task basis rather than on a un it basis. At the 

very least , engineer resources should be allocat ed 

in the same percentages that the threat presents. 

Better yet, engineers might be allocated in terms 

of the needs of the three ar eas discussed 

above-friendly mobility enhancement, enemy 

mobility reduction , and protective fortifications. 

From the point of view of the division commander, the overriding concern will be to restructure combat power in the most effective way once 

enemy intentions ar e known. By using engineers 

to enhance the ability to rap idly shift combat 

power to critical areas, the commander is able to 

optimize available combat power. 

From the point of view of the brigade commander, the optimum use of engineers lies in the 

pr eparation of movement routes and routes of 

lateral reinforcement that allow a balan cing of 

combat power against the enemy threat. 

From the point of view of ba ttalion and company commanders, engineers can best be used in 

the role of counterm obility. They will be interested in channelizing enemy vehicles into killing zones and slowing enemy JIlovement within 

those zones. 

13 
The new concept of habitually placing at least 

one Corps engineer battalion OPCON to each 

division can help alleviate the problem of scare 

engineer resources. If, by TO&E mission assignment, the Corps battalion is made responsible for 

all engineer tasks behind the brigade rear boundaries, the divisional battalion can be solely tasked 

and trained for the three major acitvities for 

which the Active Defense calls. 

By TO&E, the Corps battalion should be 

responsible for MSRs, water supply, communication sites, aircraft landing areas, and all those reo 

quirements not associated with direct application 

of combat power. The divisional battalion would 

be responsible, by TO&E, only for the tasks 

specifically involved with friendly mobility 

enhancement, enemy mobility reduction, and 

maneuver unit survival. This would require some 

basic organizational changes within each battalion, as well as some basic TO&E equipment 

changes (such as adding more D-7s, front-end 

loaders, and augurs) in order to provide full effectiveness. 

AN ALTERNATIVE would be to provide an 

engineer company team to each brigade. This 

company would be solely directed at those 

mobility tasks inherent to the brigade and its 

battalions. The type and number of subunits attached to the team would be based on the 

brigade's mission and the threat presented, much 

like a maneuver company support team. It would 

be provided with the equipment necessary to support the brigade with obstacle construction, fortifications, and minimal road construction 

capability. 

The reduced divisional battalion could then be 

solely concerned with accomplishing division-level 

tasks without competition from brigade requirements. This alternative would, of course, be 

in keeping with the fact that it is a brigade commander's war, but it would be inefficient from a 

training and management standpoint. 

The concepts of how engineers are used once 

the battle begins can be changed to provide the 

division with more effective use of its combat 

power. As the division commander moves part of 

his force from one sector to another, he must 

somehow allow for "holes" created. 

There is a point in the battle in which 

engineers would provide maximum optimization, 

not by creating obstacles to the rear, but by converting to infantry and covering "risk" sectors. 

This point certainly exists when a brigade is 

backed up to its rear boundary by a strong 

enemy thrust. Then the engineers can be used 

optimally by replacing a unit in a "risk" area so 

the maneuver unit can be shifted to reinforce the 

battered brigade. It should be noted that, with 

minimal antitank weapons augmentation, the 

engineer unit can provide excellent defense in an 

urban area. 

TO SUMMARIZE, just as tactical doctrine 

has changed drastically, so must engineer doctrine. Engineers cannot be used on the battlefield 

of the future as they were used in World War II 

and Vietnam. The threat demands that the 

resource be used as effectively as possible or 

decisive defeat is probable. 

It is interesting to note that the Russians 

perceive the engineer resource with increasing importance. There exists today, in the Soviet Army, 

a Mobile Obstacle Detachment which operates 

with the antitank reserve. Its purpose, according 

to A.A. Siderenko, "is to set up minefields on 

identified axes of counter attacks by enemy tanks 

and to destroy objectives (bridges, road junctions, 

defiles, etc .) to the front and flanks of the 

deployed antitank reserve ... The presence of a 

Mobile Obstacle Detachment permits rapid mining in the course of combat . .. Mining the terrain delays the advance of the enemy tanks and 

thus creates conditions for their effective destruction by the fire of the antitank reserve." This 

would be an excellent description of the brigade 

engineer combat team. 

One concept that has been reviewed for the 

heavy division structure is the reduction of the 

engineer battalion to three companies. It was 

shown to be a step in the wrong direction and is 

no longer being considered. Notwithstanding the 

fact that the German Army had only three companies per division in World War II, modern 

technology and the Active Defense demand more. 

The trend from 1746 through Vietnam has 

been to direct engineer efforts away from combat 

roles towards combat service support roles. That 

trend must be reversed. No longer will conventional war allow us the time to build-up and reinforce. The effort can no longer be on the MSRs 

and logistics " tail." It must be directed at maximizing combat power at the outset. The concepts of how engineers are used must be changed 

to emphasize those tasks that directly affect fire 

and maneuver of our forward units. 

Maj or Draper is current ly assigned to th e 78th 

Engineer Battalion (C), USAREUR. He wrote this article 

while attending the Command and General StaffColleg e. 

14 FALL 1979 
by CPT Harry N. Hambrle 

- - - ...­ ._ -. -----------

\ 

- .' 

--.-.-. _.. _-- -­

In recent month s, numerous questions have ap ­ In an effort to clear up as many of these myths and 

peared concerning the feasibility and capability of misunderst andings as possible, I have compiled the 

the Medium Girder Bridge (MGB ), in comparison following " Myths and Truths" cha rt. 

to other U.S. dry gap tact ical and assault bridging. 

MYTH NO.1 

The MGB is limited to a maximum of MLC 60 loads. 

TRUTH 

Studies conducted by the Marine determine the relationship between 

and Bridge Laboratory , Mobility bridge lengths and the maximum safe 

Equipment Research and Develop­ load of specific vehicles that each 

ment Command (MERADCOM), in­ leng th can sustain. Current data 

dicate that the MGB can safely cross reveal that the MLC 78 HET loaded 

loads heavier than MLC 60 on a with a M-60 tank will be able to cross 

vehicle-by-vehicle basis. MERAD­ double story MGBs with gaps up to 

COM and its equivalent agency in 94 feet wide and single story MGBs 

England are coordinating efforts to with gaps up to 30 feet wide. 

MYTH NO.2 

MLC 60 length is limited to 103 feet, with no capability 

within existing equipment to reinforce. 

TRUTH 

MGBs up to 163 feet (49 meters) in lengths and procedures for installing 

length can be reinforced to MLC 60 single span MGBs in this manner 

with the U.S. cable reinforcement set were not available for inclusion in 

(upon its arrival, 1980-81). However, it th is article. Further test ing of the 

has been determined that, very likely, concept will be forthcom ing in the 

single span MGBs may be installed near future, and data forwarded to usover a pier. Data concern ing exact ing units. 

ENGINEER 15 
MYTH NO.3 

Limited life of the MGB may affect training )1 

and operation readi ness of the bridge. 

TRUTH 

The aluminum alloy has a well ­

defined fat igue life of 10,000 Class 60 

crossings. The fatigue life of the 

bridge is not affected by training 

builds unless crossed by Class 60 or 

heavier loads. The launching components (rollers, launching nose, etc.) 

will be affected by training builds, but 

this is the case with any other bridge 

launching system as well. Fair wear 

and tear, or accidents (improper proNOTE: The same MGB sets were subjec ted to developmental and operational 

tests, not only on the MGB, but on the 

erection set, the United Kingdom pier and 

span junction sets, and the U.S. cable 

reinforcement set. The two sets have 

never experienced any type of 

catastrophic failure . Approximately 

12,000 Class 60 crossings, plus several 

cedures) may produce worn or 

damaged components, but careful 

handling and use of established procedures will limit damage and wear to 

very minor degrees. The chances of a 

tactical bridge sustaining even 1,000 

MLC 60 crossi ngsin a com bat zone 

without being detected (and put out 

of action) are slim, indeed. Ten thousand crossing cycles would appear to 

be more than sufficient. 

deliberate static loads approaching 90 

tons, did not cause failures. To obtain 

loading conditions where the " 10,000 

MLC 60" criteria may cause failure, the 

components would have to be in the same 

location for every MLC 60 crossing. This 

is not likely due to disassembly and 

relocation, as welt as mix ing, of components. 

MYTH NO.4 

Limited replacement parts will affect 

readiness and/or combat operations. 

TRUTH 

The U.S. has purchased only 34 

sets of MGB and 17 erection sets. All 

MGB units in the Army, except one, 

will have four MGBs and two erection 

sets. Each bridge and erection set 

has a minimum of one spare for each 

of the major components, more than 

one spare for items cons idered to be 

subject to high mortality. Each unit 

will have sufficient spare parts to 

replace up to two complete ends of 

bridge, four interior bays , and any 

damaged erection component 

without interfering with the capability 

of the set. High mortality components have been identified and are 

being prestocked in depots in add ition to spares already included in 

bridge sets. 

MYTH NO.5 

The flexibility of MGB has been referred to as rigid, 

while the Bailey is classified as highly flexible. 

TRUTH 

When used as a bridge (the intend- longitudinal slopes are available; 

ed purpose), the MGB is far more tlex- numerous methods exist for exible than the Bailey. Numerous ped it ing launch and de-launch; 

methods exist for jacking the bridge because of its light weight and quick, ) 

onto/ott its rollers; little, if any, site easy assembly, new and better ways 

preparation is required; up to 1:10 to employ the MGB should be 

transverse slopes and 1:10 developed through field experience. 

16 FALL 1979 
MYTH NO.6 

The cost of MGB is prohibitive. 

TRUTH 

The MGB is expensive, costing ap- for itself. The MGB is a bridge which 

proximately $3,800 per foot, com- can be launched almost as fast durpared with an acquisition cost for the ing blackout conditions, in adverse 

Bailey Bridge of $270 per foot 20 to 30 weather, in fog, or in smoke as it can 

years ago. Even considering inflation, be launched on a clear day. A 103·foot 

the difference is significant. But con- MLC MGB can be launched in less 

sidering the savings in time, person- than two hours, and de-launched and 

nel, and equipment on the future bat- disassembled in the same period of 

t1efield, the MGB is expected to pay time. 

MYTH NO.7 

MGB used in the forward part of the main 

battle area has been referred to as ludicrous. 

TRUTH 

I am sure that no engineer with situation required it. Until the late 

common sense would want to build a 1980s, MGB will be our fastest bridgbridge in the forward portion of any ing system for gaps greater than 60 

battlefield, but it would be difficult to feet . I would certainly want to get in, 

assure me that (if I were the com­ and get out as fast as I could. MGB 

mander of an MGB company) I would will be well worth its cost in time of 

never be called upon to complement war. 

other forms of assault bridging if the 

It has been suggested that perhaps MGB and open mind and a positive manner. The fact that 

Bailey Bridge assets should be consolidated in com­ there are so few sets of MGB in our inventory (34) 

posite MGB /Bailey Bridge companies. I hope that means that we must optimize their use. Testing of 

this does not happen. There is no doubt that MGB the MGB has proven beyond any doubt that it can 

and Bailey must complement each other, and I cer­ do the job, and even now there are numerous 

tainly agree that taking advantage of each system's studies and proposals for using it to an even greater 

strong points will provide optimum utilization of advantage. 

bridging assets . The MGB , like the Bailey, began as a simple 

I strongly feel that, even if a company could bridge, but through input from research and 

maintain the readiness and training required to development agencies, as well as field users, more 

field two different types of bridge, the command and more uses will be found until , perhaps some 

and control of elements locat ed in brigade areas of day, we can give it the same label that the Bailey 

operation, as well as back in the Corps LOC, would has worn for so many years-"in a class of its 

prove to be an almost impossible task for the unit. own." 

Leave the TO&Es as they are, and continue to 

allow the two bridges to complement each other, 

rather than compete with each other. Captain Hambric is presently assigned to the u.s. 

The information provided above is by no means Army Mobility Equipment Research and Developcomplete, nor is it all inclusive. I have only touched ment Command as Research and Development 

the surface of several areas concerning MGB which Coordinator for the Bridge and Structures Diviseem to be misunderstood. I hope some of the sion. Marine and Bridge Laboratory. He has been 

misconcepts and misunderstandings have been involved with the Medium Girder Bridge program 

cleared up . since 1976 and is considered the Army 's leading 

The MGB is here! We must approach it with an authority on MGB operations. 

ENGINEER 17 
Contingency Missions
 

a prerequisite 

for effective 

reserve components training 

by COL Everett R. Thomas 

CURRENT emphasis in training is on preparedness to 

win the first battle of the next war against numerically 

superior Warsaw Pact forces attacking across Central 

Europe. Requi red to support combined arms task forces 

will be more combat engineer units than have ever been 

employed in U.S . history. Since 70 percent of combat 

engineer units in the Total Army are Reseve Components, the readiness posture of these units is critical to 

victory on the battlefield. 

However, due to time restrictions, high personnel turnover, the lack of training facilities , wide dispersal of 

engineer units , and a lack of technical expertise, many 

Reserve Component (RC) engineer organizations are il1­

prepared for early deployment to the European battlefield. 

Army training philosophy dictates that units master all 

Army Training and Evaluation Program (ARTEP) tasks 

and that individuals perform all Soldiers Manual tasks 

for their Military Occupational Speciality. But , RC 

engineer battalions are , in fact , training on a limited 

number of ARTEP ta sks, and individuals are mastering 

very few Soldiers Manual tasks. The result is a host of 

poorly trained engineer units which will require extensive 

post-mobilization training before deployment to any contingency area. 

Presently, only engineer groups and higher headquarters have contingency missions. Since battalions are 

the focal point of training management, they should be 

assigned specific contingency missions as a basis for 

training. Only then can battalion commanders assign 

realistic individual and collective training priorities. 

18 FALL 1979 
As described in Training Circular 21-5-7, the restrictions placed on our Reserve Components have a pronounced effect on their ability to follow the Army's 

"training in units" concept. Of these restrictions, time 

has the greatest impact. The commander has just 38 days 

each year to insure that individuals are job-qualified, 

and that squads and larger units are functioning as 

responsive , integrated teams. 

IN ADDITION to mission-essential training, each 

organization must also recruit, perform community service projects, maintain equipment, prepare for annual 

General Inspections and Command Inspections, conduct 

civil disturbance training, and satisfy an increasing 

number of administrative requirements. There is insufficient time to meet these requirements, to train on more 

than 100 battalion and lower level ARTEP tasks, and to 

qualify on al1 the Soldiers Manual tasks. 

A second factor affecting training is the high annual 

turnover in personnel. Many units are experiencing rates 

in excess of 33 percent, some as high as 50 percent. The 

addition of new soldiers to be trained and the need to 

develop smal1 unit teamwork lost by the rotation of 

leaders has placed added burdens on the commander. 

Also, constant changing of key personnel contributes to a 

loss of continuity in training programs. High turnover 

has a substantial negative impact on RC readiness. 

Lack of training areas close to Reserve Components 

engineer units is a third restriction. To train realistically, 

engineers must construct an obstacle, install a minefield, 

dig an antitank ditch, and detonate a charge at the training site. Presently, most units must travel great distances 

to find a weekend training site or must defer these activi.ties to the two weeks of Annual Training. 

SIMULATION games, sub-caliber devices. and 

equipment models help alleviate the problem, but their 

use results in a loss of realism. By holding the commander responsible for a limited number of ARTEP 

tasks, he can develop training facilities locally and 

recommend an appropriate Annual Training location. 

Another geographical restriction to training is the wide 

dispersal of RC engineer units. Not only are companies 

separated from one another by many miles, but companies, themselves, are frequently split into two or more 

different locations. Commanders waste precious time 

traveling from one unit to another. Platoons must convoy 

to distant locations for company field trai.ning exercises, 

only to turn around and return home after just a few 

hours of training. Great distances between units , then, is 

another factor affecting RC readiness. 

ENGINEER 

A fifth and very serious detriment to mission-related 

training is the lack of technical expertise among both officers and noncommissioned officers. The principal 

causes of the deficiency are a lack of time for individual 

training and the constant redesignation of units from one 

branch of service to another. It is not unusual to find officers or NCOs who have served in three or more branches. Although many dedicated reservists devote their 

own time to branch qualification, they cannot keep up 

with rapidly changing doctrine and with the everincreasing technical demands on engineer unit leaders. 

The restrictions of time, personnel turnover, lack of 

training facilities, wide unit dispersal, and lack of 

technical expertise force the commander to careful1y 

identify his missions before determining which ARTEP 

tasks to include in his training program. It is imperative 

that RC combat engineer battalions be included in contingency planning by assigning areas of operation, anticipated missions, and a unit to support. 

ONCE HE HAS a contingency mission, the commander can tailor his command post and field training 

exercises to the characteristics of the contingency area. 

Engineers and the supported unit can exchange standing 

operating procedures, maps, and terrain studies. The 

contingency mission forms the basis for a critical ARTEP 

task list, which, in turn, becomes the foundation of the 

yearly training program. Subsequently, the commander 

can determine from the ARTEP task list which combat 

engineer Soldiers Manual tasks are most critical to accomplishing ARTEP tasks and he can devise meaningful 

individual training programs. 

Under present conditions, Reserve Components 

engineer battalions are required to perform too many individual and unit tasks. By the exclusion of these units 

from contingency planning, commanders are forced to 

speculate on which tasks are most critical. A solution to 

the dilemma is to give each battalion a mission to train 

toward. 

The end result will be a combat ready unit capable of 

early deployment to one specific locale, rather than a 

poorly trained battalion requiring extensive postmobilization training before deploying anywhere. 

As General Bernard W. Rogers, Army Chief of Staff, 

stated two years ago, "The mission of today' s Total Army 

is to maintain a state of readiness which provides an effective deterrent to aggression and which assures our 

ability to fight and win should deterrence fail." 

Lieutenant Colonel Ev erett R. Thomas was the Engineer 

Team Chief. Readiness Group . Fort Knox when he wrote this 

article as a requirement of the Command and General Staff 

College correspo ndence course. 

19 
The''lithfin Filfh"
 

in 

REFORGER 79
 

by MAJ Ronald D. Laux 

REFORGER 79 for the Fifth Engineer Battalion 

began with a " duffel bag drag " during the early 

morning hour s of 12 January 1979. The day began 

with an organized outprocess consisting of thirteen 

point s where personnel filled out mail cards and 

baggage tags, weighed baggage , received briefings, 

and bid farewell to their friend s and families. 

The first flight departed at 2230 hours 13 

January from Scott Air Force Base in 3D-MPH 

winds and a -23 0 wind chill factor. The second 

flight departed under slightly worse conditions at 

0230 hours 14 Janua ry and subsequent flights 

departed on schedlule. After refueling at McGuire 

Air Force Base, the journey resumed and 13 hours 

later the " Fightin Fifth" had landed at Ramstein 

Air Force Base, Germany. 

As part of the REFORGER exercise, the Sth 

Engineer Battalion was scheduled to move to 

Miesau , where it would draw its ent ire supply of 

trucks, equipment, tools, tents , etc .. in a nighttime 

issue from the 6th Combat Equipment Company 

(CEGE). It turned out to be one of the greatest 

challenges the battalion ha s ever faced. Working 

outside in severe weather conditions, jump-starting 

and repairing a high percentage of dump trucks, 

and moving all equipment to an unu sed snowcovered aut obahn strip shared by five other units 

would have caused a less disciplined unit to succumb . But personnel of the Fifth Battalion met the 

EDITOR 'S NOTE: This articl e does not atte mpt to 

pres ent a complete overview of REFORGER 79, 

nor of a p arti cular FTX. Rather. it is int ended 

merely as a first-hand description of one CONUSbased engineer unit's participation in an alm ost ) 

unique Wint er exercise. Hop efully , oth er units will 

benefit f rom th e 5th Engineer Battalion's experienc e and lessons learn ed. 

20 FALL 1979 
challenge head on, stuck together, and accomplished the task despite little or no sleep since 

their departure from CONUS. 

The battalion was required to inventory and 

issue the consolidated property to each company 

within the next 72 hours. This was no simple task! 

The battalion S-4, who was the proud new owner of 

$6 million in equipment, had to redistribute it. The 

task could be accomplished only by finding an area 

large enough to off-load an entire engineer battalion and reissue in company quantities. 

A reconnaissance was made and the Air Force's 

86th Tactical Fighter Wing provided assistance in 

the form of a large open area next to the taxiway at 

Ramstein Air Force Base . Having never seen an entire combat engineer battalion spread out, the Air 

Force soon realized that the equipment could not 

remain in place with jet fighters preparing for 

takeoff within 100 feet of our dozers and trucks. 

ONCE AGAIN the battalion was required to 

relocate before final inventories and property issues 

could be completed. On 22 January, the battalion 

received movement orders to begin its long road 

march to the exercise area. The two-day road 

march to Illesheim (the Major Unit Assembly 

Area) went well with only a small percentage of 

equipment requiring recovery. Excellent support 

was provided in route by the 21st Support Command military police and the 5th Maintenance 

Company. 

At Illesheim, a base camp was erected and considerable maintenance effort was applied to all 

equipment to ensure its readiness for FTX "Certain Sentinel." At this point, the Fightin Fifth had 

its first opportunity to fully equip for combat. The 

five Milvans and the mobile TOC which were ship- Ready and waiting at Scott Air Force Base hanger 

Boarding C·141 at Scott for departure to Germany 

ENGINEER 21 
••• 

x 

ped from Texas in mid-December were unloaded at 

the MUAA. Delays due to storms and off-loading 

of the 2d Brigade, Ist Cavalry Division , further 

delayed receipt of the battalion NAP (Not 

Authorized Preposition) equipment until after the 

MUAA. 

Essential items such as tow bars, which were not 

issued from POMCUS stocks, were not available 

immediately upon arrival in Germany and this 

severely hampered recovery during movement to 

the MUAA. Radios, batteries, field desks, repair 

parts, SSSC items, locks, and tools were among the 

other items being shipped in the Milvans, At one 

point in time, a personal reconnaissance was made 

by the battalion commander, 5-3, and 5-4 to locate 

the Milvans at the railhead. 

AT ILLESHEIM, units rapidly configured into 

combat ready units and prepared to link up with 

1st Infantry and 1st Cavalry units. Extensive coordination was made with the 7th Engineer Brigade, 

the 1st Infantry Division, the DRS Brigade from 

the 1st Cavalry Division and all service support 

units. During this period, obstacle plans were 

reviewed and engineer support roles finalized . 

Blue Forces included the 1st Infantry Division 

with a front consisting of five brigades on line with 

the 2d ACR as the covering force and the 3d 

Brigade. 1st Infantry Division (Forward) in 

reserve. 

The 1st Engineer Battalion provided direct support to its normally associated brigades with D/l 

supporting the 1-4 Cavalry on the west flank. 

B/8th Engineer Battalion, a S-platoon engineer 

company, was to provide organic support to the 2d 

Bde, l st Cavalry Division. The 5th Engineer Battalion was placed in a direct support role and was 

utilized as follows: 

A and D companies with a forward TAC CP, 

formed an engineer task force in the 1st Cavalry 

area. B Company was in Direct Support to the 1st 

Brigade, 1st Infantry. C Company participated in 

the interoperability training with the 14th Panzer 

Brigade and its engineer company, the 140th 

Pioneer Company. For the first two days of the exENGINEER ORGANIZATION IN 1ST INFANTRY DIVISION AREA OF OPERATIONS
 

°mJ]
 

,. < • 

U 

.,­

'[fll]
 

3[]!j]C/5 

X X 

UJ 

'40uDJRG '11!1l'
 

C"I1!1l' {rn}

X 

N <:> o, co -cr N -

'I:rh.l'
 

XTAC CP 

UJ U c» 

co ::::. 

N -

X
 

'O!ll'
 

m~Hm51 oIiJ m
 '
 

5 

m15 HOI II 

"hr." I
 

22 FALL 1979 
ercise, the 3d platoon of Company C was in Direct 

Support of the 2d Brigade, Ist Infantry. Attached 

to the Sth Engineer Battalion was the 38th Medium 

Girder Bridge Company. The S02d Ribbon 

Brigade Company and E Company of the 10th 

Engineer Battalion remained in General Support 

under 7th Engineer Brigade control. Covering 

force engineer support was provided by the 82d 

Engineer Battalion. 

As time for the exercise approached, line units of 

the 5th Engineer Battalion moved out to link up 

with assigned units. The battalion moved to a 

wooded hilltop south of Illesheirn and prepared for 

the war. As the threat of Orange Forces activity 

became more apparent, certain preparation actions were permitted and Class V was drawn from 

PSPs and ASPs. To accomplish this ammunition 

haul without assistance would have been extremely 

difficult, since most vehicles were squad dump 

trucks. 

THEREFORE, a decision was made to ground 

the bridge from the 38th MGB Company and use 

its trucks for hauling all Class V to support the 

engineer task force in the 1st Cavalry sector. All 

other units were receiving ammunition from the 

brigades they were supporting. The trade off of 

grounding the bridge for Class V haul proved successful. As soon as sufficient Class V was prestockcd forward to support obstacle plans, one set of 

MGB was uploaded for a quick response to any 

bridge mission while the 2d platoon of the 38th 

MGB Company continued Class V resupply. 

The actual start of the FTX for engineers began 

prior to the Orange Force attack. The 5th 

Engineers, as well as all other engineers, were actively involved in obstacle preparation to support 

the Blue Force defensive phase of "Certain Sentinal, .. 

However, complications including extensive 

delays in shipping 1st Cavalry Division equipment 

to the port of embarkation, improper rail loading 

for shipment to VII Corps, and lack of unit integrity in rail shipments, caused significant delays for 

the l st Cav and organic engineers. These problems 

caused the eastern flank to be insufficiently equipped and manned to defend against Orange Forces, 

which were familiar with the terrain and already 

had units deployed and poised for the attack. 

Due to the late arrival of the 2d Bde, 1st Cav 

Div, the 5th Engineer Battalion task force found 

itself forward of the FEBA emplacing obstacles in 

the first belt, a zone previously assigned to B/8th 

Engineers. 

Working around the clock, engineers placed 90 

unexecuted obstacles in the 1st Cay sector prior to 

ENGINEER 

--"-~.'"'I<

Movement by autobahn to MUAA 

LT Mark Setman of A Company stocks up on c -restone 

LTC Atkinson (Jeft) briefs BG Watts, the acting C G of the 

21st Support Command, and MAJ Newman, commander of 

the 6th CEGE Company 

23 
the Orange Forces breakthrough . Similar numbers 

of obstacles were emplaced in other sectors. The 

Fightin Fifth and other Direct Support engineers 

conceived a good scheme for delaying the Orange 

Forces. 

However, a major problem in execution surfaced 

which proved to be a serious training deficiency. 

Although 90 obstacles were prepared in the 1st Cav 

Sector, only a very small fraction were ever turned 

over to 1st Cav maneuver units. Among those turned over, only about 10 percent were executed. 

This serious problem in target turnover and 

target execution, combined with the late arrival of 

the 1st Cavalry DRS brigade, left the eastern flank 

extremely vulnerable to Orange Force penetration. 

The 5th Engineer Battalion task force found itself 

being rapidly attrited due to the requirement to 

guard unexecuted targets after emplacement. This 

prevented the emplacement of obstacles in depth as 

previously planned. 

Therefore, Orange Forces faced a thin belt of 

unexecuted obstacles with a partially effective 

maneuver brigade to defend in zone. Th Orange 

thrust consisted of a diversionary attack in the 

west, followed by a withdrawal and night rail move 

to the east flank where the major attack took place 

with Highway 470 being the main axis of advance. 

Compounding the problem was the fact that the 

main Orange advance (Hwy 470) fell upon the 

boundary line between the DRS brigade and the 

1st Bde, 1st Infantry. As a result, Orange penetration was rapid and almost unobstructed. The third 

day of the exercise found A Co, 5th Engineer Battalion and four tanks against the Orange thrust 

spearheaded by an arm ored brigade. A day later, A 

Company was reconstituted and back in the exercise. 

AS A RESULT of the rapid Orange Forces advance , Blue Forces on the eastern flank were continuously withdrawing and fighting a delaying action in order to shift forces to blunt the Orange 

penetration. The Sth Engineer Battalion TAC CP 

relocated five times to remain with the DRS 

Brigade headquarters and the Sth's main CP 

relocated three times. 

The FEB A was held in sector by the 14th Panzer 

Brigade, which refused to yield ground or accept 

penetration. Problems of target turnover and 

target execution did not exist in the 14th Panzer 

Brigade. Obstacles were planned well in advance. 

Like clockwork, the maneuver unit shows up, takes 

over the targets from the engineers, and executes 

them when the maneuver plan calls for execution. 

The associations of C Company, Sth Engineer Battalion, and the 140th Pioneer Company resulted in 

excellent interoperability training. 

Command and control for interoperability training was a problem for two reasons. First, Company 

C mounted German APCs in order to keep up with 

the battle. Second, German communications docEngineer equipment being moved through narrow German streets 

24 FALL 1979 
trine prohibits any radio transmission until enemy 

contact is made. All panzer transmissions were 

sent by messenger. The first instructions received 

by C Company from the panzer brigade commander were "under no circumstances will you 

transmit on radios." 

Radio communications for the entire exercise 

were a problem due to limited FM range, areas of 

radio dead space, shortages of secure voice equipment, shortages of allocated frequencies, and the 

requirement to operate more nets than organic 

radio assets allowed . 

Movement was also a problem. Fifth Engineer 

units soon found that while moving through a German town on a narrow street, an oncoming Blue or 

Orange force could be coming toward them on the 

same street. Movement showed a lack of training in 

reading and understanding bridge classifications. 

At times, M60 tanks were seen crossing class 20 or 

smaller bridges. At the beginning of the exercise, B 

Co, 5th Engineers did considerable bridge recon 

and classification to support maneuver units. 

By 3 February, Orange Forces had penetrated 

deep into the Blue Force zone and it was time to 

reorganize and conduct the Blue Force attack 

phase of "Certain Sentinel." However, a sudden 

thaw caused soft, muddy ground conditions which 

resulted in subsequent extensive maneuver damage 

to the German countryside. As a result, the decision was made to terminate the exercise, leaving 

the 5th Engineer Battalion with five additional 

days to plan for training. 

The commander of the 7th Engineer Brigade, 

who was on top of every aspect of engineer support 

throughout the exercise, anticipated the problem 

and had all player units prepare a training 

schedule to productively utilize the unscheduled 

time previously planned for the Blue offensive 

phase . 

THE FIGHTING FIFTH seized the opportunity 

to train all units on German prechambered targets 

and to conduct Medium Girder Bridge training. 

Both the "Fighting Fifth" and the 38th MGB Company were determined to do some unique MGB 

bridge training. The decision was made to construct a class 60 double story MGB and airlift it into position. It would be the first time that the MGB 

was emplaced by helicopter. 

The Sth Engineer Battalion planned the exercise 

using the I1Iesheim training area. Coordination 

with VII Corps aviators produced three CH47 

Chinook aircraft for the exercise (one for bridge 

lift, one for deck filler panels, and one for troop 

transport). 

The next morning, the 38th MGB Company 

ENGINEER 

.,
 

,: .. ,~ .~.
 ""

Chinook being hooked to MGB deck filler panels 

established two training sites at Illesheim. The 82d 

Engineer Battalion would train at the first site and 

the proposed airlift construction would take place 

at the second site. Because of an excess of 82d 

Engineer Battalion personnel, a decision was made 

to have A Company/5th Battalion and the 82nd 

jointly construct the double story MGB to be 

airlifted. The bridge was constructed, less deck 

filler panels, and the pathfinders were brought in 

to rig it. 

The bridge weighed 19,500 pounds with the 

Chinook having a maximum lift capacity, with considerable fuel trade-off, of 20,000 pounds. The 

MGB was located three kilometers from the gap. 

The Chinook lowered into position and hooked onto the bridge. The MGB lifted slowly and was carried to its destination where troops slowly moved it 

into position. This exercise provided excellent 

training and proved the feasibility of airlifting a 60' 

MGB. 

During this training period, the 5th Battalion 

regrouped , recovered deadlined equipment, performed extensive maintenance , and prepared for 

2S 
Personnel of the 5th and 82nd Engineer Battalions 

construct MGB during training phase 

the move to Aschaffenburg, where the 9th 

Engineer Battalion and the Aschaffenburg com ­

munity would host the Sth Engineer Battalion 

cleanup operation. After the road march to 

"A- burg," the 5th spent five days cleaning, inventorying equipment, and packing Milvans for shipment home . 

A very intensified customs inspection was made 

of all equipment loaded in the Milvans for ship ­

ment back to the States, with special attention to 

cleanliness of all equipment. The time at "A-burg" 

gave the Fighting Fifth its first opportunity to sleep 

and live in a garrison environment after 28 harsh 

days of winter bivouac conditions. 

On 16 February, the battalion moved back to 

Miesau to turn -in POMCUS equipment. An agreement was made to turn in by company sets to avoid 

reconfiguring everything back into a battaIIion set. 

The plan worked exceptionally well, with each unit 

tasked to provide support for a major phase of the 

turn-in maintenance operation. The task was to 

clean , service, inventory. inspect, and repair all 

equipment and sets in four days . The Fighting 

Fifth met the challenge and accomplished it with 

tremendous success. 

After turn-in was completed, Sth Engineer personnel were rewarded with four days of relaxation, 

which included tours to Paris, Luxemburg, Verdun, and Germany. On 26 February, the troops 

resumed final preparations for customs inspections 

and redeployment. Personnel received the most extensive customs inspections immaginable and 

departed for home on 27 and 28 February by commercial aircraft. 

LESSONS LEARNED 

Engineer battalions , as well as maneuver battalions, must have their equipment stocks upgraded . One-half of all dump trucks issued were M-51 

gasoline engine trucks averaging 17 yea rs of age. 

Although they were practically " new" from lack of 

use, parts for these obsolete model s were not 

available. 

None of the dump tru cks were issued with canvas. Had it not been for canvas provided by the 7th 

Engineer Brigad e, cold injuries would have been a 

serious problem. Several trucks did not have 

heaters which are essential for defrosting wind ­

shields . Tool kits, sets, and outfits must be properly inventoried by current SCs. Fuel tankers as well 

as fuel trucks must be topped off at issue . The majority of radios were inoperable due to missing 

components and vehicle installation kits. 

No longer can the traditional engin eer workline 

be employed between divisions and corps units in a 

Direct Support role . Engineers must work in 

bounds. For example, the division would put in the 

first belt of obstacles and the corps battalion would 

put in the second belt. Division engineers would 

then bound behind the corps unit and put in th e 

third belt of obstacles in depth. 

This concept requires the same mobility for 

corps engi neers as division engineers. When the artillery calls for reinforcement, a like mobile unit 

moves up; the engineers must follow the same principle. Corps engineers mus t be track-mounted with 

like equipment. However, they also need dump 

trucks for class IV and V transport and accomplishment of standard engineering tasks. 

III
 

Ma jor Laux was the 5-3 of the 5th E ngineer Battalion 

during the Winter REFORGER 79. 

26 FALL 1979 
Selling Engineer Capability
 

by MAJ V. Paul Baerman 

THE MANEUVER commander on toda y's battlefield 

has a vast quantity of combat power at his call. In addition to the correct employment of his dire ct and indirect 

fire weaponry, he can effectively increase his combat 

power with a variety of combat multipliers, such as 

smoke and electronic warfare. 

One of the most useful combat multipliers is terrain 

reinforcement, done either by the maneuver unit alone 

or, most profitably, in conjunction with supporting 

engineers. However, its usefulness is directly proportional to the maneuver unit's ability to understand and 

apply terrain reinforcement measures. While it is incumbent on the maneuver commander to understand terrain 

reinforcement and its contribution to combat power, it is 

also the engineer's job to increase awareness of terrain 

reinforcement operations. 

Terrain reinforcement (TR) operations are simply 

those measures that degrade enemy mobility and improve friendly survivability. To be effective, those operations require a fully developed coordination/partnership 

role between engineer and maneuver unit. Obviously, the 

maneuver commander must perform terrain analysis to 

have a good knowledge of the ground on which he will be 

operating. 

THERE ARE a number of techniques which engineers 

can use to demonstrate the value of TR operations to 

maneuver commanders. This article examines those 

techniques from the viewpoint of a maneuver arms officer , with the goal of contributing to his awareness of 

TR operations. 

Probably the most important step to keeping 

maneuver units in tune with TR operations is the 

establishment of a firm unit-to-unit relationship. 

Obstacles to the formation of such a relationship are 

many, but it is essential that these obstacles be overcome. The maneuver unit only appreciates other 

members of the combined arms team to the extent that 

those members are known and available. Ways to foster 

the unit relationship include the mutual exchange and 

review of training schedules, field training exercises, and 

classroom instruction. 

ENGINEER 

to the 

Maneuver 

Commander 

If a maneuver brigade habitually receives the training 

schedules of each company of the engineer battalion, 

then the company commanders within the engineer battalion should also have access to the brigade's training 

schedules. Each engineer company commander's platoons should also receive the training schedules of the 

battalion which it habitually supports. The engineer platoon leader should review the schedule to determine if he 

can offer assistance with that battalion's training . After a 

period of time, the battalion should be aware that an 

engineer is part of the team, willing to assist. 

Likewise, the engineer would be smart to send his 

company training schedule to the Brigade 5-3 if there is 

training being conducted in which units of brigade could 

participate. To promote the unit-to-unit relationship , the 

engineer has to "sell" himself and his product. Regular, 

personal visits by engineer platoon leaders and company 

commanders also go far in promoting their "product" 

and improving training schedule interaction. 

MANEUVER UNIT exercises should include engineer 

support or expertise. Of course, the Field Training Exercise (FTX) is the most obvious example, but there are 

numerous other opportunities for engineer support or expertise-Command Post Exercises (CPXs) , war 

games/ simulations, sand table , training exercises 

without troops (TEWTS), terrain walks, etc. TEWTS 

and terrain walks offer particularly good opportunities 

for the engineer to assist and foster knowledge of 

engineer capabilities. 

27 
Claymore mine being set on live-fire range at Fort Carson 

TEWTS are generally low-key exercises that offer ample time for interchange of ideas, impromptu classes, 

and understanding of each other's jobs. At some time 

during these activities, the engineer should be explicit in 

pointing out where he cannot help and where the 

maneuver commander must help himself. Engineer expertise does not necessarily mean officer presence. 

In many cases, lower ranking, knowledgeable 

engineers might prove more worthwhile, e.g., a D-? 

operator talking to a maneuver platoon leader. In particular, the engineer should stress those items which he 

considers in an engineer reconnaissance. 

OFFICER AND NCO classes also present opportunities to promote unit relationships. Again, it is a matter of the engineer forcefully "selling" himself and his 

product. There is enough change in engineer doctrine, 

when coupled with maneuver doctrine changes, to accommodate numerous engineer presentations to unit officers and NCOs in a classroom environment. 

An additional opportunity for promoting unit relationships occurs when the brigade engineer and his subordinates participate in unit social functions. 

But there is probably no better place to establish the 

capabilities of TR than during training. Here. the 

engineer can offer his expertise to train individuals or he 

can offer training tips to the maneuver unit commander. ':\ 

Many basic TR tasks are included in maneuver unit ) 

Soldiers Manuals and Skills Qualification Tests . A unit 

can save valuable time by "packaging" hands-on training in kit form. One kit might come in a footlocker-size 

container and deal exclusively with the unit's authorized 

mines. The kit would include all the mock-up mines 

(from TASC). any graphic training aids (to be handed 

out to the troops), plus laminated cards on which instructions for emplacement and retrieval of each type of 

mine are included. 

Kits can be used at small unit level during slack time 

(e.g. , in the motor pool). for regular training periods. as
 

concurrent training, or for inclusion in inclement
 

weather schedules. Because kits are pre-packaged, they
 

can be used quickly and with little advance preparation.
 

Other similarly designed kits could cover such subjects as
 

troop-emplaced obstacles (fougasse, ctc.), demolitions,
 

and booby traps.
 

RANGE TRAINING should be conducted with an eye 

to maximizing the potential of the range. By coordinating with the appropriate range authorities. units 

can conduct interesting, realistic TR training while on 

another type range . 

How many times have you seen troops bored to death 

with concurrent training. such as weapons assembly / 

disassembly. while waiting to fire or awaiting transportation? Spice up their life a bit-let them fire a claymore, 

Destroying a mine in place with C-4 

28 FALL 1979 
or prepare and set off a demolitions charge, or build a 

flame mine. Its guaranteed to keep their interest and 

avoid training doldrums. The engineer can provide the 

expertise to start this training and , at the same time, to 

get across the importance of TR operations. 

There are a number of easy ways, while in the field, to 

increase the maneuver commander's awareness of the 

use of obstacles and the effectiveness of terrain reinforcement. Many of these ideas utilize soldier ingenuity and 

promote the kind of thinking that will help overcome the 

odds we might be faced with on the European battlefield. 

Here are some examples: 

• Since mines are difficult to portray in the field 

.( 

I 

(unless you use TASC mock-ups which must be accounted for and cost money) , take scrap 2x4 lumber and 

cut it into 6-inch lengths. Paint the resulting blocks blue 

and stencil the word "MINE" on top and bottom. 

Several hundred of these can be made up and issued for 

field training. If some are lost , it doesn't really matter. 

Scattered throughout an avenue of approach , these 

dummy mines force an attacker to perform some sort of 

mine-clearing action . To make the situation more interesting. bury a tear gas grenade (with pin pulled) in the 

ground and put a block on top of the grenade spoon. 

Anyone who comes along and kicks or lifts the dummy 

mine will set off the tear gas. It is called mine awareness 

and causes the attacker to slow down and be more 

careful when he encounters "blocks" the next time. 

• CS/smoke grenades with pins pulled and buried in 

a road obstacle will definitely slow the CEV/ tank dozer 

crew that pushes down the obstacle and sets off the 

grenades. They will also be more careful at the next 

obstacle. 

• CS powder and /or pellets can be used to increase 

the value ofless substantial obstacles by creating confussian or more difficult working conditions. How do you 

disseminate the CS? Tie or tape a baggie, with CS 

ENGINEER 

powder or pellets inside, to every smoke grenade or 

smoke pot. No matter what color smoke, one whiff ofthe 

burning CS and masking procedures will slow everybody 

and make them more wary. 

• TR operations also include survivability of the 

friendly force. Survivability not only includes digging in 

personnel and equipment, but deceptive measures to increase the lifespan or usefulness of fortifications. The 

TOW and Dragon are crucial antitank weapons that 

must be protected. If you've had that maneuver unit out 

with their claymores. suggest splicing several strands of 

used claymore wire together and wire a TOW M-80 blast 

simulator to the ends of the claymore wire, setting the enBangalore torpedo set to fire 

tire device off with the claymore "clacker." Voila! 

They've duplicated the signature of the antitank missile 

firing without giving away their position. 

Such actions will increase the value of obstacles and, 

more importantly, increase the maneuver unit's interest 

in TR planning. "Tricks of the trade" of this sort allowed 

an armored cavalry platoon scout section, ably supported 

by engineers, to bottle up a mechanized infantry battalion for more than four hours in one recent exercise. 

And the scouts and engineers thoroughly enjoyed 

themselves! 

These are just a few of the methods by which engineers 

can better sell their product to maneuver commanders 

and make the combined arms team more effective. The 

more aware that the maneuver commander is of his 

engineer assets and their capabilities. the better off he 

and his engineer partner and their soldiers will be . 

Major Boerman. is an Armor officer who wrote this article 

while att ending th e Command and General Staff College. 

Previous assignments ha ve included com m and of a tank company and armored cavalry troop. and assignments as a battalion . brigade. and squadron 5-3. 

29 
by LTe Jerry A. Hubbard and MAJ John R. Mullans 

PROPER terrain reinforcement is critical in our 

preparations to tight and win a no-notice defensive battle 

against forces vastly superior in numbers of personnel , 

tanks, and artillery. Terrain reinforcement is not the exclusive domain of the engineer soldier , but a result of the 

combined efforts of all forces on the battlefield. At every 

level tactical commanders must consider and implement 

those terrain reinforcing actions which will best support 

his overall tactical plans. 

The 1973 Arab- Israeli War saw the re-emergence of an 

ancient terrain reinforcement concept in defensive operations-the barrier ditch. Using antitank ditches supported by minefields, the Israeli Defense Force in the 

Golan Heights defeated an attacking Syrian force which 

enjoyed an overall 4 to 1 superiority in tanks and a 10 to 1 

advantage in artillery. The Syrian s were required to use 

armored dozers and armored vehicle launched bridges 

30 

for breaching, thereby preventing a rapid advance and 

channeling them into predetermined kill zones. 

On today's battlefield, characterized by speed and 

mobility of forces and lethality of weapons systems, the 

antitank ditch is a valuable terrain reinforcer . The introduction of the antitank guided missile (ATG M) has 

greatly increased the ability of infantry to destroy tanks 

and is extremely valuable in overcoming the NATO 

disadvantage in numbers of armored vehicles. The antitank ditch stops a tank for two to five minutes, exposes 

lightly armored portions of the vehicle, and places its 

weapons systems in an ineffective attitude. It sets him up 

for the kill. 

In 1976, the 94th Engineer Combat Battalion (Heavy) 

conducted a series of tests to examine the effectiveness of 

the antitank ditch as a barrier to armored vehicle movement, and to determine the capabilities of engineer 

FALL 1979 
equipment to construct tan k ditches. These results were 

discussed in the art icle, "A nti-tank Ditches ", by LTC 

Frederick A. Perrenot in the January' March 1977 issue 

of TH E ENGI NEER and are summarized in Figures t 

and 2. 

DELAY TIME VS. DEPTH 

THESE TESTS developed equipment combinations 

which could operate effectively as a tank ditch team. 

They also determined the maintenance support required 

to keep the tea m operating. The term Tan k Ditch Team 

(TOT) represents the optimum mix of equipment which , 

operating inde pen dently as a unit, can efficiently construct ta nk ditches. Optimum teams consist of two 

dozers, a dozer and front end loader, and three each 290 

rubber-tired tractors with scrapers, with either an additional tractor or dozer as a pusher. 

The 94th Engineer Combat Batt alion (Heavy), after 

reviewing missions, capabilities, and equipment assets, 

developed a self sup porting element cap able of tank ditching. This element, referred to as the Tank Ditch Element (TOE), un derwent severa l changes in composition 

and capability after strictly in-house engineer review. 

However, the battalion had never before had the opportunity to review the concep ts in a combined arms exercise. FTX Certain Shield (Reforger 78) proved to be the 

ideal opportunity to check and revise the original 

organizational concepts. 

The 94th is organized with a Headquarters and Headquarters Company , an Engineer Eq uip m en t 

Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 Comp any (Company A), and three Combat 

TIME IN MINUTES Engineer Companies (Companies B, C, and 0 ). For FTX 

Certain Shield, the battalion deployed in General Sup­ NOT E: TIME IN MI NUTES FOR A TANK TO ATTAC K 

port of V Corps with two companies providing engineer ACROSS A DITC H OF VARYING DEPTH 

suppo rt on an area basis to the rear of the brigade rear 

boundary, one company providing the comman d and 

control element , and the majority of personnel an d FIGURE 1 

TANK DITCH CAPA BILITY OF ENGINEER COMBAT BATTALION (HEAVY) 

1.8 

0 e;,~~ ,,­ 1.6 ~"r;.:.~/

:,/' 

c--'" ~,:\(j. /'" 

~/~

1.4 V,...... .. 10" -p._Cl--­ a'! 

/) G\.l\.P­ p.E.CiP-~

1.2 

I /

II 1.0 /I 

.8 

NOTE: 

"

DATA IS FOR M·60 TANK

I I I o 

NUMBER OF TEAMS BY TYPE" 

SAND CLAY 

HO URLY RATE 

Eachlearn 

DAILY RATE" 

Allium: 

HOUR LY RATE 

Each learl 

DAILY RATE" 

All teans (.. olers lhour ) IKmldayl (" elersill our) IK.. / 6ay} 

3 SCRAPER TEA MS 

fea~ teall inchdes ."rae tractors wltll $cr3pers and one (fa ctor without SCl3pf:f) ,OO /hou, 0.1 .3.20 . 

6 K.. / day 125 m/h' .125 . 3 > 20 -

1.5 Km/day 

5 DOZE R TEAMS 

jaach teall Includes twooozert; 100/ bour 0.1 15 I 20 = 

10 K.. / Iliy 80 .. / tv 0.08 I 5 • 20 " 

8.0 K.. / ooy 

INCREASE IF SCOOP LOADERS TEAM ED 

WITH DOn'lS' " 

(thief: addUionalleans) 

(100 ) 0.113.20 = 

(61 (80 i a.os 13 .20 = 14.8) 

TOTAL BATTALION CAPABILITY 200 meters /houl 

(3001 

16.0 Km/day 

(22.0) 

205 mIll< 

(2851 

15.5 Km/day 

(2031 

"E yp eClf! d ;}VJlltl l..'I /I! y fale! 29 0 r,ac tor -67'}'o O<:ue(s-·80\ SCOOT) 

LO (j p.r.~ -50\
 

.~ 20-!1c ur C Olli,') ;;! D ft y 4. 1l()U / S maUHenatl ce
 

••• Thl," Aqu /pmenr ml q ht be r'F.t be t/s ,.,d In d,ggtnq !'j ~nSl lie PO$lf IO/15
 

N OT E: a' WIll ",ary ?cc.ordmc; '0 1Nf'i11JJ e,' d l'let o;OI/ (:(u 1d",on s
 FIGURE 2 

ENGINEER 31 
Cross -section of finished anti·tank ditch 

equipment for the Tank Ditch Element (TDE). The 

organization of the TDE as it deployed is shown at 

Figure 3. 

The 94th was the only General Support engineer battalion available to V Corps during FTX Certain Shield. 

In order to best use its capabilities, the Corps Engineer 

used the 94th only in support of defensive operations. 

Therefore, during the first half of the exercise, the battalion supported the Blue Force while it was on the 

defensive and then was inserted in support of the Orange 

forces as they reverted from the offense to defense. 

ON THE BLUE side , the TDE was placed in direct 

support of A Company, 7th Engineer Battalion, supporting th e 1st Brigade, 5th Infantry Division 

(Mechanized). The brigade commander, with his 

engineer advisors, developed a terrain reinforcing plan to 

support his overall tactical plan for defense in the main 

battle area. The covering force battle enabled the terrain 

reinforcement, approximately 20 kilometers to the rear 

of the initial line of contact, to proceed without enemy 

disruption. The battalion was credited by the umpires 

with completion of 15 ditches totaling over 14 kilometers 

in length . 

At this point, it is necessary to explain the realities of 

operations on such a large scale as FTX Certain Shield. 

Maneuver damage and environmental protection considerations precluded the actual digging of antitank ditches. Umpires credited the Tank Ditch Teams with completion of 80 meters of tank ditch per hour once they arrived and sited their equipment at the ditch location. 

All five Tank Ditch Teams worked in the 1st Brigade 

area. The Tank Ditch Element was responsible for providing administrative and logistical support to the teams. 

The teams themselves , each under the leadership of an 

E-S or E-6 NCO, received their movement and digging 

instructions directly from the 7th Engineer Battalion Platoon Leader coordinating the work in that sector. Teams 

were spread across a front of about 15 kilometers and 

were constantly being moved to new locations. The 

primary concern of the headquarters and operations sections of the TDE were locating teams and providing them 

with mess, maintenance, fuel, and administrative support. The difficulties encountered in providing hot meals 

for the exercise could not be completely overcome and 

Cvrations often had to be substituted. 

Since the equipment was not actually digging and no 

maintenance or battle damage play was inserted by the 

umpires, the utilization of maintenance and repair parts 

32 FALL 1979 
personnel and supply channels was not exercised. 

The value of tank ditches was summarized by Colonel 

Stephen R. Pawlik , Commander of the 1st Brigade , 5th 

Infantry Division (Mechanized): "tank ditches, as part 

of the obstacle and denial plan, proved to be an important and significant reason that the opposing forces 

could not penetrate the brigade defense." 

DURING the middle weekend of the FTX , as the roles 

of the opposing forces were reversed, the battalion was 

withdrawn as the Corps General Support Battalion working directly for the l30th Engineer's Blue control element 

and was placed in Direct Support of the 23rd Engineer 

Battalion, divisional engineer battalion of the 3rd Armored Division. The TDE, augmented by one additional 

dozer team, was then attached to the 23rd with the teams 

further attached to the division engineer companies supporting brigades across the 60 kilometer front (Fig. 3). 

This wide separation made their attachment to the supported companies mandatory. However, only the 

maintenance section of the TDE had the necessary repair 

parts and trained mechanics to perform maintenance on 

the heavy engineer equipment. 

The weather, which had been relatively good the first 

week, turned rainy with reduced visibility as the Orange 

defense began. Safety became a paramount concern in 

moving teams of oversized equipment on the small 

crowded German secondary roads. 

Where Blue force had fought a covering force battle to 

provide time to prepare the defense of the ma in battle 

area, the Orange force defcnded against the counterattack in their most forward positions. The tank ditch 

teams were directed to dig their ditches in or near the line 

of contact. Because of the rapid advance of the Blue 

forces and the low mobility level of the TDTs, they were 

repeatedly overrun. On one occasion , a team on its way 

to a proposed ditch location in the forward area was captured by Blue forces. The completion of only five ditches 

totaling four kilometers was the result of the attempt to 

dig far forward in the battle area. 

Several major problem areas in the control and administration of the TOE surfaced during the exercise. 

Some have been addressed by the battalion, while others 

involve fundamental problems which must be addressed 

in the larger context of basic missions and equipment of 

the combat heavy battalion . 

The lack of communications was the major problem 

encountered. The problem resulted first due to the lack 

of a central point of contact at the tactical brigade level. 

and second , due to the lack of radios and the resulting 

inability to communicate with TDTs on the rapidly 

changing battlefield. The combat heavy battalion does 

not have the organi c communications equipment to support decentralized , modular employment of its assets. 

ENGINEER 

ORGANIZATION OF THE TAN K DITCH ELEM ENT rros) 

1- '29'J WIO SCn A? H I 

2- DOZt:filS 

IO ~9 IO C~ "'F' Fl 1- J90 WiQ scnAP LH 

I - MIiIlO 1 - . ]: 21 TAL l-f. MG 1 M ! ea 

290 IilEP.t.IA PA.'1f 5 IN Yr. !: BATTj, 1I0 N A"l E CQN SOLlD"rJ:D AND SENT WIT t-!i HIS SEC7 10N 

·· D'R!:c r UPP O~ MAl "lTEN /I,"!C E.CO NTACT T~ FROM A COM PI\NV \o\'ERE 'ON CA.LL 

FIGURE 3 

The slow-moving, very vulnerable heavy equipment of 

the combat heavy battalion is not suited to front line 

employment. The TDE must have 24 to 48 hours lead 

time to produce a usable obstacle for the tactical commander. 

THE CONCEPT of forming a special organization to 

control and support tank ditching assumes the team will 

be used in a limited geographical area. Because of unique equipment and the requirement for maintenance 

and repair parts, it is essential that the TDE be provided 

this support in a timely manner. In retrospect, the 

employment of teams across the entire Orange division 

front was unmanageable. Better support could have been 

provided by each parent company controlling its own element from its position in area support to the rear of the 

brigade rear boundary. 

In a wartime situation, support requirements change. 

Since C-rations would be the norm, the need for a mess 

section is obviated . By co-locating the headquarters and 

maintenance elements with the brigade trains of the supported brigade, the requirement for a perimeter security 

force is deleted. The maintenance requirements increase 

with the need for direct support maintenance teams and 

a corresponding array of repair parts. 

With proper employment, the tank ditch capability of 

the Combat Heavy Battalion can provide the decisive 

edge required for victory on the modern battlefield. It 

produces a creditable obstacle without the logistics and 

transport requirements of, for example, a minefield. It 

reinforces the terrain to allow full utilization of both 

direct and indirect fires and provides the tactical commander an important multiplier of his combat power. 

~GA I1 TlONA l.· · 

CC N T" C T '-'A.IN r TEAM 

t.1 ET SECU PI1.,.. 

SU PPLY 

, EM 

B co 

Lieutenant Colonel Jerry A. Hubbard was Com mander ofthe 

94th Engineer Batt alion (Heavy), while Maj or Mullans was th e 

52153 ofthe 941h durin g FTX Certain Shield. REFORGER 78. 

33 
tnginttr tquipmtnt
 

by MAJ Arthur J. Parr, Jr. 

SURELY there is no interested military engineer who 

has not heard of the "ribbon bridge," the Soviet PMP of 

which the U .S . ribbon bridge is an improved versi on. 

This item of equipment, and most other Soviet bridge 

construction and assault crossing equipment items are at 

least recognizable to non-Soviet combat engineers due to 

their size , visual impact, or uniquely Soviet de sign and 

purpose. But what about the less visibly- striking mine 

and countermine warfare equipment, the field fortification equipment. and road con struction equipment? 

While it is easy to stress Soviet equipment for river and 

gap crossings, the frequent result of doing so is th at other 

Soviet engineer items receive bare mention. A comprehensive review of this equipment, besides re-cre ating 

th e existing equipment identification manuals, would 

simply require too much space . 

This article deals with standard equipment items in 

Soviet tank and motorized rifle divisions, stressing certain types which are generally not included in presentations on the Soviet military . Prior generations of equipment continue in use in reduced-readiness ca tegory divisions and non-divisional combat engineer units, so older 

items which retain their importance are included here. 

Soviet equipment design at ion s used here can convey 

meaning to the language-trained analyst to aid in his 

understanding of the role and function of a given equipment item. Much as UET or CEV both designate and , to ) a degree, describe those items of equipment, so also IMR 

(inzhenernaia ma sh ina razgrazhdeniia) designates and 

describes the Soviet "engineer ob stacle-clearing vehicle." 

Unfortunately, not all Soviet designations expand as 

usefully , nor are all the expansions known. 

THE BASIC manual reconnaissance and mine clearing kit K R comprises one sectional mine probe, one fourprong grapple with approximately 50 meters of rope, one 

lot of sm all marking flags, one reel of black/white marking tape , and a pair of wirecutters, Hand-held portable 

mine detectors include the World War II-period VIM 

series, the post-war UMIV/ U MIN type, and the transistorized IMP. 

All are capable of detecting metallic mines or mines 

with metallic components on dry land, at detection 

depths ranging from 35 to 50 centimeters, and (except in 

the case of the UMIV) in water to depths of slightly mo re 

than one meter. For high-speed detection of metal-body 

antitank mines to depths of 25 centimeters, the road induction mine detector DIM/DIM-3 is used. This detector is mounted on a GAZ-69 or UAZ-469 jeep and can 

sweep a 2.2 meter wide strip at speeds up to 10 

kilometers per hour on roads and at lesser speeds crosscountry. 

Mechanical mine cle aring equipment designed to be 

mounted on tanks includes mine rollers, plows . and combination plow-roller sets. The older cross-country mine 

34 FALL 1979 
Road induc tion mine detector (DIM) 

sweepers PT-S4 and PT-SS have now been largely sup ­

planted by the route mine clearers KMT-4 plow and 

KMT-S roller-plow combination. Each KMT-S requires 

a 7.S-ton cargo truck fitted with a special auxiliary crane 

(KM-61) for normal non-operational transport. Each 

roller of the KMT-S sweeps approximately 80 centimeters, while each section of the KMT-4 plows a strip 

approximately 60 centimeters wide. 

EXPLOSIVE mine clearance means include rocket 

propelled line charges and the bangalore-torpedo type 

elongated charge UZ, which may be conformed as single, 

paired, or triple (triangular) charges. Minefields can also 

be cleared by using the charge-emplacing devices SPZ-2, 

SPZ-4 and ITB-2 . The SPZ-2 is a metal-framed guide 

which uses a winch to draw the charge onto the minefield 

from the near edge . The ITB-2 propel s a rocket ­

launched cable and anchor across the minefield, then 

uses a winch or other motive force to draw the charge 

toward the anchor and onto the field. The SPZ-4 appears 

to be the most widely-used device discussed in the 

military journals. It is a fitting which permits a tank to 

push or pull the prepared charge into position on the 

minefield. Rocket-propelled line charges mounted on 

specially-equipped tanks or armored personnel carriers 

are not discussed in Soviet journals and their 

characteristics are uncertain. The demolitions kit used 

with the explosive means above may be designated 

"SMP". 

Mine detection team emplacing marker flags In response to their doctrinal requirement for highspeed emplacement of antitank minefields, the Soviets 

have developed and deployed a number of towed and RECENT articles in the Soviet press (1976) have also 

tracked self-propelled minelayers . Detachable mine discussed locally-developed, non-standard , mechanical 

chutes and the obsolescent PMR-2 trailer may be used by devices for assisting in the emplacement of antipersonnel 

any APe or cargo truck for surface emplacement of an­ mines, and the use of floating or bottom-emplaced antititank mines. With the PMR-3 or PMZ-4 trailers, a four assault mines for riverline or shoreline mining. 

or five-man crew can emplace up to 200 antitank mines. Minelaying devices also may be fitted to helicopters. A 

depending on the carrying capacity of the towing vehicle, special Victory Day film aired on Moscow television in 

on the surface or buried 30-40 centimeters in the ground, May 1978 showed the MI-8 (HIP) helicopter fitted with a 

in less than 20 minutes. The GMZ tracked minelayer new type of minelayer chute. a horizontal "foot" at the 

vehicle with a four-man crew can surfacelay or bury an­ end of the chute to cause antitank mines to fall to the 

titank mines (transport capacity variously estimated at ground with the desired "fuse up" attitude, at a 2-3 

150-200 mines). meter interval. 

ENGINEER 35 
Equipment captained in the pioneer kit includes the 

following: sapper shovel, entrenching tool, pickmattock, carpenter's axe, crow bar or digging bar, 

2-man cross-cut saw, and a tracing cord or tape. 

Mechanical entrenchers and excavators include: the 

BTM-3 high-speed entrenching machine which can dig 

200-300 meters per hour of loS-meter deep trench (maximum capacity: 1120 meters per hour of .8-meter deep 

trench); the PZM regimental digging machine which 

trenches to 1.1 meters deep and excavates weapon or 

vehicle pits to three meters deep at a rate of 100 cubic 

meters per hour; the MDK-2 rotary excavator which excavates 3.S meter-wide pits or trenches, to 3.5 meters 

deep at a rate of 200-300 cubic meters per hour; and the 

E·305V single-bucket excavator which can trench or excavate to 4.1 meters deep at a rate of 50-60 cubic meters 

per hour. 

40. ... ~:

""""f'".., 

+....... 

BTM high-speed entrenching machine 

A WIDE range of prefabricated field fortification 

components are available, including corrugated steel and 

concrete shelter cover, and reinforced straight or curvilinear cardboard sandbags. Fortification is completed 

by the use of MKT-L, -T or -S camouflage sets (twelve 

6x3 meter net panels per set), metallic radio-location 

reflectors OMU, and various mockups and dummy 

equipment. 

Route construction equipment includes: the BATor 

BAT-M road constructor, based on a heavy tracked artillery tractor, which mounts a variable-configuration 

dozer blade and a 2-ton crane in the BAT-M version, 

with a working capacity (depending on the task) of 

120-400 cubic meters per hour, or four to eight 

kilometers per hour of cross-country route; the PKT, 

based on the MAZ-538 wheeled tractor, which can 

prepare graded and crowned cross-country routes at a 

rate of two to th ree kilometers per hou r, or vehicle pits at 

a rate of 800-1000 cubic meters per hour; and various 

types of dump trucks and graders which may be 

available, although engineer road work in divisional 

units would appear to de-emphasize hauling and 

grading. 

Some additional fortification and route construction 

support may be gained from the use of strap-on dozer 

blades for tanks and artillery tractor prime movers . The 

BTU /BUT-55 (bul'dozer tankovyi universal'nyimiltipurpose bulldozer tank) has a working capacity of 

100-200 cubic meters per hour. Its winter counterpart is 

the STU or STU-2M (snegochistitel' tankovyi 

universal'ni-universal tank snowplow). OL-T, OS-T, 

and aT-T dozer blades may be fitted to the AT-L light 

artillery tractor and AT-S medium artillery tractor and 

the AT-T heavy artillery tractor, respectively. Where 

prepared roads or cross-country routes become impassable due to weather or heavy usage, use will be made 

of fascines, corduroy roads, spaced-log roads for tracked 

vehicles, and prefabricated sectional wooden treadway 

blocks or hinged sectional steel treadway mats, where 

available. Prefabricated steel roadway sections are 

known to be available with rear Road Construction 

Troops at higher echelons. There, use or availability in 

engineer units at or below division level is probably quite 

limited, due to simple logistical considerations. 

THE MOST recent addition to the available types of 

road construction and obstacle clearing equipment for 

tactical units is the IMR engineer obstacle-clearing vehicle. This vehicle has a 2-man crew, a mechanic-driver 

and an operator. It is fitted with an extendable hydraulic 

"Manipulator" and a dozer blade. It is used under fire 

for clearing abatis or removing steel or concrete beams 

from collapsed buildings, as well as to assist in tankdozer tasks such as clearing contaminated soil, preparing firebreaks, and light road repair. 

For wet or dry short gaps beyond the capabilities of 

FALL 1979 

, I 

36 
simple expedients, vehicle-mounted bridges are used. 

The obsolescent KMM truck-mounted treadway bridge 

comes in sets of five 7-meter spans with 3.5 meter long 

adjustable trestles (on 4 spans), and may be fully constructed in 30 minutes by a well trained crew. Its carrying 

capacity is 12 tons, its maximum width of span per set is 

34 meters, and it requires a crew of 10 men. The KMM 

has been largely replaced in Soviet forces by the TMM 

heavy truck-mounted bridge, which is issued in sets of 

four 60-ton capacity spans. each 10.2 meters long with 

3-meter adjustable trestles. The full 40-meter bridge requires a crew of 12 and takes 15-30 minutes to emplace. 

Both KMM and TMM may be emplaced underwater, 

with emplacement times increased by one-half. Since 

both KMM and TMM are truck-mounted, MTU tanklaunched bridges are selected for use under enemy fire . 

Both the MTU (T-54 tank , SO-ton capacity) and 

MTU·20 (T-55, 60-ton) use a cantilever-launch method 

for spanning up to 11 and 18 meters, respectively. 

Scissors-launched bridges developed by the East Germans may also be used by some Soviet units. 

IN SITUATIONS where it is desirable to keep open a 

crossing site after vehicle-launched or ponton bridges 

have been removed to other sites or displaced forward , 

prefabricated bridge elements may be employed. One 

such wood and metal bridge uses telescopic trestle bents 

with 6-beam wooden treadways, Each span is four meters 

long with a 35-ton capacity. Larger capacity (60 ton) 

spans of the prefabricated wooden low-water bridge 

USM may be constructed on existing or specially-driven 

piers. 

The bridge construction equipment set KMS , used to 

drive wooden pylons for bridge piers, consists of four 

pile- drivers mounted on float bridge sections, with au xENGINEER 

IRM engineer obstacle-clearing 

mach ine 

iliary folding assault boat sections, all transported on five 

trucks. The 28·man crew, augmented by reconnaissance 

elements and bridge element transport trucks. is 

organized into the following functional teams: pile-driver 

operating team, pier-building team, free span emplacement team, pile bent delivery team, treadway assembly 

team, and truck drivers to pick up assembled treadways 

for delivery to the bridge site. 

Average construction speed on pile piers is 15·20 

meters per hour, and 20·25 meters per hour on trestle 

piers. Bridge elements may be prepared from locally 

available materials using pioneer kit saws. chain saws, 

and the trailer-mounted LRV high-capacity gangsaw or 

Rp· 75 lumber sawframe. 

Float bridge support for airborne units is provided by 

the air-droppable, helicopter transportable PVD-20 airborne forces bridge set which consists of aluminum balks 

on rubberized fabric floats. comprising ten 4-ton ferries 

or rafts of up to eight tons capacity. or 8-ton bridges up 

to 64 meters long. The bridge is normally transported on 

10 GAZ-63 2-ton trucks or six ZIL-1511157 4.5·ton 

trucks. 

Float bridging for motorized rifle and tank units is 

provided by the TPP heavy ponton bridge set or PMP 

ponton bridge set. The TPP consists of bow and centersection rigid metal pontons with an integral roadway 

assembly superstructure , transported on ZIL-151/1S7 

trucks. A full set includes 48 bow sections, 48 center sections, 12 power boats, and auxiliary equipment. The set 

may be configured as varying capacity rafts, or as 

bridges, with up to 70-ton capacity. 

TPP HAS been almost entirely superceded by the PMP 

ribbon bridge. The full 36-link PMP set (32 river links 

and four shore links) may be configured as 40 to 170-ton 

37 
rafts, or 20-ton or 60-ton bridges using 12 powerboats for 

emplacement and stabilization of the bridge. Divisions 

normally have a half-set (one complete bridge) of 16 river 

and two shore links, six boats, and auxiliary equipment. 

This gives the division the capability to construct 118 

meters of 60-ton bridge, 225 meters of 20-ton bridge, or 

rafts. 

To facilitate raft construction, each river link has auxiliary ramp sections. Transition from rafts to bridging, 

and vice versa, is rapidly accomplished. Norms for 

bridge construction in current velocities up to two meters 

per second require rates of nearly eight meters per 

minute, and substantially faster have been observed. 

Powerboats of the BMK series are used with both the 

TPP and PMP. Most of the boats are towed, having integral wheel struts instead of trailers for transport. The 

most recent model , the BMK-T, is transported on a 

modified ponton carrier truck , launched and recovered 

in the same manner as the PMP pontons. 

Line of communication bridges such as the heavy penton PPS, highway railroad ponton bridge NZhM-56, and 

fixed or sectional bridges such as the RMM, MARM. 

and SARM are not organic to division combat engineers, 

but are deployed with Road Construction Troops of the 

Military Transportation Service. The Soviet military 

newspaper Krasnaia Zvezda (Red Star) recently disclosed the existence of an underwater ponton bridge. 

which appears to have a carrying capacity of less than 20 

tons. Allocation of the bridge is not known . 

RECENT developments in Soviet amphibious equipment have extended beyond light amphibious tanks and 

APCs to include the new self-propelled 122mm artillery, 

and the SA-8 Gecko and SA-9 Gaskin air defense missile 

systems. These developments, and the wide use of 

snorkelling tanks, are geared toward reducing the combat requirement for assault engineer support. Soviet 

engineers, however. still possess a wide range of assault 

river crossing capabilities, from simple pneumatic or collapsible canvas-and-frame assault boats and individual 

flotation kits, to amphibious transports and ferries. 

The obsolescent MAVis an amphibious jeep-type 

vehicle, primarily used for command or reconnaissance, 

with a five-man or 500 kilogram payload. The ZIL-484 

BAV, an improved version of the U.S. World War II 

DUKW, is a wheeled amphibian capable of handling 

loads up to 3.5 tons (28 men, a light gun or howitzer, or 

an unloaded 2-ton truck) at speeds of 8-9 kilometers per 

hour for up to six hours. It is safe to say the BAV has 

been replaced in virtually all active Soviet combat 

engineer units by the K-61 tracked amphibious 

transporter, which is, in turn, being replaced by the 

PTS/PTS-M tracked amphibious transporter. 

The K-61 can transport 5-ton loads (50 men, a 100mm 

gun or 152mm howitzer, etc .) for up to eight hours at 

speeds of 8-9 kilometers per hour. The PTS can accornmodate a lO-ton load (72 men, one or two guns, one 

prime mover) at speeds of 10-11 kilometers per hour for 

10 hours of continuous operation. The PTS can transport 

an artillery prime mover, an artillery piece, and its crew 

in a single lift. The gun can be rapidly loaded or unloaded without disconnecting the PKP from the PTS , thus 

greatly speeding turn-around time in river crossing 

operations. The PTS also has a designed capability to 

function over the beach or as an ambulance vehicle , 

transporting 12 litters on special rack mounts. 

THE GSP tracked, self-propelled ferry is designed for 

the transport of heavy tracked vehicle loads (to SO tons) . 

It consists of non-interchangeable left and right-half 

units with large, foam-filled outboard pontons that are 

carried on top of the basic vehicle and rotated outward 

once the vehicles are connected in the water. The crew is 

probably five men. 

Engineer reconnaissance equipment includes scuba 

and light diving equipment; various devices for measuring current velocity, taking bottom soundings to determine river bottom composition and profile, etc; and optical equipment such as the engineer reconnaissance 

periscope PIR/PIR20, sapper range-finder DSP-30, the 

long focal length periscopic camera PDF, and other 

periscopic and binocular observation instruments. 

Water purification and supply equipment, in addition ) to tanker trucks and cisterns, includes the truckmounted filtration station and other mobile purification 

sets with capacities up to 1800 liters per hour. 

Generators are employed for power supply to lighting 

sets. gangsaws, jackhammers, augers, and other purposes. Designations "ESB" or "ESD" indicate "electrical station" powered by gasoline or diesel fuel, respectively, followed by a numerical designation of the unit's 

power output in kilowatt hours and a two-letter indicator 

of the general application of the unit. Thus. for example, 

ESB-4-IB designates a four-kilowatt-hour, gas operated 

generator for engineer earth preparation. 

Numerous crane trucks are available to engineer 

troops, but divisional units seem most frequently to be 

equipped with the K-61, K-67, 8T210, and auxiliary 

cranes such as the KM·61. Engineer repair service to 

engineer units on the move is provided by the APRIMM, PARM-1, and TRM-A or TRM-B mobile repair shop 

vans. 

Major Parr is currently assigned to the Office of the Joint
 

Chiefs ofStaff as a Presidential Translator on th e Washington'
 

Moscow hotline. He was pr eviously assigned to th e Defense In·
 

telligen ce Agency as a Soviet Ground Forces Analyst. Major
 

Parr has had two previous articles on Soviet military engineer­

ing published in ENGINEER.
 

38 FALL 1979 
Officer Career Info _
 

COLONELS 

The new Engineer Colonels assignment officer at MILPERCEN is Lieut enant Colonel Arthur Willi ams. He 

recentl y graduated from the Navy Wa r 

College aft er a tour in Korea . 

LmUTENANT COLONELS 

Lieutenant Colonel Ernest J. Harrell 

has taken over the Specialty 21 assignment desk at MILPERCEN. He recently 

completed a tour as battalion commander of the 43rd Engineer Battalion at 

Fort Benning, GA. He is a 1973 graduate 

of th e Command and General Staff College . 

MAJORS 

Congratulations to those officers who 

were selected for promotion to Major 

(ADS) by the board which met in April. 

COMPANY GRADE OFFICERS 

This yea r, as part of the second 

specialty designation proce ss, 124 officers from other branches will be 

designated SC 21, Engineer, as a second 

specialt y. Many of thes e officers will be 

eligibl e for tours as Engineers in the near 

future. Most assignments for tour s in the 

second speci alty will be made to Engineer 

Districts and Facilities Engineer position s, 

AI] company grade officers are urged 

to insure th at result s of physical examinations and official photographs are 

current and on file at MILPERCEN. 

Photos pro vide a first impre ssion when 

board members review your file. Is yours 

mor e than four years old? Have you failed to have one taken since your last promotion ? If your answer is "yes" to either 

question , you should submit an up-todate photo as soon as possible. 

WARRANT OFFICERS 

Congratulations to those warrant officers who were selected for promotion to 

CW3 and CW4 (ADS) earlier this year. 

Ann ouncement of selectees for pr omotion to CW2 , 3, and 4 (RA) is expected in 

Oct ober. 

OPMF CONVERSION 

The destruction of OPMF paper tiles 

for all officers except Majors and 

Lieutenants had been completed as of I 

July . The start date for destruction of the 

remaining paper files is 1 Sept ember. 

Cop ies of the paper files for grades 0-1, 

ENGINEER 

0-2, and 0'4 may be pur chased through 

31 August. As annou nced previously, all 

paper files are being converte d to 

microfiche files. The MILPERCEN contact for Majors and Lieutenants who still 

wish to purchase a copy of their paper 

files is Lieutenant Colonel Hesernan, 

Autovon 221-9612/3. 

OER SUPPORT FORM 

The Army will transition to the new 

Officer Evaluation Reporting System 

during the period 15 September to I 

Novembe r. Th e new system includes 

several features which haven't been part 

of previous OER systems . 

On e of the new features is DA Form 

67-B·l , the OER Support Form, which is 

viewed as an ideal technique for increasing two-way communica tions between 

the rater and ra ted officer, especially in 

terms of developing and clarifying the 

elements of the rated officer's performanc e. 

The Support Form is designed to be 

used by the rated officer and rating officials. It is not forwarded to DA. At the 

beginning of the rating period the form is 

used as a guid e for discussion between 

the rater and rated officer about the 

rated officer's duties, responsibilities, 

and performance objectives for the 

peri od. During the rating period , it acts 

to guid e the performance of the rated officer and the coun seling and coaching by 

the rater. At the end of the rating period, 

it gives the rated officer an opport unity to 

provide the rating chain inform ation 

about his performance from his point of 

view. 

At th e beginning of th e rating period, 

the rat ed officer receives a copy of the 

Support Form which is blank except for 

the name, grade, and position of his rater 

and the positions of the remaining 

members of his rating chain . Within the 

first thirty days of the rating period, the 

rated officer and rater are required to 

discuss Part III a, the specific nature of 

the rated officer's duties (his duty 

description), and Part II1b, the focus or 

dir ection of his performance (his major 

performance objectives). 

It is important to note that although 

the objectives are meant to focus attention on only the more critical aspects of 

performance, they are not all inclusive. 

The rated officer is still responsible for all 

that is normally expected of his grade 

and duty position . 

These objectives can be developed in 

several ways. Th ey can be set by the 

rater, suggested by the rat ed officer, or 

jointly developed. Furthermore, task can 

be accomplished formally or inform ally. 

depending on the situation, style and 

personality of the rater. The important 

thing is that the discussion takes place 

and th e rated officer gets started in the 

proper direction. 

During the rating period , the rater and 

rated officer should update the duty 

description and perform ance objectives 

to reflect shifts in emphasis additional 

mission s, and other changes that are likely to occur. 

At the end of the rating peri od , the 

rated officer receives a Support Form 

with Parts I and II filled out , to include 

the names of the senior rat er and the intermediate rater if one has been included 

in the rat ing chain. The rated officer is 

required to complete all thre e porti ons of 

Part Ill-his duty description, major 

performance objectives, and significant 

contributions-and submit the Support 

Form to his rating chain . if the rated officer has kept his information updated 

and has continued to communicate with 

his rater, he is in th e best position to provide objecti ve comments concerning his 

perform ance and avoid unrealistic 

remarks. 

Part IV of the Support Form is for 

comments by the rater and /or the intermediate rater based on the entries 

made by the rated officer in Part Ill. 

These comm ent s are optional. If comments are made th ey should address the 

accur acy of the duty description and performance objectives. Comments on performance should be reserv ed for th e 

OER; however, if included in this part, 

they should be consistent with the performance and potential evaluation on the 

OER. 

The completed Support Form accompanies the OER form through the rating 

chain and is returned to the rated officer 

after it is read and considered by the 

senior ra ting official. It does not accompany th e OER to DA . 

The Support Form instutional izes a 

procedure that has been a part of effective military lead ership for generations-that of clarifying performance expectations for subordinates and, in the 

process, assisting the subordinate in his 

professional development. 

39 
Enlisted Career Info _
 

BRANCH CHIEF COMMENTS 

How woul d you like to answer the 

telephone an average of 120 tim es a day? 

Your career advis ors at MILPERCEN 

do, and they spen d an average of three 

minutes talk ing to each engin eer soldier 

who calls. 

Some of the questions asked inclu de : 

Where is my next duty assignme nt going 

to be? When can I expect to receive 

or der s for my next assignment? What is 

the turnaround time for my gr ade and 

MOS ? What can I do to improve my 

chances for prom ot ion ? Why wasn't I 

promoted on the last E7/E8 list ? 

T hes e are only a few of th e multitude 

of qu estions asked by soldiers in the 

field , and we feel that it is important for 

us to give you th e most accurate answer 

possible in th e brief time all owed for a 

telephon e conversation. 

The most impo rt ant tool available to 

pr ovide you with a reasonably res earched 

answer is your Career Management Individual File (CMIF) maintained he re at 

MILPERCEN. 

Who makes the mo st important input 

to your CMIF? You do, throu gh your 

Military Personnel Office (MILPO ). 

Each and every time we an swer your correspondence or telephone call. we request an updated Preference Statement 

(DA Form 2635) and DA Form 2-1. It is 

extremely difficult for your career advisors to give you any kind of answer 

when the mos t current forms in your 

CMIF are three to 10 yea rs old . 

Remember, your most important 

file- the Official Military Personnel File 

(O MPF )- is maintained at the Army 

Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center, 

Fort Benjamin Harrison , IN, and it mu st 

be updated regularly. Do not , under any 

circumstances, bypass the OMPF and 

provide documents only for your CMIF 

maintained at MILPERCEN. 

The mailing address for forw arding 

documents for inclosure in your CMIF is: 

MILPERCEN, ATTN: DAPC- EPL-E, 

2461 Eisenhower Ave. , Alexandria, VA 

22331 . 

EER RULES CHANGE 

Enlisted Evaluation Rep ort (EER) 

rules for all EM ch anged April I. The 

changes are design ed to make EERs 

more complete and less fr equ ent, accordin g to M ILPERCEN officia ls. 

EERs are now required a t least yearly 

but not during amont h that is ba sed on a 

soldi er's gra de. In stead, annua l reports 

will be made one year from a soldi er 's last 

rep ort month . Excepti ons to thi s change 

will be allowed if a soldi er should need a 

" ch an ge of rater" or "spec ial" EER , or if 

an EER must be delayed because a rater 

has not man aged a soldier for a t least 

three months. When a soldi er does 

receive a "change of rater" or " special" 

EER, the next annual rep ort will not be 

due until one year after t ha t EER. 

Oth er changes include mandator y 

comments in all EERs. Currently, commen ts are only required if soldiers are 

ra te d below or above average. Recommendations for promotion must a lso be 

explai ned in a rater's comments, no matte r wh ich option a rat e recommends. 

Career development rec ommendations 

for schooling and assignments mu st also 

be made in every EER. 

Ano the r change is th at raters will have 

the option of usin g a " com plete th e 

record ," or updated , EER for soldi ers in 

gra des E-6 t hroug h E-9. This rep ort 

could be mad e whe n a sold ier is be ing 

considered by a DA promoti on or selection board. This option will allow raters 

to " upda te the officia l record" and ca ll 

att ention to new and specia l informat ion. 

The new rules are spell ed out in 

changes to AR 600·200 , DA Pam 623·1 

an d DA Pam 600-8. 

MOS 12F RESURRECTED 

MOS 12F , Combat Engineer 

Vehicle l Armored Vehicle Launched 

bridge Crewman, is be ing re surrected effective 1 September. The MOS, whi ch 

was converted to MOS l l E in 1976, will 

include Engineer APC Operators as well 

as CEV1AVLB Crewmen. 

Reclassification is mandatory for all 

12B 1U personnel and for all current Skill 

Level 1 inc umbents (l9EI0 and 19FIO) 

now serving in CEV / AVLB position s. 

Reclassific ation is voluntary fo r Skill LevIe 2 and high er personn el currently or 

formerly associatd with CEV a nd AVLB . 

Coordi nating drafts of Sold iers and 

Com ma nders Manuals for MOS 12F 

wer e sched uled for completio n in August 

and should be deliver ed to T RAD OC in 

Janua ry 1980 for printing and world-wide 

distribution . Manuals sho uld arrive a t 

un it level by next sum mer . 

Work on Skill Qualification Tests for 

ski ll levels one th rou gh fou r will begin at 

T he Engineer Sch ol late this year. The 

initial testing period will ha ve an evalu ation (e nding) da te of 30 June 1982. 

Sold iers in grades £-6 a nd E- 7 who 

qualify for relcassification into MOS 12F 

may apply for Instructor duty in th e l 2F 

Course, which is to be ta ug ht at Fort 

Leonard Wood , MO . Applications 

should be forward ed throu gh com ma nd 

channels to MILPERCEN. 

MILPERCEN CONTACTS 

Sh ould you at any time wish to call or 

write your career managem ent br an ch 

regarding an assign men t or othe r as pec ts 

of your career, the add ress is: U .S. Arm y 

Military Personnel Cen te r; ATTN : 

DA PC-EPL-E ; 246 1 Eisenhowe r Avenue ; 

Alexandria , VA 22331 . T he telephon e 

numb er is Area Code 20 2 , 

325 - 77 10 11 1/1 2 o r A u tovo n 

221-7710/11 /12 . 

Engineer ca reer advisors include : 

Master Sergeant Kell y Brown , CMF 81, 

Drill Sergeants (Fo rt Leonard Wood only), MOS 122 and 12B for E-7 ( P); 

Sergeant First Class AI Henderson . CMF 

12 Comb at Engineering; and Sergeant 

First Class Billy W . Moore, CMF Sl 

General Engineering. 

SQTREVIEW 

The Army is con sidering reducing or 

eliminating the written portion of th e 

Skill Qualification Te st (SQT) for E-l 

through E-5 in combat arms MOS , including MOS 128, Combat Engineer. 

Similar changes ma y be in store for 

soldiers in comb at support and combat 

service support MOS , acco rding to 

TRADOC officials. 

Trainers, personnel managers and 

units in the field have been reviewing the 

SQT based on tests conducted in comb a t 

arms MOS. Decisions were expected by 

September, with ch an ges to be implemented earl y next year. 

The SQT is intende d to test a soldier's 

abili ty to do his job ra th er than his ab ility 

to a nswer writt en qu est ions. SQTs con ­

ducted over a three-year peri od in comb at arms MOS sh ow that soldiers improve progress ively on t he hands-on and 

performance cert ification portion s. Im ­

pr ovement on th e written test, however, 

has been " mo dest or uneven ." 

40 FALL 1979 
In addition to reviewing the writte n 

portion of the test, officials have been 

looking at the various stand ards 

established for the SQT and whether 

these standards provide a workable and 

equit able syst em for determ in ing 

eligibility for promotion and reenlistment. 

APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM 

Mor e than 11,000 soldiers, includ ing 

many engineer soldiers, are using their 

Army training and work experience to 

prepare themselves for civilian jobs. 

They're making sure their Army training 

doesn't go to waste by applying their 

work experience toward becoming 

qu alified journeymen in a skilled trade or 

craft. 

Currently registered with the U.S. 

Department of Labor's Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training (BAT) are no 

less than 15 engineer programs and 23 

engineer-oriented MOS. listed below. 

PROGRAM MOS 

Plant Equipment Oper at or 62H,62G 

Grad ing & Paving Equip . Operat or 62E 

Heavy Du ty Rep airman 628 

(Cons truction Equipment) 

Uni versal Equip. Operator 62F 

(Const ruction Equip.) 

Carpenter SIB 

Prumber/Pipcfiucr SIN 

Electrician SIR 

Lith ogr apher (Offser Press 41K .8JE. 

Operat or ) 83F 

Drafter (Architect ur al) 8lH 

Refrigerat ion / Air Cond itioning S2C 

Repairer./Servicer 

Firelighter SIM 

Industrial Electrician- Repairer S2E 

Powerh ou se Electri cian /Repairer S2E 

Surv eyor (Enginee r) 82A. 82B, 

810 

Rigger JIB, izc. SICSIH 

Apprenticeship terms range from one 

to five years or from 2,000 to 10,000 

hou rs, depending on the trade or sk ill. 

Each 2,000 hours of work experience also 

requires 144 hours of related instruction . 

To participate, soldiers must be working in a primary or secondary MOS that 

is part of the program. Soldiers may 

transfer from one program to another, 

but th ey cannot participate in more than 

one program at a time. 

To enter the program, soldiers must 

visit their local education office to complete an application form. Their past 

work experience will be evaluated and 

they will receive a DA Pamphlet 

621·series which lists th e number of 

hours required and Army Correspondence Courses available if needed, 

Each soldier is responsible for recording work experience hours in a log 

book . Hours are recorded daily and once 

a week the soldier's immediate sup ervisor 

must certify the log book . 

Upon completion of the program, a 

certificate is awarded from the Dep artment of Labor. Although this certificat e 

will not guarantee a civilian job, it will 

make former soldiers more competitive 

with civilians in the trade . 

For more information , soldiers sho uld 

contact their local educati on office. 

OCS DEADLINES 

En listed personnel interested in attending Officer Candidate School will h ave 

to wait until next year unless they h ave 

already submitted a compelted DA Form 

61, Application for App ointment. to 

MILPERCEN , The deadline for receipt 

of applications for OCS Class 1-80, with 

a starting dat e of 18 November, was 17 

August. Applications for Class 2·80, 

scheduled to start on 3 february 1980, 

must be received by MILPERCEN no 

later than 5 November. Th e deadline for 

receipt of applications for Class 3·80, 

sch eduled to start on 6 April 1980, is 7 

January . 

SOCAD PROGRAM 

Six American colleges and universities 

ha ve agreed to extend their Servicem en 's 

Opportunity College Associate Degree 

(SOCAD) program to soldiers overseas, 

The program standardizes procedures 

for academic evaluation of, and college 

credi ts for, military scho oling, ex· 

perience, and training for more than 70 

educational institutions. The program 

provides flexible credit transfer options 

and adjustable residence requirements 

leading to an associate degree. The 

SOCAD program was origin ally designed 

for soldiers in combat arms, but has been 

expanded to meet the needs of soldiers in 

oth er career fields. Soldiers interested in 

the program can get full details fr om 

th eir local educat ion services office. 

"CODE-A·PHONE" 

Soldiers wanting information about 

th e Army Correspondence Course Program (ACCP) or wanting to check the 

status of a course they are now taking, 

can get answers direct from the Training 

and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) by a 

new "code-a-phone" service. 

Training specialists will answer 

soldiers' questions via phone. Or, if 

soldiers call after duty hours, they may 

leave a recorded message and ha ve their 

question s answered when their call is 

returned the next work day. If soldiers do 

not have acce ss to an Aut ovon line , their 

questions will be answered by mail. 

The number for ACCP information is 

Autovon 927-3085 or commercial 

804·878-3085 , 

We need your help . Whenever a 

significant change in your local assignment , duty position, marital status, area 

of preference, etc., occurs, take a few 

minutes to prepare an updated copy of 

your DA Forms 2-1 and 2635. 

ARMY DIVERS NEEDED 

Enlisted personnel in grades E-2 

through E-4 interested in becoming Army divers should submit a formal school 

appl ication through channels to HQDA, 

ATTN: DAPC·EPL-E, 2461 Eisenhower 

Avenue , Alexandria, Virginia 22331 . 

Applicants must meet all prerequisites 

in AR 611-75, paragraph 2-2. Personnel 

accepted will attend a 12-week Second 

Class Diver Course at the Navy's Diving 

and Salvage School in Washington , D ,C. 

Upon successful compl etion of the 

course, soldiers will be awarded MOS 

00B10 and further assigned to th e 

Engin eer Hard Hat Diving Unit, 

EERWA DATA 

The Enlisted Efficien cy Report 

Weighted Average s (EERWA), as of 31 

March 1979, were as follows: 

Pay Grade EERWA 

E-9 124.41 

E-8 123,73 

E-7 122.19 

E-6 120,25 

E-5 117.82 

E-4 113.94 

ENGINEER 41 
NCO Channels _
 

ACADEMIC GRADING POLICIES 

Students reporting to the u.s. Army 

Engineer School to attend the Engineer 

Advanced Course should be fully aware 

of the current grading standards applied 

to professional development courses. 

Students must pass ea ch examination 

with a grade of 70 percent or higher in 

order to receive a passing score. If the 

student fails to achieve at least 70 on the 

first examination, he is retested following 

remedial training in the defici ent areas. 

If he fails the retest, his academic record 

will be reviewed by the Professional 

Course Review Committee, which is composed of senior NCOs detailed to the 

board. 

The Professional Course Review Committee will convene twice during the 

course , upon conclusion of the common 

phase of training, and after completion 

of the entire course. Upon completion of 

the common phase, the committee will 

review the academic record of all 

students who have fail ed a rete st on one 

or more examinations. Based upon the 

student's academic record , the committee may recommend any of the following 

actions: 

Continue the course-based upon the 

premise that the student will benefit from 

the instruction although he may not 

graduate . 

Referral to the Faculty Board-Faculty board may grant additional tests or 

recommend relief from the course, 

depending on the student's academic 

records. 

Upon completion of th e course, the 

Committee wil again review all academic 

records of students who have failed one 

or more retests in the entire course. This 

review will include an academic evaluation as well as the "whole person concept." Based upon these two areas, th e 

committee may recommend th e following 

actions: 

a . Administrative Pass-graduation 

with diploma. 

b. Certificate of Attendance-Unsuccessful Completion- Students may be 

given an option to complete specific correspondence subcourses to meet course 

requirement within a one -year period. 

Upon sat isfying course requirements, the 

student is issued a diploma . 

Acad emic averages are used to determine a general ranking of students which 

will be annotated on the Academic 

Evaluat ion Report DA Form 1059. Four 

categories identify student achievements 

as follows: 

" E xceed s Course Standards"­

Limited to 20 percent of class enrollment, 

it includes only those students who 

achieve the highest academic averages, 

exceeding 90 percent. 

"Ach ievcd Cou r se Standards"­

Includes all students who do not " exceed 

cou rse standards, " but pass ea ch examination with a score of at least 70 percent. 

"Marginally Achieved Course Stan ­

dards" -lncludes students who "fail to 

achieve course standards" due to their 

failure on retests. These students are 

given the opportunity to earn their 

diplomas by completing additional 

academic work in a specified period of 

time or they may be granted an "administrative pass" for the course . 

Diplomas are awarded to these students. 

" F a ilu re t o Achieve Cours e 

Standards"-Includes students who fail 

to achieve a passing grade of 70 per cent 

from any element of the course. 

These grading standards reflect The 

Engineer School's current policy that 

students must be proficient in all 

academic areas. Students failing to 

achieve the minimum score of 70 percent 

on the first examination receive reinforcement training and are retested in 

the subject area . If the student th en 

receives a passing score, he has profited 

from the reinforcement training and 

testing. 

Academic Evaluation Reports: Effec ­

tive with the Engineer Advanced NCO 

(ENCOA) Class which graduated in 

May , corrected copies of academic 

evaluation reports ar e no longer being used , Previous policy permitted The 

Engineer School to issue corrected copies 

of academic evaluation reports once the 

st udent had completed course reo 

quirements. 

Academic Evaluation Reports: Effective with the Engineer Advanced NCO 

(ENCOA) Class which graduated in 

May, corrected copies of academic 

evaluation reports are no longer being used . Previous policy permitted Th e 

Engineer School to issue corrected copi es 

of acadmic evaluation reports once the 

student had completed course requirements. 

Students who fail to achieve course 

standards and are given an option to 

complete a specific correspondence subcourse, will have a notation placed in 

block 16 of th e DA Form 1059 as follows: 

"A certificate of attendance is issued at 

this time. A diploma will be issued upon 

successful completion of th e following 

sub-courses within a one-ye ar period ." 

Upon complet ion of cou rse requirements, copies of the diploma with a 

letter of explanation , will be forwarded 

thru the same distribution channels as 

the academic evaluation report. to include the soldier's Official Military Personnel File. 

NEW TOP·LEVEL NC05 

Personnel reassignments this summer 

at the U .S. Army Engineer Center and 

School have resulted in new senior Noncommissioned Officers for both the 

center and the school's Directorate of 

Training Developments. 

The new post CSM is Frederick 1. 

Eisenhart, Jr., who just completed a tour 

as the Command Sergeant Major of the 

DA Military Personnel Center. CSM 

Eisenhart replaced CSM Lucion L. 

Cowart, who departed for Korea in June. 

CSM Eisenbart has au extensive 

background in combat and general 

engineering and has served most of his 

Army career in the Corp s of Engineers. 

He is a graduate of the Sergeants Major 

Academy and numerous schools of 

engineering. His 26-year career has included assignments as First Sergeant, 

Command Sergeant Major of several battalions, and Command Sergeant Major 

of an engineer brigade. 

The new Sergeant Major of The 

Engineer School's Directorate of Training Developments is SGM Waverly 

George. He is now the key point of contact for field units in the areas of individual and collective training. If you 

have a problem or just need information 

on Skill Qualification Tests, Soldiers 

Manuals, ARTEPs, correspondence 

courses, or TEC, SGM George is the person to contact at The Engineer School. 

Letters and ohter correspondence may be 

addressed to : Commander, U.S . Army 

Engineer School, ATTN: SGM George , 

DTD, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060. 

42 FALL 1979 
Reserve Components~======-= _
 

ITSCHNER AWARDS 

Th e annual Ttschner Award winners 

for the Reserve Components were announ ced in th e Spring edition of 

ENGINEER and hon ored at the annual 

Engineer Dinner May 11 at the U.S. Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir. 

The USAR winner was the 332nd 

En gineer Company (Dump Truck) of kittanning, PA, commanded by Capt ain 

Ernest M. Cooper. Th e ARNG winner 

was Company C, 612th Engineer Battalion , Norwalk , OH, commanded by 

Captain D ale L. Liebenthal. The 

Itschner Award is named for Lieut enant 

General Emerson C. Itschner, a former 

Ch ief of Engineers. 

NEW ENLISTMENT OPTION 

A " 3x3" enlistment option for nonprior service males was initiated 30 May. 

The new opt ion allows a three-year 

un it/three-year control group obligation. 

Men who select the 3x3 option are not 

eligible for enlistment bonuse s, educational assistance, or the split training option. Since 1975, males age 17-25 have 

had th e choice of only two options- the 

" 6xO" option in which all six years ar e 

served in a unit , and the " 4x2" opti on 

which calls for four years in a unit and 

the other two years in a control group. 

SCHOOL APPLICATIONS DUE 

Applications for most 1980 school year 

cou rses are due , through command 

channels, by I Novemb er. Included are 

applications for the Army War College, 

the National War College, Logistics Executive Development Cour se, Command 

and General Staff College, and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. 

Warrant Officer Senior Cour se applications were due at DA in August fa the 

January 1980 class; application s are due 

at DA by January for th e June 1980 

course. Applications for all courses are 

submitted through command channels. 

Check with unit training officials for furth er guidance and eligibility. 

TRAINING SCHEDULES 

Subparagraphs 3-3e and 3-3f of AR 

140-1 explain how USAR unit commanders may select training schedules to 

best suit their unit's needs . Th e reg 

ENGINEER 

breaks out the allowabl e limits of choosing individual Unit Training Assemblie s 

( UT A) , Multipl e Unit Training 

Assemblies (MUTA) or combinations of 

the two. Th ere are restrictions on the 

percen tage of a unit's total training hours 

which may be scheduled within anyone 

month or three-month period . Only ar ea 

commanders may authorize deviations 

from the percentages. Under no circumstances will the authorization allow 

ind ividual unit members to exceed 48 

training assemblies a year. 

OVERSTRENGTH APPROVAL 

DA has approved a new policy, allowing CONUSA commanders the authority 

to approve requ ests from subordinate 

units to exceed the 110 perc ent enlisted 

overstrength ceiling. There are some additional ground rule s. Th e unit's parent 

USAR command (ARCOM or GOCOM) 

cannot exceed the 110 percent ceiling , 

and the CONUSA cannot exceed 103 

percent of its enlisted strength. Also, a 

unit cannot recrui t over the (10 percent 

ceiling if there arc no other units within 

normal commuting distance under the 

110 perc ent level. Memb ers recruited 

under th e policy must be informed that. 

upon mob ilization , they may be reassigned anywhere the Army has a requirement. 

UPDATE ON SRIP 

The expansion of the Selected Reserve 

Incentive Program (SRIP) to all USAR 

units ended in June, but commanders 

who are still eligible to offer enlistment 

incentives are enc ouraged to keep providing referrals and to stay closely in 

touch wit h th e unit's supporting 

recruiters. 

PRIMARY LEADERSHIP COURSE 

The Primary Leadership Course is the 

first leadership and management course 

approved for E-4s and E-Ss with noncombat skills. USAR schools offer a selfpaced PLC which closely parallels th e 

Active Compon ent cour se. More than 

4,000 soldiers are currently enr olled. At 

the present time , several community colleges, mainly in the states of Washington 

and California, offer academic credit in 

personnel management for successful 

completion of th e PLC. Community colleges in other states are reviewing PLC 

content, and more schools are expected 

to grant credit for it. USAR school commandants are urged to submit the PLC 

curriculum to local colleges and universities for evaluation . 

NCOs SOUGHT FOR NCOLP 

Th e Non- commission ed Offi cer 

Logistics Program is available for NCOs 

in grades E-6 and above. The program 

includes an intensive 9-week resident 

course at th e Army Quartermaster 

School at Fort Lee, Virgini a. A nonresident NCOLP cour se is also ava ilable. 

To be eligible, NCOs mu st be high school 

or GED graduates, and be qu alified in 

an MOS within Supply and Service , 

Transportation, or Maintenance . 

Chapter 13 of AR 614-200 spells out all 

requirements. Both unit and Individual 

Ready Reservists are urged to take advantage of NCOLP . Other references include DA Pam 600-8 and AR 604-5. 

LONG TOUR MANAGEMENT 

PROGRAM 

DA has approved the establishment of 

a USAR Long Tour Management Program, designed to improve the quality 

and professionalism of th e long tour 

USAR force. The program also seeks to 

more effectively control spa ces and personnel assigned . DA Circulars 140-14 

(for officers) and 140-13 (for enlisted personnel) spell out the details. A Long Tour 

Management Board met during the summer to review all officers on tour and all 

new applications, and also to provide an 

order of merit to be used to fill fu ture 

vacancies. 

RECRUITING PARTNERSHIP 

Th e last of 57 District Recruiting Commands (DRC) assum ed the USAR 

recruiting mission in May, thus fully implementing the USAR-USAREC partnership . All Reservists should play an active role in th e partnership by making 

referrals to the recruiters who support 

their unit. T he new 

US AREC /FORS COM Regulat ion 

601-67, USAREC/USAR Referral Program, spe lls out the procedures. 

Remember the formula-quality referrals equals more USAR accessions equals 

successful partnership. 

43 
The School Solution-
 - - - - - - - -

TIME REQUIREMENT 

Nine bays are required to cross 170 feet (Table 

6-1, FM 5-34) . Assembly time is five minutes per 

bay, or a total of 45 minutes, under normal conditions. However. weather and blackout conditions 

must be considered, along with the time required 

to install a BEB temporary anchorage system. 

A factor of 50 percent must be added to the erection time due to blackout conditions. while a 30 

percent factor has to be included due to the frigid 

temperatures. Allow approximately 9-10 minutes 

for installation of the BEB temporary anchorage 

system. The net result is a final estimate of 90 

minutes for construction of the Ribbon Bridge. 

PERSONNEL REQUIREMENT 

Since two, rather than three, launching sites are 

to be considered in estimating the required troop 

strength, and since the requirement for a fixed anchorage crew has been eliminated, the figures in 

Table 6-11, FM 5-34 must be adjusted. The final 

estimate is four NCOs and 36 enlisted per personnel. Officer requirements may be added as 

necessary. 

EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENT 

From Table 6-9, FM 5-34, you determine that 

two bridge bay ramps and seven bridge bay interiors are required to span a distance of 170 feet. 

Bridge bay ramps may be adjusted to compensate 

for the extra 20 feet in length of the nine bridge 

bays. 

The number of bridge erection boats required is 

determined by the number of launch sites (2), the 

number of required bays (9), and the stream velocity (6 FPS). The estimated requirement is seven 

boats, which can also be used for the anchorage 

system after bridge erection is completed. Since 

one M-812 Transport Vehicle is required for each 

bay and erection boat, 16 vehicles are required. 

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 

Bridge erection time may be considerably longer 

depending on (1) the speed and skill of personnel 

involved, (2) the availability of necessary equipment, (3) weather conditions, and (4) 

miscellaneous factors which could hinder mission 

accomplishment. 

Troop strength estimates are based on assumed 

availability. Use of additional launch sites and a 

fixed anchorage system would increase the number 

of troops required and would, likewise, lengthen 

the time required for completion . 

The equipment estimate is the minimum required to accomplish the mission. Back-up and 

safety equipment, as well as command and control 

vehicles. should be on hand in case of equipment 

failure on site. 

ENGINEER UHOTLINE"­

The U.S. Army Engineer School at Fort Belvoir, VA, has 

established a 24-hour "Hotline" to answer questions from the 

field on subjects such as TO&E organization, doctrine, 

materiel, MOS, training literature, Skill Qualification Tests, etc. 

Engineers using the Hotline must provide their name, unit, address and telephone number in order to get answers to their 

questions. The Hotline number is Autovon 354-3646 or commercial 703-664-3646. Questions wi II be referred to the appropriate activity within The Engineer School. Callers will be 

contacted by telephone and/or in writing as soon as possible. 

44 FALL 1979 
CORPS DESIGNATED AS MACOM 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was 

designated as a Major Army Command (MACOM) on 16 

June, the 204th anniversary of the founding of the Corps. 

The new command consists of the Office of the Chief of 

Engineers, the Engineer divisions and districts, research 

and development laboratories, and other assigned field 

agencies. Excluded are members and units of the Corps of 

Engineers ' branch of the Army, such as combat and construction engineers, facility engineers, and other engineer 

organizations which are part of other MACOMs. The Corps 

remains a DA staff agency with the Chief of Engineers 

serving as both head of the agency and commander of the 

new MACOM. Traditional oversight of Corps programs by 

Congressional military and public works committees and 

the Executive Branch remains unchanged. The establishment of the Corps as a MACOM is expected to clarify the 

Corps ' functions and relationships within the Army. 

·u.s. GOVERNMEN T PRINTING OFFICE 1979·0·620·06513