. ." .'iw,**'.."" 

.:.;; ,l..LI1*.t~;rert*t:~:~~~i * BATTLEFIELD lNlTlATlVES FOR THE '90s 1: ,.,*&*.'.'#E" .,.*r rtgj :.PrrV 

: # : f : usAcE SUPPORT OF TnE oEH SOVIET ENGINEERS . 

, .~:i..l .*euvw* $$g&g ".. 91p$;?:- 1s ..'IS BRIGHT STAR '85 0 COUNTEROBSTACLE VEHICLE 

. 
Obstacles- Engineers and Maneuver Forces Need Common Terms 

Personal Viewpoints 


Point 

by CPT Michael D. Baehre 

Terrain is the first T iii a commander's METT-T analysis. He 

considers existing ohstacles to determine hour reinforcing obstacles can I)(! 

used to shape the terrain. 

AirLand Battle doctrine emphasizes 

early consideration of ohstacles. 

"Preparatkln of the ground," states 

FM 100-5, Oyjeratlons. "cannot he an 

aftcrthought.'' 

However, once the commallrl<!r's 

analysis is complete, ternis don't exist 

in eligineer arid maneuver vocabularies 

to quickly convey hoa. lie wants 

obstacles to contribute to the ot!jeclivc. 

If the commander propvrly considers 

terrain rc~inforcement as an integral 

part of his coizc~pt, how does he conin1unic;ite his intentions for use of 

enginerrs? How docs hc focus the 

ohstncle effort? 

The need for a commilr, language can 

he satisfied sevc~il ways and d?serves 

serious consideration. For the salre of 

disciission, I propose t\vo ternis with a 

concept for their use ;is control 

measures. The ternis are obstacle 

zone and obstacle belt. 

Until me agree on these or some 

engineer effort in each unit area 

(assuming the sul~ordinate commander 

fully uses the assets), it docsn't focus 

tlie nianner ill m,liicti obstacles are used 

nor their general location. 

Current rnginccr doctrine and common sense hot11 dictate t,hat individual 

obstacles be planned and sited at the 

lowest level possible to ensurc they are 

tied into other obstarles and covered 

by direct and indirect fire. The nornial 

rapal,ilities of a division or brigade 

cngineer staff don't allo~v them to conduct the reconnaissance, detailed planning or coordinati~in required t~] pro~ivrly site a large numtier of iii(iividoa1 

obstacles. 

Counterpoint
 A 


by MAJ Arthur Marubbio 

he concept IJC obstacle zones and Tbelts 1s by no means new. It pops 

up cont.in~lall>, in briefings given to 

miineuvor commanders. The concept 

descrihcd by CPT Bachrc offers a good 

proposal for a stantlard definition of 

terms, but causes some immediate 

problems. 

First and foreni~lsl is the restrictive 

rialure of division and brigade dcsigrlated ohst;rclc areas. Predesignated 

zones and helts reniove consi~inrable 

Obstacle planning from thc 111ittom 

up becomes a necessity. Thcreiorr, 

teams and task forces develop obstacle 

plans (collactions of obstacles), which 

are then reconciled with higher 

maneuver plans at hriwde, and finally 

passed to division for Further integration. Until the plans filter up, the commanders at each level don't know 

whether subordinate units are using 

obstacle assets as intended or whether 

tlie obstacle plans restrict mtineuver's 

flexibility. Instead of focusing the 

engineer effort, this resource allocation rnctlioci merely assigns capability. 

Finally, the physical loeation and 

status of individual obstacles are of interest to maneuver .commanders at all 

levels. Every staff engineer must be 

capable of providing the status of any 

obstacle within their maneuver commander's area of responsibi1it.y. 

Do zones and helts imply that a detailed estimate was conducted and an 

obstacle listing with current status is, 

therefore, available at division? At 

brigade? This does not appear to he the 

case! 

1 believe the current planning process must remain inlacl. The enbfineer 

estiniate must he c!impleted and the resources allowlvd liased on that estimate. Thi. m:m(auuer conimaniier at 

tlie t~attalionltask force levcl must rctain thr iilit i,S sh;iping the 

battlel'ieltl. 

Otire this procedure is ulnlplete rye 

might consider the usts of zones arid 

hclts lo ease the grrrphic rluilw of llic 

engineer obstaclc overlay. But l11c 

engineer must hc prcp~red 10 iliscuss 

1111staclestatus in detail. 

MAJ A rlhnr :21,7n~bhiois oiti~$ofthe 

Engin~~r Bvorirh. Dqa~t~nent ~fCumhined AJ~s,TJSAES. 

other official terms and cor~t,~~)l 

measures, the maneuver and anginerr 

staffs will continue to discuss !)Lslacle 

plans in vague, general ternis at task 

force level, or in unrealistic detail at 

brigade and above. 

The Problem 

A review of F'hl 101-,?-I.Opwo,tionni, 

Rmzr and Gmplbirs, and engineer 

field manuals rrveals no clearly documented engineer control niewsures 

short of iiesi~.natin~ - .suecil'ic ~~hstacles. 

The result is that engineer cfforl is 

focused hy the atlocalion of obstacle re 

sources (engineer units and materials) 

to unit areas. While this constrains the 

,.. 

flexibility [ram the battalion/tasl< force 

comm;lnrlcr. 'They restrict lhis ability ti, 

shape the battlefield i~ased on his 

direct observati~ln of tlic trrrain-n 

perspective not alu.ays shared by tlie 

division level planners. 

A second problem arises when cow 

structing the unconstrained c,II &' onecr 

estimate at the brigade and division 

levels. This estimate is based on the 

physical plotting of anticipated individual obstacles and is the primary 

means of allocatinlr resaurces to suhor- ', 

dinate units. How can the division and 

hrigade planners request and alloratr 

resources based r)n the general dcfiniLion of zorles ant1 belts? 
\ Ih r - la' IF' ' 

UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER 

AND FORT BELVOIR, VA 

COMMANDERICOMMANDANT 

MC Richard 5. Kem 

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

COL Don W. Barber 

CHIEF OF STAFFIDEPUTY 


INSTALLATION COMMANDER 


COL Peter D. Stearns 


COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM Charles T Tucker 

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING 


AND DOCTRINE 


LTC Robert L Keenan 


CHIEF OF PUBLICATIONS 


Sheila L. Burns 


EDITOR 


Marilyn Fleming 


FEATURES EDITOR 

Victoria McAllirter 

DESIGN DIRECTOR 

Thomas Davis 

DESIGN ASSISTANT 


iMarthd O'Rr~en 


CONTRIBUTING ARTISTS 


Nicholas Mosura 


John Keipchar 


Sprctal th.lnkl loLlAl Homg Y So0 ant1 lh'! 

Direcfoielr oICr~mbdlDevrlopinri?lrfor llwr 

iontiibut~o!~ to Ill#\#q\oe sncl 
 fo lanlci

Woodbrrry fr,r ,~uiil%$y
 confro1 

On the Cover 

Art by Nicholas Moruru capturer the 

warrior rpjrit of Engineer Battlefield 

Initiatives of the '90s. 

FEATUIZES 

10 	E-FORCE 

h2/ MG Rzchard S. Knn, MAJ J. Richard Cnpka and 


MAJ H0un.q Y. Soo 


I6 Combat Heavy Redesign 

by LTC Robert L. Hernrfon 

19 Introducing: The Sapper 

20 	Equipment Roundup: The Shape of Things to Come 

by CPT JefFEn,qbrecht 

24 	Bright Star '85 

Ph,oto essay hy CPT John Florence 

26 he M9 ACE: Rugged, Responsive and Ready for AirLand 

Battle 

b?l Victoria McAllister 

28 	Counterobstacle Vehicle: New Horizons in Battlefield 

Mobility 

bv LTC Wzliznm R1la71 

30 	Combat Heavy Deployment Checklist 

by CPT Samuel W. Burkntl 

32 	Soviet Engineers in Combat: The Objective is Rapid Advance 

by CPT Charles R. Boyrr 

31 	USACE Support of Army Installations: One Year after the 

Green Ribbon Panel 

by COL Stephen F. Rutz an,d Vicloria McAllister 

38 	The Cross-FLOT Raid: Engineers in the Deep Battle 

by LTC Larry Izzo 

41 	Awards: How Do You Measure Professional Achievement'? 

by MAJ Jgferson J. Im:in, 

43 	Engineers Join Regimental System 

DISI'ARTMENTS 

Inside Front Cover: A Pcsrsr~nalViewpoint 


2 New and Notes 10 Engineer Problem 


6 Clear the Way 4 Engineer Solution 


8 Bridge the Gap 41 School News 


9 Career Notes ?!I Past in Reriew 


27 	 Hotline Q&A 

ENGINEEKIISSN 0046~1989lispublishcd quilrtrrls by the11.5. Arms 

Engineer Center ilnri Furl Belro~r. VA. Unless speci1'ic;tlly slated. 

material does not necessarily reflect offiela1 pulry, tliinkinp nor 

endorsement by any agency nf tbr L1.S. Army. ESGINKEK'r objectives LIWouthor~ are to provldc il forum for the exchange of ideas. to inform. and to SUBSCKIPl'IONS. I,;N(;INtiEK is nua~l;iblt. thn~ugh 1111. Sup<.ri>lpromote the professional devtilupment of all mrmb~rs IOPthe Army tendent of Ilo~urn~tlts. 1IS G<,vcineit.nl I'rinllng Oillrc. \V;lrilinyti,o. 

engineer community. IJC. 2(IJOP. A chc.rk or tooney ori1t.r yeysblr u, Supcrinlrlidcnr uf 

FUNDS.Theuseoffunds forprintingthispubliritti~rnwasapproved by Ilorurnci~tsrnustilrrt,rnp~ni, ail subi~riplion requests. Hut(.$ ;tl.cSI 1.00 

Headquurtors, Departmrntofihr Army. Second C:lus~postageis peicl at f)r~~domestir.o~ldrrsssrlincludiny Al'Otrnd I'l'O!andSI:l.illlo~~f~~reiyn 

Fort Reivotr, VA. and addition;~l mailing offlcs.~. addresses. Indiv~~lusl cu~it.snn~o~aili~liiesi.~.lII! [pcrrctl'y Ictrrl~~cnestic 

CORRESPONDENCE. Lcttersto therditur.manuscripts. and photo- addresses and $;).is for foreign sddrrssra. 

graphs should be sent to: ENGINEER hlayirrine. ATLA-TU-P. Stop POSTMASTER. Send address <l~i%nnr to ENGINEER. IVI-LA-TI)-P. 

291V ,Fort Relvoir. VA 220605291. Phone: (il!:lj 664~301n,AV :15,1. Stup2'11L). Fort Beivoir, VA PP06~1.~191. 
- News & Notes

WESKeeps the Army Moving lems At the . . En,ncer 

Waterways Experiment Station 

A winning Army most he highly beaches and minefields are common (WES) in Vickshurg, MS, engineers 

mobile. However, crossing streams, ivarti~iie tasks that still present prob- perform research in all of these areas. 

Flexmat 

River crossing operations are an 

integral part of land warfare. For this 

reason, \YES engineers are studying 

different accesslegress methods. One 

solution is to uverlay surfacing 

material on margitlal soils and steep 

riverbanks. 

A promising overlay material, called 

flexmat, consists of woven steel fabric, 

neoprene-coated nylon memhrane surfacing, and extruded aluminum support channels. This system comes in 

50-foot sections that arc 16.4 feet 

wide. The syst,em rolls into a package 3 

feet in diameter. Lsin~thc nexx flexm:~t. :in II11:I Al'C emerges from a lake test site. Flcxmat 

An assault vt:liicle such as the MI13 is designed for marginal soils and steep riverhanks. 

armored personnel carrier can transport the sections. The MI13 can deploy can he hand deployed do~bn the slope. t~on of a mechanism to convey and 

the tlcxmat up a slope, or the flexmat Current research ~ncludes the evalua- launch the flexmat system. 

Sand Grid Confinement 

Cells 

Crossing beaches with personnel and 

supplies crcdtes another set of problems. The most successful solutions to 

these problems are sand grid conlinemerit roads. 

Grids made of hish %, densitv "." nolv

ethylene are manufactured and shipped in 4-inch thick sections that are 

easily expanded to 20 feet during road Sand grids are expanded and filled with sand. The 4-inch thick sections can 

construction. Two trucks can carry be expanded to 20 feet and a li~ht layer of liquid asphalt can he applied to 

enough grid for one mile of roa~i. provide a durable surface for wheeled traffic. 

Personnel expand the grid and fill 

the cells with sand. A light layer oi'liquid asphalt ran be applied to provide a 

more durable wearing silrl'acc for Construction of a sand grid harrier duccd the construction time even 

wheeled traffic. fur a 155mm self-propelled howitzer more. 

Sand grids are also finriir~g use in emplacement, using only hand labor, A sand grid barrier is easy to disasfield fortifications. One study used the required 132 manhours. This is nlmosl semble and is reusal>le. Future uses for 

grids successfully as barriers and re- half the time needed to build a similar grids as harriers include load-bearing 

vetments to protect artillery emplace- sandbag position. Using a front-end walls and vehicle obstacles to counter 

ments. loader to place the soil would have ro- terrorist threats. 
Minefield Detection systems may produce images to help h~ghresolution thermal Images for 

tomol-row's A~mylocate and neutralize dayt~meand nighttime photography. 

minefields faster and more efficientlf. Dip;ltal data processing techniques 

WES is also evaluating optically WES is also researching new remote reduce terrain background clutter. 

aligned images that provide data methods for minefield detection in dif- Single channel image data separates 

simultaneously in multiple wave-length ferent terrains and environments. mincs from background terrain. Under 

bands. An active laser source investi- Engineers are testing several types of some conditions, this system results in 

gation is also ongoing in the area of scanners individually and in combina- numerousfalse mine targets within the 

minefield detection. One or more tion. The thermal line scanner provides image. 

Engineers Compete in NBC Olympics 

wearing protective equipment. At the 

same time, we wanted to have a good 

The brigade's five battalions and 

company headquarters competed in 

the NBC Olympics. Except for protective mask assembly, all events were 

performed in MOPP gear: 

Playing volleyball 

Testing driving skills 

Erecting an HC-292 antenna 

Exchanging MOPP gear 

Assembling an M16 

Setting up a GP small tent 

Using German firefighting equip- -

0 -Throwing a grenade 

PFC Greg Bowling hurls a dummy grenade at .his target during the 18th Running a relay race 

Engineer Brigade's NBC Olympics. photo by T~~~ *darns Eck said the relay race was the hardest event physically. However, exchanging MOPP gear was also difficult 

because it's part of the new NBC trainNearly 350 soldiers from the 18th CPT William Eck, the brigade ing doctrine and unfamiliar to many. 

Engineer Brigade squared off in NBC chemical officer, said, "We wanted to . The brigade NBC office plans to 

Olympics competition to find out who demonstrate that NBC and military make the NBC Olympics an annual 

was best in MOI'I' gear. skills could be accomplislicd while event. 

Soviet Acquisition of Military Technology 

The Soviet Union has a massive, 

weil-organized campaign to acquire 

Western technology for its weapons 

and military equipment projects. Each 

year Moscow receives thousands of 

pieces of Western equipment and 

thousands of unclassified, classified, 

and proprietary documents as part of 

this campaign. 

Understanding the Soviet effort is a Copies of this 40-page publication 

critical first step in protecting Western can be obtained by sending a check or 

technology and preventing it from be- money order for $2 payable to the 

ing turnedag-ainst the West. SovietAc- Superintendent of Documents, U.S. 

quisitim of 1Militu~SLgn,ificantWe~t- Government Printing Office, Dept. 

em Technology: An Upda,te reveals in SSMC, Washington, U.C. 20402. 

detail the structure of these Soviet programs and gives examples of Soviet requirenielrts and successes. 

3 
s 6 Notes 

Engineers Create Tire House 

for MOUT Training 

The 92nd Engineer Battalion, Fort 

Stewart, GA, worked hard to turn 

10,000 used tires into a house that ahsorl~s live ammunition while soldiers 

practice military operations in urban 

terrain (MOUT). The 1st Battalion 

(Ranger). 75th Infantry Division, initii~t~ii the construction. 

MOLJT training consists mainly of 

room-clearing techniques. Units using 

the briil~iing can practice c,xternal and 

internal tactics, Internal taclics will 

c(~nsist of moving from room to room 

safely or clearing a closet of tlie 

enemy. External tactics will have a 

utrit xttncli and enter the buildirig from 

the nearby treelinc. SilhouetLes will be 

placed in tlie windows for targets. 

I'latoons from Company K, Y2nd 

Engineer B:tttalion, began construction by sinking8 x R-inch timbers 4 feet 

into tlir ground and pouring concrete 

around them to stabilize them. Then, 

using the timbers much like pegs in a 

ring toss game, they dropped tires 

o\,rr the timbers, individually filled the 

tires witit dirt and wired them 

togetller. 

The end result was a 44 x 90-foot 

structure with 9-foot walls, no ceiling 

and a dirt floor. The tire house has six 

separate rtloms, each with a closet. 

The total cost of the project is expected 

to be $129,082, according to 2LT 

Kevin Cronin, assistant construction 

officer. 

The 35 soldiers who spent six hours a 

day working on the project gave 

se\:eral reasons for their motivation in 

this project. 

"We support the Rangers. If they 

need as, we're there for them," said 

PFC: Joseph Walsh, a carpentry and 

masonry specialist. 

SFC Jerry Mathis, NCOIC, said the 

project gave them training in laying 

out the site and mixing anrl placing 

concrete. 

Units will be able to use a variety uf 

weapons and live fire ammunition in 

the house. The MI6 rifle, .4G caliber 

pistol, 9mm submachine gun, lrand 

grenades, shotguns, and the 7.G2 

sniper rifle can all be used. In addition 

to live ammunition, units will use 

blanks and do Rlultiple Integrated 

Laser Engagemen1 System (MILES) 

training in the building. 

SP1 Ilohert Ozclrn. 92110 En~neer 

Battalion, Iols ihrou-11 piles of 

tires pro\.ided at no rosi bp a local 

tire company and the property 

disposal offices at Fort Stewart, 

Fort Gordon, and Charleston Air 

Force Base. 

Army Generates Computer Images 


To Plan Future Battles 


Military pilots often Irarn their trade 

Iy .jl.?/in,g aircraft simulators through 

con~putm-gt:~~rrated terrain scenes.

Sin~ilar srrnes may someday help th? 

Army 11lan battles and test missiles. .

1

. 

wo Arm)- organizations-the Enginrer Topographic Lahilratories (ETL) 

and the Rlissile Command-have 

teamed xvith the Defcnse Advanced 

Research Projects Agency lo apply 

computcr image generation (CIG) to 

these tasks. Over the next three years, 

lioeing Aerospace Company will develop four specialized CIG syst.ems for 

the Arniy, two for battlefield manage 

ment and two for missile simulation. 

The CIG system comhines digital terrain elevati<in and feature data with infi,rmation from maps, phot(~grai-,hs, 

and satellite imagery. It produces 

shaded three-dimensional perspectives 

of the terrain. These scenes $lion 

natural terrain features as well as objects like bridges, buildings and roads. 

Clouds, fog or snow can he added for 

extra realism. 

Computer-generaled terrain scenes 

could help commaniiers study their 

areas if operation and plan their 

courses of action. Commanders could 
examine the terrain from any viewpoint and location and try out. different 

liattle tactics. They could position 

troops, deploy smolie, blow up dams, 

01. simulatc other maneuvers and predict how thest, actions would affect the 

battlefield and the hattle. 

Boeing will deliver an initial software-based system to ETL in the fall 

of 1986. The second system, scheduled 

for the following fall, will transfer the 

iniage generation function from software to hardware. This shift will speed 

processing time Crom 5 minutes per 

frame lo 30 fr:~mcsper second. ETI, 

test 'ystelns to de- Computer-generated scenes-realistic pictures of the terrain similar to those vplop techniques that can help com- used in flight simnlators-may help commanders plan battlefield maneuvers 

manders analyze the terrain and malie someday, tactical decisions. 

Letter to the Editor 

I enjoyed Captain William J. Sandbrook's article, The Engineer Officer: 

Advisor or Leader, A study of the Bafrle of Pefersburg, which drew forth 

examples of good and bad use of engineer officers on the battlefield. Ioffer two 

more thoughts in extension of the author's points. 

F~rst,I agree with his conclusion that "the Army still needs engineer leaders 

for the front lines and engineer advisors for the headquarters." However, at 

some points in the chain of command these should be the same. The clout that 

the division engineer/battalion commander can bring to hisduties as he wears 

both the commander hat and division engineer hat ensures that the direction of 

engineer forces in support of a division does not get separated from the advice 

given to the major general. True, the assistant division engineer (ADE) must 

provide a full time presence at the divis~onCP and should be one of the more 

experienced englneer officers in the division. But the battalion commander is 

also the senior engineer. 

Second, the engineer staff advisor (whether the platoon leader providing 

advice to the maneuver commander, or the brigade engineer, or the ADE) must 

stay close to the S-3 or G-3. As the engineers support in the areas of mobility. 

countermobility, survivab~lityand other "sapper" duties, the advice must be 

coordinated with the principal staff advlsor concerned-the S-3or G-3.Further. 

engineers should be surrendered willingly to brigade and division S-3/G-3 

slots, and replaced with equally competent and experienced officers. Of all the 

company grade officers, perhaps excluding only the armored cavalry lieutenant 

or captain, the engineer officer often gets the best opportunities to learn 

combined arms. He has been exposed to ~nfantry.armor, and artillery real time 

warfighting issues, as well as providing engineer support across the battlefield. 

He sees the big picture early. We have in the Corps of Engineers a pretty good 

track record of officers who have become brigade S-3s. division G-3sandchiefs 

of staff, and occasionally assistant division commanders. I hope the Corps of 

Eng~neerssenior officers continue to seek opportunities to provide tested 

engineers in those positions. The engineers of course profit, and so does the 

Army on the battlefield. 

-LTG E. R. HEIBERG Ill 

Chief of Engineers 

Modules 

Available 

A limited number of demonstration modules for the Hewlett 

Packard HP-41calculator are available on a "first come, first served" 

basis from CERL. The read-onlymemory (ROM)module for the handheld programmable calculator includes programs on: 

Demolition formulas 

Minefield logistics 

Wire obstacle logistics 

Bridge classifications 

Road crater formulas 

Network analysis 

Programming utility routines 

If you want copies of the modules, 

you can request them in writing 

from USA-CEKL. ATTN: CERL-FS 

(Mr. Deponai), P.O. Box 4005, 

Champaign, IL61820. 

Or youmay call MrJohnDeponai 

at (217) 373-7271, FTS 958-7271, 

AUTOVON through Chanute AFB, 

or toll free 800-USA-CERL (outside 

Illinois). 800-262-7122 (within 

Illinois). 
Engineer 

LEAR THE WAY 

by MG R~chardS. Kern, Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School 

We Stand scores the importance of well-equipped engineers 

to the successful combined arms team. Consider 

at the Watershed the comments I heard from the Israeli defense 

force during a visit last fall: 

From the Armored Division Commander who 

said. "In Lebanon. the real heros were our enziSince I became commandant nearly two years 

ago, I've visited with many of you to assess how 

combat engineers fit into this Army. We've got a 

lot that needs fixing. With your help, the Engineer 

School has designed a master plan for improvements that I call Combat Engineer Battlefield 

Initiatives for the '90s-a thrust to modernize 

engineers as part of the Army of Excellence and 

provide a linkage to Army 21, the Army of' the 

future. I want to share highlightsof this plan with 

you. 

We stand at a watershed! At a time when the 

Army has fielded a new generation of combat 

vehicles and AirLand Battle doctrine places a 

premium on mobility, the engineers are viewed as 

a combat multiplier that adds strength, depth and 

flexibility. Butwe are often viewed as cumbersome 

and deliberate-equipped heavy, unprotected and 

slow. Engineers are handicapped by an antiquated 

force structure that limits our productivity and our 

ability to respond to maneuver commanders' 

needs. 

Now, after two decades of research and development, we are on the verge of modernization. The 

technology for a new generation of combat engineer systems has been developed. Improved 

capability will allow us to create a more efficient 

organizational structure. A new breed of engineer 

-th,e supper-is emerging (story page 19). Dynamic, comprehensive change is at hand. 

Equipment 

Engineers are essential on today's battlefield, 

but our soldiers don't have the tools they need for 

the jobs they are being asked to do. We cannot 

continue to bring new engineer equipment and 

materiel into the Army at a stutter step. 

Despite the fact that defense budgets are decreasing, engineers need a sustained equipment modernization program. Recent Israeli experience under-

- neeri . . .Without them I couldn't advance a mile. 

Their speed was my speed." 

From the Armored Division Commander who 

said, "In Lebanon, the real heroes were our engineers ...Without them I couldn't advance a mile. 

Their speed was my speed." 

They were saying that success rides on responsive engineer support, but the speed of the bulldozer is too slow. If the Army is going to execute 

AirLand Battledoctrine.. .if the Army is going to 

fight the deep battle, then engineers must he truly 

available at the FLOT-ready to obtain freedom 

of maneuver-agility-for the ground force. 

The mechanization of the forward deployed 

engineer corps battalions in Europe has begun. 

The M9 ACE is coming (story page 26)-fielded 

now to the 13th Engineer Battalion, 7th Infantry 

Division (Light). FASCAM capability is being 

introduced into the engineer force-the 9th Infantry Division and Europe are receiving their 

GEMMS. MICLIC will change our ability to 

breach com~lexobstacles. The technolonv ... for a

host 111 new syhteni-: l~ketht. COV c.sror> page2,. 

the'I'f.:SS. \'c;lcan(,, ;tnd tht*H;\lI ison rht. horizon 

(story page 20) as bur Engineer Materiel Master 

Plan charts our transition to the future. 

Organization 

Our objectiveis to be available at the FLOT and 

in the deep attack-to be capable, protected, mobile 

and productive-and most important, to he responsive to the maneuver commander. But new 

equipment aloneis notthe panacea. We must forge 

a new engineer architecture. We need: 

More compact units with a higher ratio of 

equipment to manpower. 

Greater integration with the Army field structure at all levels. 

A forward shift in command and control. 

Reduced overhead and greater productivity. 
Battlefield Initiatives for the '90s 


Today in the field you are trying valiantly to 

make our World War 11-vintage organizational 

architecture work through ad hoc command and 

control arrangements and task forces. The missions haven't changed with AirLand Battle 

doctrine; the implications have. 

The emphasis is on rapid tempo, greater distances, quick shifts from mode to mode, and 

shorter warning times. The length and depth of 

the battlefield extend over a greater operational 

area. 

But the most significant challenge is time. The 

windows in which the combined arms team must 

act are very short. We no longer have the response 

time necessary to shift engineer units across the 

battlefield -to pull off bridge and mine missions 

in one place, reattach, move to another sector, and 

be ready to support an attack and breach a 

complex obstacle. 

Yet under our current structure, the center of 

mass of engineer assets is hack at corps. Nearly 

70% of engineer combat assets are assigned to 

corps despite the fact that more than 60% are 

required in the division and brigade areas. Units 

are task-organized forward creating complicated 

command and control arrangements at platoon, 

company, brigade, battalion, and division. 

Habitual association-the key to integrating 

engineers into the commander's scheme of maneuver-suffers at every echelon. The engineer 

platoon leader is overloaded to the point that he 

has difficulty juggling his many responsibilities 

for mission execution and staff. Logistics and 

maintenance- already complex -becomecomplicated to the point of not working as the battle 

progresses. 

We are determined to solve our architectural 

problems-to fix the systemic base so we no longer 

must accept Band Aid solutions. We made important progress last year with the redesign of the 

engineer combat battalion (heavy) to give robustness to engineer construction and defense 

capability in the rear area (story page 16). 

The Engineer School is currently developing a 

plan to restructure the engineer assets. It brings 

together the requirements of AirLand Battle, the 

lessons learned from field exercises like Reforger 

and the NTC, and the results of our worldwide 

engineer analyses. This aggregate plan is called 

E-FORCE (story page 10). 

Missions and Challenges 

AirLand Battle poses new challenges for all 

engineers. Change is the companion of modernization. As we rethink our organization to make 

better use of engineer assets, we must keep in mind 

the realities of AirLand Battle. 

Don't fall into the trap of limiting your definition of AirLand Battle to the close or the deep 

operation. The engineers' contribution to the 

combined arms team is not exclusively in the 

brigade area. True, it is the focal point of ground 

combat-bayonet to bayonet. But this is not the 

way the Army describes AirLand Battle. In order 

to have the deep operation, all elements must be 

synchronized successfully throughout the depth 

of the battlefield. 

Missions and challenges abound for all of us in 

AirLand Battle. Let's not overlook the fact that 

the combat heavy unit in the rear may be fully 

engaged in hostile operations at an airfield that 

we are desperately trying to keep open to sustain 

the flow of troops to continue the fight. 

Remember the terrain analysis team that plays 

an increasingly vital role in the commander's 

success as new topographic systems provide 

information critical to his shaping of terrain and 

scheme of manuever. 

We have a number of things we need to fix. But 

leadership throughout our force and the way wego 

at doing our jobs are not among them. These are 

the strengths we share. 

When I think of warrior spirit the word that 

comes to mind is audacity: to execute violently, to 

confront the issues. . . to go at it. 

I ask you to keep charging. Keep convincing 

that maneuver commander that engineers are 

valued partners in the combined arms team. But 

make sure he knows that your organization is 

antiquated and your tools areobsolete-make sure 

he understands when you have to put a Band Aid 

on a command and control arrangement to make 

it work. Ensure he knows what you could achieve 

if properly equipped and organized for battle. 

Go get credit for your drive on, can do, essayons 

leadership and your warrior spirit. But make sure 

he knows if you were effectively organized and 

equipped with the proper tools you could devote 

your warrior spirit to being even more responsive 

to his needs. 
?RIDGE THE GI"; 

by CSM Charles T. Tucker. U.S. Army Engineer Center & School 

Adjusting to Change: 

The Leadership Challenge 

As the Army modernizes combat engineers to better support the combined arms team in t,he AirLarrd 

Battle, engineer noncommissioned officers face the 

challenge of helping troops adjust to new organizations and equipment. 

During my visits, many of you have said you are 

pleased with the new equipment and the quality of initial training provided by new equipment training 

teams. However, some of you may receive no training 

prior to joining units undergoing changes in equipment and organization. You must prepare to deal 

with predictable problems like: 

Conscious or unconscious resistance to change 

because of uncertainty and nnfamiliarity. 

Tlie tendency for units undergoing rapid change to 

become unmanageable and unproductive because 

of the complexity of the effort. 

Hampered teamwork due to personnel changes as 

soldiers move to new teams and new working relationships. 

While change creates opportunities to improve professionally, it also threatens the tried and true. People resist change almost instinctively because the old 

ways are well known and the new ways aren't yet 

established. Soldiers who are experts with old equipment may resist change because they feel they are 

not adept with the new equipment and may lose 

status. 

NCOs and their officer counterparts must work 

together to overcome this natural resistance by explaining the advantages of the new equipment or 

organization. Information and experience are the 

best cures for uncertainty. As soon as you receive information or training, start familiarizing your troops. 

Read everything you see about the proposed force 

structure and equipment developments. Granted at 

this point information may be limited. But with a little 

research you can find helpful material. 

This issue of ENGINEER makes a good beginning. 

You should also receive the Engineer Center Team 

Minutes which are published monthly by the IJSACE, 

Directorate of Combat Developments (DCD), ATTN: 

ATZA-CUP, Stop 281, Fort Relvoir, VA 22060-5281. 

Information notes and bulletins published by 

MACOM engineers and laboratories also contain 

useful information. Specific questions can be directed 

to the Program Management Office of DCD or the 

Engineer Hotline. 

Don't overlook the fact that the new frequently 

builds upon technological advances and improvements to the old. Keys to understanding the deployment of new equipment are often found in field 

manuals that explain similar, existing systems. You 

would be wise to get together with your commander, 

platoon leader and subordinate NCOs to review field 

manuals on the utilization of like equipment. 

During the transition, you must respond to the 

demands of both the old and new systems. The potential for conflicting priorities, unclear guidance and 

ambiguous situations increases. I think you will agree 

this is truly a leadership challenge. The attitude "Z 

know you've got problems, but so do I, so go out there 

and work it out" isn't conducive to a smooth transition. 

You must create a climate of understanding that 

allows soldiers to express their frustrations and apprehensions. This does not mean you should tolerate 

lack of discipline. But soldiers need opportunities to 

air their concerns. 

Change, by its very nature, is disruptive. The 

disbandment of intact teams, the creation of new 

teams, and all the associated changes in procedures 

and reporting relationships can cause units which 

once functioned smoothly to lose effectiveness. 

To offset this, stress the things that will stay the 

same. Reassure soldiers that while some things are 

changing, others are not. You must present a clear, 

time-phased plan so troops can see they will soon be 

through the transition and things will return to normal. 

Units where officers and NCOs welcome change 

and the opportunity it brings will have the greatest 

success. Keep your soldiers informed. Let them express their frustrations, problems and apprehensions. 

Increase their confidence by devoting ample time to 

training. Give awards and incentives that recognize 

superior performance and reestablish the value of 

teamwork. 

Most importantly, remember the unit is looking to 

you for leadership. 
-
I Career Notes 

Commissioned Officers Branch 

Advanced Civil August 31, 1986 is the deadline for applications to the Advanced Civil 

School Board which will meet September 1, 1986. The procedure for ap- School Board: 	 plying to the Board is outlined in AR 621-1, Training ofMilita,ry Personnel at Civilian Institutions. All officers who have previously sent in applications will automatically be considered unless they have withdrawn 

their applications. 

The following fully funded quotas were available in FY 86. 

USMA 27 

Civil Engineering 16 

Engineering Administration 4 

General Engineering 5 

Electrical Engineering 1 

TopographyIPhotography 2 

Geodetic Science 1 

ORSA 2 

Area Studies 2 

Journalism 1 

Robotics 1 

FY 87 quotas will be similar. Additional quotas for Degree Completion, Co-op, Permissive TDY,and Training with Industry will also be 

available. 

Officers selected to attend ACS who will not complete 24 months of a 

CONUS tour or the prescribed overseas tour by the start of school will 

be deferred until the next school year. 

A predetermined number of officers will be identified as alternates. 

This alternate list will be used for two years to fill unprogrammed vacancies. 

All officers applying to ACS should be branch qualified (TOE experience, advanced course completion, and successful company command). Each application should include a current photo, transcripts and 

GRE test scores. Selection is based on the whole person concept with 

particular emphasis on successful company command. 

The results of the Advanced Civil School Board will be released in October. For additional information, contact CPT Pete Cooksey, (202) 

325-7426, AV 221. 

CGSC Board: The Command and General Staff College Board ~vill meet October 7 to 

November 21, 1986. Officers selected for promotion to major in 1985 

plus majors in year groups '73, '74, and '75 will be considered. 

LTC Promotion Board: The FY 86 lieutenant colonel active duty promotion board will convene 

from July 15 to August 29, 1986. Year group '71 %,ill be in the primary 

zone; year group '72 will be below the zone. To be considered for promotion, you must have completed CGSC before June 15, 1986. 

Career Tips: Make sure your ORB, phone number, address, photo, and fiche are upto-date. 
by MG Richard S. Kern, 

MAJ -1.R~hardCapka 

and M AJ Houng Y. Soo 

A'~rLandBattledoctrine stressescombined arms operations over 

large areas. Its four tenets-agility, 

flexibility, depth and synchronization-accentuate the role of the 

combat engineer on the modern 

battlefield. 

It demands increased tempo and 

greater distances from all functional 

engineer missions-mobility, 

countermobility, suruiuability, 

general engineering and topography. In other words, engineers 

must accomplish the same tasks 

over a larger area in significantly 

less time. 

This comes at a time whencombat 

engineers are at a watershed. The 

Army has embraced a new warfight 

doctrine that stresses maneuverability and is equipping with more 

mobile and lethal fighting systems. 

Yet, the combat engineer-the man 

who converts mobility to maneuverability-finds himself supporting a 

The Engineer School is currently 

developing E-FORCE-a plan to 

restructure engineer assets throughout the depth of the battlefield. EFORCE brings together the requirementsofAirLand Battle, thelessons 

learned from exercises like Reforger 

and the National Training Center 

(NTC), the results of analyses of 

worldwide engineer requirements, 

and studies of new equipment productivity. 

The goal is to fix systemic defects 

in engineer organizations.. .defects 

that until now prevented thecombat 

engineer from providing timely, 

responsive support to the maneuver 

commander executing AirLand 

Battle doctrine. 

E-FORCE addresses the entire 

spectrum of engineer organizations 

from the combat zone to the 

RCZ/COMMZ. E-FORCE consists 

of three components: 

Support to close combat heavy 

forces in the forward combat zone. 

Support to close combat light 

for implementation. Engineer support toclosecombat light forces was 

reorganized to meet special requirements of air transportability to and 

within the theater of operations. As 

a result, the engineer support package to XVIII ABN Corps contains 

light corps engineer battalions and 

light equipment companies that are 

readily transportable to augment 

the light division engineers in the 

contingency theater. 

In the RCZKOMMZ: 

The topographic engineer hattalion has been reorganized and 

tailored to meet theater-specific 

needs. 

The engineer combat battalion 

(heavy) has been redesigned to 

increase horizontal capability 

relative to vertical capability, 

reflecting battlefield requirements. 

Specialized teams and detachments were formed at echelons 

above corps to centralize control 

and decentralize execution of 

rapidly modernizing battlefield with forces in the forward combat zone. specialized functions such as well 

a cumbersome World War I1 oreani- - Suooort .. for the rearcombatzone/ drilline. -. divineand - as~haltooerazational architecture and antiquated communications zone. tions. 

equipment. Inshort, today'scombat Two of these-support to the close Now our energies are focused on 

engineers are the weakestlinkin the combat light and fortherearcombat improving support to the close combattlefield combined arms team. zone-have already been approved bat heavy forces-on giving the 
-- 

1 

1 

1 

ENGINEER BATTLEFIELD LAYOUT 

maneuver commander the respon- DEFENSE SCENARIO 

siveness he needs to win on the CURRENT 

modern battlefield. I I -I ! ! I I 

The Problem 1 Ll? E?! "" C I ""7 ,
 Engineer support to the close p x @

combat heavy combined arms team co'os 

is broken. Insufficient engineers are x x 

X El c"'"43 .; 


organic to maneuver forces. Attempts to overcome the deficiency 

by assigning ad hoc task forces 

forward out of corps assets overload 

COrV CI 

@ ax 


E3 @ >

> 


B 
"" 1 


""'" 

engineers at all echelons. Command 5.21im -- li.21~~

and control (C2),communications, Figure 1 

maintenance, and logistics become 

@ 1 corps 

complicated to the point of not 

working as the battle progresses. 

The current structure also fosters a 

false sense of flexibility at the corps 

level. 

Studies and our long term experience in Europe show that each 

maneuver brigade in the forward 

combat zone requires at least one 

engineer battalion. Typically, the 

need is met by augmenting the 

divisional engineer battalion with 

corps combat battalions. Even with 

the mechanization of corps combat 

battalions, there are significant differences between divisional and 

corps battalions. 

For example, divisional engineers 

have AVLBs and CEVs; corps units 

do not. So, we patch together ad hoc 

task organizations in avain effort to 

ensuresufficientengineers and equipment are available to support maneuver forces. Figure 1 shows how 

this task organization is deployed 

on the battlefield. 

This complex arrangement strains 

towards a solution. The divisional 

engineer leader at each maneuver 

echelon is dual-hatted-serving as 

both commander of his unit and the 

maneuver commander's engineer 

advisor. 

For example, the engineer battalion commander not only exercises 

command and control over his battalion which is spread throughout 

the division area; he is also responsible to the division commander 

for orchestrating theactivitiesof all 

corps' engineer assets that support 

his maneuver echelon. His attentions are divided and his staff is 

overtaxed. 

The divisional platoonleaderwho 

supports a battalion task forceis the 

most overloaded engineer unit commander. He serves simultaneously 

as an engineer planner, executor, 

coordinator/integrator, and principal advisor to the lieutenant colonel maneuver commander. Yet he is 

one of the youngest officers in the 

division-typically 20 to 24 years 

old and probably fresh out of EOBC. 

Consider the task force engineer's 

area of responsibility compared with 

that of his infantry counterpart 

(Figure 2). Experience at NTC has 

borne out how easily the task force 

engineer (platoon leader) is over^ 

come by events. Maneuver commanders at NTC quickly recognize 

that their engineer platoon leadersno matter how motivated-cannot 

succeed as both planners and 

executors. This limits the engineer 

support available to a task force! 

There is also another C' problem. 

At each maneuver echelon, the level 

of engineer command and control is 

inappropriate in relation to the rest 

of the combined arms team. For 

example, at brigade level, the brigade commander works with armor, 

infantry, artillery, and support battalion commanders and battalion 

staffs (Figure 3). The disconnect is 

with theengineer. Hisengineer commander is a company commander 

who must overcome thedifferencein 

level of experience between himself 

and battalion commanders to get 

into the inner circle. 

Ad hoc engineer task force organizations also play havoc with communications. Units compelled to 

operate at extended ranges require 

AM as well as FM communications. 

Multiple nets must be used to establish command and control with 

engineer task forces, supported units 

and parent units. The differences in 

assigned frequencies, CEOIs and 

ENGINEER PLATOON LEADER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 

Figure 2 
and the flexibility to provide en- the attacking division would go on 

gineer support over a broad area the offensive with only its divisional 

and still weigh the main effort. engineers forward-with assistance 

When subjected to the rapid tempo from corps engineers limited to 

of AirLand Battle, this apparent facilitating movement behind the 

flexihility dwindles to illusion. FLOT and following to keep the 

For example, consider thescenario LOC open for CCS elements. 

in Figure 4. The corps commander is 

COMSEC keying equipment ex- required to control the FLOT, con- The Solution 

acerbate the problems. Engineer tain the penetration from the center, E-FORCE solves the problems 

responsiveness is hindered. and conduct a counterattack in the inherent in our current structure by 

Similiar problems arise in the south. Engineers are shown com- providing sufficient engineer assets 

maintenance and supply arenas. mitted to the forces holding the organic to the division and sim1)ivisional units are supported hy FLOT and assisting in containing plifyingcommand and control, comDISCOM; however, corps units op- the penetration. munications, maintenance and superating in the division area are still Although the corps commander ply. It gives engineer units the 

tied to their COSCOM umbilical would like to reinforce his attacking advantages of habitual association 

curd. The issue is further compli- division with additional engineers with their go to war units. 

cated because maintenance and (dotted lines), his mechanized enThe closecombat heavy E-FORCE 

supply relationshipschange ascom- gineers are committedforward. This divisional organization (Figure 5) 

mand support relationships shift. 	 means the best he can do is provide consists of three 493-man divisional 

The result? Corps units operating wheeled engineers to support the combat engineer battalions and one 

forward put unresourced burdens on attacking division. Due to the time ribbon bridge company. These batan already overloaded DISCOM and required to disengage and link up, talions have three armored combat 

engineer companies comprised of 

CURRENT C' 	 twosapper platoonsandone assault 

and barrier platoon. With an end 

strength of i,684, it is formed by 

combining the 893-man divisional 

engineer battalion with a 790-man 

---T--------- l---------- I 	 corps combat engineer battalion. 

gineer battalion. 

field. The division engineer orchesFisore 3 trates theengineereffort throughout 

must work with an external logis- +:""I ,,>;1 	 ENGINEER BATTLEFIELD LAYOUT LLL'Z. La... 

Habitual association-a close, OPERATIONAL LEVEL 

continuous relationship between all < 

elements-is vital to successful in- .. 9 

tegration of the combined arms 

team. It enables the maneuver commander to mold the team he will -

ao 

to war with-to put them through 

gruelingdrills that instillconfidence 

and cohesion. Yet, stationing and 

our current architecture deny corps 

units opportunities to train in habitual association with their go to 

war divisions. They become pick-up 

units rather than well drilled cornbined arms partners capable of 

anticipating thecommander's intent 

and acting with mission type orders. 

Perhaps the most serious pitfall Xinherentin our current structureis a 

false impression of flexibility at the 

corps level. The original intent of XXX the current structure was to provide 

the corpscommander with the assets Figure 4 
E-FORCE 

DIVISION ENGINEER 

the HHC will support the engineer 

companies with POI, and Class V 

(ammunition) resupply-reducing 

the size of company trains and 

paralleling armor and mechanized 

infantry organizations. 

The fact that the battalion will 

operatewithin a brigade rather than 

Fh a division area makes these organizational changes possible. By centralizing support assets, we focus 

RIBBON the effort oE deployed squads, platoons and companies forward. This 

allows units more time on-site to 

!2 23% support the maneuver commander. 

It is a flexible organization that 

integrates sufficient assault 

breaching equipment forward with 

the maneuverforces-allowing units *Ito deploy rapidly, cross obstacles in

stride and maintain the momentum 

11-0.46-56 3-1-100.104 of the attack. 

Each maneuver echelon has an 

engineer element of the commen. 1-1 Fl surate level tosupport the maneuver commander: 1-0-31-32 1-1-62-64 Figure 5 An engineer company commander supports the task force. 

the division area-controlling both Each E-FORCE engineer battal- .An engineer battalion comorganic and corps assets. An en- ion has three of these companies. mander supports a maneuver 

gineer battalion is forward witheach The battalion organizational dia- brigade. 

of the forward deployed brigades. gram is included in Figure 5. The .A division engineer directs the 

The third divisional engineer bat battalion organizational structure total engineer effort within the 

talion provides general support of parallels that of the combat arms division area and performs adthe entire division rear and moves battalions. Maintenanceis colocated vance planning for future operawith the reserve brigade upon cam at battalion level with company tions. 

mitment. teams to support the engineer com- The maneuver commander can 

At task force level, today's over- panies. A support platoon within expect and receive the same level of 

loaded platoon leader is replaced as 

task force engineer by a company ENGINEER BATTLEFIELD LAYOUT 

commander. The company com- DEFENSE SCENARIO 

mander brings the maneuver task (E-FORCE] 

force commander the additional 

knowledge, expertise, personnel, and 

equipment necessary to responsively p ... E! 

and adequately support the task 

force. And the engineer platoon X leader is given the opportunity to 

learn his trade under the tutelage of 

r' 

la 

an experienced engineer com- x 

X mander. 

The E.FORCE company organi. \ 

zational diagramis shown in Figure 

7. The company is organized into 

two sapper platoons of 30 men each 

Irl 

COlP. 

(similiar to today's sapper platoon) 

and one equipment intensive assault 

and barrier platoon. This organization provides flexibility for task 

organizations in support of both 

offensive and defensive situations. 

IEWL 

Figure 6 
ENGINEER BATTLEFIELD LAYOUT 

OPERATIONAL LEVEL 

xxx 7 E-FORCE 

responsiveness throughout his 

organization. 

Communicationsrequirements are 

simplified. As organic members of 

the division, engineer units are 

assured access to CEOIs and 

COMSEC keying materials. The 

area of responsibility for each engineer battalion is reduced to a 

manageable level. DISCOM can be 

resourced to support the additional 

engineer assets in the division area. 

Most important, engineer units can 

habitually train with their fellow 

memhers of the combined arms 

team. 

E-FORCE provides the maneuver 

commander at corps and division 

level with dynamic, flexible, responsive engineer support to influence the battle. Figure 8 depicts 

the Figure 4 scenario under 

E-FORCE. 

Figure 8 

Again,thecorpscommandermust time the attacking division has 

control theFLOT,containthepenetra- sufficient engineer assets to support 

tion in the center, and conduct a its offensive. 

counterattack in the south. En- Corps units can still assist in 

gineers are again committed to preparing the route of advance to 

assist in controlling the FLOT and the FLOT, but each attacking briE -FORCE containingthepenetration. Butthis gade has at least one battalion of 

DIV ENGR COMPANY mechanized combat engineerssoldiersthev habituallv trained with-

.. ... . 20-11-1 3 14-23-30 1-0-37-38 

I - HMMWV 

1 - 2'bl Trli 

, - APC I I 

1 -water Trlr

, - APC I 

1 -water Trlr 

I - HMMWV 

I - APC I - APC 

2 - ACE I- 1 HT Trlr 

. . 10 n l 0.0-13-13 

1 - HMMWY I - COVICEV 2 - VOLCANO 

I - *T T,,, 2 - MICLIC 2 - Dump 1.k 

2 - AVLB 2 -SEE 

1 -ACE 2 -Dump Trk 

1 - HMMWV I - HMMWV 

I - ROBAT 4 -l "iT Tll, 

2 -61 Cargo Carrler 

Figure 7 

who are ready to accompany them 

into battle. 

Concurrent with the reorganization of the divisional engineer support structure, engineer capability 

in the corps' area will he restructured. Corps capability and flexibility is retained because over 52%of 

the engineer structure remains at 

corps. 

Figure 9 is an organizational line 

diagram of the corps sapper battalion.This three-company battalion 

will replace today's corps combat 

engineer battalion. Blade-type earthmoving equipment is being added to 

carry out the rubble clearance and 

route maintenance tasks expected 

from high intensity combat in built 

up areas such as central Europe. 

The combat support equipment 

(CSE) company will also be reorganized to focus on LOC maintenance-typemissions and to augment 

corps sapper battalions with heavy 

engineer equipment. Figure 10 
t 

E-FORCE CORPS SAPPER BATTALION 

shows the proposed CSE company 

organization. 

The emphasis on LOC maintenance and rubble clearance acknowledges the importance of keeping the corps' lifeline to resupply 

open and preserving ability to maneuver behind the FLOT. The heavy 

equipment is also readily available 

to move forward and supplement 

the divisional engineers in creating 

survivability positions and constructing obstacles. 

Figure 9 

the problems through ad hoc command and control arrangments and 

task forces. E-FORCE attacks and 

corrects the deficiencies. Under 

E-FORCE, the combat engineer is 

truly an integral member of the 

combined arms team. 

MG Richard S. Kem is commandant of the Engineer School. He has 

served in armored, corps, combat 

heauy, and airborne engineer battalions and at both division and 

corps staff leuel. 

MAJ J.Richard Capka is the S-3 

for the Engineer School Brigade at 

Fort Beluoir. Hegraduated from the 

U.S. Military Academy and the 

Command and General Staff College. He has a master's degree in 

engineering from the Uniuesity of 

California at Berkeley and is a 

registered professional engineer in 

Virginia. 

MAJ Houng Y. Soo is assigned to 

the Engineer School Directorate of 

Combat Deuelopmrnts. He has a 

bachelor's degree from the Polytechnic Instituteof Brooklyn, a master's 

degree in nuclear engineering from 

the Uniuersity of Washington, and 

is a graduate of the Command and 

General Staff College. He is a reg. 

istered professional engineer in 

Washington. 

ENGINEER COMPANY 

COMBAT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT 

I I I mander must wait for his enpineers. - a - - -

Conclusion ..* MAiNTENANCE TI "' ,rl

EARTHMOVING 

While AirLand Battle doctrine 24-19-21 10-29-30 1-2-62-65 1038-39 doesn't change the basic combat ,_,,,,,,,, engineer missions, it places addi- ;:;:: 

tional emphasisonthedimension of '-"" 

time. To contribute as a combat 

multiplier and true members of the 2-,>., C"C" '0.iOI DUMP 7s.. ,-oozFR .,W,NC" combined arms team, combat en- 1-5111 CUC" 

- fleeting windows of opportunity on 

the battlefield are lost. 

,-LET 

,-,OT,R, gineers must be able to provide I-IIICrY .,C

1--1A,ll D,S,

timely, responsive support to the 9-r~~rororn ,--01.0E1

maneuver 3-cI).*e commander. If, on the 

SUPPLY 

.A?.? ".,.*>.A2 "...>*.,< ".".A.* 

3-ScRAPee 

2-oozER *,R<OPER 

I-ssr lolls, ,-LET 

3-40T TRL 

,-sTTwk 

. 

The current engineer structure is .-,,,, cucv I-co~~~~~ TRUCI I-CONIICI ,. 1-1 ,)?I TR" 

I-III1UDB,Lr I-rutRE9 s*os 3-57 YRLC unresponsive to the demands of ,-3a~w~E~GER (-=EN pus irOSwos I-*jL VA~ 

,-wu >.",STA" AirLand Battle. The deficiencies q-w~L~,woTRL t-s7 TmAc 

Figure 10 .-ST,m"c" 

4-3 ,*, ,R, 

>-ST WRECXER 

defy genuine efforts to overcome >-2,,2TTRK 

other hand. the maneuver com-
A leaner, more proiiuctive, better 

led, more r;itiimaIl,y desibmed, 

mixlern engineer vombat battalion 

(heavy) rvill soon be fielded. Tile first 

unit (not ye1 selecled) will convert in 

FY 87. New ARTEl's and revised 

soldier's manuals will he available 

whcn the new TOE takes effect. 

The redesigned combat heavy will 

fucus on general engincering tasks to 

the rear of the brigade boundary. 1l1e 

advent oi efficient. modern combat 

engineer equipmentsuch as the 

Villcnno, TEXS, and COY will enhance 

the capabilities of divisio~ial and corps 

hattalions and obviate the need for the 

combat heavy in the brigade area. 

Howtver, the batt~lion will retain 

limited combat engineering and infan~ 

try capabilities anii, thus, retains comhat as a descriptor in its title. 

Recause the raor.irnled cr~mhat 

heavy battaiiim gerlrrally will be 

located lo the rear of the bri~ade lioundurg, it is defined by Aft 310-25 as a 

Catc~ory I1 unit. Hy det'initirrn, this 

opens the entire hatlalion to women. 

Historical Perspective 

The Department of the Army spproved the new TOE 5-115 in response 

ti, roncerns that the existing battulion 

is overl<,ade(l. 

Iu 1974, the engineer construction 

battalion was converted to the combat 

heavy. The main thrust IJ~this conver~ 

siim was to pui more tooth into the 

Army's general purpose force structure as required by the Nunn Amendment. Studies of the early 1970s 

engineer slice of the force structure 

typically referred 1r1 the engineer combat battalion as part of the tail. 

The cor~version added conr1)at 

engineering missions anii "infantry 

operations, when required" to the 

repertoire of the battalion and changed 

"The engineer cornhat at. 

talion (he:*,!.) is D~~ 

t, it, jircalerflesibiljtv and utilit~., planners have cn~n~nitted it to 

~nissionsfrom the FCZ to the 

COMMZ which call for it to perform all combat and general ~'ll~ineerin!: tasks." 

-Functional Area Assessment 

Issue 5-7. August 1984 

its name to the engineer combat hat^ 

talion (heavy). As a resull, the battalion asas added tu the tooth portion of 

the force structure and the Army's 

tooth-fo-tailratio was enhanced. 

While the change appeared superficial to some observers, the impact 

was significant within the battalion, 

The post-Vietnam soldiers in (:MF51, 

general engineer, who comprised most 

ol the hattalion, were required to learn 

not only technical constructions skills 

(carpentry-masonry, strucluras, 

nlurnhin~. electrical. and construction -, 

equipment operations), hut also to 

nlasler all combat, engineering and 

most light infantry skills. 

In support of the installation or 

hlACOM, the hattalion performed consttrvdtion, tasks during most of the 

year, but aas then evaluated in a field 

environment, primarily on its combnt 

skills. Over tile next several years, the 

Ch'IF 51 NCOs scored lower than their 

on the S&T and per. 

formance evalu:itiilns,slid the 

heavy battalions appewed lcss trained 

duling ficld evaluations to ARTEP 

standards. 

The a~ntt)at heavy liad become the 

decathlete of battalions. It was rcquireii to perform all general engineer 

tasks of thc old constructkm t~attalion, 

plus all combat eng3neering tasks of 

the a~mhat engineer battalion, and to 

be prepared to conduct all light infantry operations of an infantry battalion. 

It was everything to everybody. It was 

overloaded! 

Redesign Process 

In 1984, through I.'ztn*.lionaL Are(* 

Assessment Issue5-7,the Army leadershit~ recocnized llie urohlem and task- %, 

ed the Engineer School to evaluate the 

employment of thc combat heavy and 

to consider redesign, if appropriate. 

Engineer Combat Battalion Heavy 


TOE 05115L000 


Engr Cbt 

Bn Hvy 

32-3-672-707 

3 Engr 

Cbt Hvy Co 17-3-207-227 5-0-155-160 

F~gure1. 
Headquarters andsupport Companyi(HSC) 

Engineer Combat Battalion Heavy 

TOE 

n 

051161000 

I 1 1 1

I 

I , 

S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 Maint 

0-0-8-8 0-0-4-4 3-0-20-23 0-1-13-14 Plt HQ 

1-1-2-4 

- I . , - I 

Comm Sec Med Sec Equip Intermediate 

0-0-15-15 0-0-12-12 Plt HQ - Maint 

1-0-2-3 0-1-25-26 

I I 

Dump Trk Asphalt Const Maint Ctl 

Sec Conc Sec Equip Sec &tAcctg Sec 

0-0-13-13 0-0-16-16 0-0-25-25 0-0-10-10 

: 

The Engineer School asked heavy 

i~attalioncommanders how the battalion should be ,fi.zed and in April, 

1985 convened a workshop of: 

Active Army and reserve component group and battalion commanders, 

Command sergeants major, including the Corps of Engineers 

Command Sergeant Major, 

Corps and MACOM engineers, 

Corps of Engineers staff officers, 

Engineer School repres~ntatives. 

The result was a major reorientation 

of the battalion's mission and 

capabilities statements and a redesig-n 

of the battalion. The c11ang.p~were not 

developed in a vacuum. 

Thc mission of the combat heavy was 

rationalized considering ail engineering requirements on the AirLand battlefield. Although many engineers feel 

a visceral fear of losing combat heavy 

battalions if they are perceived as being more con.slructio?ithan com,hnl, recent assessments of engineer requirements on the modern battlefield 

fully justify the existence of the com~ 

bat heavy to execute general engineering in the RCZ and COMMZ. 

The necessity within the force structure for combat heavy engineer battalions to perform construction tasks is 

now accepted. Therefore, the mission 

was rationalized without constraints or 

fears that a more realistic mission 

statement might result in eliminating 

the combat heavy battalions from the 

force. 

Revised Mission and Capabilities 

The revised mission arid capabilities 

statements greatly relieve the battalion overload and provide a more rational approach to the vast engineer requirements on the battlefield. The 

Co Maint 

0-0-28-28 

Figure 2. 

redesiped combat heavy will operate 

from the division rear througl~the 

COMMZ. 

Because the battalion will t)e 

conducting operations to the rear of 

the brigade boundary, the requirement 

"Lo pmjom inja.rf.try combal missions. 

wt~mregwirf;d" was revised to read "to 

perfwm~rea.r aren seeurily operations 

to i?i,cludcjyhting o..: infantry, wh.en 

required." This change deletes many 

light infantry tasks from the 

battalion's ARTEP. 

A major deletion from the 

capabilities of tile battalion was the 

elimination of minefield emplacement 

and clearing tasks. Mine detection 
equipment has been retained in the 

battalion, and routine minesweeps remain an integral part of construction 

and reconnaiss;mce operations. 

The hasty protertive n~inetask also 

remains in the batlalion's repertoire as 

it is a common soldier task. However, 

emplacement of deliberate and point, 

minefields and breaching of rninefiel(is 

are hrig;lde area lasks and, therefore, 

out of tht2 work area of the comhat 

heavy 

When minefields are foumi to the 

rear of thc l~rigadet~oun(lsry(opposing 

forces' FASCAM or bypassed 

minefields), it is postulated that the 

Liming of the removal will not he so 

urgent and frequent allowing comhat 

engineer Rattalions to be tasked from 

corps assets to cxccute tlrese n~issiims. 

Keorientat,ion of the comt);it heavy's 

mission greatly relieves o~~crloadi~~rg of 

the t,attalion. It also provides a ratir~nalarchitectural a~lpronchto support the vast enginccr requirements of 

the Airl,mcl hat.tlcfiel(l. 

Organization Redesign 

The intrrnal cirganization i~fthe ronrbat henvy \*.;IS srrutinized. Every position and item of eqiiipmcrlt was exaniinod under the microsc~lpcill' n~is~ 

sion essentiality, ~loctrine,proper skill 

utilization and rank struclure. anii 

niodcrn construction practices. .Again. 

tliere were no niicrnd cou,s. The result 

u.as a lean, modcrn, more proriucti\,r 

battaliori designed for wartime missions, not peacetime c<mstruction. 

Substantive chang-esReduced the hattalion level I 'I'OE 

strength from 796 to '707, a savings 

of 89 spaces per halttiI ']on. 

Estal~lished requirements f11r 

modern engineer ronstruction 

eqnipmenl such as interchairgeilk~le 

drum vibratory rollers and extenriing boom excavators. 

1)eleted tile engineer equipment and 

maintenance conillany (TOE 5-117; 

A Company) and rollt,d tilt unique 

engineer equipment and engineer 

direct support maintenance into a 

rellesigneri headquarters and supporl. company (TOE5-116), inrreasing the size Ron] 116 to 227; large. 

hut within the commmri calmhi1it.y 

of a captain. 

Keiluceri the size of the general ajnstruction squad from 12 to 10. 

Modified the 20-person emhankment 

Engineer Company 

Engineer Combat Battalion Heavy 

TOE 051171000 

Engr Co 

5-0-155-160 

- Co HQ Maint Sec Gen Const 

Plt Horiz Const 

2-0-17-19 0-0-22-22 

1-0-37-38 1-0-42-43 

- I h b

* I 

and excavation section r,F tli~three 

engineer companies (TOE 5-118) 

into one 12-person embankment section and one 14-person excavation 

section. 

1)eleted the battalion power 

distrihution section. 

Ileleted all MOS SIC, structures 

specialists, hum the battalion. ('l'hr 

Engineer Schnol is reviewi~igthr 

validity of retaining this RIOS in the 

force structure.) 

Consoliiiated the concrete mobiles 

into the asphalt-concrete section of 

the headquarters and support conipany. 

Consolidated the medium equipment 

transllortrrs and 20-ton iinmp 

trucks requiring 64C, heavy vehicle 

drivers, into a separate dump lruek 

section in the heaiiqu;irters and sup 

port company. 

1)eleted ohsoletr and unnecessary 

equipment such as ditching 

miichines, telephone maintenance 

trucks, chi~mici~land biological 

shelter s>-stems, and all hot-mix 

asphalt equipment (two hitumintus 

distributors remain). 

Organizational diagrams I the 

redesigned battalion, 11eaclqu:rrters 

and support company, and engineer 

company are shown in Figures 1,2and 

3. Figure 4 compares lhc redesigned 

battalion to the existing battalion. 

Excavation Grading & 

Compact Sec 

0-0-14-14 0-0-11-11 

Embankment 

Sec -

0-0-12-12 

Figure 3 

Conclusion 

Some cr~nfusion is inevitable 

whenever a ncw TOE is fielded. Ten]-

pora~?modifications will be nitlde until 

near equipment is procured. As the 

Army embarks on this shakeiiown, 

keep in mind that this redesign grra 

out of a detailed evaluation by expcrienced field and staff engineer r~fficers and NCOs. The goal \\-as a lean, 

modernized, more productive battalion. The redesigned engineer conihat battalion (heavy) meets that goal. 

Thf new combat heavy is not a compromise t~asedon politically expedient 

tooth-In-taii decisions, nor is it change 

f~orthe sake of change, nor a manpower savings drill. The combat. hew? 

re~iesipreilects a realistic look at 

wartime engineer requirements. The 

conlbination oE the redesigned comhat 
Comparison : Current Redesigned hea\.y, corps combat cnginetjr, and ~chere he qluicled the Xatirmul 7'rm:ninn~] 

ECBIH) ECBiH) divisional engineer battalions ~~roniiies Center from concr?pt .ionnulation to 

Strength 796 707 a coherent package of enginerr sup- eslnhkishm~nt. 

Officers 32 32 port to the AirLand battlefieki. He is CZL)T(IILLJ~ atfelrd'iny Honnmd 

Warrant linil'wsity os a senior ,fbllou: i,?z naofficers 9 ' 3 LTC Robert L. H~~-ndoncom?rii~n<l*.rl tional securily. He hrr~ n bni:h,rlor's 

Enlisted 757 672 the 802d Engineer Bcrttctlion de.qrer? in civil e?zgi?i.eerin,!] .jrm the 

General ICBT)(HW in Korea ~lus construc~ lirrit,ersity of Terns nt Austin, 11, 

construction 62% 53% tion und cdi~!isionol ~ngine~:~~ ,:om mrrster's derjmt. in eoizstrz~ction

Earthmoving 38% 46% pir?lie.?ill Vietmni. He has also serr~>d rnu~~~ngrfncrrt,frmrr Tizi~s A&;M Unic(rrLeader/led ,199 ,209 in Germany, P~onnma, and CONVS. s%ly,and o nraster'.~ degree an mrrnrqpHfj seined ??I HQDA, OUCSOPS Troi??. ~nt-ntfii~in MIT. He is (I r(!.q:yis/ercd pro^

Figure 4 inn Di?.eclorotr ,fionr 1975 to 19892 .fession~~l ~ngineerin %,so:.

Introducing: The Sapper 

An entirely new breed of soldier is emerging within the light and heavy divisions-the 

combat engineersapper. Equipped with uniqueskillsand abilitiescritical to AirLand Battle, he 

is a creation of Division '86, the Army of Excellence and the restructuring of the divisional 

engineer battalion. 

Today's sapper is a soldier trained to attack engineer problems with the speed necessary to 

support AirLand Battle and mobile armor warfare.. . to get the job done with whatever is 

immediately at hand.. .toseekquick and dirty rather than elegant solutions.. .to operateand 

survive under fire. Initiative, ingenuity and agility are his stock in trade. 

Traditionally, thecombat engineer builtfield fortificationsand deliberately breached routes 

through complex obstacles and minefields. He worked under fire, relying on manual labor, 

and occasionally aided by unprotected heavy equipment. The engineer missions remain 

virtually the same. But tactics and doctrine have changed-rendering slow, deliberate 

methods obsolete. AirLand Battle puts speed and ingenuity at a premium. 

Who is a Sapper? 

The sapper's hallmark isn't his organization or his equipment; it's his frame of mind. A 

sapper is an engineer who survives on his wits and his grit.. . an innovator who turns terrain 

and time to advantage by exploiting his situation and surroundings with the quick and dirty 

solution to whatever problem is at hand. His can do, essayons ingenuity are what make him 

essential in support of both the light and heavy force. 

The Light Sapper The Heavy Sapper 

The light sapper supports the light infantry The heavy sapper has more equipment to do 

team in deep thrust operations behind enemy his job-not enough.. .never enough.. . but 

lines and in defense of mountains,jungles, urban more than the light. An APC is his conveyance, 

environments and other terrain that demand his workroom, bunker and fighting platform. He is 

unique talents. He relies on airmobile insertions, armed with an array of demolition materials and 

stealth and night movements on foot to achieve mines. But his focus is not on his equipment-it's 

mobility. Equipped only with what hecan carry, on the mission: How toget it done with what he's 

his single greatest assest is his sapper spirit-his got! Like the light sapper, he depends upon his 

ability to improvise. own resourcefulness-his sapper spirit-to 

sustain the momentum of the attack. 

The modern 12B engineer assigned to a corps or divisional battalion resembles his 11B 

infantry counterpart in many ways-handling many ofthesame basic tasks. The difference isa 

matter of emphasis-the 128 specializes in the engineer-unique; the 116 in the infantryunique. While sappers do not usually fight as infantry in the macro sense as a battalion or a 

company, they fight as platoons within their task forces when the tactical situation requires. 

But the sapper is audacity personified-a new breed of combat engineer honed for the 

demands of AirLand Battle, a true combat multiplier. 
The Shape of Things to Come 


. Yauiprncnt 
 ,L 

Roundup 

by CPT Jeff Engbrecht 

The Volcano 

'Yiic Volcano-;I scatteral~le minc 

delivery system-1.uyidly dispenses 

960 niititank ;in(i anti~~crsonliel mines 

from tile UH.(iO heli(.ol,ter iinil iivaric-

~y of gr:rounil \~eliiclcs. Rcspo~isi~enew 

is limited only t~ythe crew's abilith- to 

load ~IIP dis~~er~s('r (at)olit 15 mirlutes) 

and uchiclc spcrri. ~\ir VcjIcii'n~) 

dispenscs iLs payload in 1.5 sec!~nils at. 

120 knots. 

\olci~n<~,l~slal-s the enmliZ. isolates 

tht! battlefield, r(!infi~rces friondl?; 

fires in hoth the offense and drfeosc.lt 

will replace the k156 3s the standard Tj~c TTulcano system was lypa I)ivisior~s in FY 87. Volcano will tr 

helicopter mina (lisl~rnsing system and for prumwement in fall E'Y auailablc to otlier aviation and 

GICAISS as the g-round delivery s)-stetn 86. Helicopter c;q~ability will be engine?, units in 19!12. 

for hes\,y a1111 light forccs. a\.ailahle to thr 7th and 9th Infantry 

The M58A1 Mine Clearing 

Line Charge (MICLIC) 

T~IcA~ICI,IC;
 L roclret-prnjectcd es~ 

plosiv? line charge-1)rovidcs close-in 

hrcacliing capability. \\'hen detonaleii. 

tlie &Il(:LI(: cleiirs a lane 5 x 100 

meters from a standhi'f distan(:r of 5O 

meters. A sccond hIICI.IC can be [ired 

from the hreached lane if a longer 

hreach is reqiiired. 

MICLIC will be used in irsponsc3 lo 

minefield breaching requirements 

identified hy tlie maneuver unit. A 

combat prime mover trlws 1.11~trai1c.r. to 

the point of the brrach Ivhere the line 

charre - is ~reuxrcd 

.. hv an encineor . . fir- *- ..; 

i11g squad. The trailer is rmsable and 

can be rlroppt.tl oil ;it ;i p~eselected 

location firi~~g lijrrcro\.i3ry 114. SIIIIIKI~~ 

elcment,~. to each eng3net.r company in airborne, trailtm will he allocated to heavy diviFielding is scheduled for Call I:Y 86. air assault, high terh light division, an(l sion engineer companies equipped with 

'i'hree hllCLIC trailers will he issued corps support roles. Two !VlICI,IC the KOBAT. 
The Robotic Obstacle 

Breaching Assault Tank 

(ILOBAT) 

I breaches tnir~efieliis by 

reni~tccontrol. An operator outsiiie 

tile vehicle dirccts RORAT into the 

[minefield wliera it fires a line charge 

and marks ti~clcnred lane. Depending 

upon the tactical sittiation, ROHAT 

<:allalsr, t~e~,pel.atetlmanually Gom inside. Eventiially, cornpiltcr technol(igy 

will firlly automate KOKAT's 

breaching capahilily. 

RnMnecrs mill operate ROBA'I' in 

support of the comtlined arms team. 

KOUAT ~(~nsists of an ilnproved MfO 

c:hassi.;, a rratk-width mine. roller or 

plou., two mine clcarir~gline charges, terrain Eeaturc bciiirirl mnneurt.r has tiecn prodnccd. IIowcver, ;i 

and a miirking system. Wiirn a I'orccs to brtach. fielding date has not i1er.n set b~?c:iuot. 

mii~efiel~lis detected, HOHA'I' \vill An accelerateil ile\~eli~prnentpro- uf 1,ucIjiet constraints. 

move f~irw?.artlFrom approximatt4y one griim is pnreeding ariii a prototype 

The Tactical Explosive 

System (TEXS) 

TEXS Will c~~nsist oi'a liquid hlasting 

;igent, mixing and pumping equipment, and an cntrcncliirii: attacllnrent 

niiiuntcd on a small en~pl;iccmcntcxcavator (SEk:). 

I':ngineers \\-ill employ tile TEXS in 

covering force, main battle and rear 

areas. TEXS will: 

Create long antilank ditches or 

crater r~~ails uing pre-emplaced or 

~i~~idly cmplaceii pipe.

.Ilestroy I~ridges. 

Crcate rubblc ohstaclrs in urban 

areas. .Ktvluce 1111st;icIcs10 incrc~:~scrno1)ility. 

(;reale defiladt, positions. 

Perform general demolition tasks. 

First dex~elopni:nan antitank riitclling cxpiosive. TESS is now finding 

i~tlrrruses such as deliberate breaching 

of mint.ficliis. The lower dct<iniltillll 

velocity of the TEXS explosive produces 1,lnst pressures that last longer 

than such high explosives as C-4 or 

TN" This all<r\vs tho mechanical 

spring systems of pressure-activated 

mines niorc tinlc to respotid to an applied 11l;ist pressure. 

Because the 1'1':XS blasting agent is 

nonexy~losiveuntil it is mixed, it offcrs 

a trcmcndoils ad\,anlage over corlventional eaplosi\,as in terrns of h;indling 

;III~storttge, especially in zones sut~ject 

to enemy fire. 

Ucvciopmcnt is under.way, 'rlre agent and the mixing, purnpil~gand 

Waterways Experiment Station emplacrmlent hard~~rr:. 

(WES) is tcsting tile liquid blasting 

ENGINEEP Sprlny 1986 2 1 
The Heavy Assault Bridge 

(HAW 

The HAB will be a standard tank 

chassis modified to transport, launcli. 

and retrieve a military load class 

(MLC) 70 bridge that spans 32 meters. 

It will also launch the current 60-foot 

armored vehicle launclied bridge 

(AVLB). 

Tlie HAB \%,ill be used by heavy division forward elements and emplaceti 

similarly to the AVLB. The assault 

carrier can 1au11ch the bridge without 

cxposing the crew to enemy fire and 

retrieve the bridge at either end. 

The HAB is in advanced devclopment. Fielding is slated for FY 92. It 

will be distributed among heat divisioli engineer units. 

CW JcfJEnybrc!chtis assigned to th? (C.S. engineer representative lo llie 

hree Design R~anoh qf the D.ireetorats A1,lieti Command Europe. ~Mohiie 

qf Combo./ Da>elopments, CSAES. He Force) ari ~nistrr,ntS-3 of the 78th 

~ULSsat-vc,d as plntoun lander rdC Com- En,ginew Rattalion i?~Etllin.gm, Gerpawg oj the 78th En,qirteer Ratlalioii mrzny. 

He is an EOAC ,qraduatr alzd has a 

degree in industrial engin*.eri.ng Jriirn 

Kochest8r I?istitntc. of ?i!ch.noloyy. 

Current Engineer Topographic Laboratories projects involve terrain analysis, mapping, automated cartography, 

image processing, surveying, weapon guidance, and robotics. Recent Copies of the following ETL technical reports are available 

at a nominal cost from the National Technical Information 

ETL Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA, 22161, or 

through the Defense Technical lnformation Center, Cameron 

Publications Station, Alexandria, VA, 22314-6145. When ordering publications from these organizations, please use the AD numbers 

listed. 

Ue~,elopmmtof ~~'IPCITO~~C Cortlrol for the Supsrrondur.ling 

timr,ity (;radiometer, Srptember 1985, AD-A 160 641. 

Ylrclronic Feedback Control of ,Mrrsr-Spring Ssrlerns, 

Septenaber 1385, All-A160691. 

ExtendedAreaExitPupil Viru:er,Augurt 1!)85,AIl-Al58364. 

?'bird-nrdrr (',I-III.FIITP~CP .. - T~XIUTF Ana1vh.i Applied . . t o

Samples of Hiph Hesolution Sgnlh~.lir Apertur.e Radar 

Imagery, Augusl 1988, All-A160 640. 

Soft<~,are('unuersion "[LIMA Standard Linear Format fSl.I.7 

to Inlerprnph Corporation Standard Interchange Formot 

(SIFI,July 1885. A1)-A161 086. 

Bibliography ufln-House end (:onlroet Report*, Supplement 

11. May 1985. All-A160 607. 

A Nrza I.orge-Scale, High-Hesolution Multirolo~ Software 

Diaplay Concept, March 1985, A1)-A165404. 

Alternoliue- Theories of Inference in Elrperl Systems for 

Image Anolysir, February 1985, AU-A153 649. 

Further Study of Digital iMorrhing of Di~similar Images. 

February 1985, AD-A163 112. 

SyatemAnalyetsofaFieldArmy Topo#raphtcSupport Syslem. 

February 1905, AD-A153 318. 

Evidential Reasoning in Expert Systems for image Aanlynis, 

February 1985, All-A153 379. 

Video Disc6 for Map Displaye, June 1984. AU-A149 646. 

Applicotiorr of Artifiriol lnlelligenre to Hudur /mope Lhdrrxlonding, Yehruory 1985, All-A132 518. 

Anolssir of Kdge l~clecliun Algo~ithmg on I)IAl., January 

1985, AD-A156 738. 

Defense Mapping Agmcy Kaxler-to-Vector Benchmark 

Trsling, December 1984, AD-A154 152. 

Drf<,n~eMopping Agency Honler-lo-Vrrtor Anolyair, 

November 1YH4, All-A134 158. 

Applirolion of Hierorehirnl Doto Str~et~r~s to G.<mgraphical 

Ir~f~rmalionSysterna, Phoae Ill, October 1984, AD-A162 

169. 

('ulturnl Uato Llase Implemenlalion Study and (?<,rnputerAided Scene Modeliny Usern Manual, October 1984. A1)- 

A154 232. 

Hexagonal Unln Hare Study, Phaw 11, October 1984, AllA150 178. 

FeotureExtraelion Aassssmrnt Study, Final Report, October 

1984, AD-A150 189. 

Interaetiue Digital Image Proeexsing for Terrain Doto Ex. 

traction, Phase 5, September 19H4. All-A148 580. 

Terrain Analysra Procedural Guide for Burlt-Up Areas, April 

1984, All-AIIZ 918. 

Terrain Analysis Procedural Guidefor SurfaeeConfigurotion. 

March 1984, AD-A147 837. 
ObstaclesEngineers and Maneuver 

Forces Need Common Terms 

Point 

lcnnt imcd j+orn inside ,front collerj 

The Proposal 

Clearly, a set uf obstacle control 

measures is needed to allow the commander at each level to concentrate 

the ihstacle effortand provide onetime 

guidance that accurately conveys his 

intent. The terms ol~slaclt~zone and 

ot~staclebelt, defined as follows and illustrated in Figure l, satisly the need: 

Obstacle Zone-An area in which 

ot~staclesare to be placed. It ]may tlc 

restrirti~e (fur example, limiting 

obstacles to an area of difCicult terrain along a river). It could be nonrestrictive, enconlpassirrg most. of 

thc area of operations. Used in a restrictive manner, designation of 

ot~slacle zi~nesa-ould leave other 

areas ohstacle free to facilitate sopport operations and maneuver. It 

fi~ci~sesthe ot~skacleeffort (a limited 

resource) in areas ahere reinforcement of the terrain plays a defitiite 

rule in the commander's concept of 

the operation. 

Obstacle Bell-A groupirrg of existing ;mi reinl'orcing obstacles that 

serve a conimon purpose (such as to 

block an avenue of appro;ich, seal a 

flank or channelize an enemy unit into an engagement area). At brigade 

and task force lr\rel, the designation 

of ohstacle belts \r-ould serve the 

sitme purpose as obstacle zonrs. 

The nlethod for using the tcrms to 

control ~IIFengineer effort \v~~ul(i i~llon. 

appropriate input at each level: 

A division would designate obstacle 

xoncs. So obstaclrs could he emplace11outside tlie zones other than 

hasty protective minefields and 

division-controlled FASCAM. 

A brigade would, in turn, designate 

~illstacletlelts (normally oriented on 

compariy-sized avenues of 

approach). These iiclts wr.ould be 

placed to allow for support operatioris and niitneuver. No obstacles 

could he placcd outside tlie belts 

other than hasty protective minefielrls and l~rigade-controlled FAS~ 

CAM. 

\Obstacle Zone Bravo 

Obstacle 

A 

. 

Obstacle Zones Wtthin a 

\ 

Division Area 

, -

\ Ind 

- - ~v~dual Obstacles Wlthln a Belt 

I F~gure1. Use of Obstacle Belts and Zones I 

At task forcr level, indi\ridual 

l>bstircles~voullihe planned ;lnrI ?mplaced lvithin thc belts. Specific 

obstaclc sitings would be determit~ed 

II~the task force or over~,atrl~team 

as appropriate. 

Commanders at any level a~uld re^ 

quest that helts or zoncs 11cadileil or 

extended to nlore closely wigport ttit>ir 

plans. Tliey coulii also direct that 

specific obstacles be emplaceri ii~i(ilor 

that execution authority be rctaincd at 

any level. 

This would allow the division commander to focus the engineer effort 

u,it,hin his area of operations ujitl~onctime guidatice and retain llt?xit~ilityin 

his nlanruver planning. HE and his 

division enginccr could discuss the 

locatiun of ohstacle zones rat lie^, than 

that of numerous individual obstaclrs. 

Any specific 1111slacIesiiiscassed would 

be limited to those that wrre critical to 

the division's mission and woulii. therefore, l~ecomedirected targets. 

At brigade level, the use of belts not 

only would focus the counterrni~t~ility 

effort; it would direct attention to: 

An exp~seiiflank, 

.An economy of forci sector. 

l'hr k~rigade engineer TL-ould plot 

targets in th(: t~eltshe had devrloprd 

wit11 thi! S~:lin ortlcr to makr general^ 

ized logistics plans. The st,lt~rtionarxl 

location of the ;ictu:~llargets uould he 

up ti, the task f(~n.v;lnd team com~ 

n~anders. 

At the task force levc!l, thc S-:S a~iii 

the t,ngineer wirulrl 11;ive clear constraints within urhicli to implement the 

I~rigadecommander's concept, Time 

\v\.rruldnot lie ivasteii on Large1 reconnaissance, planning and rcsour.ces l'ur 

ot~stnclesoutside the hclts. The tilsli 

force engi11et3r'salready difficult joh 

would be simplified. 

Conclusion 

My intention is not to adrl tnr, eso~ 

teric engineer terms to a cumhersi~rrie 

military vocab~~lary. We need a common lan~wagethat allows the maneu~ 

ver commander to convey tiis en&' rineer. 

concerns to subordinate commaniiers. 

The proposed concept would let the 

Areas where tile a~mmanderwants 

to defeat the enemy, (conPinued on pirge 4s) 

'3 


Rugged, 

Responsive 

and Ready 

for AirLand Battle 

by Victoria McAllister 

This summer the Army will 

accept bids to begin production of the M9 Armored Combat 

Earthmover (ACE)- a$45.7million 

congressional authorization to begin 

buying 22 M9s in FY 86. The Army 

Systems Acquisition Review Council 

chaired by the Vice Chief of Staff 

andtheunder Secretary oftheArmy 

has agreed to procure 580 M9s over 

the next 6 years. 

The 14 initial production models 

that were used during strategic and 

tactical mobility evaluations in 1985 

will he fielded this year: 

Seven to the7thInfantry Division 

for light infantry use, 

Four toTRADOC todevelopinstructional programs and train training 

teams, 

Three to AMC for ongoing tests. 

In 1988,the 9th Infantry Division 

(motorized) is scheduled to receive 

18 of the 22 M9s that will he built 

under the FY 86 contract. The remainder will go to TKADOC and 

AMC. 

As production proceeds through 

1991, the priority for distribution 

will be first to forward deployed 

division engineer battalions and 

armored cavalry regiments and to 

TRADOC, and finally to selected 

light forces and theremainder ofthe 

forward deployed heavy force. 

The M9 gives comhat engineers 

an earthmoving system that keeps 

pace with lead elements at a time 

when AirLand Battle challenges 

engineers to be responsive over 

greater distances in less time. 

The M9 is far more versatile than 

the bulldozer tractor/trailor system 

it replaces. Functionally, it is a 

rugged comhat vehicle that brings 

protected earthmoving capability to 

the forward brigade area. In addition to digging at a rate comparable 

to the D7, the M9can haul and place 

fill, transport up to 200 cubic feet of 

cargo, winch, and tow. It is able to 

negotiate slopes up to 60% and side 

slopes up to 40%. 

Its mobility improvements over 

the D7 are significant. It moves 

cross~countryand can achieve road 

speeds of up to 50 miles per hour. 

It swims at 3 miles per hour in a 

current of 1.5 meters per second. 

The M9 can be air transported by a 

C-130, C-141 or C-5A cargo plane 

compared with the D7 which requires a C-5A. This strategic mobility improvement is especially 

important for our light forces. 

The MY is equipped with a smoke 

grenade launch system; and its 

armor protects its driver from chemical and biological agents, small 

arms fire,and artillery fragments. A 

radio makes it easy to dispatch the 

M9 to new positions by allowing 

contact with an engineer platoon or 

supported manuever force's communications net. 

On the offense the MY prepares 

crossing sites, breaches antitank 

ditches and clears rubble from attack routes to sustain the momentum. In the defense, it digs fighting 

positions for weapons systems and 

assists in shaping terrain to meet 

the commander's intent by digging 

antitank ditches and helping construct obstacles. 

How valuable is the M9 ACE 

to the combined arms team? 

While performing on a par with 

the D7 in work productivity (90% 

digging capability) and reliability. 

the M9 during Fort Hood tests 

demonstrated it exceeds the D7 in 

mohility,responsiveness and survivability. 

During the FTX phase of the 

evaluations conducted at Fort Hood 

in 1985, an M9-supported platoon 

performed with a D7 tractor/trailer 

system-supported platoon in headto-head competition. 

At the Engineer Commanders' 

Training Conference in November 

1985,MG Kem described theresults: 

"For example, during a deliberate 

attack - a run of the western 

corridor on the second of the 5-day 

FTX -the tank-mechanized infantry task force conducted a furward passage through two points 

along Elijah Road, continued north 

across Cowhouse Creek, then attacked to seize the objective on 
Manning Mountain. There were two 

teams, each with its own engineer 

platoon . .. one supported by M9s: 

the other by D7 dozer systems. 

"Crossing the line of departure, 

they immediately met complex obstacles. The M9 breached the antitank ditch in 3 to 7 minutes and 

moved on to the next obstacle line 

at Cowhouse Creek. Meanwhile, the 

D7 system didn't gettherefor 1%to2 

hours. Consequently, the D7-

supported task force moved over 

to use the M9 breaches and moved 

on to thenext phase line. Becauseof 

their inability to follow the tankinfantry force cross-country, the 

D7s were sent over a nearby (out of 

the maneuver box) asphalt road so 

they could continue to move. 

"At Cowhouse Creek . . . the M9 

got its task force through the obstacle system. Once again the D7 

was unable to close with theobstacle 

system; and its task force crossed 

using AVLBs, CEVs and borrowed 

M9s. 

"The task force moved on up to 

Manning Mountain -theobjective! 

The roads were cut so the Mls could 

not get up the mountain. The M9s 

backed around and filled in; the Mls 

went on up and achieved the objective. The D7 system never completed the mission and the team it 

supported never completed its assault on the objective . . . mission 

failure due to the D7. 

"There were six different tasks on 

the way up. The M9 accomplished 

six out of six; the D7 accomplished 

one out of six." 

The results come at a time when 

National Training Center experience - where the combined arms 

team performs together rather than 

simulates -is again teaching the 

Army the value of the combat engineer on the battlefield. In deep 

battle, the onus is on the combat 

engineers to maintain the ground 

forces' ability to maneuver -to get 

them to the right place at the right 

time. But equipped with the D7, the 

engineers are too slow and cumbersome to be counted upon. 

The missions haven't changed: 

Mobility -remove obstacles. 

breach minefields, cross gaps in 

stride and under fire. 

Countermobility-constructmore 

fighting and protective positions 

faster. 

Suruiuability-emplaceobstacles 

and minefields rapidly. 

However, the windows of opportunity when the manuever commander must act decisively have 

narrowed.Engineers arechallenged 

to perform the same tasks over 

greater distances in less time. The 

M9 met the challenge. 

A maneuver commander at the 

Fort Hood FTX summed up the 

improvement. "The engineers," he 

said, "are finally going to get rid of 

their ball and chain." 

Victoria McAllister is Features 

Editor of ENGINEER Magazine. 

(1 When wsll Army Natnonal Guard sngrneers t to participate with

combtned arms at the Nattonsl Tratn~ngCenter? 

A. Natzonal Guardeng~neersarealreadyallowedtopam~c~patew~thcomO~neaarms 

at i Tralning Center Nattonal Guard unlts can submlt a request through 

co nnels to FORSCOM Funds are avatlable R~tatlondates are not 

OP mbts must accept the date asstgned by FORSCOM Part~clpationby 

Nartona~buard units wouldtake a heavy loadofiact!veun~tsnowbe~ngovertasked 

WI 

the Natmna 

mmand cha 

tlonal and I 

,-

F and OPFO 

od IS usedtc 

.,, ,, -. 

nts 

erfortroop: rig isn't 

...., 

Q 5 when thevwell-dnlling I 

av 

A ~rar: rtaw w.;r8-ur#rtlr1yrby rlda .arrta C~~~~=YVL.~~UIIIIY as a 5-ton LIULK 

Hc ns when the well-drllltn avarlable. use the 

tas system (TWDS) 

What meth 

allable, 

TL. .. 

are sttuatto 

dlstrlbutaon 

?g rtg is not 

. . (1wnen proDlng a mtnerleld using nonmetallic probes. ooes tha prober carryhis 

WI 

A. 

th 

sapon with 

When breat 

e weapon sr Statement of Ownership, 

Manaeement. and Circulation 

tileld wath a 

IS back 

(requGed by i9 U.S.Code 3685) 1 a. - ,. ...,.=,. ....s.:r.w-Tvo. or.:..Is, - ~- .,--

A. Screw-type pickets (NSN 5660-01-072-29771-.- ..-.".ailable at the depot. ENGINEER, an official periodical of They have been replaced by U-shaped pickets which are easier to use, transport, the DepartmentuftheArmy, is published and store. Also. U-shaped pickets are commercially usedwhile screw-type ptckets quartrrly by the U.S. Army Engineer are not. The NSN far U-shaped pickets are 5660-00-270-1587 and 

School. ATTN: ATZA-TD-P, Fort Beivair, 5660-00~270-1589. 

VA 22060~5291. 

Date of Filing: September 20. 1985 

Publisher and Editor: Marilyn Fleming 

Extent and Nature uf Circulation: The 

following information shows actual 

number of copies of the single issue 

nearest the filing date. 

a.Inacombat heavyengs 

ts authorized a rnamtenanca suppvy sa~rton.IS ~narnnssmvrt or xnas srcr#onr o I SU pportonlyt he d~rect-su Class IX req

&tirebattalic 

The suppor ,A -",..A. "a. 

pportshop I 

er Class IX 

rlth Class IX 

uirement or 

? 

IS anlyfar e 

lCYrrln 

~nof englne repaor parts 

t battallon r repar parts 

an, ru.v=, .,-,lerat{on eq~.~,,,=.,,YC$ MTOE 051 .. r.V 

ipment 

r problems, 

rtzatfon,and 

a reply w,thi 

to 

>r comment. 

Callthe US./ 

ys The Hotli 

s relatmg to 

3rmy Engine 

ne is not a r 

engrneer d, 

er SchoolSI I ecemng age

Do you ha", 

tra,n,ng. orgar 

You'llrece,ve 

7ctnne. 

iotl~ne 

'ney for 

Paid circulation: none 

Requested circulation: 9,400 

Other free copies 900 

Copies not distrihuted: 200 

Total number of copies: 10,500 

formal reques 

The Hotlrna, telephone 

6. or A V 35. 

number 1s 1703) 664-3646. WATTS 800 336 

1-3646 
Counterobstacle 

New Horizons in Battlefield Mobility 

b!y LTC William Ryan 

D" lllll ! r e i?rrll ill,. ~:i~unlr~t-r:~I?stni'Ic \rl,icle (COV)? 

1 say ?/Ps. The ueed has been 

documented by AirLand Battle mis~ 

sion area analysis and Army 21 requirements. 

Rased upon extensive Soviet use of 

mines and obstacles in both offensive 

and defensive operations, combat 

enonerrs require a survivable system 

for countermine and counterobstacle 

tasks to support heavy i'orces. 

Today's Army relies on a number of 

special-purpose combat engineer and 

construction equipment vehicles to 

marginally counter the mobility threat 

f:iced by the combined arms t,eam. 

But imagine one engineer vehicle 

that covers the spectrum of AirLand 

Battle mobility, countermobility and 

survivability missions. That's the COV. 

Mobility Enhancement 

The COV excels at minefield 

breaching. The best ray to counter 

any minefield is to bypass it. Ilowever, 

restrictive t,frrain or manmade 

obstacles blocking the avenue can 

make this impossible. When forced to 

hreach, engineers have two options-attack thc fu7.e or the mine 

itself. 

It used to be that n~ostmines were 

pressure-rod or tilt-rod activated and 

v~zlll,,r:il~lcto pt.i~ssui.~~ rollers. 'l'oday, 

n~incs are increasingly more 

sophistic;iled. They may have 

magnetic or multiple fuzes capable of 

defeating rollers and overpressure explosive systems. These mines must he 

removed or destroyed. 

The Army currently uses a track^ 

width mine plow or] the M1 Lank to 

remove mines from the tank's path. 

While effective, this doesn't pvoviiie a 

safe lane For following arrnvr force?. 

The COV's full-vehicle-width miriepluw 

corrects this deficiency. 

Counterobstacle mobility tasks 

handled by the COV range from overcoming antitank ditches at the fir end 

of niinefields to clearing urban ruhl~le 

in front of the a~mbiuedarms team. 

For its counteroijstacle role, the COV 

has two telescopic arms and a mine 

~~Ioaldozer (confibmred as a bulldozer 

blade or V plow). In the bulldozer 

mode, the COV's earthmoving capacity 

equals the D8 tractor. 

The two telescopic arms (each with a 

lifting capacity of 14,000 pounds and a 

32-foot reach) accommodate a variety 

of attachments. Curreritly under 

evaluation are the: 

Lifting lrook 

Hydraulic hammer and pavement 

breaker 

Grapple 

Auger 

1.25-cuhic-yardbucket 

Quick change adapters allow engineers 

to change attachments in three to five 

niinotes. All attachments can be used 

alone or in coml)ination, depending 

upon the obstacle being breached. 

Designed to replace the aging Com~ 

bat Engineer Vehicle (CEV), the COV 

excels at battlefield mobility. But 

countermobility and survivability n~issions also come sL1nd;ird in the COV 

repertoire. During tests, the COV 

prepared hull defilade t,ank fighting 

positions in less than 10 minutes and 

an antitank ditch (5 meters wide, '120 

meters long) in less than two hours. 

Technology Integration 

The COV prototype uses the basic 

hull and chassis design of the armored 

recovery vehicle. By modifying the upper hull so the crew sits in tandem, 

designers made room for telescopic 

arms on but11 sides. The standard fi~urInan crcw required for the CEV was 

reduced to three. An escape hatch, accessible t~ all the crew, was added in 

the floor. 

A standard 908-horsepower, turbocharged, air-cooled diesel engine 

powers the COV. A standard Detroit 

Diesel Allison transmission provides 
The COV's two telescopic arms (left) 

overcome obstacles and dig tank 

traps. A full vehicle-width mine 

plowldozer blade (below) provides a 

safe lane for following armor forces. 

the high torque required for heavy 

earthmoving. A remote suspension 

lockout ailils chassis stability for plowing, dozing and digging. The lockout 

blocks are posiliont-d by hydraulic 

cylinders controlled inside by the crew. 

External hydraulic outlets on thc 

chassis allow engineers to use a variety 

of hydraulic tools as the tactical situation permits. Tools carried on board include a wrench, hammer and saw. The 

rear compartment contains a slave 

receptacle I external electrical 

power, a remote telephone and a 

searchlight. 

On boarrl, art individual, microclimatic environmental control system 

provides NBC pri~tectionto improve 

crew efficiency while reducing stress 

under all environmental conditions. 

The comhination mine plow/bulldozer blaiie is driven by a 

400-horst:pnwer takeoff unit that providcs up to 4,000 psi of operating 

pressure. 'She bulld(~zerk~ladeis eontrolleil manually by either the driver or 

center seat operator using a three-axis 

joystick ti] control the blade's roll, 

pitch, raise and lo~verfunctions. 

Thc mine plow riorn~allvoperates 

automatieally through a computer it]-

Legrateti with three ultrasonic sensors 

suypended 10 feet in front of the plow. 

\Yhm using the automaticdepth control, the drivcr or operator simply 

selects the desired plowing depth 

depeniiirig on thc types of mines enci~unlcred.The crew observes all pli~u. 

movemcrit through a silt of passive 

fiber-optic viewers located on each side 

I thc vehicle. The viewers allow 

perfect depth control if manual plowing becomes necessary. 

The mine plow system has several 

configurations. In the full-width plow 

mode, two extensions (each 1 meter 

long) attnch at each end to clear a 

mine-free lane more than 12 feet wide. 

Witli extensions removed, the V plow 

<,pensa path through battlefield debris 

and urhan rubble. 

The mine plow collapses to create a 

full-width dozer for eartlimoving reqniremrnts. On-site. the conversion 

takes less than an hour. 

Testing 

To accelerate fielding, the 'OV has 

two development phases instead of the 

usual three. Production of fully operational technolorn demonstrators in the 

first phase made this possible. The second phase-production prototype 

testing and evaluation-will begin in 

March 1987. 

Engmeer design tests were just 

finished at the Belvoir Engineer Proving Ground, and troop demonstrations 

sponsored by the Engineer School are 

now underway a1 Fort Knoa. Combat 

engineers there are evaluating crewTtraining requirements and the functional utility of the mineplow, hulldoaer 

and telescopic arms. The US Marine 

Corps will evaluate the COV's foreeintegration requirements at Quantico. 

VA in June. 

The COV is scheduled for initial pro 

durtion in fall 1989. 

The Engineer School is the COV user 

proponent. The Army Materiel Command and TKADOC designated the 

Troop Support Commanii (TIZOSCOM) 

as the C,OV materiel developer and the 

Tank Automi~tiveCommand (TACOM) 

as the readiness activity. TKOSCOM's 

COV project office is at the Combat 

Engineering Directorate of Belvoir 

K&D Center to allow close cooperation 

between TKOSCOM developers and 

,n rtneer users. t b' 

An aggressive preplanned product 

impri,venient program (PaI)covers: 

Development of improved automatic 

depth control; 

Ki)hotic applications for the 

telescopic arms to reduce crew 

workload and increase operational 

efficiency; 

An autonomous COV when the 

technology matures. 

As a,forcem,?iltipli~r~, the COV grratly enhances the mobility, countermobility and survivability of the combined arms team. It gives combat 

engineers and their maneuver partners 

a decisive erlge-both on thc AirLand 

battlefield today and the Army 21 battlefield of the future. 

LTC Willim Ryn??i* lhe COVpnip 

ect ofliccr,for ihr Beii!o%rR&D Cntsr. 

He holds a research and dm:elopmmzt 

specialty code 51 und is in the rnuteriel 

acyuisiton mani1,gw program. He hay 

att*.rided th,r Command and Generill 

Stalf College at Fort Lem:r?17:u:orthirnri 

the Program Munayar.s Course at tka 

Defense< Systwns Mon,o,geminzt College. 

His infant? &5si,qnm,ents inch~de: 

platoon lead~r,X2nd Airborne Ui?'%-

sion; cmpany commrrnrlcr. 173d Airhome Rrigr~de (Vi<?tna,m);hatloiron 

S-8; and XO in the 1st Irbfanlrg UiGsion Fwwnrd in Gm7rian.y. He Iim also 

serced ns a rn7tgsr school instructor 

a?rd o teat md r?:alu.otiurrofficer. 

He has an un,dergra,duate de.qree 

Jrom Hdm-son Strr te L'rti~t:r!rsityin 

hioiogy and an advt~nced degree in 

munagrment ,from Centmi Michigan 

LTn.iz.m.~it?). 
Combat Heavy 


Deployment Checklist 


by CPT Samuel W. Burkett 

It's ht,e~t a hectic wrvl. lor tit? co~~tbnt lreav? cTI g' tt~i:t~r

Lattalioli. As conrmarldvr ~~l'(:~~rnl~;in~ I{. yooareyushingto 

romltl<.te road ~:iinntrurti<~rr albc;iil rllwintrr rai~~s. YOU are

i.<.a<l! lor 111'. ~vt~i~l\i:ri~l W~IPII 111~ IIICSS~~P comes ~OWI~ late 

I -thv I,attislio~~ ~:,,rrrr~~iit~d~~t~ has ~:nlleO a ir~octinglor

1000. 11'. 11111 111~ lirlt lntv ~n~wtit~~... ~~rul~tik~ly more 

~,rohlrrn, witli trasll at thr. IH~I~UI.~uoI. 

loo ;~rri\c: lropitl~ tr, l'iui-I* rluic.kly. Rut the hattnliciti 

airfirlds alid base camps. Krcrritly rnucll of the action has 

heen in Central r\mt?rira, but comjlarly comn~andrri must 

he prepared lor a lalo Friday call that could send them 

artywhere in the world. 

Khrn units arrive, they most he able to operate, 

rnsirltain security. and cornllletr a variety ul engineer 

missions lor extended 1,l:riods of tinip. If important 

equipment ur material is left behind, it may be months 

i:~~~rrtnnr~~lrr'~ii~~~~iiu~~~-,~~~~~~~~t (:atrhrh t.i.rryolie by i~r~~riic. before tl~c deployed unit sers it again. 

'loo I to llott<luras in t wrks. L)urstiot~ is 

utlhni,wrc, llut the rniss~url I-.ronstt.l~~~tic,ll-~.oads,ail.liclds, 

and 1t.mporary II;IWcarnpi. 

Friday jnst liccamr a new hlottrlay. hut vou ;trp tor! l,us? 

to worry ahoi,t the wrekrn~l you'll rniss. 

Kith irlvrvasil~pfrerlurncy, Arm) rrlginerrs are dc. 

ploying ilrl 6110rt no ti(^ ti1 foreign coutltries tu huild r,,;l<ls. 

Mntrrial rrrtd eqt~iyrnertt10 tulie. 

I. typew writ^,^.\ iwd jteld iile,~. 

2. r\ rceli1 201 filtl 01)(lac11 .llidil.r. 

3. Puilliriitions. 

4. k:acl~ a<~ld~er sl~~~ul~l I~ciu~ 	 (in atld~tiurt to .1'.4-.30 :and

onilors~s): 

a. I{u~rnio~gr;ir. 

li.Extra st~arinp anil >RUWCI SLIJI~IIC.. 


I.. Sta1lo~1rl.yitnd stiirnps. 


d. Boul~iind magazine*. 

c. Othrr itr,ors depending ox, s[lac.r. a~i-sianand gru~raph~rnl 

arril. 

Actionx lo orromplislz b,:fo.furrdrploynwnt. 

1. 1~:risor~ea~I~ s~l<li~rI>ix.~ l)r~Par<.dIIwill al~da~~igued puwt:r LI~ 

altornry. 

2. Serurp and rto1.t. privately awnt.d veliicles 

3. Arrange storilgr arid srrurity of soldiers' I~oosehuld goods 

and personal i~ems. 

4. Brief dcprndents on: 

a. Mirsio~r (if possible). 

b. 	Where help can bc round (Army I,:morg*ncy K~ltef, llcd 

Cross, chaplairt). 

c. How to contact soldiers in an rrnrrgency. 

d: Information necessary for each hmily lo conduct daily 

activities in spouse's ahsrnsc. 

.

1

.

Iris clmcklist ofl'rrsguidelinrs for conlparl! command<.ri 

who Ir11151 "lake quick decisions i~l,out w-hat to take and 

what to leave behind. It is by nu lrleans complete, hut 

provides the combat heavy battalion a hasis lor planning on 

a monrrnt's notice. Deploying units should add and delete 

items drprrldillg upon the mission, shippirtg space, 6notin 

secnrit). threat, and tl~cco,rrmandcrs- prelrrmces. 

I-. (:all pcrsot~aliitlil governtncnt i:!>crksbc c.i.rl,crl'! 

5. Ullat is tin. I<><.i~l curret~!CXCI>LI~I~C rate'!

6. UIlat rltik!trwl.; rrtll lhariill~ all types 01 pt.rru!~~iel zrctio>rs? 

7.Uill i.ililil,.rmcnts bt: ~,r<,vi<icdniter the rlnit dsployi! 

8. How w~llrrjilarrrnentr I,?pro<,rssed'! 

9. How xcll smccgriir? Irilve Irr pri,crssvil'! 

10. Ilu* \rill solr1iri.a lii,rrturtwd to tl~r,ir l,on~c statirli? 

.Jloterinl rtnd r.q~ipntera.to mkr. 

I. \laps. 

2. I'uhlit.alt~,r~c. 

3. Overlay n,atrr,al. 

4. Carrirra. 

.4rtiona to ncr.ontplirh be/orc deployment. 

I.Krqurst and diatribu~r maps. 

2. liricl rommsndc,rsarrd itaffor, weirtlrei.ei~emy si~uationarld 

local pol,ulixlion. 

Qscxtioru to rrali. 

1. \Thert! is the nearebt 1.S.Emhassy? 

2. R lhat is the corditiorl and rapnhility of tile road network'! 

3. Are there any luc;il sources oirunstru~:tion material? 

4. \Chal are lhe dartgt:ious animals and insects in the areal 

5. \\. hcre arr local watri suurcrs lucatrd? 

0. Who are the lnost nation puints olcar~tact and coordinatia~~? 

7. What is the overall situation irrcludinr: 

a. Any terrorist thrrat? 

Questionr to ask. b. Rerommended lc\,el 01security? 1. Bhat will mail procedures be? 	 c. Prirndly factions? 

2. What will the mailing address be? 	 d. Anti-US. groups? 3. What financial suppurt will he provided? 	 r. Attitude oi host nation to I!.S.? 
S-3. 0pt.ralions and Training. 

lletrrinl rrt8,l ~gaip,,#pr#llo mkr. 

I. \l,l,lz<.:,l>l<~ ~#,,l,Ii*..,l,<!,,.. 

I.\SIV~~I~:LIV ~I~ttIl~t~g atrgcl .urwi!tg - L > ~ ~ ~ E P

.lr.rio,~xlo rr~.r.r~,,,plislzbefirn, $c~plt,ymv,tr. 

I.l:~~!~clu, t 
 .1,,.<~,2,l <,I,:

;I. l{a,11i, ~~vwcclorr~. 


I,. \lt,,li,,;tl l~!g~t:t~~,
 artd <IIW~L-Vl,r,~~<~t>lior>. 


,. (;l,,,,;,lt. [~~>l,Ibl,<,t
 5vt.&tl,<T,. 

J. l',.rlr~~t,:r.VVIII~~\ 

2. i:,,rt~~l~:l,. 8 II,<~~<I,>~I~ t,,.~l~!~~l,,2Z~ Ul ~I':\..iO.

:j. l,!.,,c.k:l :,,,,I I',rc,:,I1 \V<V[I<#t,.. 

I.Ctii. -ln.vt~tl lralii~t~g it, i~lr~~plvt~~ i$ 5~,<,illiv ~nli--icjo.

5. F,,,,! <,,,I t,< ,,,,,,.I, .Al,"~,lt,v ,,,,>.,<>I, as j,O..,Ill<. 

6. Idc,t~liIyall ,wl<l~rl->tliit sl,i.iih 1111. languixgt. 01 llw 10111t11). 

.lfat~ri,~l,,,I,/ ,~,/!,i/,r~~etrt 10 t,zke.

I. 'l'rahh cans. 

2. (:,uts. 

3. 'l'ahles iancl c:l~air.-. 


.%. :\d,Ir!iot~;tl ICTII?. 


5. Uatcr rarl* (potablrj. 

h. %'atec purilir.atian ;upplit,s. 

7.Extra ti,ol~ and repair parts (I,asrd (I!, inihrion). 

8. Cor~stl-urtinrl material, (i~~r~ri~tial COIII~IIIL~~UIIU~L~ llased 1111

rr~ission). 


<>. Sar81Jlw.g~. 


10. (:on<;erlirta. 

11. liarbed rice. 


I2 I'irkets. 


13, llnsir load Iurnnto). 


14. Uarbci kit. 


I,5. Toilvt paprr. 


16. Laonllry soall. 

17. Athletic ge;r 

18. Clcunlng .;el,plit,: 

ICJ. \l~~lcri%l >up>Iit~3. 

YO. I'I~I-auil paprl-. 

Q,,,~~ti',,,.~ I,, risk.

I.rr ~srl~w<c (.nr~~iii~~~ri avd rnll~laii i>*rlt.d ru:lltilrirr. 

((:O\I<\> zaml >Ill,\:\\s) :a~;jil;tt>lv tur~torage,.t~t~~pit~gst~d 

xc:urity.! 

I,(:a,,, ll,~ l,r,,,,it! ,,I' >"l,l,l! r<.,]ilr5t> LC u],gra,l,Yi'! 


;I. \\l,*lI,<.;,,lq~,~~l,.~> w,ll [,~,,~,.>> >"[,1,l) ~v\\,D<..I>
 <31tt.r 

<Ie-,,l,,! ",6,,,1'! 

I. \YIK will hitppl? iuvl'! 

3. Cl,,w will it bc ~tlili.1/'! 


t,. \\'I,<,! ,\ti,<, I<><. :,I,,,,,<,I!I,,. lr<,<>l, 
 ,>St,,! >,,I>>,.tf.,,~.? ~tt~liv~l>


iI'lS:\)'? 


7, \X I~atr.~tsw~,,!,,Ivwill Iw a~>cd'? 


X. Wliu will -upl>l! l.rutiJrr,'slronr auylmrt'! 


c). Lb ILO WIII q>l,l? wt%t,,r puriCi<:aIiut~ 
ul,puct'! 

10. I, ill, ,irljlrg,s, lurd a~~dtliililc. 10i 111111t~d Iu~;itl jlui.(.I~a-C( 

C1'7~SornrrzlU . I1orkrrt ir ~~.oriiingon the Corsurll .,lI.'M 

Ifospirni i.utio~otiurt nnd nq,,ri~riun project ir;ith the Fort Worth 

1)iatrirt. HI.piorluatrdfinm tho l,'.S. 3liiitury Acadeni) arirl 

complctcd EOHC nnd EOAC. He scvz:ed os rr plo~oortl~ader, 

5.1, 5.2. nnd curnpany ,YO, with the dhth En~in~rr H,~tt~iIiott 

((,'B7)(H V Y), rbrt Ki~ckai. .AL. C1'7'Wur/rrtl d<tployt~iauth 

the 46th art I?l~I~'OI~G'ER in IYHl and to llondoror ]or

.I111 'AS 7'AK:l Illiorn Srplrntber 1911.1 (0 F~.b,riilryIYXJ. 
by CPT Charles R. Boyer 

T lie pld~ng Soviet principle of land .".

vartare 1s violent, sustained, deep 

offensive action. Mechanized and arniored formations, supported by aviation and artillery, are to seize the ioitiative at the outset, penetrate enemy 

defenses, and drive deeply into the 

rear. 

To accomplish this, highly mobile, armor heavy Soviet forces will attack in 

successive echelons hoping to overwhelm enemy defenses-an operation 

that relies heavily on engineers. 

sustain rapid advance. They remove 

mines and obstacles, cross water 

obstacles, protect the flank, and air1 

against counterattack. 

Engineers are included in all reconnaissance elements of tank and 

motorized rifle units. They report the 

condition of advance routes, providing 

the main body with information on 

assembly areas, detours around 

obstacles, and warnings of minefields 

and craters. The engineer reconnaissance patrol is equipped with portable 

mine detectors atid route-marking 

flags. 

The Soviets stress that water 

obstacles must he crossed from the 

is used extensively to mask assault 

crossings during daylight. 

Engineers reconnoiter water 

obstacles to find lording sites and 

suitable eritry and exit points for cornbat vehicles. Detailed terrain analysis 

is req~lired for bridge and ferry sites. 

Reconnaissance of tank-fording sites 

requires divers arid a tracked amphibiiln with river-reconnaissance devices. 

Engineer river-crossing capability is 

found in the regimental engineer company organic to motorized rifle and 

tank regiments; the division engjneer 

hattalion; and special engineer battalions, regiments and brigades at 

army and,front level. 

march to preclude major halts in the 

The Offense offense. Their doctrine dictates cross- Movement Support Detachments 

The Soviet engineers' primary mis- ings at lnultiple points along a broad During marches, movement support 

silm is to clear and maintain routes to front to overwhelm the enemy. Smoke detachments (MSDs) travel ahead of 
~ 

the main body, clearing obstacles re^ 

ported by reconnaissance teams. They 

fill cmtcrs, clear rnines and prepare 

bypasses around major obstacles. 

The MSUs are task organized from 

divisional or regimenk~l engineer 

assets based on mission and availability. They can be from platoon to 

company strength and are equipped 

with route and mine clearing vehicles 

and equipment. An MSD's bridging 

cayability is normally limited to equipment required for its own movement. 

A division engineer battalion can 

form two to three MSDs. They are employed on nrai~r routes and travel under 

the protection of an advance guard or 

forward security element whenever 

possible. 

On other routes, the leading regiments provide MSlls from their own 

resources. A typical MSD at this level 

migilt consist of an engineer platoon 

wit11 one or two dozers and up to three 

tanks fitted with dozer blades. These 

MSl)s are protected by up to a platooli 

of infantry or tariks and are often accompanied k1y chemical reconnaissance 

personnel. 

Breaching Minefields 

Normally during an assault or rapid 

advance, the Soviets breach mil~efieliis 

using mine plouzs and rollers fitted to 

the lead tanks. Although enb' meers reconnoiter the minefield, the initial 

breaching is riot primarily an engi~iecr 

task. 

Engineers assist in iitting the plows 

and rollers which are commonly used 

for minefield reconnaissance. These 

are usually employed on the scale of 

one per platoon oi three to four tanks. 

The Soviets estimate clearing speeds 

of about 10 kilometers per hour (kmph) 

fur plow-fitted tanks, :iricl up to 22 

kmph for roller-fitted tanks. 

Combat vehicles that aren't on tank 

chassis must wait until the full width of 

the lane is cleared. Tliis is olten done 

hy tanks with plows or rollers that tau) 

line charges across the minefield, then 

detonate the charges. 

The Soviets also use a mine-clearing 

device mounted on the B1'R-SOPK 

AE'C (tu~ to each divisional engineer 

hal.talion). An explosive line charge is 

fired across the minefield and 

detonated. This clears a lane siw- to 

eight-meters wide. 

The RTR~SOPK is part,icularly useful 

during assault river crossings when 

there are minefields on the far bank, 

and amphibious APCs may have to 

operate initially without tank support 

in the bridgehead. An average of four 

to six lanes can he expected. Of tlrese, 

at least two will be developed into permanent lanes for artillery and logistics 

vehicles. 

Mobile Obstacle Detachments 

Special teams called mobile obstacle 

detachments (MODS) are f~rmed from 

regimental and divisional engineer 

assets. Their mission is to rapidly mine 

the most likely avenues of enemy attack or counterattack. The MODS 

travel on the flanks of a march column 

or formation where they ozn deploy 

rapidly. Thq are normally near the antitank reserve. 

Minefields are most rapidly laid using armored, tracked mine layers 

(three to each divisional engineer hat 

talion). Hand emplacen~ent and towed 

mine layers are also used. 

Both the tracked mine layers and 

mine-laying trailers dispense mines at 

predetermined spacings of 4.0 or 5.6 

meters. On suitable ground, a 

division's three armored, tracked mine 

layers can surface lay a three-row, 

1,000-meter~long minefield in a half 

hour. In the same time, a regimerital 

MOD'S three mine-laying trailers could 

lay about 500 meters of minefield. 

The Defense 

The Soviets consider the offense the 

unly means to decisive victory. 

Ilefense is a temporary posture leading t,~ resumption of the offensive. The 

engineers implement obstacle plans 

(particularly antitank obstacles) to 

block enemy penetrations. A MOD 

may join antitank reserves to counter 

enemy tank threats. They also repair 

existing routes and create new routes 

t,o support maneuver forces. They respend to enemy nuclear strikes with 

fire fighting, structure repair and 

debris removal. 

Mechanized earthmoving equipment 

is used in survivability missions to dig 

trenches and huild revetments or 

shelters in areas not exposed to direct 

enemy observation or fire. Because 

self-entrenching blades are standard 

on many tracked vehicles (tanks, selfpropelled artillery), a Soviet division 

could probably dig in all of its combat 

vehicles within t,hree hours. 

To some extent, all troops construct 

fortifications, shelters and vehicle revetments. H ~ the engineers ~ coil. ~

the more complex rortifieations. 

Countermobility 

During countermohility operations, 

engineer troops normally construct 

harrier systems which are coordinated 

with the overall system of fire. The 

first priorig is antit,ank obstacles. 

Mechanized diggers can dig up to 400 

meters of antitank ditch per hour depending on the dimensions of the ditch, 

soil conditions and terrain. 

Defensive minefields are laid in 

much the same manner as flankprotection minefields. The quality and 

specific structure of the minefield 

depends upon time and terrain. However, the doctrinal guidance describes 

three rows of mincs per belt, up lo 100 

meters between rows, and three belts 

per field, with the field covered by fire 

whenever possihle. Additional countermobility capabilities include road 

cratering, wire harriers and abatis. 

Conclusion 

Engineers play a vital role in maintaining maneuver mobility in land warfare. The Soviet army's emphasis on 

rapid advance directly reflects their 

desire to fight and u.in. Their 

engineers are well trained, well equipped and ready. 

CPT charlas R. R,,~~~, an intelli.

g,,ce oflirer, is chic( (,J IJ~CThreat 

Branch Direclorole of Combat Development& USAES.H~has seri:ed in in. 

telligenxe assignmls in 60th COIVUS 

and G~~~~~ and is graduate 

state ~/~i~,~~~i(~. 

The Army Occupational Surveys for MOS 12B andMOS 12C 

will be distributed to selected engineer units in May. These 

surveys will gather task performance and training information from a large sampling of soldiers, E-1 through E-7, 

and use the data to improve combat engineer training. 

Pleaseanswer each item of the survey carefully, since this is 

a unique opportunity for you to influence training. 
ne Year After The Green Ribbon Panel 

Support Of 

Army Installations 

by Col Stephen F. Rutz and Victoria Mc Allister 

"The activities managed by the installatlori 

commander's Director of Engineering and Housing 

(DEH) are on the critical path of nearly everyth~ngthat 

happens on Army installations. Readiness, recruitment, 

retentiori, force structure, modernization, training, 

n~ohilization,the Army Family, quality of life -all these 

important elements of today's Army depend upon 

effective, efficient facilities engineering and housing 

support." 

-Green Ribbon Panel Report 

on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

Support to Army lnstallation Commanders, March 1985 

I

n October 1984. the Chief of Engineers, LTC; E.R. Aeiberg 111, appointed a Green Rihbon Panel of senior 

officers and civilians to evaluate 

USACE support to Army installation 

comtna~idersand recornniend areas for 

improvement. 

The panel found that "the,~obql'prnding quality, tiel sol is IZ 

ton,gh one . . . irnw Ihfrt ruyui7,es exceliemce an,d tenmu~orico?z i,hP pcrt i!f 

both the UEH IL?~suyportin(j disl?.ict 

i:ny%neur." 

Installation support is a a~mplex, 

$5-billion-a~yearbusiness, aggravated 

by numerous regu.uiatoryand statutory 

restrictions. Seven areas were identified where improvement would 

significantly enhance support to 

soldiers and their families: 

.USACE installalion support 

priority 

Responsiveness 2nd efficiency 

Policies and procedures 

The cost of dnine - business

Procurement support and commercial activities 

* Education, train in^ and carccr de 

velopment 

The scope of IISACF; support 

What chanres have been made in the 

year since the report? Wliilc there have 

been few easy solutions, there has been 

significant progress. Here is x status 

report on the major initiatives underway. 

USACE Installation Support 

Priority 

At the heart of the Creen Rihbon 

study was the panel's finding that despite the importance of USACE's role 

in assisting the IIEH with installation 

support, the mission was not adequately described in Army regxlations. This 

left Corps districts to lake a makeshift 

approach to installation support in 

comparison to their traditional military 

construction and civL works responsibilities. Successful installation support 

generally reflected the personal efforts 

of the staff involved rather thana clear 

mission definition. However, even the 

hest DENS and districts had difficulty 

communicating t~ecausethe s~qlport 

role was poorly defined. 

Echoes of this prohlcm are present 

in many of the issues identified by tlie 

panel. The report concluded tirat 

"USACE rnusl dmzon.strot~de~kicaterl 

~1~l)porl uiid ~Zeribilityin response to 

DEH mission nmds in eyiual nleasvre 

to ils more traditional n%ilita?:y constructirin (.4/iCAj nn,d civil 'uwrks mis-

,sior~s.Thw top priority of the instnliotion s71,pportmission,must be apparent 

to uli. " 

As a result, nrajor changes are being 

made to key Corps policies and Army 

regulations. 

In February 1986, the Chief of 

Engineers issued new policy that 

makes installation support a factor in 

the job descriptions, performance 

standards anii officer efficiency 

reports of many USACE personnel. 

The goal is to ensure the same at ten^ 

tion is given to installation support 

tlrat is given to other critical missions. 

The USACE support role to DEWSwill 

also be described in upd.ates to DA 

Pamphlets 420-6and 420-8 and AR 

420-10. 
The awards probTam to publicize 

superior district support performance 

is in place. The first winner is being 

presented the award at the USACE 

Commanders' Conference in May. 

The issue of which district should 

provide installation support is being 

evaluated for some installations. In 

many cases, the Corps' direct sem~iei? 

support military construction district 

for a particular installation is distant 

while another civil works district has 

offices virtually across the street. 

L)EHs and installation commanders 

frequently feel they would receive 

more responsive service from the 

closer district. 

The Chief 11f Engineers has directed 

that the dirc:ct support responsibility 

be shifted to the ciosest district where 

it rnakes sense within Corps ~livisions 

and can he done without increasing 

division manpower. Manpower 

availability is oiie of tile serisitive 

issues that will govern t,he ext,ent to 

wlrich changes can be made in the 

years ahead. The Ci~rpsis also considering possi1)ilitiesfor interdivisional 

workload shifts. The emphasis will be 

on making efficient use of the Corps' 

limlierrigu system to assign work froln 

To tackle tliis problem, USACE is 

implementing a simplified set of model 

contract provisions for maintenance 

and repair contracts to beawarded this 

summer. Cong~essis also considering 

simplified competitive acquisit,ion 

techniques that would streamline contracting procedures for projects in the 

$25,000 to $5 milliotr range. 

JOIIOrder Contracting-a quick way 

to contract snrall repair ji)k)s or new 

work projects-is being tested at five 

sites: Fort Ord. Fort Sill, Fort Bragg, 

Fort Monroe and Aberdeen Proving. 

Ground. 

An effort is also being made to improve communication and accountnbility on architect~engineercontracts that 

districts administer lhr the DEII. A 

test is under way to send architectengineer design teams to jot) sites dur~ 

ing construi:tiun to discuss problems 

with customers. Results are due this 

summer. I)El-Is are also being 

educated on options to extend one-year 

contracts with reliable architectengineer firms for a second year to 

capitalizr? on experience. 

geographically disl;i~~tdi,.r'r.l .wii.ir.r: Policirs and I'rorrdores 

districts ti>yi:nr:~.r~i siipyort dislrlcl of- l'lrc! (;rt,i,n I~ihI~otrP;~nelrecognized fices. that responsiveness is largely an atIlesponsiveness and Efficiency 

The Green Ribbon Panel found that 

design, construction and operations 

procedures that govern district services for repair and maintenance projects must he streamlined and 

simplified. 

The support a I1E.H needs to carry 

out a maintenance and repair project 

paid for by installation (OMA) funds 

differs simdficantlv from the surlnort 

titude-a dedication to communication 

and teamwork on the part of tlie DER, 

the district engineer and their staffs. 

Attitudes cannot be regulated, but 

they can be fostered by policies that cncourage initiative and make tlie 

DEllldistrict en~neerteam more effective. The panel recommended 

several policies that are now being implemented to enhance smix~thoperations: ., . . required for major military construction (b1CA) projects funded t)y Con- .Policy is being revised to improve 

LTess. Management control procedures flexibility in the use of I< an11L acdo not adequately describe how the in- count money to modernize aged 

stallation support relationship is sop- facilities that need major renovation 

posed to work, so districts have im or repair. The panel found the work 

provised based upon conservative classification criteria so restrictive 

MGA models. that newly renovated facilities frequently fell short of modern standards in essential areas such as 

utilities and electrical systems, user 

requirements and space utilization. 

The new policy is being sent ti) 

major commands for staffing. 

Pro~,isionsare being made that will 

provide a warranty for qualifying 

maintenance and repair projects accomplished by USACE districtssimilar to guarantees for MCA projects. The USACE is estal)lishing a 

procedure to correct problems due 

to design error, construction deficiency or contractin' warranty 

disputes that cannot be resolved by 

the district, the 1)EH arid the major 

command. This means an installation (:an correct facility problems 

without waiting until negotiations 

between the district and the contractor (or ligitation) are complete. 

Details on the new procedure will be 

published this :-ear. 

Several Army agencies such as 

AAFES. NAF and TSA have their 

own construction funds. The Green 

Rit~honPanel realmmended that the 

Corps ensure that these agencies 

use the normal DEH master planning process to obtain new facilities. 

A command letter will be sent to 

these agencies that directs compliance with the new master planning regulation AR 210-20 and the 

programming procedures in AR 

415-19. 

The Cost of Doing Business 

The panel found DEHs believe that. 

district services lor professional 

engineering and contract managcmrnt 

are more expensive than in-house 

costs. UEHs and district engjneers 

have different accounting methods 

which distort a comparison of costs for 

similar services. For esample, tire 

DEH in-house a)st for a project docs 

not includc overhe:~d which is carried 

in the uverall installation acci~unt. 

Ilistricts, on the other hand. must add 

overhead to project costs. 

To clarify the a~stbrrakiii~wns>ipplieil to installatioil support services, 

Engineer Pamphlet 3'i-1-4, Cost Q"Do~ 

ing Busiwss, is being published for 

distribution to major comman~lsand 

divisions tliis fiscal year. It will help 

DEHs understanti how districts charge 

for services provided as part oi'a rrimbursahle project. 
A new 7.5% supervision and administration rate for maintenance and 

repair projects establislred in April 

1985 is being evaluated this year to 

determine it' it adequately covers construction management costs. If not, 

the rate will be adjusted. 

The Green Ribbon Panel also found 

t,hat procedures used to transfer funds 

between DEHs and districts for operations and maintenance (OMA-funded) 

projects are Loo coniplex. Federal 

statutes preclude much simplification. 

However, Europe 1)ivision has been 

using direct fund cite procedures for 

contracts. The Installations Finance 

an~l Accounting Office is cited for 

proqcss payments. These procedures 

have always been authorized. Other 

districts may c<insider this if it 

simplifies Inca1 administration 

Procurement Support and 

Commercial Activities 

One of the most dilficult issues ex 

plr~redby the panel inv<rlvcs contract 

authority. Tho Conrrnercial Activities 

I'rogram (A~76)and UEH rnanpon.er 

constraints liave increased the 1)EM's 

reliance on contracting without giving 

him contract administration authority. 

The Green Ribbon Panel recognized 

the IIEH iireds authority to start, stop 

and change a contractor's operation, 

and to alter the scope and dollar 

amount of the contract. Without it, he 

has difficulty responding to emergencics and onforeseen devrlopments. 

'he Corps is asking Lo decentralize 

?ontracting control to a degree that 

will give the I)EH authority with teeth 

at a time when the Army is trying ti) 

streamline. tighten and consolidatc the 

procuremcnt business. The new standard installation organizatiori is consolidating n~ntract management. under 

a contracting officer who will report 

directly to the installatkln's chief of 

staff. Until the new system has been 

tested with the DEH's full, professional support, it will be difficult to 

justify further decentralization. 

'he Facilities Engineering Support 

Agency (FESA) has improved DEH 

training ijn the commercial activities 

program by preparing model perlormance work statements and s1i;ving 

lrsnons leurr~ed at crrnferences and site 

visits. 

Education, Training and 

Career Development 

Professional development of the 

DEH work force and cross-training 

with district engineer staffs were ma. 

jor concerns of the Green Ribboil 

Panel. Thc panel found that while 

DEH workloads have increased and 

t>econie more complicated, the size an11 

average pde of the IlEl-I work force 

has declined. The panel said the 

disparity in grades between the DEA 

and district engineer professioiral 

staffs is a ileep~rooted problem that 

hinders successSul recruitment and 

retention of qualified UEIi personnel. 

Several initiatives to tackle these problems are underway. 

A critical first step is to see that installation commanders and their key 

personnel hetter understand the comulexitv of DEH management. - The Instalklion Co.mrntlnder's Gzride has 

been revised to better explain and 

publicize the objectives, carrabilities 

and nrocedures that eovern illstaila ,., 

tion support. Draft copies are now 

available. The new version &.ill be 

published as DA Pam 420-XX in yy 

XG 

L 

Thc ilisparit! in job classificatiorithe perception that ci~ili;~~ grade 

structure for key L)EH management 

positions is louxr than for their district 

counterparls-is being reviewed by the 

Army's Deputy Clrief of Staff, Prrsonriel. A review of key DEH positions at 

several installations will be completed 

this summer tu determine whether 

changes based on nianagerial responsibility and work complexity are 

justified. 

The engineer intern program is also 

being revitalized to add cross-training 

between district and DEH personriel. 

T)EH interns &.ill sperlri four weeks at 

the supporting district. I)istrict inLerlls 

will spend two weeks with the DEH. 

The entire issue of UEH training is 

being reviewed by a ask force. Currently, training responsibility is fragmented among FESA, USAES, the 

USACE Training Management Division (Huntsville), ALMC. AMETA, 7th 

Army Training Center and others. In 

the meantime, the number of training 

spaces allotted to IIEH personnel at 

Huntsville has heen raised from 12'70to 

209'0 of thc total. A pilot test of television satellite transmissions Lo remotc 

classrooms to expand training opportunities is planned. 

Finally, the Green Ribbon Panel 

recommende(1 that carcer progression 

patterns for engineer officers be niodifled to give more junior officers DEH 

experience. The Corps needs a irigger 

trase of experienced, knowledgealrle 

senior officers for critical DEH assignments. 

The Scope of USACE Support 

The last area of the panel's report 

discussed Llie need to improve support 

for uther types of UEH activities such 

as automated master planning, preparation ofcor~struction project approval 

clocuments (I)D Form 1391), and support LO upyradc ,\rnry Kcsrrvc Ce11tt.r 

facilities. A separate Green Kihhon 

Panel report on USACE support to the 

reserve component was recently submitted to the Chief of Engineers. 

The entire issue of improved support 

of installation master planning slid 

construction programnliny is bc.il~g 

studied baseii upon the results of the 

En,ginver Inspector Gf?~,f<rulRepc~i-1on 

the :Mi/itory Construi!tion Design 

Rebrrse Process, i?li2uly fD8:i. 

Efforts arc also underwah- to pnrmote tile research airii development 

services and the technoloby transfer 

information available thnrugh the 

Corps laboratories. One Stop suliport 

calls to the labs have steadily increased. The Engineer Circular 

70-1-13. Research arbd U@uelopmt:ni 
OneStop Service, lists more than 50 

areas in which help is available along 

with phone numbers and points lor 

contact. 

Conclusions 

Substantial improvements to Corps 

support of the DEH and inslallation 

commander have been made in the 

gear since the Green Ribbon Panel 

report. UTe will he better able to 

measure the effects of these changes in 

the year ahead. 

Hunever, thc ~JI,.,FI iunila~:ie~:tal 

observation of the Green Ribbon F;inel 

goes beyond changes to regulations, 

policy and programs. Support is an 

attitude-a spirit of co<q~el,ation and 

teamwork. Success will xtu:a)-s depend 

largely upon making the engineer 

family a family that truly cares. 

The experience of the Fort Sill DEH 

and the Tulsa Ilistriet Engineer working together in the Model Installation 

Program bears this out. Although the 

program allows ample opportunity to 

experiment with changes to regulation 

and policy, thcy found they were able 

to resolve 80.85% of the issues between them without special exemptions. 

Many of the solutions being impie~ 

in<,j~te<l in rrsponse tu thr i;~vi.il l~tilibon Panel are alsc the t.cs111i vf programs already worked out hy a DEH 

and a district that could be shared as 

motiels for the rest ul the Corps. 'The 

kcy to our progress is tlir communication and spirit of a,operation that initiatives like the Model Installation Program and Green Rihhon Panel stimulate. 

The Chief of Engineers has established Leaders i n Ct<stomcr Care as the 

theme for the engineer family. The 

Green Ribbon I'anel initiatives are a 

good beginning. Your comments and 

observations are invited. 

COL Stephen F. Rutz is chief ?f the 

Installution Planning Division for the 

Ass%stnnt ChiefqfEu,~n.eer,s (ACE).Hc 

served as the deputy d~istrief (mgiginnw 

.fir the New Orleans District from 

198.q-8.5. He was chief qf the Facility 

Progrms Branch fi,r the U.S. Army, 

Europe IL'SAREUR) Dvpzrty Chief of. 

S~<L,/;E~iginver (DCSENGR) in 

2982-83. He also unti1:yzerl the DEN 

wryur~izatitrnwlrr~dmision ioorkioad in 

Europe in 1981 as speeir*l assistu?zt to 

the USAREC'R DCSENGR. 

Victoria Mulllister is.features editor 

for ENGINEER. She ulas thc f!nginl!r!r 

informot.i.frn olrice?. and @&tor oj'THE 

SCOOPfor tile L7SAREIIR DCSENGR 

and Instnllation 3uUpport Aclil.ity, 

Elrropc, ,/'ram. 1!)RO-R:i. 

any articles of interest to engineers are welcome. address, and phone number. Also, please include 

Write in aetive voice and be as concise as possible. biographical information such as military and civilian 

Please give your article a title, too. education and past and present assignments. I I 


LENGTH: Let your subject dictate length; gen- If you have any questions, please call us. 

erally, articles should be two to six pages, double 

spaced. (7031 664-3082, AV 354. 
The Cross-FLOT Raid 

Engineers 

in the 

Deep Battle 

by LTC Larry Izzo 

0,ne oi our Arrny's goals is to trainCIS we' .~ntendto fight. Airband 

Battle doctrine tells us how we think 

we arc going to fight. It postnlatcs n 

battlefirl(i on which disruption of 

enemy activities in depth will t~eti 

routine feature of hot11 offensive and 

defensive operations. 

Unfort~~nately,little attention has 

heen devoted Lir Llle use of engineer 

strike operations to support the main 

battle. In an effort to revitalize this 

caoabilitv. ", the 307th Eneineer bat^

talion, 82nd Airborne, stages monthly 

night raids to destroy targets behind 

enemj- lines. They provide tough, 

realistic professional development opportunities for platiiiin leaders anti exciting training for soldiers. These raids 

capture the essence II~the four tenets 

of Air1,anii Battle doctrine: 

Initiatioe-setting or changjrig the 

terms of thc battle. 

Agility-reading the battlefield and 

acting fastcr than the cnemy. 

Synchronuation-arrangir~g conibat .act.nlt~es .' ' , ~n' tirric and space to 

maximize combat power. 

Depth-extension of the battlefield; 

planning ~'III. rear and deep operatir~nsthat suppcrrt the close battle. 

Training Scenarios 

The battalion has dcvelopeii several 

Cross-FLOT sc~nariosincluding some 

in cooperation with the Corps of Enp 

neer District in Wilmington, NC, anil 

civilian industries: Targets include: 

Thr Philpott and .John 11. Kerr 

L)ams-raid the powcr station arid 

deny electrical generating. capability 

to the enemy mitl~ouldestroying th~ 

dam. 

The AMOCO oil storage facility at 

C.rcensb<~r(i-attackthe enemy POI, 

distribution point without destroy 

ing the fuel that friendly forces plan 

to capture at a latcr date. 

Bridges and communications 

bunkers at Fort A.P. Hill and Camp 

Le.Jeune-dem<ilish a native timher 

hridgr or other structures constructed for the exercise. 

Each month the battalion rotates a 

new platoon through one of the 

scenarios, giving the platoon leader a 

chance to plan and lead an air assault 

engineer raid. Time fuzes and blasting 

caps :idd realisnl to simulated demolitions at civilian facilitiixs. Actual 

demolitions are used at Fort A.P. Hill 

and C;lmp LcJeone. An aggressor 

detail from the hattalion is at the 

target to provide realism, control arid 

cleanup assistanccj. 

Combined Arms Team 

Although the engineer battalion 

plans the exercise, the training is a 

tiivision combined arms operation. The 

33-man patrol is a representative slice 

of the division's comt~atpower. Three 

Uli-60 Rhckhamk helicopters from the 

aviation battlion providc transportation for the patrol urllich typically consists of: 

An air defense artillery stinger 

teani. 

A tactical siitellite (TACSAT) communicatiilns radio team from the 

sipal battalion to o~mrnunicate 

witlr hon~cstatii~n. 

An infantry squad for security. 

SP4 Donald Wayne and SP4 Richard Whitke, 

307th Engineer Rattalion, storm the John A. 

Kerr Dam control room. 

I'holo by 1I.T Peter F. T;rylor 

.Engineer elements to carry out the 

demolitiolls missions. 

Pathfinders and teams from the division rrconnaissance platoon are inserted near thr oiijective a few hours 

to a day early. Pathfinders mark the 

landing zone (LZ)for the night landing. 

and orient the patrol leader tourards 

the objective. Thc reconnaissance team 

maneuvers close to the oI1ject.ive and 

keeps it under surveillance. They send 

intelligence back to home station for 

the patrol leader, 1)otl1before and after 

he reaches the LZ. When available, 

Cobra helicopters provide fire support. 

Planning Considerations 

As simple as the Cross-FLOT concept sounds, the raid ischallengingand 

complicated. As with all air assault 

operatiuns, the engineer raid has Siiur 

hasic steps: 

The gn~undtactical phase. 

The landing phase. 

The enroute l~hase. 

The loading phase. 

Planning considerations are shown 

in Figure 1.' The patrol leader also 

plans the engineer portion of the mission. The Cross-FLOT aspect adds to 

the difficulty: 

ENGINEER, Sprlnq :986 
Hmr- ran the patrol slrrvive getting 

through the FLOT? 

\\.'hat fire suppixt can it rcly on? 

What are the escape and evasion 

plans if aircraft are lost across the 

FL,O'l?!Z 

The 'Mission 

The exercise hegins when the platoon leader and his company comniander receive the battalion operations order. 

Although Cross-FLW is primarily a 

platoon leader's training exercise, the 

company cnmn~amlerpliiys an essential role. He selects the platoon and 

times the operation so it is coml~alible 

with the ciimpany training plal~.When 

the operations order arrives, he 

coaches the platoon leader throud~the 

planning phasc. During the exercise, 

he niay accon~panytlie patrol ,: an

observer or ev;iluator. Tliorough 

evaluation is essential i.11get maximum 

Lanefit from the exercise. 

Ttie decision on hou. much time the 

patrol leader will havc lo plan the 

i)pet.ation is a compromise hrtwcrn 

t~vocomprting factors. On tlie one 

hand, the platoon neeiis time to pian 

kind rehearse; on the other, it must la 

realistic in terms of what thr unit 

would experience in hattle. 

The battdlion foul~dthat 24 Lo 36 

hours alloivs tinre to assemble the 

Lcam, plan, rehearse, lii~ldthe air mis~ 

sii~nconference, backhricf, and insert 

tile ren,nnaissance elements. It also 

placcs realistic pressure on the patrol 

leader and patrol. 01 course, the hat^ 

talion staff must coordinate use (11' the 

target facility and participation by tiivision assets in ailvance. 

The mission consists of. 

Pickup at a friendly pirkup zont, 

(1%). 

Kight anial iiavigatiml to a LZ that 

is 20 to 100 miles off post. 

Linkup with the pathfinders on the 

7.7. 

Navigation to the objective. 

Reconnaissance and the assault. 

Demolitir~nof the target. 

Movem~ntt,o a nearby PZ for extraction. 

The helicopters either laager in the 

vicinity or refuel aL a neart~yairport. A 

tactical arming and refueling point 

(FAKP) is sometimes used. %'bile this 

adds realism, it demands a great deal 

more planning, coordination and aviation assets. 

Lessons Learned the ITH-60's is difficult but imCross~FLOTproves Clause~vit~was perativc to correctly time thc excorrect: "Everythinp in war is very traction. 

simple, but the simplest thing is dif- .Iletnileii rehearsals are mandatory 

ficulL."" for a night operation. \\'ithout thc.m, 

In every raid, Clausaitz's concept of coordinated patrol action is impossifriction-those countless, unforeseen, hie. 

minor incidents which make tile real 1,anii navigation at night in enemy 

battlefield so different from war on territory always takes limgsr tl~alr 

paper-is clearly demonstrateti. Sure planned. 

enilugh, patrol leaders are continually Intelligence preparation is critical. 

surprised by unexpected difficulties Tlie patrol needs reliable informaassociated wit11 air assault operations tion regarding enemy strength at 

attempted at night in unfamiliar ter~ the target, nearby relief forces, and 

rain. the locations of air defense enroute 

Important lessons Icarned during to and at the ob,jective. 

Cross-FI,O'r raids include: Use of gatt~i'inders and reconDespite the use of the UIi-(iO'sDop naissance teams is heneficial, hut 

plrr system and night vision gog- they must he carefully briefed to 

gles, pilots frequently experienced avoid conijiromising the patrol 

difficulty navigating at night svl~t'n early. 

travelirrg long distances over Planning must be mrticul~lusand 

nnbnolvn terrain. Carefully selected coniy~rehensive. IL must cover 

routes are essential to find the cor- aspects such as: 

rect LZ. -artions uplon encountering enemy 

Maintaining c<~mmunicationsbe- or civilian personnel enroute to 

t\vcen the patrol on tiit. ground and the objective; 

307th Engineers Blow Up Dam 

by 11.'1' Peter F. Taylor 

Company A of thc 307th Engineer Battalion blew-up tlie John H. Kerr 

Dam on the North Carolina and Virginia horder last fall during a CrussForward Line of Own Troops (Cross-FLOT)enginrer raid. 

Cross-FLOT raids train enii test engineers fur operations behind enemy 

lines. 

The dam raid began when airl~orncengineers were inserted on a landing 

zone (LZ) several miles from their target hy Rlackhawk helicopters from 

the 1st Ratinlion, 17th Air Cavalry. From thc LZ they maneiivereil with 

reconnaissi~nceand pathfinder support to the dam. Friendly partisans left 

an access door open into the guarded power station. 

The engineers entered the facility and moveti undetecteti to their objective-the dam's control room Using simulated demolitions, they rigged 

and blew up the facility. They were picked up at a prearranged time by 

RlarLhawk helicopters at a pick-up zone adjacent to the dam. 

I 1LT Peta7.F. ?'a.yk,r is tho S-2jir the 307th Enyinerr Ratlalion. I 
-1 

1 new road 

RAID PHASES 

Ground How many troops will be gotng in? 

Tactical What deception plans are part of the operation 

Phase (CAS, jotnt air attack team, feints or demonstrations 

elsewhere)? 

What tlme of day (or night) will the landing occur? 

How long will the force be on the ground? 

What are the contingency plans if aircraft are lost en route or 

at the objective? 

Landing Will landing be on or away from the objective? 

Phase Does the commander want to use one or multiple landing 

zones (LZs)? 

Do you want to use attack helicopters or Air Force assets to 

prepare the LZs? 

Do you want to use pathfinders to assist in landing? 

How many aircraft can be diverted to make false insertions. or 

do you want to make a series of false insertions en route? 

En Route What flight corridors will be established? 

Phase Can you arrange for escort aircraft (Air Force or attack 

helicopters)? 

What are the refueling and rearming requirements en route or 

at the objective? 

How are smoke and chaff used to assist in deception? 

Where will passage points, pilot pickup points and air control 

polnts be established? 

Loading How many pickup zones (PZs) are requested? 

Phase Are the air movement tables (to include the bump plan) 

complete? 

If the flight is larger than the PZ will permit at one time. 

where will the aircraft meet for the initial point? 

Figure 1. 

Oetermins l 

-what to do with prisoners; 

-extraction of wounded; 

-fire support crossing the FLOT 

and at tlie objective. 

A thorough air mission conference is 

critical to success. The patrol leader 

should not view the helicopters as 

taxis, hut as an integral part of the 

patrol. He shonlii rely heavily on the 

air mission commander's expertise. 

Conclusion 

The 307th Engineer Battalion's 

Cross-FLOT raids are excellent professional development exercises for the 

platoon leaders who lead the patrols 

and great training for patrol soldiers. 

Combat engineers ~villhe called upon 

to execute such missions as part of a 

total combined arms team on the 

Airband battlefield. The projection of 

this combat power deep across the 

FLOT on a well-timed opcration in 

support of the main battle lies together 

all four tenets of AirLand Battle doctrine. 

LTCLarry Izzo is in tthr U.S. Amnay 

War College Aduanced Operational 

Studies Fello7r:ship Progrom. 

nssociated u~ith.the School of Advanced 

Mililury Studies a1 For1 Leauenu;orl.~ 

KS. Hu joreuiol~sly com.m,an(Ied the 

307th Engineer Battalion at Fort 

Hrugg, NC LI% Izzo, a I9(;7 WMA 

I with a PV

.-** z--. 

I(point of 

~n~ineer Problem yriiduate, has a master's degrue in 

Nue/en?.Enginewingfrunt MIT and a.n 

- MBA born Lwny lslond Cnivursily. flu

is a rf!,gisteredprofis.sionnl en.gincer in 

Virqinia. 

I 

Notes: 

vertical int' -A -..,-A:-

the new road at station 95t00 and :56.00 feet as shown b 

vertical curve of the new road mu! ?dto Dass through the 8 

elevation of the existing road. 

PV 

Eie ,UY 

1 

-4% 

the length o 

'CPT Ron Klein. "Aviation Employ. 

ment in Special Purpose Operationa," 

7I.S. Army Aoioliori Digest, Septembcr 

1984, p. 6. 

WAJ Charles L. Berry, "l'lanning 

Aviation Crass-FI.OT Operations," 

Military Rpuiew, January 1984, pp. 

34-48.This article provides an excellent 

introduction to plannine considerations 

for cross-FLOT attacks. 

.'Carl von Clausewitz, On War, edited 

and translated by Michael Howard and 

Pcter Parut, Princeton, 1984,p. 119. 

?lul!on subr 

n, 

f vertical curve lequlrea lo pass rn xed point. Vega Baja, Puerto Rico 

n~rredby Roberr D Bsldwr,~.Pt . 1 A~ifields LTC Luis M. Carrillo-Rivera ,.,,.,... -~,.,....~.....Mililary E,,yt,lerring 

elevation 3 

;t be selectt 

lt station 9 -- 8:-

6+00 and 

rough the it 

Road$ 

elow. The 

centerline 
When I was ten and my father 

was stationedin France, I recall him 

telling a story about General 

DeGaulle. 

One day, while reviewing the 

French militia, General DeGaulle 

entered a village. A squad-sized 

town force fotmedup for inspection. 

The senior officer was a heavily 

beribboned colonel; the second-incommand was a colorfully decorated 

lieutenant colonel. They were followed by a gaudy array of majors 

and captains-all bedecked in 

military finery. last in line was a 

private in a plain uniform. "What's 

the matter with you!" DeGaulle 

glowered down at him. "Can't you 

sew?" 

How do you measure professional achievement? 


Aunlt can easily lose control of 

awards. ' I once attended a batLalion ceremony where the post's 

championship basketball team received 

the same certifirate of achievement as 

the departing NCOs. Several of the 

players were under indictment for 

drug ahose. Kot airprisingly, people 

tittered. 

If a unit is too free with awards, 

soldiers dismiss them. On the other 

hand, there is no substitute for awards 

that are based on oh~ective, measurable, professional competition. They 

provide a highly visible tool for 

documenting the achievements of 

those who deserve early promotion, 

by MAJ Jefferson J. lrvin 

plum prot'cssional schooling, and 

special enii~of-tourecognition. 

I became a, believer the hard way. 

While I was a platoon leadrr, my best 

squad leader left my unit without an 

Army-level award. The brigade stafl 

rejected the ARCOM citatiori 1 wrote. 

It read something like this: 

SSG J(mes toas the best squud leader 

inSeeond Platoon, B Corr~r~nny, diirin,.q 

the period. . . . He enforced %oith,ir~his 

syuud Lho i~igh.(!stslandards qf hurrrks 

and personal iqpsur(rri?Ee.His apemision of th,e Damstadt mintenunce 

facility, th.e Schwei?f?~rL dependent 

school, and the WiUJlecli~tunk lu?~ 

irig pad con.?trurtion projects resulted 
in the (:oniplelio?i q/ lhesc high doliar 

projects on timv iinrl (0 n high ~p~alil!j. 

He is a great crellil to B Company (znii' 

/,he Cliitnd Slnles Am~y. 

To me, it was 81 failurc of pers~mal 

leadership. 1 truly believed the man 

u.;~?my hest squad learler. The ciutioa, liolvever, lacked objectivti 

evidence of achievement. My opinion 

alone w;ls not sufficient to mi~vethe 

decision makers. I felt the rejection intensely-especially wtren, instead of 

the ARCOM, my sq~iaileader received 

the same battalion certificate of 

achievement as the indicted baskethall 

pl:~yersthat day. 

Flow can you t,ake care of' your 

soI(iiers? How can you make sure the 

promotions and awards you influence 

don't go disproportionately to those 

u-ho are aiiegt at self-promotion, ir~ 

respective of actual performance of 

duty? 

You can inst.itute a comnlandmonitored set of competitio~~sfijr the 

company, platoon or squad that allows 

i~rdividualsto u~mpeteseveral times 

over a range of skills. Thc wider the 

range, the greater the probability that 

every individual mill find a niche where 

he excels. Soldicrs gain a sense of acci)mplishment. Their enthusiasm 

transfers to other areas, and they are 

more likely to reenlist. It's good for the 

soldier, gooii for the unit, good for the 

Army. Competitions u,hich touch all 

soldiers include: 

Army Physical Ileadiness Test 

(APKT) 

NBC defense 

Land navigationlorienteering 

Marksmanship 

Weapons employment 

Some competitions should test 

athletic skills (APRT); some should be 

written tests (map readings); some 

should he hased arr simple continuo~is 

expenditure of effort (personal equipmrr~tmaintenance); and s(~meshould 

he shreu-dly chosen combinations of 

skills (orienteering, SQ'l' level 1 camany level ainig~etitions).If the same 

people win every time, thej: may be 

superhuman; ho~vcver,it is more likely 

that yllur competitions don't yet cover 

an adequate range. 

By nou, you are saying, "Wait, this 

siiunds administratively oppressive." 

But actually a routine system of cornpetitivc evaluation simplifies company 

supervision. It is managcable because 

the SQT procedure has defined objective criteria (or MOS proficiency that 

are easily adapted for competitive 

testing. Tangihlc records on soldier 

performance reduce the inevit;lblc 

headaches surrounding efficiency 

report?., promotions, selections for 

schooling and other contentious decisions. 

Make surp everyone competes in a 

way that connects directly to their 

work (th? traditional Mechanic-of-theMonth compctition, for example). This 

is alugh to accomplish considering the 

variety of MOSS in a company headquarters. Hun do you set up professional a~mpetitionfor the three indiviiiuals in l.he communications section or the two PI,L clerks? 

You can try one of two tacks. You 

can encourilge the bat tali or^ to set up 

intercompany competitions for low 

density MOSS, or you can set goals the 

soldiers compete against. For cxam~ 

ple, have the communications personnel compete against brigade radio 

re;~dincssnor.ms tliat are incrementcd 

upwtlrds to increase the challenge. 

When the norms are exceeded, individuals receive written recognition. 

The criteria must be uniform and ohjcctive. Everyone competing must be 

tested under tlic same amditions. The 

evaluation criteria must be as (lev(1id(if 

sut~jectivejudgment as possible, as it is 

in the Go. h'(o-Go SQT. Objectivity is 

crucial; you want competition to identify the talented, quiet and dedicated 

soldier who might otherwise go unnoticed among more g-epirious personal favorites. 

Competition ma), he haseii on ali~ 

nounced or unannounced tests or inspections, but the award itself should 

not he a random event. A routine 

schedule of awards allows those who 

are competing to prepare rationally. 

You lose legitimacy if the Mechanic-ufthe~Morit11 award is given out 

sporadically in January, May and July. 

Once you have competition, make 

sure that awards are made promptly, 

results are widely disseminated, and, 

most important, that you maintain 

good records. 

While I was a first lieutenant, 1 

asked my platoon sergeant, w21om I ad^ 

niireri greatly, who his best plat~~nn 

leader had t~cen.He did not, to my 

chagrin, flatter me but immediately 

namrri his platoon leader in Vietnam-a man who carried six notebooks 

into a~mbilt,hanging - - like medals all

over him. 

Why the r~otehooks?When sol(liers 

nerfnrmed well. he wrote on-the-swot 

notes that 'documented their 

8~chievementsatid won his men the 

recognition they deserved. 

That message hit home the day my 

outstanding squad leader didn't receive 

the AKCONI I knew he deserved. 

When I hecanir a company com~ 

mander I was determined nirt to repeat 

past mistakes. I established an imjlerfect version of the a\r?irils system 

described here (imperfect, iri that 

Iliings always tiecome clearer in hindsighl). I may have been sporadic, giving the Mechanic-of-the-Month award 

in January, .July and September; but 1 

kept records religiously and it paid off. 

When 1 left, thc new coninlander 

received my record of individual and 

unit avards, filed by individual in the 

company. A newly promoted staff 

sergeant had t~ccnthe hest marksman 

in the unit, had repeatedly hested the 

other NCOs in I'T tests, had the hest 

squad in ARTEP testing, and had 

worked on construction grojei:ts that 

won brigade awards. In his company 

file were 12 aaariis and letters-ail 

from intraconipany competitions or endorsements to larger unit a\v;lrds. He 

was a quiet individual who kncw his 

i~usiness,set high standards and made 

his men perform. When 1 met him f; 

months later ac Fort Belvoir, he was 

wearing a new Meritorious Service 

Medal. 

,I(IAJ JeJfrrson J. In.'~nu:as air 0"ssi.sta7it prq/i)ssor ofgeocjraphg clnii corn,. 

p"te7. sciclzca at the L'.S Military 

Acadmby in 1985. He serced us u plnLoon leader and company eo~nrnander 

in thr (14th Engi,mer Ratlalion is Germany. MAJ Inin hus u bachelor's 

degreefinrn ihe KS. Miliiarg Acabmy 

rand a nnmter's ilrgree ,from Sfnnford 

Ln%~:ersily.He i.: nou, o civil engineer 

and o m~ijor,inthe Arn~,yKcspr7.e. 
Engineers Join 


Regimental System The colors will Ile of a stCindard design 

fir conthat arms ri'gimc!nts. 'l'hr crest 

The Corps of Engineers will join 

other comhat arnis liranciies as a full 

participant in the Army's i,rgirnt,ntal 

system. ?'lie engineer regimrnt will be 

known as thc Corps of Engineers. 

Thc wl~ole i~ranch regiment means 

that all engineer officcrs and enlisted 

soldiers will be affiliated with the 

Corps of Engineers as their regiment 

regardless of their assignment. 

AT(> Richard S. Kern, Commandant 

of the Enginecr Scliool, believes that 

the regimental plan caljturt,s and 

strengthens the dual sense of affiliation that engineers feel both ti, tire 

Corps and to their t~tti~lion, tl~r basic 

wor.kirrg arid fighting cl~nierrt. 

"To enhanre soldicr affiliation at the 

battalion and separate company levels. 

the Cory~s will initiate a program 

. - to

highlight unit historics and acciimplishments," said LTC Charles E. 

ObstaclesEngineers and Maneuver 

Forces Need Common Terms 

Point 

iro~?llnu,:rl, jiov~.page %?.?I 

engineer staff :it each level provi~ie appr~~priately detailed input as the 

maneuver plan evolves into a set of 

0rt1~'rs and co~itrol measiirps. If we 

agree on ternrs that let commantifrs 

clearly communicate their intent, 

obstacle plans will be mure res~~rlnsive 

and engineer participation wrly in the 

piarrnirrg pruccss will hc guaranteed. 

(IPT ~Miehiie!D. Baeh:ri! is ott(?nding 

qroduate school nt Runsse!,ner Polytech,. 

nic 1nstitnt.e. He hos ,surr!rd ,u;i.th the 

10th Engimcr Uolluliun, 3rd Infin.t?-M 

L)i?:isinr~. Kitzingen, (;errna?ly, ns u 

,ri/,atvon Lcorlnr: hattalion. mainlannca 

qfficer, company conl~nander., and ossistr~rrt dirisC~ti eriyLneer. CT'T Roehrc 

r?cPil~i?!llQ bnchr,lnr:s (i~!grce.from the 

C.S. .MiiilrtryAcadu~ny and is u gradtiute uj'CAS:' and EOAC. 

mill be \vorn above the right pocket [in 

Olson, Chief oC the Engineer P~I- tire Army green, white or blur 

prlnency Office. uniform. 

Engineer officers and enlisted To syn~t)olize membership in the 

soldiers will wear the branch insignia. Corps of' I?rrgilieers, the crcst will be 

They will wear the i~on~erical ilesigna- presented to each memljer r~f the regition of tlieir current engineer battalion ment, either at the i<ngineer Ol'i'icer 

abovc thc insignia. When engineers Basic Course graduation, Warrant Ofserve in other assignments, they may ficer appointment ceremony, or ad^ 

elect to wear. the numerical designa- vanced Indiviilwal Training graduation of one of their former engineering tii,n. Soliliers \vlio reclassik into an 

battalions. cnginecr specialty will rereive the 

The Corps' regimental home will he crest aftcr completing an on-thejob 

Fort eir When the Eribfineer training program or attending an apSchool moves to Fort Leonard TVood in pr!~rlri;ite military school. 

1989, the rcfrirnental Ilorne will move 'rho Corps regimental plan 1i:ill also 

with it. include designating and selecting an 

The Corps is working with thr Army IIoni~rary Coli)nrl of the Corps ;%nil 

Institute of Heraldry to devciop colors L)istingilished Illemhers of the Corps. 

and a coat of arms, or crest, that will The plan will be implemerrtrd hy Jurre 

syn~bolize the Corps as a regiment. 16, the Corps' 21ltir t~irlhday. 

A. Given: PVI at station 96t00 

ELP 


Fixt 


ELF 

6. Procedure: ..., ., ,point is off: ? PVI, there le fixed 

point form ula 

1 =9% 

1100 = 1 stat 

3. tiLtq*+",, = ~LP,,, - -. 

4. Otf95+OD= 363' - 355' = 8' 

L= 2 r~+ 210ffi) + 4 /Alotfl -- /off\2 

lves the eqt 

L -.3.a~, a.18 


L 10.74 stations 

I School News 

Directorate of 


Combat Developments (DCD) 


Thermal Sight 'resting of therm;~l sights on thc XI1, M2/3, and M6043 tanks and the 

improved TO\\' vehicle (I1'V) was conciucted at Fort Knox, KY, Minefield Detection: 	 November 18-20, 1985. Testing determined whether existing thermal 

sights can detect. friendly and threat mines, both surface laid and L)uried. 

Evaluation results are expected by carly May 1986. 

M870 Semitrailer I'lanrring is underway to upgrade the fit870 for tr;insport of the 1'11 

Upgrade: 	 tiozcr. THAIIOC is assessing operalioual requirements to ensure that all 

M870 deficiencies are cc~nsit.iered. This list is based on an 51870 syst,cm 

assessment and on cont;~c~ with thrw combat heavy engineer battaliorls 

;is representative users of th12 vehicle. I)eficiencics associated with the 

M870 are also bcirig identified and will be considared for repair antilor 

upgrade. 

Ground Emplaced Thc GEMSS program was epprovetl for fielding in FORSCOhl and

IJSAREUK. A total of 55 systems will be fieldcii in IJSAKEUR accord- Mine Scattering ing to a materiel fielding plan puhlishcd Octoher 1985. Initial deploySystem (GEMSS): ment of 22 systems begail in January 1986. 

Tl~ch174 AT' lnirie will nut he axiilable until fo~irt.li quarter, FY 86. 

Cleared Lane 	 The CLAMS and n~ountir~g kit for M60 tanks were type classified 

standard on September 30, 1985. The first unit equipped is scheduled fur Marking System third quarter, I"Y 87. 

(CLAMS): The mounting ltit for the MI Abrams tank is beinp \vorlied as a product 

irnpro\wnent i* the CLAMS and is scheduled fol.;ntroduction 'into the 

force by third quarter, FY 88. The separate adapter is required to deflect 

high exhaust temperatures from the MI turbine anti to provide a unique 

interface with the Abrams odometerispeedometer system. 

Engineer Force Several important engineer force structure changes were approved by 

the Chief of Staff of the Army on November 6,1985. Engineer initiatives Structure: 	 in this review include the redesign of engineer combat heavy hatt aI.Ions 

and engineer topographic battalions, restructure of the 20th Engineer 

Brigade (Airborne), and recovery of ten roundout a,rnpanics to the active component. An NTC engineer company with 200 spaces was 

resourced during the force structure review. 
Minefield Prototypes of MIRAIIOR will be tested side-by-side at Fort Knox in 

Reconnaissance and late FY 87. This will define the state of the art in mine detection and 

canitalize on multisensor svstems to improve accuracy, reliability and Detector speed. Although initiated as a concept exploration, MIKADOR is the 

(MIRADOR): first engineer program that fits Ante's Proof qfP,ri.nciple streamlined 

acquisition cycle. Il successful, (:lose-in detection of' mines will improve. 

Reserve Component Advisory 

Staff (RCS) 

USAR School The Winter 1985 issue described the 14-week EOAC-R(: course and its 

EOAC Program: two-week modules. Both of these options are still available, but there is a 

new USAR school version. 

The USAK school EOAC program started Octol~er 1. 1985. The new 

course is divided into four phases. Phase 1 consists of common sul?jects. 

Phases 2. 3, and 4 consist of engineer-particular sok)jects. 

Phase 1 can be taken at a IJSAK school, inactive duty training (IW), 

or by correspondcnce. Phases 2 and 4 niust be taken on active duty at. 

Fort Belvoir. Tliese two phases cannot be taken hy rorrespondencr. 

Phasc 3 is available by correspondence. 

The new USAlZ school EOAC-RC is now the only EOAC-RC taught by 

the USAR schools. The nea- EOAC-RC phases equate to the old phases 

as folloms: 

New EOAC-RC Phase Old 1':OAC-KC Phase 

For more information, conlact your IISAR school. your Personnel 

Management Officer at ARPEKCEN (800) 325-4987, or thr KC Advisory Staff at Fort Belvior (800) 336-3095, extension 1166. 

ARPERCEN: A new organization, ARPERCEN, was createti ahen RCPAC and 

ARPERCEN combined on November 5. 1985. ARPEKCEK is a field 

operating agency of the Office of the ('hief, Army Reserve (OCAK). 
School News 

Defense Mapping School (DMS) 

Cartography 

Courses: 

A redesigned Basic Cartography Course (RCART) for MOS 81C places 

greater emphasis on rnap revision techniques using the Zoom Transfer 

Scopes (ZTS). Thc course, implemented last fall, retains instruction in 

map hase construction and color separation. The course has been 

shortelled from 56 to 53 academic clays, and the number of classes has 

changed from 10 to 5 per year. 

The Advanced (lartogmphy Course (ACART) has also been redcsigned. ImplemcntetJ in January, this course is 41 academic days. 

Department of 

~ilitar~ Logistics (DML) 

CMF' 63 Subfield A revision of the special purpose equipment repair subfield in CMF 63 

Restructure: has heen approved. The revision will improve the ovcrall maintenance of 

power generation, engineer construction, utilities, quartermaster, and 

chemical equipment. It will also enlrance the utilization, supervision, promotion opportunities, career progression, professional development, 

and retention of soldiers in the affected MOS. 

The revised suhfield establishes a new "cappel. MOS" of 52X (speci:tl 

purpose equipment repairer) for use only at skill level 4 (E-7).It will be 

the capper MOS for 22C (utilities equipment repairer), 52D (poiver 

generation equipment repairer), 52F (turbine engine driven generator 

repairer), and 63J (quarternlaster and chemical cquipmcnl repairer). 

The revision realigns the career progression of: 

MOS 62R-construction equipment repairer. At skill lcvcl 4, 62H 

presently is fed hy 52C, 52D, 521i7, and 62B. The rcvision eliminates 

thc feeder MOS progression for the 52 series. 62B will progress from 

skill level I through 4. 

hlOS 63J-quartermaster and chemical equipmcnt repairer. 635 

presently progresses from skill level 3 (EM) into 63H (track \,chicle 

repairer) at skill level 4. The revision redesignates all 6:iJ skill level 3 

positions as MOS 52C. Skill level 3 for 63.J will be eliminated af1c.r 

TAADS dociimsntation and personnel reclassification :Ire complete. 

The new MOS data for 52Xreflects in the October 1985 update to AR 

611-201,Enlisted Ca~eerMunagm.cnl Fields a,r~dMilitor,yOccupirl ionul 

Specialties. I'ersonnel reclassificatioli guidance can be obtained from 

Commander: USAMILPEKCEN, ATTN: DAPc-EPL-0, 200 Stovall 

Street, Alexandria, VA 22332-0400. 
Directorate of 


Training and Doctrine (DOTD) 


Doctrine and The New Eqnipmenl Systems Division coordinated Doctrine and Tactics Training(DTT) to coincide with the mid-February fielding of the M9 Tactics Training armored combat earthmover. The training teaches the combat

(DTT): capabilities of the MS and gives doctrine for employing the equipment. 

The DTT provides guidance to the first unit equipped with the M9, the 

13th Engineer Battalion, 7th 1nfant.r~ Division, at Fort Ord, CA. 

Formerly called New Organization Training, IWTs are a vital part of 

the TRADOCIAMC systems support strat.cgy for fielding ncw equipment. 

Department of 

~ilitar~ Engineering (DME) 

Construction Mobile training teams (MTTs) in construction n1an;tgement are 

Management available from the Engineer School. These teams consist of subjecl matter expcrts who will instruct, observe and evaluale both active and 

Training: reserve component engineer units. Primary services offered are nssessment of construction management proficiency and presentation of training to acceptal~le standards. 

[;nits desiring MTT assistance should contact SFC Richard Brown, 

Nonresident Training L)ivision, IIOTD, (703) 664-3008, AV 364. 

Units that conduct their own training on construction management 

can obtain exportable training packages (ETPs) from the Engineer 

School. The E1'I's consist of student workbooks, lesson plans and student practical exercises. Lessons are also available on video cassette or a 

33mm slidelcassette recorder combination. 

For more information on these constn~ction management ETPs, conlact CPT Chuclc Horn or CI'T Tim Devens, DME, (703) 664-3272, AV 

354. 

The Engineer School has purchased several software packages in project management. The purchases were based on extensive evaluation of 

software or1 the market today and information from the Construction 

Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL). 

For more information on these software packages, contact CPT Chuck 

Horn, DME, (703) 664-3272, AV 354. 
School News 

Directorate of 

Evaluation and Standardization (DOES) 

Lessons Learned: 'rwo 1,essons Learned products are available from the Engineer 

School. 

TaskFvrce En,giri.ee?;CombinedAmns Integ?,ationPacicapje-designed 

to assist the engineer unit in combined arms training. It offers some 

train up ideas for units preparing for an exercise and a sample briefing to assist in starting an early working relationship with maneuver 

commanders and staff. Units identified to attend an NTC rotation 

have already been sent a copy of this package. 

NTC Lessons Lc?armdQua~lerlyNewslelter-offers a condensatiorl of 

combined arms lessons learned from observation at NTC. 

Kequests for Lessoris Learncti products should serit to Commandant, USAES, ATTN: ATZA-ES, Stop 271, Fort Belvoir, VA 

22060-5271. POC is CPT Craig Tavani, AV 354-4172. 

TRADOCUSAR The Engineer Scliool and five USAR schools became iornially afSchools Affiliation filiated October 1, 1985. The affiliation program ensures TIZAIIOC and 

FORSCOM that USAR school instruction is of excellent quality and con- Program: ducted by competent instructors using the best and most current instructional materials. 

The Engineer School is affiliated with: 

1155th USAR School, Edison, NJ 

2059th USAK School, Bethlehem, PA 

2070tli USAIZ School, Fort Belvoir, V11 

2071st USAK School, Owings Mills, MI) 

2072nd USAR School, Philadelphi:~,PA 

New Directions 

for EOT: 

Correction: 

46 

The Engineer Orientation Team (GOT) has taken steps to provide ever1 

better service to engineer field units. When preparing for a visit, the 

team asks the unit cornmantier and tiis slaff for ideas, issues and concerns. The EOT staff then tailors the team to thc unit's needs by gatliering sut~jectmatter experts from the directorates and training departments of the Engineer School. 

The GOT visits units-battalion and above- every two years, hut cammanders may request a visit from the team at any time. The Engineer 

School encourages reserve component engineer units to submit requests 

for an EOT visit. 

Requests should be addressed t,o the Director, Ilirectorate of 13vaiuation and Stantiardization, Stop 271, Fort Relvoir, VA 22060-5271 or call 

SFC David M. Rexrode, AV 354-3668. 

EOHCIEOBC-RC Class Schedule FY 86 

The report date for class 7-86 is 10 August 86. 
Past in 


Review 


by 1)s. IYilliat~~C. Baldxvi~l 

Historical I)ivisic~n, OC:l< 

when the North Korean army attacked Soutli Korea in late June 

1950, it quickly pushed the surprised 

South Korean and American forces 

into the southern tip of the Korean 

peninsula around Pusan. The Jnvhr~n 

1,andilig behind Korth Korean lines in 

September lau~iclied a iJnited Nations 

counterofferisive which drove North 

Korean forces toward the Yalu River, 

the border with Communist China. 

As part of this counteroffensive. 

American troops landed on the eastern 

roast of North Korea in October and 

moved north to the 4.000-fool: plateau 

around the Chosin Reservoir. In late 

November. Chinese troops launclicd a 

massive counterattack which forced 

IJnited Nations units Lo withdraw from 

the frozen, rugged terrain of North 

Korea. U.S. Army engineers played an 

important part in this withdrawal. 

Surrounded hy Chinese troops, the 

1st Marine Division and elements of 

the 7th Infantry Division fought their 

way south frorn the Chosin Reservoir 

lo the village of Koto-ri. Fourteen 

thousand troops, including 2,000 from 

the Arniy, had to withdraw over a narrow road which dropped over 3,000 

feet through a treacherous pass. 

Ahout threc miles from Koto-ri, the 

road ran along the side of a steep cliff 

and crossed a hridge next to a 

gatehouse. The gatehouse covereti 

four steel pipes which carried water 

from the reservoir to the turhincs of a 

power plant in the valley below. 

Because the gatehouse had no fli~r, 

the bridge was the only means for 

crossing tlre steel pipes. 

Recog-nizing the importance of the 

bridge, Chinese troops had destroyed 

the original bridge anri two replacements built by Army engineers, leaving a gap of 22 feet. U'ithdrawal of 

American vehicles, tanks and gms required spanning this gap. 

The 58th Engineer Treadway Nriclgr (:urnpan? experimented with airdrop 

techniques to span this 22-foot gal) during the retreat from the Chosin Keservoir, I)ecember, 1950. I'hoto: U.S. Marine Corps 

Eiigiileers in the Korean Jrar: 


The Bridge at Koto-ri 


Marine and Army c?nginrers coricluded tllat bypassing was impossil~le 

and tlrat the small assembly and 

launching space, in addition to enemy 

fire, ruled out the use of a Kailcy 

bridge. Although they had never tried 

the technique before. Army engineers 

decided to experiment bvith paraclluting sections of a treadway hridge froni 

the air. 

Thr 58th Engineer Trcadaay Bridge 

Company was in Koto-ri, and two of' its 

bridge trucks were operatiilnal. Onlg 

two days were availzble for exprrimenting with the airdrop techniques. 

On the first day, the tests failed ~vhen 

the bridge sections crashed to the 

earth. An Air Forcc expert on airdrops 

had larger parachutes flown in friim 

Japan during the night, anit thp airdrops on thc second day were successful. 

On December 7, Air Force C-119s 

released eight treadway sectionstwice as many as needed-over Kotori. Only one section was iianiaged 

when its parachute failed to open. 

Engineers loaded the sections onto the 

58th Bridge Company's trucks and on 

December 9, rebuilt the abutments and 

laid the treadways in three hours. 

Throughout the night, a steady strewn 

of t.roops anll vehi(:les cn,sse~I tli]:! 

span, headed for the port of Hungnam 

arld t.varuation to the suuth. 

Rumors ahout tlit hrid~]:.nrar Kotori hrorldit American journalists Lo the 

site. and their dramatic reports ni:~ile 

the span, :ring ti Llir Marinr 

C:orps account of the campaign. "the 

iiorlii's most famous bridge for the moment." Sr~~na storics were l'ancili~l, implyinx that the treadu,ays had 

par.avliuted iritii position on the 

al,otments. Ycl tlic r]:%lity was still im~ 

pressivo. Enginc!ers devised an innovative solutiorl ti~ a Lactical prol)lem, 

tt.stvd it in a shi~rt peri~jd of time, and 

applicd it under difficult iircamsblnces. Tho hridge at KoL<i-ri playcii 

an importa~;t part in thc legendary 

Marine withdrawal fnlm the Chosin 

Reservoir. 

Suggestions for further reading: 

E.L.Rowny, "Engineers in the Hungram Evacuation," The :Milila.r?y 

Enyinei!r 43 (Sept.-Oct. 1951): 

315-19. 

Lynn Montross and Nicholas A. Cxnzona, The Chosin Rcsen:oir Cnmpnign. liS. :War%ncOperalions in 

Korea, 1.950-1!)5s (Washington, I1.C.: 

Government Printing Office, 1!)57).