F~Ll1974
 
\JO UME: 4 NUMBE:R 3 ft\LL 1974
 

fE:~TURE:S

11 OPMS/ COL Carl P. Rodolph, Jr. 

14 Engineer Soldier's Manual/ CPT Robert Sperberg 

16 River Crossing Operations/ 

CPT Benjamin F. Heil, Jr. 

18 Incentive Training/ LTC Charles L. Shreves 

22 Engineer Center Team/ Engineer Staff 

23 Partnership/ LTC Joachim K. W. lickert 

26 Construction Management At Work/ 

CPT Lamar C. Ratcliffe, Jr. 

31 Training-The Elusive Commodity/ 

MAJ Charles E. Gardner 

34 Domestic Action/ CPT Jeffrey A. Wagonhurst 

36 Geodesic Domes/ CPT John H. Robertus 

38 Lighting Freedom's Frontiers/ CPT Larry L. Austin 

40 Dig it Now - See You Later/ CPT Cecil Green 

DE: P~RT ME:NTS 

1 Chief's Briefs/ History 

2 Pipeline/ News Items 

4 Stop 16/ Letters to the Editor 

5 Engineer Interview/ Project Nimbus Moon 

28 The Henry Larcom Abbot Awar / 

CPT Gordon T. r by, Jr. 

42 Issues a d Answer / LT Joseph H. Hottes 

44 ridging the Gap/ Career Notes 
Major General Joseph Gilbert Totten was born in New Haven. Connecticut, August 23. 1788. He was graduated from the US Military 

Academy, July 1. 1805, and appointed Second Lieutenant, Corps of 

Engineers. He resigned from the Army on March 31, 1806, to 

accompany, as secretary, his uncle. Captain Jared Mansfield, who had 

been appointed by President Jefferson, Surveyor General of Ohio and 

the Northwest Territory. 

Totten re-entered the Corps in 1808. where he remained until his death, 

April 22, 1864. He was an authority on sea coast fortifications, and as a 

member of the first Permanent Board of Engineers (established in 

1816) he laid down principles of coast defense construction which were 

followed for more than a century. His service covered three wars, the 

War of 1812, Mexican War, and the Civil War. He served 26 years as 

Chief Engineer. 1838-1864. the longest on record. 

As Chief of Engineers during the Civil War he supervised the defensive 

works around Washington. On the day before he died he was 

brevetted a Major General by Congress "for long, faithful and eminent 

service". 

Edward B. Russell 

Curator. US Army Engineer Museum 

_,1­ _ 

I 
·PIPELINE. PIR
 

RIBBON BRIDGE 

EQUIPMENT RECEIVES NEW TYPE 

CLASSIFICATION 

A faster method of launching 

the boat used for the assembly 

of the Army's new ribbon 

bridge has been Type Classified as Standard. This means 

the method used, along with 

the equipment itself, is considered the most advanced and 

satisfactory item available to 

meet current military needs. 

Both the new launching 

method and the ribbon bridge 

itself were developed and 

tested by the Military Tech ­

nology Department at the US 

Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center (MER DC), Fort Belvoir, 

Virginia. 

Essentially a boat cradle assembly, the new method permits the present standard 27 

foot bridge erection boat to be 

launched directly into the 

water from the ribbon bridge 

truck transporter in a fraction 

of the time required using a 

crane. This enables the boat to 

keep pace with the 20 feet per 

minute assembly time of the 

actual bridge modules which 

are launched from the transporters directly into the water. 

Use of the cradle assembly 

reduces the boat launching or 

retrieval time from 30 to approximately two minutes. This 

a Iso means the el im ination of a 

20 ton crane and the number of 

personnel reduced from six to 

three. 

The ribbon bridge is now in 

production under a $10 million 

contract with Consolidated 

Diesel Electric Division of 

CON D E X Corporation, Old 

Greenwich, Connecticut. Units 

2 

are expected to be available 

for field use in the summer of 

1975. Cradles are expected to 

be available concurrent with 

the bridge units under a contract for 54 of the special boat 

units awarded to Pacific Car 

and Foundry Co., Renton, 

Washington. 

PLANS AVAILABLE 

FROM OCE FOR A 

TRAINING 

ENVIRONMENT 

Do you have a place for 

commander's call and cornpany training? A place where 

all the soldiers in the unit can 

sit around and be close to 

equipment, sand tables, speakers, etc.: see a vehicle maintained; a weapon served; 

equipment repaired; first 

echelon maintenance pulled; 

tactical concepts worked out on 

a sand table? 

Are you fighting the weather 

and noise out under the trees or 

trying to make the theater, 

dayroom or messhall do? 

If the answer to any of these 

questions causes you irritation, 

makes you see red, or revivies 

bitter memories, then READ 

ON. The Office, Chief of Engineers may have a dynamic 

answer to your problem. It's a 

brand new self help company 

training facility to satisfy most 

units' needs. 

The Office, Chief of Engineers has contracted to Clark, 

Nixsen and Owens, Architects 

and Engineers, to design a 40 ft 

x 40 ft x 20 ft high structure 

which will be added to the 

Army's Functional Component 

System (AFCS). The structure 

will accommodate all of the 

personnel in a company-size 

unit and will solve many of th 

unit's training facility problems. This all-weather building is large enough to permit 

static display of most items of 

TOE equipment; use multiple 

sand tables, slide projectors, 

viewgraphs or film projectors; 

and allow all the personnel to 

see and hear what's going on. 

The structure is designed to 

be built in usable phases; that 

is, foundation and roof first; 

siding and windows next; followed by a floor and utilities. It 

can be built by non-engineer 

units as a dynamic training 

project with some construction 

equipment and engineer support, particularly in fabricating and erecting the roof 

trusses. 

If, this building would fill a 

gap in your unit's training program and you're looking for 

some adventure in your training, you can obtain a set of 

plans and bill of materials by 

contacting the Office of Chief of 

Engineers, Engineering Design 

Division, HQDA, ATTN: 

DAEN-FEE-A, Washington, 

D.C. 20314. 

MINIATURE TORCH 

DEVELOPED BY 

MASSTER 

RESEARCHERS 

Accidents and emergencies, 

such as a car wreck or many 

combat situations, often require a cutting torch to burn 

through tangled masses of 

metal. 

Now, researchers at MASSTER (Modern Army Selected 

Systems Test, Evaluation and 

Review) are examining a new 

Miniature Thermal Bar Torch 
INE. PIPELINE.
 

at has a greater cutting 

power than the familiar 

oxyacetylene torch. 

The new torch was developed 

by the Land Warfare Laboratory at Aberdeen Proving 

Grounds, Maryland, and the 

MASSTER testing is putting 

the torch through it paces in 

typical field situations with 

soldiers from the 2d Armored 

Division at Fort Hood. 

The torch has such a high 

burn temperature that it can 

cut through concrete, stainless 

steel, earthen materials and 

other items that the oxyacetylene torch cannot penetrate, or 

has trouble penetrating. 

For example, the mini torch 

can cut through eight inches of 

armor plating in 39 seconds, 

which could be significant in 

rescuing men from a damaged 

tank or armored personnel 

arrier when time is a critical 

actor . 

There are great possibilities 

that the mini torch could be 

used in non-explosive demolition roles. It could be an effective tool to replace thermite or 

other explosives to destroy 

bridges, vehicles or such things 

as concrete field fortifications. 

The greatest advantage of 

the mini torch is that is can be 

handled by one man. It can be 

parachuted into an area for 

clandestine operations, and it 

can be lit and operated on land 

or in the water without prior 

preheating or special preparation. 

On the other hand, the 

oxyacetylene torch requires a 

preheating period prior to operations, it is bulky, unless 

operated from a truck, it requires at least two men to 

operate it, and it cannot be 

iara chuted into an area in a 

combat-ready state. 

Also, the oxyacetylene torch 

has an approximate heat range 

of 6000 degrees, whereas the 

mini torch can effectively operate high above this range. 

The mini torch does leave a 

much rougher cut than oxyacetlene. but this is understandable 

since it has greater heat level 

and melts more material 

faster. 

Although the mini torch has 

innumerable possibilities as a 

military implement, the developers see it as a needed tool 

for humane operations. 

The torch can operate off any 

type oxygen container and 

could be feasibly handled as an 

emergency rescue tool in such 

things as car wrecks where 

victims are trapped inside. 

Any ambulance, police car, 

fi re truck or rescue veh ic1e 

could easily carry one of more 

of these torches and be prepared for any type of emergency cutting operation. 

The MASSTER tests of the 

torch include timed tests for 

mobility, speed of operation 

and assembly. Soldiers from 

the 1st Battalion, 50th Infantry, 

of the 2d Armored Division 

were trained to operate the 

torch and used it on a variety 

of materials, including steel 

l-beams, armor plating, hellcopter bodies, concrete and 

earth. 
Sir: 

I have read several issues of 

your magazine and find it to be 

very informative in many 

areas , however, I feel the articles seem to avoid the area of 

new equipment under development. 

I believe that if artlcles in 

this subject area could be published to inform field soldiers 

of developing concepts or 

methods, the Corps would receive comments from the field 

on proposed changes. These 

comments could avoid costly 

modifications to equipment 

after issue, and would reduce 

the number of unauthorized 

modifications which occur in 

field units (I .e. radio's moved 

to driver's area of Gamma 

Goat in troop units). 

This would also allow field 

personnel the opportunity to 

relate personal experiences in 

order to provide research 

CPT Michael F. Burns 

CE 

Sir: 

I was very pleased to see 

Eugene McAndrew's article on 

"An Engineer in the Black 

Hills". (Spring 74) As a geological engineering student at 

the S. D. School of Mines and 

Technology I became very 

familiar with many of the 

places mentioned in the article. 

However, I disagree with Mr. 

McAndrew's last paragraph : 

"Ludlow had a great vision, 

but the Indians have retained 

much of their land in the Black 

Hills." Hardly! Forced out of 

the holy land, the "PahaSapa", the Sioux finally were 

4 

settled on land that is about as 

worthless as the Black Hills 

are beautiful. 

Most of the Black Hi lis is US 

Forest Service land; what little 

private land there is is almost 

universally owned by the white 

man. About the only Indians 

one now sees in the Black Hills 

are one or two amusing the 

tourists during the summer. 

The bel ief that the Indian retains much land in the Black 

Hills is about as worthless as 

the treaty that said he would. 

In conclusion, Mr. McAndrew's article was excellent 

save for its ending . If one is to 

print history, it would be stated 

as it was . .. not as we would 

like it to be. 

Gary C. Brown 

SP4 

Specia list Brown: 

The conclusion of Mr. McAndrew's article was not his 

own, rather an added editorial 

afterthought. You may take 

some comfort in the fact that 

your letter was not the only one 

received challenging the added 

paragraph. 

Sir: 

The Spring 1974 edition of 

THE ENGINEER contains an 

article by Major McDonald entitled "It Was a Gallant Work" 

- the story of engineer partlclpation in the Battle of Fredericksburg. In the article Major 

McDonald explains that General Burnside had available to 

him: The Engineer Battalion, 

a Regular Army unit commanded by Lieutenant Charles 

E. Cross and Volunteer Engineer Brigade commanded by 

Brigadier General Daniel P. 

Woodbury _ 

As the Engineer Battalion is 

in the lineage of the 1st Engineer Battalion, I read the 

article with much interest and 

hope that you and /or Major 

McDonald might help clarify 

some data inconsistencies concerning the Engineer Battalion's participation in this 

campaign. 

Our records, here in the 1st 

Engineer Battalion, show that 

the Battalion of Engineers (as 

our data indicates it was 

called) was commanded by 

Major James C. Duane from 

1861 through 1865, which would 

have included the period refer-red to in the article. I would 

appreciate clarifying the command status of the Battalion 

during this period so that w e 

can correct our records, if 

necessary. 

Thank you for your assistance. 

W. M. SMITH, JR. 

LTC, CE 

Colonel Smith: 

Your letter was turned over 

to Mr. Edward B. Russell,Curator of the Engineer Museum, 

for verification. He graciously 

agreed to check out Major McDonald's facts and furnish you 

a reply. For our ever inquisitive readers, we will relate that 

the article, as written by Major 

McDonald, was correct. 

Stop 16 is our "1£ tters to the 

Editor" Department. We encourage timely, spirited response 

and constructive criticism about 

THE ENGINEER and its contents. 
E:NGINE:E:R INTE:R\JIE:W:
 

With Captain Overton Day, Captain Roy Whitman, Captain Kenneth Elrick,

Captain William Korn, Sergeant First Class Theodore J. Lenegar,
 

Staff Sergeant Earl D. Divelbliss and Staff Sergeant Donald G. Harmel.
 

Operation Nimbus Moon (Land ) 

was a join: eff ort by the Unit ed 

States, Britain, France and 

Russia to assist the Egyptian 

Government in clearing the 

banks of the Suez Canal of mines 

and other explosive ordnance. 

This was accomplish ed in preparation for the reop ening of th e 

canal to international navigation. 

In the spirit of the first joint 

Unite d States and Egyptian 

peace project , a team of engine ers from Fort Belvoir, Virginia 

was sent to the area of Isamailia 

with th e mis sion to instruct 

Egyptian soldiers in the training 

and doctrine of u. S. mine remo val. 

In an eff ort to keep readers of 

THE ENGINEER magazine up 

to dat e, we interviewe d that 

team and got a first hand reaction to th eir mission and the 

country of Egypt at large. This 

is their story: 

ENGINEER : Can you tell our 

readers just exactly what was 

the role of the engineers durinq 

OPERATION NIMBUS MOON 

( LAND)? 

CPT DAY: The engineer mission 

was to train and advise per sonnel of the Egyptian Army combat 

engineers whose mission was to 

clear minefields from the vicinity 

of the Suez Canal. We were part 

of a combined task for ce of 

engineer and EOD personnel. 

ENGINEER: Who made the 

determination for your mission? 

CPT DAY: Our mission was 

primarily determined by the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff after two 

preliminary planning trips to 

Egypt. Both of these trips were 

supervised by Navy Personnel. 

Nimbus Moon (LAND) was in 

fact an element of th e joint 

Army-Navy Task Force under 

Members of the Fort Belvoir Training Team are : Front Row, (left to right), SSGT 

Earl D, Divelbliss, SSGT Donald G Harmel , SFC Theodore J . Lenegar; Back Row , 

(left to right) CPT William Korn, CPT Overton Day, CPT Kenneth Elrick and CPT 

Roy Whitman . 

Navy command. 

ENGINEER: What was the 

duration of OPERATION 

NIMBUS MOON (LAND)? 

CPT DAY: Th e execution of the 

oper ation began 11 April 1974 

and was concluded on 24 July 

1974. 

ENGINEER: How many personnel where involved? 

CPT DAY: Eight engineer officers, 13 combat engineer NCOs 

and two maintenance NCOs were 

initially deployed to Egypt. In 

May , some personnel returned to 

the states. 

ENGI N E ER: In what capacity 

were the engineers utilized? 

CPT DAY: We were organized 

operationally into Battalion Advisory teams. Th e engineer side 

of the task force dealt primarily 

with the 209th Egyptian Engineer Brigade. The brigade consisted of brigade headquarters 

and four organic battalions. Their 

mission was to clear minefields 

the full length of th e Suez Canal, 

approximately a 100 mile stretch 

in length and a depth of 250 

met ers. This area pertained to 

both banks, with the exception of 

certain built up areas. There the 

depth was increased to 500 

meters. The ea st shore of the 

Great and Little Bitter Lakes 

r equired no clearance. While the 

US engineers were organized 

into four BN Advisory teams, 

only three of th e four Egyptian 

BNs were utilized on the canal 

clearance. Each BN advisory 

team consisted of an engineer captain and two or three 

engineer E-7 or E-8. The two 

5 
mine detector personnel were 

utilized for the purpose of conducting actu al mine de tect or 

main tenance and subsequ ently 

training Egyptian personnel for 

th at purpose. 

ENGINEER: How were you 

received by the Egyptians? 

CPT KORN: Th e Egyptians were 

very warm and friendly. They 

seemed extremely happy that 

Americans had come to their 

country in ord er to provide assistance. Any rumors t hat we 

had heard of the Ame ricans being 

treated otherwise pro ved very 

false. 

CPT WHITMAN: I felt that we 

were not only well received by 

the Egyptian Army personnel we 

worked with, but also by the 

civilian community. In some instances we wer e eve n ta ken int o 

their homes and welcomed as a 

memb er of the ir family. 

ENGINEER: Did you encounter any language communications problems? 

CPT WHITMAN: Most of the 

people we worked with spoke and 

understood En glish. Keep in 

mind however, that all our cont acts were wit h th e civilian officials of the Suez Canal authority 

and Egyptian Army Engineer 

Officers. Most of the enlisted 

personnel spoke or understood 

lit tle En glish. Americ an tourism 

was a very going concer n over 

ther e, so most taxi drivers could 

get you where you wa nted to go. 

ENGINEER: What was your 

impression of the Egyptian 

combat engineers? 

CPT KORN: I felt that the 

Egyptian engineers were more 

comba t exper ienced than ourselves . Remember, th ey' ve been 

engaged in a war since 1967, so 

t heir act ual exp erience is far 

greater. As far as their use of 

equipment and materiel, they 

ma y not have the capabilities we 

do, but they still accomplish th e 

job by benefit of sheer numbers. 

Their troops are utilized more for 

labor type tasks, whereas a US 

engi neer would utilize some form 

of sophisticated equipment. 

CPT DAY: In fact , the 209th 

BDE appeared to be a pioneertype combat engineer unit and 

not heavy equipme nt. The 

Egyptians do hav e other engineer units that are mor e t ailor ed 

to specific missions , however, we 

had no contact with th em. 

CPT ELRICK: My over all impr ession was that their performance on the clearing operation 

wa s efficient and effect ive. 

ENGINEER: O.K. Now back 

to your actual mission. Tell us 

how you went about establ ishing an operational concept. 

CPT DAY: Our operational concept consisted of three phases. 

The fir st pha se was t hat of US 

engineer conducted trai ning for 

an Egyptian officer cadre. The 

se cond was t hat same cadr e 

training their own troops, with 

the US engineers advising and 

assisting in said tra ining. The 

t hird or final phase was that of 

the US engi nee rs advising act ual 

clearance operations. 

CPT WHITMAN: Ph as e one consisted of three days of t raining by 

two separa te groups meeting at 

two different times. Each group 

received one day of demolition 

training und er Capt ain Korn, one 

day of minefield br eaching under 

CPT Elrick and one day of mine 

detector training, which I was in 

charg e of. 

CPT KORN: My phase of demo 

t rai ning was broken down into 

three areas, nonelectrical priming, ele ctrical priming and de ­

tenation cord priming. We hadn't 

any real fee ling as to the 

Egypt ian Officers exp ertise, so 

we began with our basic demo 

proced ures. We soon discovered 

our techniques were similar. 

They had experience with our 

TNT , some Italian dynamite, etc., 

so this was mor e or less a 

r efresher course for t hem on our 

nomencla ture and equipment . 

This expedite d the natural training phase . 

CPT WHITMAN: My mine de ­

tector tra ining began with class ­

room instruction on the nomen ­

clature of t he mine det ector, its 

parts, general operating procedures and how the detector functi ons. The metal mine detector 

they had been using was very 

similar to ours, so the group 

adapted very quickly. The training progressed to t he field where 

actual detection for unused live 

mines of va rious ty pes took place. 

The Egyptian officers seemed to 

like our metal mine dete ctor very 

well because of its sensitivity. 

might add we only tr ained them 

in th e use of th e AN-PSS /ll 

metallic mine detector. 

CPT ELRICK: The third day of 

instruction was designed to show 

the Egyp tian officers t he techniques use d by US engineers for 

clearing and breaching minefields. Considering the fact they 

6 

I 
had seven year s of exp eri ence in 

this ta sk, our procedure was to 

show t hem th e techniques the US 

engineers utilized in location and 

r emov al. This was demonst rated 

by use of detectors and probing. 

In t he final analysis, since both 

our techniques pro ved quite similar , it was mer ely a question of 

comparison and selection. 

ENG I NEE R : The words 

"classroom training" and 

" f ield training" keep occuring . Why the distinction? 

CPT KORN: In order to conduct 

thorough training, it was necessary to expose th e student to an 

indoor and out door pha se. Indoors he learns t he basic applications, outdoors he accomplishe s 

the task. It's that simple. Take 

demo training, for example . 

After a bri ef class on how to 

pr ime TNT with a non-electric 

cap, we'd take t he student to a 

ta ble containing the needed gea r 

and let him go through the 

pro cedures we ha d outli ned . 

Then it was outs ide to t he demo 

range for follow-through. 

CPT WHITMAN: Detection 

tra ining was the same. Each 

group, consisting of about twenty-five men, with one US Advis or 

for eve ry three or four E gyptians , would go through a practical exe rcise. The US advisor 

would put the mine detector into 

oper ation th en br eak it down. 

One Egyptian officer would in 

tur n trai n the other two or three 

in th e same operation. 

SGT LENEAR: Th e system 

work ed well. One gro up of 

Egyptian officers and one US 

advisor working as a team. The 

Egyptian cadre in t urn would 

trai n their NCO per sonnel. 

SGT HARMEL: For exa mple, 

Sgt. Divelbliss and I trained one 

Egyptian colonel, who was accompanied by an NCO. In the 

next two day s he trained two 

additio nal NCOs, with us acting 

more or less as supervisor s. 

These individuals in turn wen t to 

the field and trained personnel 

from t heir re spective battalions. 

ENGINEER: SGT Harmel 

and SGT Divelbl iss. You gave 

actua l traini ng in add it ion to 

th at given by th e US Officers? 

SGT DIVELBLISS: Yes , in maintenance of the detector itself. We 

pointed out such things as the 

fragility of some of the components, care and cleaning, et c. 

ENGINEER: How about your 

advisory activities? Were you 

ever in any apparent danger? 

SGT LENEGAR: Not th at any 

one was awar e of at the time . I 

believ e th at the Egyptian officers 

were constantly looking out for 

our welfare. 

CPT ELRICK: We were specifically told we would not handle 

any ex plosives, demolitions or 

mines at any time during our 

advisory role. We were there to 

advise and not to participate. 

ENGINEER : As advisors to 

the 209th Brigade, didn't you 

actual ly get in to th e fi eld on a 

de layed bas is? 

CPT DAY: The canal clearance 

began on 12 February while our 

participation in the actual advi sing of clearance began on 15 May. 

Up to this point the brigade had 

had three full battalions involved 

in cleara nce operations. After 15 

May t he Egyptian clea ra nce effort started to decrease and by 

th e end of June has ceased. Our 

involvement occur ed at a time 

when only significantly difficult 

clearance projects r emained. The 

bulk of their minefie lds had been 

pulled by this time and as of 30 

May the bri gade had cleared 

approximately 146,000 mines. 

CPT WHITMAN: Subseq uent 

rechecking of mine fields which 

were already clea red prior to our 

arrival there was accomplished 

with our AN-PSS /ll mine detector . This pr oduced additional 

mines that had been missed. 

ENGINEER: Everything 

sounds Iike it moved smoothly 

and efficiently. You were probably furnished precise minefield records . 

CPT ELRICK: Not quite. I did 

encounter several differ ent recording forms the Egyptians had 

available to them but it was at 

best a draftsman's sketch of t he 

area of installation. The writing 

was always in Arabic but I could 

discer n some of the numbers , 

possibly the pattern, turning 

point and soforth. 

CPT DAY: I want to point out 

that this was the only time actual 

recording forms were encountered. Generally, the record ing 

consisted of an overlay to scale, 

the locations of mine fields and 

some figures that migh t or might 

not be t he number and ty pes of 

mines. This was only on their 

side of t he canal I might add. The 

Israeli side lacked both accurate 

recording and r econnaissance. 

7 
ENGINEER: Captain Elrick, 

you mentioned m inefield patterns. Were there any standard 

patterns in the operational 

area? 

CPT ELRICK: In every instance 

that either I or my NCOs encountered th e pattern employed was 

the basic Soviet row mining type 

pattern. In this pattern, mines 

are simpl y spaced in rows four 

meters on center for anti-tank 

types and two me ters for antipersonnel ty pes. The turning 

points were in increments of 

eight meters at a time, in sixteen 

or twenty-four meters, then the 

row would angle out at a different 

azimuth. Picket points marked 

the beginning of each row. This 

in turn made removal quite simple. 

ENGINEER: That sounds too 

simple. Anybody encounter 

anything different? 

CPT DAY: No. For lack of a 

better word, this "pattern " method seemed to be used with 

uniform r egularity by both the 

Egyptians and the Israelis along 

both sides of the Suez canal. In 

not one instance was the six 

cluster pattern as known in our 

doctrine used. We feel this is 

significant in describing the ease 

with which the Egyptians were 

able to remove most minefields. 

ENG I N E ER: What types of 

mines were encountered along 

the canal? 

B 

CPT DAY: There were actually 

thirty different types of mines 

encountered in the canal area. 

These were divided evenly with 

the Israelis and the Egyptians 

using 15 different types each. 

ENGINEER: Encounter any 

sophisticated hardware or real 

problem areas? 

CPT ELRICK: Sophisticated 

hardware? No. Problem areas? 

Yes. Along Lake Timpsa, near 

Isrnalia, masses of the Soviet 

Tl\'1N-46 mines were employed in 

the water using a tilt rod type 

fuse. The mines were encased in 

concr ete and placed along the 

shoreline to prevent amphibious 

landings. Removal was complicated by the growth of water 

hyacinths in the canal along the 

shore line which had covered 

these mines. Since the tilt rod 

fuse is very sensitive, clearing 

the plants so the mines could be 

located visually was exceptionalIy dan gerous. A person moving 

around in that morass would 

detonate a mine . 

CPT WHITMAN: The Russian 

PMN non-rnetalic personnel mine 

was another problem. Since it 

only takes a very low pressure to 

be applied to the pressure plate 

to detonate, probing is extremely 

dan gerous. Even though it contains metal and can be dete cted 

by our metal detectors, its sensitivity makes it difficult to deal 

with. 

CPT DAY: This mine was also 

used dir ectly on the canal ledge 

just above the water line. In 

many cases. fortification work 

subsequent to the minefield installation or banks sloughing oflA.. 

caused these mines to becom., 

buried very deeply in dense soil. 

ENGINEER: How was the 

problem solved? 

CPT WHITMAN: In areas of 

deeply buried mines, the Egyptians would dig adjacent to the 

rows of mines about a meter deep 

or more and then use bulk explosives. Everything was used in 

this hole. Everything from Russian clay TNT , Italian Dynamite 

and old anti-tank mines that 

could be recovered. Primed with 

detcord, the mines would be 

detonated symphatetically. 

ENGINEER: Now that we're 

on special situations again, 

were there any instances of 

mines being recovered for possible re-use? 

SGT LENEGAR: When we arrived at the 31st Egyptian Engineer Battalion, we did notice a 

few thousand mines stacked at 

the training area. We were told 

they were stacked for detonation, 

but it looked as though they were 

going to re-use them. However, 

mines t hat could not be removed 

conveniently or that had fuse 

wells that hampered removal 

were blown in place. 
ENGINEER: Back to the location and detection of mines. 

What types of equipment did 

the Egyptians use? 

CPT ELRICK: In most case s it 

was the good ole probe. Some 

said it was a Soviet innovation, 

some said Egyptian, but it didn't 

matter. It was about two meters 

long and a man could walk 

through a minefield with it unlike 

the US probe which has the man 

down on his stomach or hands 

and knees. In addition to that, 

they had a rake about four 

meters long which they would 

use in grassy antipersonnel mine 

fields . The rake would locate the 

mine and the personnel would 

either disarm or detonate them 

as the case might be. 

ENGINEER: You've discussed the probes, but what 

about the electronic detectors 

that are used by the Egyptians? 

CPT WHITMAN: I personally 

saw some old US metallic mine 

detectors and was told that they 

had used some Russian mine 

detectors prior to our arrival. 

ENGINEER: Earlier in this 

interview you mentioned that 

you trained the Egyptians in 

the use of the AN- PSS/ll metallic mine detector exclusively. Was another type of detector taken along? If so, why 

wasn 't it used? 

CPT WHITMAN: Yes, the 

ANPRS-7 non-metallic mine detector. The reason why it wasn't 

used is simple. When we first 

rec eived our mine detectors upon 

arriving in Egypt, we immediately ran checks on them to see if 

they were operational. Our 

maintenance people were going 

over th em, calibrating th em and 

ensuring that the y were operating on the correct frequency. It 

was then we discovered that the 

non-metallic mine detector s 

would not give us reliable detectibility due to the immense 

dry soil area. 

SGT DIVELBLISS: Sgt Harmel, 

Cpt Whitman, a couple of other 

NCOs and myself took it through 

the mock minefield we had set up 

to see what depths it would 

detect. We found it would detect 

very few mines even along the 

canal shore line. This left us with 

very little reliable detection. 

ENGINEER: It wouldn't work 

where it was dry and it wouldn't work where it was damp. 

Did you test it under any other 

conditions? 

SGT HARMEL: We even took it 

down by the water that edged 

the mock up field, placed the 

mines in holes which had water 

seeping over the mine itself and 

again the only mines detected by 

the ANPRS/7 were metal mines, 

Dot non-metallic. 

ENGINEER: The group concensus says the AN- PRSI7 is 

less than desirable. Anybody 

got some positive recommendations? 

CPT WHITMAN: It is my opinion 

that some warning should be sent 

to the field immediately. The 

detection ability is not the only 

limiting characteri stic of the detector. It requires a homgenous 

type soil and cannot be operated 

in any vegetation, because the 

mere tou ch of a blade of grass 

against th e side of the search 

head gives a false sign al. I think 

the whole unit should be reevaluated and taken out of the 

field because of the overwhelming limitations. It is not designed 

to detect anti-personnel mines 

and where anti-personnel and 

anti-tank mines ar e emplaced 

together, it could be come a real 

sticky situation. As a combat 

engineer,I wouldn't ask any troop 

to enter a minefield with that 

detector. 

ENGINEER: What about the 

AN-PSS/ll and its proponents? 

CPT ELRICK: There is no doubt 

that the AN-PSS/ll is a tremendous detector for locating metallic objects. The Egyptians 

thought it was much better than 

any detector they had worked 

with. There were some problem 

ar eas in a combat zone where the 

ground had been plowed over and 

was saturated with metallic objects such as shrapnel and discar ded ammunition. You can get 

all kinds of signals with this baby 

because it's so sensitive and each 

signal means the operator has a 

probe to determine whether he's 

got a mine or a piece of small 

metal. In a large scale operation 

this takes a considerable time to 

get through a minefield and I 

think the US Army will have to 

evaluate its hasty breeching t echniques using this detector. 

CPT WHITMAN: Even the many 

so-called non metallic anti-tank 

mines contain a small amount of 

metal such as a striker or spring 

in the fusin g system can be 

de tected using the AN-PSS/II. 

ENGI N E ER: That means if an 

area has been fought over we 

really have no recourse for 

detecting mines other than the 

"good ole probe". Well, maintenance on a probe should be 

simple enough. How about 

problems on our detectors? 

SGT HARMEL: Very little. Two 

AN-PSS/ll s had gotten sand 

inside th e handle and the collar 

9 
used to tighten t he short handle 

and th e extension pole. When 

the collar was tightened it resulted in some damage, but nothing that couldn't be prevented 

by supplying a brush along with 

the detector. 

SGT DIVELBLISS: We also had 

one instance of the search head 

working the connections of the 

short and long extension loose 

and stripping the end of the 

extension pole. 

ENGINEER: Quite a few 

things have been discussed 

here, now let's turn our attentions to the benefits derived 

from the operation. 

CPT DAY: I feel that doctrinally 

we have certain problems within 

our own counter-mine operations. 

We were exposed to very simple 

t ypes of mining in the Suez Canal 

ar ea and very efficient clearing 

operations. Our own mining doctrine is very complex - complex 

to the point that I feel we are 

hurting ourselves concerning efficiency. Our doctrine on counter-mine clearance is tr eated 

quite vaguely and generally. 

Everything is based on an ideal 

situation, which is not a suitable 

basis upon which the small leader 

in the field can develop clearance 

procedures for a specific situation. 

CPT WHITMAN: We should 

also realize mines are not a thing 

of the past and will be used in 

ground combat again and again. 

The US Army should place emphasis on training in this part.iculas area in the service schools and 

in field units. 

ENGINEER: Aside from the 

usual camel rides, the food, the 

belly-dancers and, of course the 

pyram ids , can one of you come 

up with a concrete example of 

mutual beneficiality? 

CPT WHITMAN: While I was 

working in Suez, President Amwhar Sadat came to visit Suez 

City and view the destruction 

that had occurred there. I had an 

opportunity to chat with him for 

a while and passed on to him my 

personal American flag. He appeared to be very moved by this, 

and looking at the flag first, then 

at me said that he would cherish 

this always . I think that's the 

way we will all feel about our 

mission over there in the time to 

come. 

1 

o/"i ,,;" -./· ' 

. 'c-"O, . _­

~~.

¥ .... 

10 
OPMS 

OP S 

OPMS 

Colonel 

OPMS 

OPMS 

ANATN IA
 

o PANACEA
 

FOR CAREE
 

DEVELOPIEN
 

As a result of the withdrawal of u.s. Military 

Forces from Vietnam and a corresponding reduction in the active force structure, the Army has 

had the opportunity to reflect upon personnel 

"lessons learned" and to develop a force struct ure, 

consistent with available resources. to be responsive to future military requirements. Since 

"people" are our most important resource it is 

logical to expect that personnel career development programs would receive priority attention ­

and they did! In March of this year DA Pamphlet 

600-3, entitled "Officer Professional Development 

and Utilization". was released to the field for 

implemention. This document,in effect,established 

a "road map" for the Officer Personnel Management System (OPMS). OPMS, for the majority of 

career branches, represents a significant shift from 

a rather rigid, long existent. traditional value 

system of personnel management to one in tune 

with providing officers, trained in proper specialties and skills. to meet current and future Army 

requirements. Further, OPMS is the most evolutionary change to the Army's Officer Personnel 

System since 1947 and is a response to a changing 

requirements and the military environment. OPMS 

has three main objectives for officer professional 

development: 

• To develop officers in the proper numbers 

and skills to meet Army requirements and maximize the individual officer's abilities. aptitudes and 

interests. 

11 
• To assign officers based upon Army requirements and within capabilities in consonance with 

individual competence and desires. 

• To improve the overall motivation and professional satisfaction of the officer corps. 

There are many factors which prompted the 

development of OPMS. In recent years the officer 

corps has decreased in size, the need for specialization and functionalization has increased, the Army 

has insufficient officers trained in required specialties, command opportunities have decreased. the 

previous promotion systems have encouraged generalization versus specialization, and professionalism and career satisfaction need to be improved. 

As previously stated, DA Pamphlet 600-3 promulgated the new officer personnel system, however. because of the voluminous size of the 

document, rather strong feelings and experiences 

of many senior officers, and a general suspect of 

departing from traditional patterns, the officer 

corps has not yet fully "signed up and climbed on 

the OPMS band wagon". Undoutedly, many will 

continue to have strong reservations and will 

reserve final judgement until results of future 

selection boards are posted. However, it is 

important that ever y officer fully understands that 

OPMS is being implemented and DA is totally 

committed to this program. OPMS is now a fact of 

life! 

The questions for the young company grade 

officer and some majors are: Is OPMS the 

anathema or panacea for career development? How 

has it changed from the old system? How will the 

new system affect me? Should I generalize or 

should I strive to be a specialist? What alternate 

specialty is best for Engineers? 

These are challenging questions and the type 

received each day by military personnel officers 

assigned to Engineer Branch, Officer Personnel 

Directorate (OPD). Military Personnel Center, HQ, 

DA. Before launching into OPMS, it would be 

worthwhile to place the current professional development in perspective. The new DA policy to a 

great extent formalizes an informal system that 

has been practiced by Engineer personnel managers for years. Engineer officers have been 

developed to be highly competitive for both branch 

material and immaterial assi gnments to meet 

Army requirements. Therefore, for the Engineer 

officer. it represents a continuation of previous 

efforts. With this background in mind now, let us 

address "How has the system changed?" and 

"How does it affect me?" . You must develop 

yourself in depth to serve in two of the Army's 

specialty areas. This represents a shift from the 

former policy which fostered the generalist who 

perhaps became a token specialist. Under the new 

system everyone must develop in-depth expertise 

in two specialty areas. Your basic entry specialty 

is Engineer. Within the Engineer specialty, the 

primary development is in one or more of the 

following areas: combat. construction, facilities 

and topographic engineering. An officer, during 

his first 8 years of commissioned service. will 

become qualified in a broad spectrum of jobs 

within the Engineer specialty. The larger the 

spectrum and the deeper your expertise into the 

many facets of military engineering the greater 

your value as an Engineer. But keep this in mind. 

of all the qualities required for success in the 

Engineer specialty. your ability to command still 

dominates. 

Following the first 8 years of commissioned 

service, an Engineer officer will select an alternate 

spe cialty and can expect to receive future assignments in both the Engineer specialty and his 

alternate specialty on an alternating basis. The 

normal Engineer company grade career development will continue. as in the past. The first eight 

years will consist of: attendance at t he Engineer 

Basic Officer Course (EOBC), assignment with 

troops to gain command and staff experience, 

attendance to En gineer Officer Advanced Course 

(EOAC), company command. attendance to civil 

schooling (depending upon academic ba ckground. 

overall manner of performance and DA educational 

requirements) and assignment to an Engineer 

functional utilization. It is the Engineer Branch 

goal to assign all officers to troop units following 

EOBC graduation to become thoroughly grounded 

in troop unit operations. 

Your alternate specialty is largely your choice 

consistent with Army requirements. For success, 

qualities and attributes must match those needed 

in the specialty you choose. The Army is large and 

its requirements are diverse but soldierly qualities 

are and will remain fundamental keys to success. 

The successful officer will not be the technician 

who happens to be wearing th e uniform. he will be 

the soldier who is well versed in the technicalities 

of his specialties and who demonstrates his technical capabilities in performance meeting Army 

requirements. 

We just said it. "Army requirements" . Requirements Drive The System. This is an age old 

truism and still true under OPMS. The statistics 

show that beyond the eight years of service 

nearly 50 percent of th e requirement for Engineer 

officers is outside the "pure" Engineer specialty. 

So the requirement for you to develop additional 

skills is r eal and not contrived. 

Which specialty is best for Engineers? This 

question gets at the heart of the whole matter. The 

answer is simple. There is no one alternate 

12 
specialty for engineers that is better than another, 

but there is very definitely an alternate specialty 

that is best suited for you. It is your job to figure 

out which one that is with the guidance of your 

personnel mana ger. As was stated before, the 

election of an .alternate specialty is dependent 

pon Army requirements, individual military experience and personal preferences. Normally, field 

grade officers, particularly Engineers, already 

have established skills in one or more alternate 

specialties. This fact was particularly evident 

during a recent evaluation which culminated in the 

final designations of alternate specialties for lieutenant colonels. Approximately 80% Engineer 

lieutenant colonels received their first choice and 

98% received no less than their second choice. A 

recapitulation of these results is delineated below. 

ENGINEER LIEUTENANT COLONELS OPMS ALTERNATE, 

SPECIALTY DESIGNATIONS 

Specialty Code Percent 

Research & Development 51 20 .0 

Operations & Force Developm ent 54 12.7 

Foreign Area Officer 48 9.8 

Atomic Energy 52 9.2 

Education 47 8.5 

Per sonnel Management 41 7.7 

Supply Management 92 7.5 

Procurement 97 5.9 

OR /SA 49 3.5 

Mainlenance Management 91 3.0 

Tactica I/Strategi c I nte\ I igence 35 2.5 

ADP 53 2.3 

Comptroller 45 2.2 

onstr uction /Marine Mater ial Mgmt 78 1.3 

ogist ics Ser vi ces Manag ement 93 1.0 

Aviation Material Management 71 .7 

Tank/Ground Mob Mat Management 77 .7 

Personnel Adm ini stration 42 .5 

Information 46 .4 

Missile Materi al Management 73 .2 

Munitions Material Mana gement 75 .2 

POL M anagement 81 .2 

TOTAL 100.0 

Now that lieutenant colonel desi gnations have 

been completed, the next DA target group is 

majors and captains. Records will be reviewed by 

DA personnel managers to evaluate both education 

and experience for alternate specialty designation. 

Although Army requirements always drive the 

personnel system, individual desires and personal 

preferences are considered. If there is some doubt 

concerning your experience or selection, contact 

Engineer Branch for advice. Additionally, rem ember the alternate designation is not irrevocable and 

can be changed after a period of 2 years. 

The importance of OPMS is properly reflected 

in the forwarding statement made by former Army 

Chief of Staff, General Creighton W. Abrams, 

• when promulgating DA Pamphlet 600-3. He said: 

"The Officer Personnel Management System 

described in this Pamphlet is the blueprint 

for the development of the Army's officer 

corps of the future. This system will provide officers the opportunity to develop the 

professional skills that the leaders of tomorrow's Army will need. I commend this 

Pamphlet to your study, but caution you to 

bear in mind that how well you do in the 

Army depends not on our system of management but rather on your individual 

efforts and dedication to service." 

The Army's leadership is dedicated to total 

implementation of OPMS. Assignments currently 

are being made to satisfy Army requirements in 

the alternate specialty areas. This effort will be 

fully implemented once alternate designations 

have been finalized for both majors and captains 

during CY 1975. OPMS is an evolutionary pro ­

fessional development program that should provide 

the achievement of a successful military career. As 

General Abrams has suggested - each officer 

must study 600-3 and become familiar with the 

options. OPMS is neither the anathema nor the 

panacea for career development. As General 

Abrams indicated, there is no management system 

which guarantees success. Each officer must 

conduct a self analysis, become familiar with Army 

requirements, consult with personnel managers, 

evaluate personal goals and select the career 

progression route which satisfies both Army and 

individual needs. Once this "blueprint" has been 

developed, then it should be implemented with 

nothing less than quality performance. 

Colonel Carl P. Rodolph, Jr., is the Chief of 

Engineer Branch, Officer Personnel Directorate, 

Military Personnel Center, The Department of The 

Army. Since being commissioned in 1952, he has 

served in a variety of command and staff assignments to include cons tru ction units in Europe; 

Vicksburg Engineer District; HQ, 8th US Army, 

Korea: tours with both ACSI and ACSFOR on the 

Army staff; and a previous tour in the Engineer 

Branch, OPD. Colonel Rodolph's Vietnam tours 

include assignments as engineer, 173d A irborne 

Brigade (Separate), CDR, 577th Engineer Battalion 

(Construction) and CDR, 326th Engineer Battalion, 

lOlst Airborne Division (Airmobile). He most recen tly served as CDR, US. Army Engineer School 

Brigade, Fort Belvoir. Colonel Rodolph is a 

graduate of the Engineer OA C, the Command and 

General Staff College and th e National War 

CoUege. His civilian education includes degrees in 

Industrial Management, Civil Engineering and 

International Relations. Colonel Rodolph is a 

registered professional engineer. 

13 
A new type manual is being developed by the 

U. S. Army Engineer School that will contain all 

the MOS related information a soldier will need to 

know to perform his duties. The manual could 

allow for a whole new set of potential application 

including revolutionizing the individual training 

process. Unfortunately, the program is still 

plagued by shortcomings that threaten the usefulness of the manual. 

The Soldier's Manual is an answer to the 

1'RADOC requirement that each branch of the 

Army pr epare a manual that will address each 

MOS under their particular control. The requirement arises from the recognized problem that it is 

not uncommon today to find soldiers unsure of 

wha t they are supposed to be able to do, or unable 

to complete tasks that should be within their 

capabilities. 

The Engineer version of the Soldier's Manual is 

being pr epared at the Engineer School at Fort 

Belvoir. The School has defined its guideposts for 

the preparation of th e manual to be: 

• It will belong to only one soldier. Each 

soldier will be issued the Soldier's Manual for his 

particular MOS. 

• It will clearly define the soldier's responsibility with regards to his MOS duties. 

• It will contain all MOS related information 

that the soldier will need to perform his du ties. 

Further, the project group tasked with the 

preparation of the initial draft of the manual was 

given special guidance with regards to the overall 

development of the manual. As a result, the new 

manual uses only information and terminology 

CPT Robert Sperberg 

LDIER
 

MANUAL
 

14 
geared to the average educational and experience 

level of the using soldier. The text is written in 

the second person so as to give the manual a 

personal tlavor and talk the soldier through the 

material. Also. all technical information is presented only to the skill level required to make use 

of the information. 

As prepared by the project group. the manual 

is organized into chapters. with Chapter 1 being 

the introduction chapter. However, this introduction chapter. besides explaining how to use the 

manual, will also provide information on what the 

soldier must do to gain his next promotion. In 

addition, it will outline his progression from his 

present rank all the way to Sergeant Major, 

including all schools and special training required. 

This is a feature that no other manual has. 

Subsequent chapters would contain the information the soldier would need in the performance of 

his MOS duties. These chapters contain a series of 

tasks outlining all the required missions a soldier 

might have to perform within his skill level and 

MOS. These tasks are broken down into four 

parts: 

• "Task Statement" or what the soldier must 

be able to do. 

• "Condition" which tells the soldier what he 

needs to complete the task stated above or under 

what special environmental conditions he must be 

able to accomplish the mission. 

• "Standard" is the degree of proficiency the 

soldier must demonstrate in the performance of 

the task. 

• "How To Meet The Standard" is the main 

part of the manual which explains the step-by-step 

procedures that the soldier must follow to complete the task within the constraints of the conditions and standards set above. 

This manual, in its completed format. will 

certainly improve several areas of individual 

training currently causing difficulties. For example, all the questions on MOS tests will come 

from the text of the Soldier's Manual. Since all 

information for a particular MOS is in the Soldier's 

Manual, and each soldier has his own copy, there 

will be an end of the requirement to maintain the 

large MOS libraries. 

The manual's format also provides for a "Record of Performance." This will be a table in the 

manual with all the tasks listed and a space for the 

signature of the soldier's supervisor. When this 

space has been signed. it means the soldier has 

successfully performed the task required, similar 

to the Boy Scout merit badge card. This record 

readily lends itself to two uses. First, it can be 

used as a promotion guide. When a soldier gets all 

the tasks for his next skill level signed off, he 

becomes eligible for promotion to that skill level. 

Second. for union recognition. these scoreboards 

will demonstrate to unions that certain skills have 

been mastered. Already some unions have expressed interest in providing apprentice-hour 

credit towards journeyman certificates for completed performance records in related skills. 

Despite the possibilities that the manual has in 

these and other areas, its application to the active 

Army has been delayed due to five major problems: 

• There is a need for an accurate and realistic 

job and task analysis for each MOS and skill level. 

This ensures the reliability and creditability of the 

manual. The manual must contain all pertinent 

MOS data, no more, and no less. 

• There is a need to determine whether there 

is an inclusion of either too much or not enough 

information for each particular task. With too 

much information. the book is too bulky. With not 

enough information, we leave the soldier with 

insufficient data to perform the tasks assigned. 

• As a result of the above problems. the size 

and final organization of the manual is still a 

matter of debate. 

• The job performance record poses some 

difficult problems. especially finding a method of 

preventing forgeries of supervisor's signatures. 

• There is also some question as to the field 

usefulness of the manual once it has been issued. 

Will it be too big? Will the individual soldier use 

it? 

Though these problems are still being studied, 

it is the opinion of the project group that, after 

some additional refinements, a manual that not 

only meets but also exceeds TRADOC requirements will be developed. Should it be accepted by 

TRADOC, the Engineer Soldier's Manual has the 

potential of improving the quality of the Corps of 

Engineers overall. It could become a truly useful 

and tremendously versatile manuaL 

Captain Robert J. Sperberg was a project 

officer unili the team from the Training Programs 

Dioision, Deputy Commandant for Combat and 

Trainiiu; Developments, U.S. Army Engineer 

School; Fort Belvoir. which prepared the first draft 

of the new Engineer Soldier's Manual. He has a 

B.S. degree in civil engineering from the Virginia 

Military Institute and is an engineer-in-training in 

Virginia. He recently returned from a tour unili 

the 9th Engineer Battalion (Combat) in Europe. 

Currently he is attending the (3-74) Enqineer 

Officer Advanced Course and ultimately unll be 

assigned to the Republic of Korea. 

15 
RIVER CRO SI_
_. 

CPT Benjamin F. Heil, Jr. 

It is six o'clock in the morning of the second 

Sunday in September . You ar e on the Rhine River 

near Leeheim, West Germany where during World 

War II. General Patton crossed his Third Army to 

continue its advance into the heartland of 

Germany. The 547th Engineer Battalion (Combat) 

is commencing construction of an eleven hundred 

and eighty-five foot class sixty floating bridge on 

the shore opposite that used by General Patton. 

The "Br idge. Builders" have prepared for this day 

through extensive training and are set to challenge 

the modern-day record for closure. The week's 

training period immediately preceeding the closure 

attempt has resulted in many corrections and 

innovations towards reducing construction time. 

Bridge erection boat control has been determined 

to be the largest contributing factor to timely 

closure. A new method of boat control has been 

selected for use by the commander and staff. The 

547th Engineer Battalion is prepared to prove or 

disprove the concept that the use of a central boat 

control for all bridge erection boats on a major 

river crossing operation is effective. efficient. and 

time saving. 

The boat control organization has been extracted from the normal assets of the supporting16 
OPE TIONS 

and supported units with little, if any, detraction 

from their ability to accomplish assigned tasks. 

The headquarters company commander has been 

designated as the boat commander and has selected a location for his control headquarters that 

affords him an unobstructed view of two-thirds of 

the entire construction site to include the complete 

centerline. Communication nets and personnel 

have been designated for the boat control element's use. The boat commander has a direct 

radio link with the construction commander, the 

battalion operations officer who is located in the 

tactical operations center. Additionally each boat 

crew can communicate with the control element or 

any other boat crew through a separate net. 

Bridge erection boats have been allocated and will 

be utilized according to normal tasking. Each of 

the six construction sites has a single construction 

boat. Six two-boat teams have been allocated to 

provide raft delivery. Additional boats have been 

allocated for centerline, safety, and the commander. None of the assignments to the boat 

control organization has depreciated the ability of 

the other construction elements. 

The central boat control team concept provides 

a strong, responsive tool for the construction 

commander. All of the boat and boat operator 

assets of the three participating float bridge 

companies have been pooled, thereby providing a 

complete team of boats and operators from a 

situation where there were boats with no operators and operators with no boats. Special teams of 

maintenance and heavy equipment personnel have 

been assembled and trained to man the raft 

delivery crews. In this manner the necessary final 

closure manpower has been provided without 

weakening the committed line company strength. 

All boats remaining uncommitted after the initial 

allocation have been formed into a reserve and located with the boat commander. This effective and 

efficient use of available resources detracts little 

from the operation and, when coupled with the reserve, provides the boat commander with all of the 

necessary assets to accomplish his mission. 

The establishment of a central boat control has 

provided flexibility and a subsequent strong possibility of time reduction for the crossing operation. 

Breakdowns of critical boat assets are easily 

remedied by dispatching other boats from the 

constituted reserve which is directly available to 

the boat commander. As six -float rafts are completed at the construction sites, the delivery teams 

can secure, remove, and dock the rafts away from 

the construction sites. This system precludes 

cluttering and congestion around the construction 

sites, thus facilitating movement and accordingly 

cutting construction time. Continuous final closure 

can be assured by proper allocation of available 

assets by the boat commander. No construction 

site personnel are required at centerline for raft 

marriage, thus freeing crews for actual construction work. No delivery teams are idled while 

waiting for completed rafts at designated construction sites since the boat commander can allocate 

specific crews to specific sites as rafts near completion. The raft delivery teams have the capability 

to dock rafts on the far shore prior to the raising of 

the highline. This insures a continuous and 

responsive flow of completed rafts at the appropriate time for effective centerline marriage. Centralized control under a strong boat commander 

facilitates construction and provides timely, responsive boat assets. 

It is now 9:25 A.M. and the first vehicle starts 

to cross the bridge. The 547th Engineer Battalion 

has completed the bridge in a record three hours 

and twenty-five minutes, thus continuing its three 

year domination of Rhine River closure times for 

Europe. Additionally, the battalion has surpassed 

its best closure time by forty minutes. 

The results are in and conclusive. The only 

major change between past and present bridging 

operations has been the use of a centralized boat 

control. The 547th Engineer Battalion has definitely proved that the use of a central boat control 

provides effective, flexible and responsive boat 

assets for major river crossing operations. 

Captain Benjamin F. Heil, Jr., is a recent 

graduate of the Engineer Officer Advanced Course 

at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He has commanded 

companies in Vietnam and West Germany. He 

participated in three Rhine River closures, the last 

during September 1973 when he served as the 

547th Engineer Battalion Operations Officer. He is 

presently pursuing a Master of Science Degree in 

Civil Engineering at the University of California, 

Berkeley. 

17 
Ch e L 

How much does a combat engineer Private in 

MOS 12B10 need to know before he joins his unit? 

The answer will vary with the type, location and 

mission of units. Most commanders and noncommissioned officers will agree, "Give me a man who 

understands the basics of combat engineering, 

knows the school of the soldier, is motivated, and 

confident of his ability to learn. I will train him for 

accomplishment of the mission assigned to my 

unit." This is the challenge for the A.I.T. commander today - PRODUCE SUCH MEN. 

A consensous of opinion of the 1st Battalion 

(Pioneer), 4th Advanced Individual Training Brigade (Engineer) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 

was that the Army Subject Schedule 12A10 

contained too many boring and repetitive classes. 

The training appeared to be geared for the 

average or below average man who was being 

given his only opportunity to learn something 

about combat engineering before becoming a 

replacement in the RVN is no longer an area of 

assignment. The draft is over. Above average 

volunteer soldiers do not want to be taught at a 

pace below their capability to learn. AWOL rates 

are high, in excess of 10% for most cycles, and at 

times as high as 20%. Sick call rates sometimes 

average more than 2 times per man during the 7 

week cycle. 

When the trainee strength figures went to less 

18 

than half the programed capacity in the summer of 

1973, the 1st Battalion and the Pioneer Training 

Committee in the 4th Brigade were combined and 

challenged to write a new proposed training 

program. During the 28 day period that the 1st 

Battalion was out of cycle, many of the Drill 

Sergeants and support personnel worked elsewhere in the Brigade. All the trainees were 

channeled into the 2d Battalion. 

A network analysis was prepared listing all the 

steps and sequence of the study. The entire 12B10 

technical program of instruction was reviewed in 

detail using the systems engineer "Task Analysis" 

approach. Many areas presented were not "required knowledge" for the combat engineer from 

his AIT experience and were eliminated. Many 

subjects had excessive time devoted to practical 

exercises which were eliminated. The basic knowledge to be imparted did not change. Repetitive 

and boring items of instruction were removed. 

The goal was to produce a well motivated, highly 

competent soldier who could function as a private 

or PFC in a field unit. 

The program which was developed and tested 

reduces the length of the course from 204 hours to 

112, or from seven weeks to four. In addition, the 

highly motivated and better educated soldiers are 

challenged to complete this course in only three 

weeks by taking classes on Saturdays. 

Specific comments concerning changes to each 
of the technical subjects taught follow: 

a. Engineer Tools: During the practical exercise (PE) portion of this subject, projects such as 

the construction of buildings, picnic tables, etc., 

resulted in individuals remaining at the same task 

for 9 hours, i.e. sawing studs to length. Concentration has been shifted from construction project 

completion to learning how to use tools, and 

eliminating the hand tools which are easily learned 

or already known by 99% of the trainees. 

b. Vehicle Operations: The driving time has 

been reduced by 41

/2 hours. Eliminated also were 

techniques of vehicle recovery and dump operations. The original purpose of this tr aining was to 

qualify a man enroute to RVN to move a vehicle in 

an emergency sit uation if the assigned driver were 

to be killed or wounded. The reduced training still 

accomplishes this. In ord er to qualify for this 

training, an individual must have a Driver's 

Battery Te st score of 85 or higher. Although we 

had recommended the elimination of this entire 

block of instructions, USAES requested that it be 

retained even if at a reduced scope. 

c. Landmine Warfare: Deleted was the laying 

and recording of the minefield, but not the emplacement and removal of mines. A pioneer 

private in an engineer battalion does not supervise 

the laying and recording of a minefield. He is a 

mine carrier, a mine emplacer and a mine remover 

- these are still being emphasized, and he still 

receives all the instruction on a standard minefield 

pattern. 

d. Field Fortifications: Eliminated was a practical exercise (PE ) in construction of heavy timber 

...
 

cut-and-cover bunkers. Instead, a series of static 

displays teaches the complete concept. The time 

was increased on wire obstacles and wire ties 

because experience has shown that the majority of 

trainees have difficulty in this area. Anti-vehicular 

obstacle construction was also eliminated and will 

be r eplaced with static displays. 

e. Roads and Airfields: An excessively long 

PE has been reduced. Unit team work is stressed 

as well as individual effort. 

f. Demolitions: Repetitious classroom material 

has be en deleted. Safety standards have not been 

reduced. Each man still detonates three charges. 

g. Rigging: Formulas not essential to MOS 

12AIO were removed. The PE in construction of 

lifting devices was reduced as was the time spent 

touring the static site. 

h. Squad Tactics: Eliminated review of all the 

items taught in basic combat training. Emphasized 

reorganization of th e engineer squad as infantry, 

combat formations, control, movement, engineer 

reconnaissance and ambush patrolling. Also, defensive positions, range cards and supporting fire 

will be taught during a night bivouac problem. 

Eliminated daylight and nigh t firing on squad 

defense range. 

i, Non-standard Bridges: The complete bridge 

instruction remains. Eliminated reinforcement and 

replacement of the center section of simulated 

destroyed bridges. A static display easily shows 

how the same procedures used earlier in construction of t he non-standard bridge apply and t hat 

repair is just a repetition of wha t was already 

learned . 
j. Panel Bridges: Eliminated jacking down of 

the bridge on the far shore and removal of the 

launching nose. All procedures are taught on the 

ncar shore which would otherwise have been 

repeated on the far shore. 

k. River Crossing Operations: The bridge 

committee evaluating this training recommended 

that the 27 hours be reduced to 16 to eliminate 

repetition. During the staff visit to Fort Belvoir, it 

was requested that it be further reduced to 8 

hours and that the M4T6 float bridge PE be 

eliminated. 

Added to the program of instruction upon 

recommendation of the Department of Doctrine 

and Training Development at Fort Belvoir were 3 

hours of communications and 5 hours of map 

reading and land navigation, which are no longer 

taught in BCT but are .required knowledg-e for 

mobile combat engineers. 

After the program had been reduced to four 

weeks with an opportunity for the highly motivated and better educated to complete it in only 

three weeks, it was time to develop the next two 

ingredients that commanders want in a combat 

engineer - motivation and confidence of his ability 

to learn. 

DEVELOPMENT OF MODULES 

Modules were developed. lasting. I, 2, and 3 

weeks in duration,in the 3d, 4th, and 5th Battalions 

of the 4th Advanced Individual Training Brigade 

(Engineer), These modules included: 

• Crane 

• Wheeled tractor 

• Quarry operator 

• Light vehicle driver 

• Material Handling Equipment (Forklifts) 

• General Construction Machine Operator 

• Grader 

• Asphalt Plant Operator 

• Electrician 

• Plumber 

• Water Supply 

• Demolitions 

The personnel who completed the course in 3 

weeks (by working Saturdays) were given first 

choice of modules for follow-up training. After 

completion of the proficiency test during the 4th 

week, the rest of the company was ranked 

according to test results and overall performance. 

The man who was the best achiever got first choice 

of modules. Since there were a limited number of 

vacancies in each module, motivation to excel was 

extremely high during the combat engineer training. The men were reluctant to miss a class 

because it could affect their standing. Barracks 

orderlies were rotated at noon. Sick call was about 

one-third the normal rate. 

Indicator statistics for the two test companies 

in the 1st Battalion reveal that motivation of 

trainees was achieved. 

PROFICIENCY TEST 

The Proficiency Test administered was the 

same one given to the graduates of the normal 7 

week program. It was administered by the 

Director of Plans and Training at Fort Leonard 

Wood - the same personnel who administer the 7 
week test. The 15 cycles immediately prior to the 

test program averaged from 30% to 58% maximum scores. Company A had 50.15% and Company Chad 72.4% of their personnel who "rnaxed" 

the test. 

The enthusiasm displayed by the trainees for 

this test program was captured on an Educational 

Television Video Tape with interviews of graduates who completed the course by modified selfpaced instruction in 3 weeks. 

Some of the Drill Sergeants and Pioneer 

Committee cadre were skeptical of the program 

initially. The trainees have completely changed all 

this by their attitude and motivation, which is far 

above what was experienced previously. Trainees 

indicate that the previous program had only taught 

them military skills. What they really want is a 

hard skill they can also use outside the Army. 

With this opportunity to obtain it, and win an 

additional MOS at the same time, most of the 

complaints previously registered about pioneer 

training were eliminated. Additional MOS's obtained during this test program were as crane 

operators, tractor operators, and water supply 

specialists. The same tests were administered as 

are given to their regular A.LT. 7 or 8 week 

classes. The extreme motivation displayed by the 

pioneers in the module phase of this test program 

astounded the regular trainees as well as their 

cadre. 

The pendulum is swinging. The name of the 

game is recruit, train and retain. The addition of 

this incentive training with the opportunity to 

learn hard skills will greatly assist in this goal. If 

the pendulum should swing back to draft, train and 

ship to a combat zone, the standard program now 

in being can be quickly reestablished. It is just 

more repetition in the hope of establishing a finer 

edge to the combat sword. However, the modern 

volunteer Army must be flexible, challenging and 

incentive oriented. 

It appears that the incentive program with the 

modified self-pace option for Pioneers will prove to 

be a huge success and will improve the caliber of 

the privates sent out as replacements for combat 

engineer battalions all over the world. The results 

are still being compiled and the final decision rests 

with TRADOC. However, the data so far appears 

to indicate clearly that this program will produce 

soldiers who understand the basics of combat 

engineering, know the school of the soldier, are 

motivated and are confident of their ability to 

learn any job or mission assigned to them related 

to their MOS. 

LTC Charles L. Shreves is currently the Operations Officer in the Engineer's Office of 7th Corps 

Headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany. LTC 

Shre ves was the form er Battalion Commander, 1st 

Battalion (PIOM, 4th AIT Brigade (ENGR) at Fort 

Leonard Wood, Missouri. In addition to having 

commanded combat engineer companies in Germany, Korea, and Fort Campbell; Kentucky, LTC 

Shreves has been a Facilities Engineer and was 

Deputy District Engineer, Okinawa. LTC Shreves 

holds a Masters degree from Arizona State University and is a graduate of OCS, the Engineer 

Officer Advance Course and the C&GSC. 

21 
ms I~N(.INI~I~11(jl~Nrl'I~ll
 

rl'l~l')1
 

How many times have you said, "who came up 

with this idea, why aren't the Engineers talking to 

each other?" Or maybe you have wondered about 

such things as the possible use of Commercial 

Construction Equipment in Engineer units or the 

requirement for a boom on the CEV? Well, it may 

come as a surprise to you but the Engineers have 

been discussing subjects as these and other 

matters of mutual interest and doctrine for sometime. This was first accomplished at the Engineer 

Quarterly Conference and later, commencing in 

1967. though the Engineer Center Team. Unlike 

the Quarterly Conference, which functioned primarily as a Senior Officer briefing, the Engineer 

Center Team emphasizes the pooling of expertise 

and experience and is a forum for the free 

exchange of ideas and opinions. 

The Center Team was formally established by 

DA on 18 July 67 in recognition of its potential in 

strengthening Army doctrinal, educational and 

training programs. Adoption of the Center Team 

concept was directed for all service schools having 

counterpart combat development agencies. 

The Engineer School delved further into this 

concept and the Engineer Center Team was 

officially formed with the signing of the Joint 

Coordinating Agreement on October 17, 1967. The 

Commandant, United States Army Engineer 

School, (Chairman), the Assistant Commandant, 

United States Engineer School, Director of Facilities Engineering, OEC, and the Commanding 

Officer of the United States Army Mobility 

Equipment Research and Development Center, 

the President. United States Army ArmorEngineer Board, and the Director, Defense Mapping School are dedicated to the resolution of 

issues on matters of Engineer interest. In addition 

to these members, the Commanding General of the 

United States Army Training Center and Fort 

Leonard Wood. as well as the Chief, Engineer 

Division, United States Army Armor Engineer 

Board are invited to participate or send representatives. The team is not meant to replace routine 

day to day coordination but is concerned with 

r 

expediting matters of Engineer interest that 

support the Army in the accomplishment of its 

mission. The Engineer Center Team meets the 

last Thursday of each month with the mission to 

surface problems and conflicts in areas of Engineer 

interest. This means that the Center Team works 

together to arrive at a consensus agreement prior 

to addressing issues with their respective commands. This effort shows that Engineer matters 

are being resolved by Engineers. 

The inner workings of the Engineer Center 

Team are not complicated. A Standing Coordinating Committee. made up of junior representatives, strives to expedite resolution of problems at 

the working level prior to the Center Team 

meeting. The Standing Coordinating Committee 

also selects the agenda topics and arranges for 

presentations by knowledgeable persons. 

Since its conception, the Engineer Center Team 

has discussed a wide variety of topics from 

pollution control to personnel management. Some 

of the topics which have been discussed include: 

Commercial Construction Equipment, Countersurveillance and Camouflage, Geographic Intelligence 

and Topographic Support System for the Army in 

the Field -1975 (GIANT-75) and the Construction 

Battalion Evaluation, which was a topic in the 

January, 1971 edition of THE ENGINEER magazine. The Engineer Center Team has also been one 

of the leading exponents in the exchange of 

minutes between Center Teams in order to bring 

about a more efficient overall approach to Armywide problems and strives to provide a greater 

impact on methods for solving problems. 

Some of the items to be discussed in the future 

will include: Engineer Support of other services. 

Combat Engineer Systems Program Review 

(CESPR), Engineers fighting as Infantry and Individual Unit Training. 

So the next time you ask yourself, "who came 

up with this idea?" There is a good chance it was 

discussed within the Engineer Center Team one 

Thursday morning. 

22 
LTC Joachim K. W. Zickert 

lRTN 

• he erman 

AmyEgi ee 

Working for freedom is a never ending job 

which requires a united effort of all nations. Such 

is the role assumed by the North Atlantic Treaty 

\ Organization (NATO) nations. But what of these 

allies? What do they share in common or work to 

achieve together? A closer look at one of these 

partners will perhaps imbue a greater understanding of the similarities and differences which exist. 

Picture yourself on a bridge site along the 

Rhine River in Germany. American and German 

army engineers are constructing a floating bridge. 

In the mountains, another joint training exercise 

becomes a mission accomplished. After duty in a 

US Army club or in a German gasthous, American 

and German soldiers are enjoying a beer to 

celebrate the days achievements. These are just a 

few of the many faces of partnership. 

In the years of this partnership, units of both 

American armies have participated together in 

training exercises, athletic contests. social events, 

and have worked together as "sister" units. These 

units conduct annual maneuvers to monitor and 

test unit training and readiness as integrated 

armies under the NATO command. As soldiers of 

NATO they have discovered how much they have 

in common as citizens of allied nations of the free 

world. 

But what does the German Army and the 

German Corps of Engineers look like and how are 

th ey organized? Since Germany makes the largest 

contribution of all the allied nations to the ground 

forces of NATO, let's take a look. 

23 
THE GERMAN ARMY
 

The Bundeswehr of Federal Defense Forces 

totals more than 460,000 men. The Army itself 

numbers over 350,000 troops and is the largest 

component of the Bundeswehr. The Army's 350,000 

men are divided into three corps in which there 

are 12 divisions; four mechanized infantry, four 

armored, two light infantry, one mountain division, 

and one airborne division. Each division is further 

broken down into three brigades (and special 

troops) organized into battalions and companies. 

Some examples of these organizations are: 

• A Mechanized Infantry Division (PANZERGRENADIER) made up of two mechanized infantry brigades and one armored brigade. 

• An Armored Division (PANZER) made up of 

two armored brigades and one mechanized infantry brigade. 

• A Light Infantry Division (JAGER) made up 

of two light infantry brigades and one mechanized 

infantry brigade. As a combined arms units, each 

brigade is self-sustaining and capable of fighting on 

its own for a limited time. 

• Brigades. There are four types of brigades. 

Each is organized differently and tailored to a 

specific mission. For example, an armored infantry 

brigade consists of three armored infantry battalions and one armored battalion. Each brigade 

has their own artillery battalions, one support 

battalion, one armored engineer company, and 

special troops of company-size. 

THE GERMAN CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

The Chief of Engineers and his staff are a part 

of the Army General Office which is a subcommand 

of the Chief of Army. Civil works such as flood 

control and other missions of this type are not 

provided by the army engineers. They are matters of other government installations. 

The active Corps of Engineers has a total 

strength of: 

- 29 battalions 

- 7 battalions partly activated 

- 43 separate companies 

The mission of the German Engineers is briefly 

as follows: 

Facilitate the movements of friendly troops 

Impede the movements of the enemy 

Raise the combat capability of friendly troops 

Reduce the combat capability of the enemy 

Support the service troops in logistic tasks 

Be responsible for damage control 

Fight as infantry in self defense and in critical 

situations. 

To accomplish the above, the German Engineers are organized as follows: 

Armored Engineer Companies are organic to 

24
 
the different types of brigades. Their mission is to 

support the combat arms in their combat tasks. 

These companies consist of: 

a company headquarters squad 

three armored engineer platoons with three 

squads each 

one AVLB platoon (5 AVLB s) 

one heavy equipment and ammunition platoon 

one maintenance platoon 

Engineer Battalion (divisional) are division 

combat support tr oops. The division Engineer 

battalion consists of: 

one headquarters support and maintenance 

company 

three combat engineer companies (the third 

engineer company is a basic training company during peacetime) 

- one heavy equipment and brigade company. 

The battalion commander is also the division 

engineer. 

Engineer Battalion (heavy equipped) are corps 

combat support troops under the direct command 

of Corps Headquarters. The battalion consists of: 

a headquarters company
 

- 3 combat engineer companies
 

- 1 heavy equipment company
 

This type of engineer battalion contains more and 

heavier construction equipment than any other 

type of battalion but is not a construction battalion. 

Engineer Battalion (light equipped) another 

battalion on corps level has: 

- one headquarters company 

three combat engineer companies - (primarily designated for barrier missions) 

Mobile Assault Bridge Battalion also belongs to 

the family of corps troops and consists of: 

- a headquarters company 

- three mobile assualt bridge companies 

Each bridge company is equipped with 18 

M2-B amphibious bridge and crossing vehicles. 

Float Bridge Battalion and Separate Companies. 

1 headquarters company 

- 3 float bridge companies (equipped with the 

hollow deck bridge MLC 60.) 

River Ferry Company consists of 9 river ferries 

and 3 patrol boats. 

Specialized Engineers are organized according 

to their mission tasks. Examples are as follows: 

- Pipeline Battalions and separate companies 

- Railroad Companies 

- Technical Companies for electric power and 

water supply. 

Another Engineer organization as a part of the 

Territorial Army are the special barrier teams 

(Wallmeister), They are attached to the Military 

districts and their mission is to build and maintain 

fixed barriers for all NATO troops in Germany. 

LTC Joachim K. W. Zichert is currently Deputy 

Corps Engineer, II Corps, Ulm, Federal Republic 

of Germany. During th e period 1971-1974, he was 

formerly assigned as the German Liaison Officer to 

the US Army Engine er School at Fort Belvoir, 

Virginia. Prior to his assignment at Port Belvoir 

he was the commander of the German 4th 

Engineer Battalion in Northeast Bavaria. Prior 

assignments include duty as a member of the 

Engineer Section in the Army's General Office in 

Cologne, Germany. 

25 
c ST TIO A E E T 

CPT Lamar C. Ratcliffe, Jr. 

The United States Army Engineer School at 

Fort Belvoir, Virginia, instructs officers and noncommissioned officers in many subject areas that 

they can expect to see and use in their military 

careers. One important subject which sometimes 

does not receive proper student attention is 

construction management. This lack of student 

interest is probably due primarily to one of two 

factors: the students either consider construction 

management techniques to be "common sense 

ideas that are obvious" or question whether or not 

they are applicable to the military environment. 

The author cannot argue the first point because 

he also believes construction management to be 

based upon common sense; however, he knows 

from his personal experience that construction 

management techniques can be used with great 

effectiveness on large military troop construction 

projects. The construction of the heliport facility 

at Camp Carroll Depot, Korea, demonstrates the 

proper application of the construction management 

techniques taught at the Engineer School. 

In July 1973. the 802d Engineer Battalion 

(Construction) received advance notice that it 

would soon have the mission of constructing a 

heliport at Camp Carroll Depot. Upon receiving 

the job directive, the battalion commander and his 

operations officer visited Camp Carroll Depot to 

investigate the proposed site for the heliport and 

complete the preliminary planning. They reviewed 

the plans and the construction specifications with 

the commander of Company D and made some 

26 
rough estimates of the types and quantities of 

construction effort required. They quickly determined that the project would include the displacement and subsequent compaction of 100,000 cubic 

yards of earth fill, construction of a 70 ft wide, 450 

ft long runway, placement of three 45 ft by 75 ft 

concrete parking pads and installation of a 370 ft 

long underground drainage system. The company 

commander was confident that his company could 

handle the entire project if it received additional 

earthmoving equipment. Based upon the initial 

calculations and his company commander's confidence , the battalion commander assigned the 

heliport project to Company D and promised that 

additional equipment would be provided if re ­

quired. 

Upon receiving his company commander's 

guidance, the company construction officer developed a detailed plan for the project. He 

analyzed the scope of work of the project, determined the activities to be accomplished and 

developed a detailed cost work estimate of the 

required man-hours, equipment hours and materiel 

for each activity. Next he used the critical path 

method (CPM) to determine the critical activities 

and th e required delivery date for each construction material. From his critical path analysis, he 

scheduled the entire project and obtained the 

estimated completion date. He also determined 

that compaction of the earth fill was the critical 

factor and that the company would need additional 

compaction equipment to maximize earthmoving 

efficiency. 

While the detailed planning was being completed, the company commander mobilized his 

available men and equipment resources. First the 

earthmoving platoon prepared the site for the 

installation of support facilities and set up a 

general purpose (GP) medium tent for messing 

operations. Next the first general construction 

platoon erected a portacamp to be used as the 

project office and first aid station. Simultaneously 

the maintenance section set up a maintenance tent 

to provide a covered facility for support maintenance. Mobilization was completed when two 

sheepsfoot rollers, two bulldozers and three 290M 

wheeled tractors were provided to solve the 

compaction problem. 

When the actual construction began on 4 

September 1973, the company commander used 

directives and control measures to supervise his 

project. He directed his platoon sergeants to 

submit daily progress reports which detailed the 

work accomplished, the construction effort actually 

required and the materiel used. The company 

operations sergeant compiled the information from 

these reports and maintained complete records for 

the project. He also monitored the expected 

delivery date and the receipt of each construction 

material; he informed the company construction 

officer when materiel problems occurred. From 

the daily progress reports and the materiel status 

r eports, the construction officer updated his CPM 

schedule three times a week. This updating gave 

him a graphic representation of potential problem 

areas in sufficient time for him to reallocate the 

available men and equipment resources and thus 

minimize delay of the estimated completion date. 

To insure that quality construction was being 

accomplished safely and efficiently, both the company commander and his construction officer made 

daily inspections of the project site and made 

on-the-spot corrections. The end result was a 

quality construction project which was completed 

on time. 

Management of the heliport construction at 

Camp Carroll Depot included preliminary planning, 

detailed planning, site preparation and proper 

supervision. All four techniques are taught at the 

Engineer School. Admittedly, they are common 

sense techniques. In addition, as you have seen, 

they are applicable to the military environment. 

The proper use of these construction management 

techniques resulted in the quality construction of 

the Camp Carroll Depot heliport. 

Captain Lamar C. Ratcliffe Jr is a recent 

graduate of the (3·74) Engineer Officer Advanced 

Course at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He graduated 

from the USMA in 1968 and obtained an MS 

degree in Civil Engineering from the University of 

Illinois in 1972. He was the commander of company D, 802d Engineer Battalion (Construction) 

during the initial construction phase of the Camp 

Carroll Depot heliport. He is currently assigned to 

the US Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir. 

27 
THE HENRY LARCOM ABBOT AWARD
 
fortunately, our preoccupation with construction 

speed carried over into peacetime operations with 

rew size, materials used, and money spent 

elegated to secondary roles. 

Our civilian counterparts in the construction 

industry learned long ago that time is not the 

governing resource. With a large percentage of 

our labor force engaged in construction, it goes 

without saying that construction has become big 

business. And which of the four major resources 

reigns supreme in any big business? The omnipotent dollar has been crowned the new king. 

Today, military construction is big business 

also. Not surprisingly, the dollar has "muscled in" 

on time as the governing resource. As Corps of 

Engineers officers, we are tasked with constructing 

with fewer men, less materials, and at lower costs. 

And as one might expect, we have found that in 

many cases the optimization of the use of men, 

money, and materials has resulted in shorter 

project durations. 

How has the Corps of Engineers responded to 

the need for a better product at minimum cost? 

The development of new military road building 

techniques is only one of many areas in which 

progress is being made. Specifically, the U. S. 

Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, 

Mississippi, has developed construction methods 

and procedures for the use of membrane-encapsulated soil layers in military road construction. 

The utilization of membrane-encapsulated soil 

layers will reportedly speed up road and airfield 

construction at decreased costs. A more palatable 

blend of resource utilization cannot be imagined. 

Since the 1940's, the Corps of Engineers has 

employed the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) 

Method of designing flexible pavement structures. 

Basically, the CBR value of a soil is a comparative 

measure of that soil's resistance to failure by 

shear. The CBR of design combines the results of 

a load-deformation test with an empirical design 

chart to determine the thickness of pavement 

str uct ur e layers. 

Although nineteen of our fifty states use this 

method with its numerous variations for design of 

their asphalt pavement structures, the CBR 

Method is not immune to criticism. Proponents of 

other design methods have attacked the CBR 

Method on two counts. First, it is said that 

penetration of a piston into a confined soil 

specimen does not simulate the shear stresses 

which actually develop in similar soil under a 

flexible pavement. Second, the soaking of specimens for four days prior to testing is not 

representative of actual field conditions in most 

cases. Generally, wet soils yield lower CBR values 

when tested than when dry. Low CBR values 

dictate large overburden thicknesses for adequate 

29 
stress distribution, as indicated by the empirical 

design charts. The requirement for large pavement structure thicknesses usually points to high 

construction and material costs. 

Up until this time, it has been customary 

procedure to select pavement structure materials 

with high CBR values, i.e., not adversely affected 

by water. Materials commonly used for this 

purpose are crushed rock, granular materials from 

natural deposits, and stabilized in-place soils. 

However, it is not uncommon to find that such 

materials do not exist on or near the project site. 

As such, much time and construction effort must 

be expended at great cost in obtaining such 

materials. 

The Experiment Station at Vicksburg has 

demonstrated that in lieu of granular materials, 

membrance envelopment of fine-grained soils can 

be utilized as the base courses for flexible pavements. It is known that high density fine-grained 

soils exhibit high strengths if kept dry. The availability of such soils poses no problem - they may 

be used from cut sections at the construction site. 

But keeping them dry is another matter. Numerous types of membranes were tested; and 

although the results of these tests have not been 

finalized, it appears that a 6 mil-thick polyethylene 

lower membrane ($0.07/SY), when used in conjunction with a nonwoven polypropylene upper rnernbrane ($O.35/SY), will prove to be the most 

feasible. 

As dry fine-grained soils yield high CBR values, 

required base course thicknesses are minimal. 

Traffic tests have shown that a 12-inch lift of soil. 

when compacted to 95% of AASHO T-180 Method 

B density will easily support 5-ton dump truck 

operations for extended periods of time. It can be 

seen that the use of membrane-encapsulated soil 

layers represents an economical, as well as rapid, 

means of constructing military roads in the Theater of Operations. 

Today, more than ever before, we as Corps of 

Engineer officers must be alert to the proper and 

efficient management of those precious resources 

with which we have been entrusted - specifically, 

that omnipotent dollar. 

Captain Gordon T. Greeby, Jr., is presently 

assigned as a student in the Engineer Officer 

Advanced Course , Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He 

commanded D Company, 249th Engineer Battalion 

(Const), in Germany, and served as a project 

officer UJith the Eighth Army Engineer in Korea. 

After receiving a BS degree in 1968 from the 

United States Military Academy, he received a 

MSCE degree in Soil Mechanics and Foundations 

Engineering and a MSCE degree in Construction 

Management, both from Stanford University. 

30 
Major Charles Gardner 

- The o m 

The air is hot and stuffy in the smoke filled company classroom as a crusty com bat engineer sergeant labors through yet another lesson on bridge 

demolitions. Two specialist four silently doze in 

the back row while a PFC and a specialist five 

engage in a homemade "wargame" near the front. 

The first sergeant has reported 25 men present for 

training. The soldiers shuffle restlessly in their 

seats as Captain Candid, the company commander, 

slips in the back door to "check training". 

Sound familiar? Read on, Captain, because you 

are the Army's principal training manager. 

Mission-oriented training and testing still receive low priority from engineer unit commanders. 

Training objectives are not being met in many 

cases. The reasons are clear and basic: (1) lack of 

a clear definition of training responsibilities and 

concepts, and (2) the failure of field elements to 

obtain. review, and use the military training 

publications now on the market. 

31 
This article attempts to focus on the role of the 

engineer company commander in training his unit, 

the concept of performance training, and sp ecific 

sources of information to guide training activities. 

The development of the notions herein concerning 

training is based on the following concepts: 

• Operations and training are synonomous and 

inseparable. 

• The best training takes place in units. 

• The company commander is responsible for 

the technical and tactical proficiency of his people. 

Setting performance as the goal. The civilian 

and Army training and educational systems are 

committed to performance training. To know how 

is not enough. Today's soldier must be able to do. 

The literature producing people at United States 

Army Engineer School, Fort Belvoir, Va. (USAES) 

and other service schools are committed to producing literature on how to conduct performance 

training and testing. No matter how the system 

tries, however, it would appear that the Army 

continues to have a "packaging and marketing" 

problem, i.e., getting the right literature in the 

right quantities to the right person. Perhaps the 

problem in the field is that when one is inundated 

day after day with official literature of all sorts 

emanating from all sorts of sources, he becomes 

less abl e to skim off those publications primarily 

dealing with effective training. Some of the most 

highly eff ective publications are noted in this 

article. 

It is necessary that all commanders understand 

what is meant by performance training. For 

example, suppose a platoon sergeant takes his 

platoon out for some demolitions training. He has 

each man in the platoon prime and detonate a 

quarter-pound block of TNT. Good performance 

training. right? Wrong! Should the commander 

now assume that the platoon can now emplace 

explosives for road craters or bridge demolition? 

About all he can reasonably expect is that each 

man can now prime and detonate a quarter-pound 

block of TNT. 

Performance training requires some ingenuity. 

As a place to start, forget the classroom scene. 

Most soldiers get enough sleep at night. Performance training should occur in the field , but all 

training in the field cannot properly be described 

as performance training. If the training must take 

place outside of the normal operating environment, 

your approach is suspect. Use your head. . 

Get in the mood for performance-oriented 

training by absorbing some of the information in 

FM 21·6, Military Training, dated 1 June 1974. 

This manual is short. easy to read, and doesn't 

even look like an FM . Chapter 2 should put you on 

the track. 

Before wasting a lot of time attempting to do 

all the work yourself. reach for instant relief in the 

form of the Army Training and Evaluation Program (L RTEP ) 5-35 if you are in an Army 

Engineer Combat Battalion or 5-145 for the 

Mech anized Divisional Combat Battalion. In a 

pinch, use them interchangeably. ARTEP's for 

other engineer units are on the way. The ARTEP 

provides guidance for scheduling, conducting, supervising. and evaluating unit training. It provides an excellent "laundry list" for evaluating 

your curr ent training proficiency as well as 

minimum training objectives in terms of acceptable 

degrees of proficiency and levels of performance. 

Unit Training - the logical alternative. The 

Army is composed of a large number of individual 

skills molded into units with designated missions 

and capabilities. Since we fun ction as a unit, why 

not train as a unit? Many direct and indirect 

advantages accrue from unit training. Once again 

the ARTEP is your handy one stop reference for 

guid ance. 

Soldiers report to a unit after completing AIT 

and developing a basic skill. At best these 

individuals are at the appropriate level and require 

practice and additional training to develop added 

proficiency. The Enlisted Personnel Management 

System (EPMS) now being structured will require 

th at the unit develop the individual soldier's skills. 

EPMS is a review of the enlisted MOS structure to 

provide an improved skill and car eer progression 

for qualified enlisted personnel. This system will 

most likely get the company commander more 

involved with assisting the individuals in his unit 

in maintaining technical proficiency. 

Unit training encourages total involvement of 

every member of the unit. Unit training develops 

leadership. It provides incentives for squad 

leaders, platoon sergeants, and platoon leaders to 

gain and maintain proficiency. It allows the 

commander to evaluate his subordinates in an 

obj ective manner. 

F inally. unit training is cost effective. In 

reality, it is simply an efficient way to utilize the 

training time now available. It would seem 

reasonable to predict on the basis of past experience that military budget cuts during peacetime 

will take their toll on the Army's training base. 

One can reasonably expect a reduction in the 

number and length of school taught engineer 

courses at both Fort Belvoir and Leonard Wood. 

Troops must remain in a unit and maintain 

proficiency. Good performance-oriented, unit 

training is essential for future readiness. 

Role of the engineer company commander. The 

primary mission of the comp any commander is to 

train his unit. His job and the complexity of his 

mission have changed very little. Many young 

32 
company commanders find themselves so enmeshed 

with administrative functions that the primary 

mission becomes obscured. This total involvement 

with administration is poor camouflage for what is 

likely a serious training deficiency. Mobilize and 

tr ain those headquarters platoon elements, diverify the workload, and get back to the real mission. 

FM 25-2 (Test), Unit Commander's Guide, dated 29 

March 1974 will help you to more efficiently 

accomplish your administrative functions. Try it! 

Lack of ad equate time for mission-oriented 

training continues to be a problem for most 

engineer units. An analysis of the situation will 

likely determine that the belief there is not time 

for training is a self-imposed constraint. Commanders must allocate time for training if they 

expect combat capability. Minor construction, area 

beautification, and nice-to-have projects gen erally 

do not constit ute good tr aining for most engineer 

units regardless of t heir political implications. 

These tasks must be accomplished but recognize 

their limited training value. Tasks should be 

performed in a manner which maintains unit 

integrity where possible. Clustering individuals 

rather than utilizing an existing squad is likely to 

be counterproductive from the training viewpoint. 

Accept th ese projects as part of the engineer 

mission and plan around them. Proper planning 

well in advance is the key. Develop your schedule 

for training. Block out reasonable periods for 

projects. Set deadlines and goals for both t he 

tr aining and the projects. Stick to the plan. 

Once you have set your sites on a good unit 

training program, a key step is training analysis. 

Only the company commander can determine those 

areas in which a unit really needs extensive 

training. Chapter 2, FM 25-2, is helpful for general 

guidance; use the ARTEP for specific tasks to be 

trained . Once you have completed a training or 

testing cycle you have some notions as to th e unit's 

proficiency. 

Another item to support training now under 

development is th e individual counterpart to the 

ARTEP called the Individual Training and Evaluation Program (ITEP). If approved this document 

would replace the Army Subject Schedule for each 

MOS. Both the ITEP's and ASubjScd's produced 

by USAES are quite detailed and carefully delineate what each soldier should know and be able to 

do. These documents are invaluable to the MOS 

holder and the unit commander in the analysis and 

development of a unit training program and should 

be a part of the unit's publications library. 

There are some indicators of individual proficiency available. Consider the MOS test results 

for a moment. Each company commander should 

review and analyze the results reported on the 

USAEEC Form 10 and t he summary profile 

report. MOS tests are about proficiency, not just 

extra pay. Perhaps a composite of the MOS test 

scores for the NCO's and EM in a unit may really 

be a measure of the proficiency of the unit 

commander and his training program. Commanders must: 

• Understand the purpose and importance of 

the MOS test. 

• Insure that study guides are provided in a 

timely manner. 

• Insure that all required study references are 

on hand or readily available. 

• Provide a quiet area conducive to study. 

• Make on-duty study tim e available. 

• Show special interest in very low density 

MOS's and understand the problems inherent to 

these individuals. 

• Counsel NCO's and EM on the importance 

and implications of MOS test results. Under 

EPMS the test results take on added importance. 

Assembling a good company library which will 

adequ ately support unit and individual training is 

no small task and requires careful attention to 

detail, some ingenuity, and many hours of work. 

Hop efully, one is not starting from scratch. First, 

which manuals should be on hand? No simple 

answer here but some good sources for developing 

your own list are available. Consult the ARTEP 

and th e study guides provided for each MOS in 

your unit. 

Leadership is still the key. Two things are 

clear to this writer. Good training can occur only 

when properly planned and executed by an aware 

and dedicated company commander. Secondly, due 

to time limitations, the company commander needs 

knowledge of and ready access to a few key 

training publications to guide his activities. The 

trend towards the one-stop training guides and 

study references such as those mentioned in this 

article is a significant step forward for commanders in the field. Exercise your leadership 

abilities through proper training of your unit. 

Raise your sights and train for performance. 

Major Charles E . Gardner is assigned to the 

Enqin eer S chool, Deputy Commandant for Combat 

and Training Developments. He re ceived a BS 

from the Unit ed States Naval A cademy and an MS 

in Civil Engineering from the University of Illinois. 

He is a graduate of the Command and General 

Staff College and a registered professional engineer. He has served with the 10th Engineer 

Battalion, 3d Infantry Division; MA CV Advisory 

Teams; MA CV Construction Directorate; Nuclear 

Cratering Group; and the Department ofEngineering Science, USAES. 

33 
DOMESTIC ACTION
 

CPT Jeffrey A. Wagonhursf , 

The primary objective of the Domestic Action 

Program is to instill interaction between the 

civilian community and the military. If we were to 

look around our country, we would find that the 

needs of the civilian community are great. For 

various reasons it is not always possible for the 

civilian population to do the work that needs to be 

done to improve its community. For example. the 

community may not have the necessary equipment 

for certain projects. nor the money to purchase or 

rent the equipment. A shortage of people is also a 

problem, as it is difficult for working people to 

take time away from their jobs to participate in 

community projects. Another difficulty may be 

that the cost of these projects is too great for a 

small community to sustain. 

The Army has the capabilities, the equipment, 

the time, and the personnel to apply to these 

situations. Our country is always one of the first 

to send aid and assistance to foreign countries in 

need. We can apply this system to our own 

smaller communities who are also in need of 

outside help. The Army is always looking for ways 

to make itself more intriguing and appetizing to 

the civilian population. What better way is there 

to do this than by helping the neighbors of its 

military installations throughout the United States. 

Many soldiers complain that all they do is train 

and maintain equipment. As a result, they become 

discouraged and disenchanted with the Army. 

Participating in civilian community projects, such 

as constructing a park and recreation area or 

helping the community in a crisis situation, provides interest and stimulation for the young 

soldier. He is given the opportunity to meet and to 

work with people outside of the Army community, 

thus abandoning the feeling of separation. Also, he 

has the chance to leave the Army post and to see 

its surrounding countryside. 

To show how interaction between the civilian 

and military communities can be a worthwhile 

endeavor, the success of a Domestic Action Project 

completed by a platoon of men from B Company, 

20th Engineer Battalion (Combat), Fort Campbell, 

Kentucky will be discussed. The city of Cleveland. 

Tennessee, located approximately forty miles 

northeast of Chattanooga, was planning to construct a county recreation area consisting of 

various athletic fields and picnic areas for the 

people of the community. The Chamber of Commerce realized that they did not have the heavy 

equipment necessary to do the earthwork for the 

project. The construction companies in the area 

were very busy with other important contracts 

and county work. and they could not release any 

equipment to do the job. Mr. John Tyler of the 

Cleveland Chamber of Commerce decided to write 

to the Commanding General at Fort Campbell to 

ask for assistance in completing the earthwork for 

their recreation area. When the Commanding 

General received the letter, it was forwarded to 

the C-S of the installation for evaluation. The C-5 

made contact with the Operations Officer of the 

20th Engineer Battalion to request that a reconnaissance of the project in Cleveland, Tennessee be 

made by personnel from the Battalion. An initial 

recon of the project was made in the spring of 

1973. and the project was evaluated by the C-5 

based on the information from the initial recon. 

The project was assigned to the 20th Engineer 

Battalion (Combat), and the Operations Officer of 

the Battalion further assigned the project to B 

Company. In August, the company commander 

and the project officer flew by helicopter to 

Cleveland, Tennessee to made a final estimate of 

the project. After a discussion with personnel 

from the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce, the 

dates for the project were set for 1 through 15 

October 1973. On 1 October 1973, a platoon, under 

the command of Lieutenant Sheldon L. Jahn, 

departed from Fort Campbell, Kentucky for Cleveland, Tennessee. Upon arrival in Cleveland, the 

platoon was met by Mr. John Tyler of the 

Chamber of Commerce. After the platoon unloaded their heavy equipment, Mr. Tyler took the 

men to the motel where they would be living for 

the next two weeks. The accommodations pro ­

vided for the men were very pleasant, as each man 

had a doubled bed to himself and a color television 

set in each room. The men ate their meals in the 

motel resturant where they could order what they 

wanted. All accommodations were provided at the 

expense of the city of Cleveland. 

Work began early on the morning of 2 October. 

and it was continued everyday for the following 

34 
two weeks. The initial task accomplished was the 

upgrading of the existing drainage by clearing and 

rerouting the natural stream channel at the project 

site. An access road to the rear area of the site 

was cut by removing the top soil, and then it was 

graded to the approximate grade. Drainage 

ditches were cut along the length of the access 

road and tied in with the natural stream. A 

borrow pit was then upgraded, and the material 

was stockpiled at a local farmer's farm. This 

material was hauled to the project site and used to 

fill around two culverts placed in the stream 

channel. The two culverts allowed access to the 

project parking area. Fill was then hauled to this 

area, and a parking lot 70 x 120 feet square was 

filled and leveled. At the same time the fill was 

being hauled in, the first of two Little League 

baseball fields was being cut and filled to grade. 

The second Little League field was then cut to 

grade while the first was smoothed and drainage 

around the field was established. A third softball 

field was then cut to grade while the second field 

was smoothed and the drainage was established. 

The first two fields measured 160 x 160 feet square 

each, and the third field measured 320 x 320 feet 

square. All roads and fields were then regraded, 

included the existing loop around the grade school 

which was adjacent to the project site. Separate 

drainage ditches were cut to aid in draining- the 

open field of the recreation area. The borrow pit 

site was cleaned up, and the access road to the pit 

was smoothed. Approximately 15,000 cubic yards 

of soil were moved during the project. A total of 

2,773 man hours and 2,241 equipment hours were 

expended on the project. The project was completed on 15 October 1973, and the unit returned to 

Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The lessons learned 

from the project were very beneficial, and the men 

got to operate their equipment which contributed a 

valuable resource to the community. 

On any domestic action project conducted by 

the Army, it is strongly recommended that arrangements are made for some kind of recruiting 

drive. The 20th Engineer Battalion used several 

methods in its recruitment efforts. A trailer which 

displayed pictures and posters about the unit itself 

and of the opportunities offered by the Army was 

parked next to the project site. The local newspap er, the Cleveland Daily Banner, was contacted 

upon arrival, and it gave the unit complete support 

by printing articles with pictures concerning the 

project. A Chattanooga television station came to 

the project site and filmed a short news clip which 

was shown on the local news. Howe ver, most 

important of these efforts in establishing rappor t 

between the civilian and the military communities 

and in encouraging enlistment was the close, 

eyeball to eyeball contact the civilian community 

received by working hand in hand with the Army. 

The Viet Nam war left an uneasy feeling in this 

country towards the military. Using the Domestic 

Action Program as a tool, t he Army can change 

the feelings of the civilian communities to that of 

respect and understanding of the military. Not 

only will the Army benefit from community 

relations; they will also be rewarded in that the 

soldiers will become well trained with their 

equipment, and they will feel that they are actually 

taking part in a job that contributes to the 

country. The Domestic Action Program is neces­

~ary to both the Army and the civilian population 

in order for the people of this country to live and 

work together as one community. 

Captain Jeffrey A. Wagonhurst is presently a 

member of the Engineer Office Advanced Course 

at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. He was the Commanding 

Officer of B Company, 20th Engineer Battalion, 

Fort Campbell; during the project at Cleveland, 

Tenn. CPT Wagonhurst also serv ed as the Asst. 

Group Operations Officer of the 34th Engineer 

Group in Vietnam. 

Although the preceding article may be a few 

months old, it is typical of the many military 

engineer projects being done under the Domestic Action Program. We would like to share 

your experiences with our readers. Please drop 

us a line. 

- The Editors 

3S 
GE:ODE:SIC
 

John H. Robertus , CAPT, USMC 

Nature has provided the examples that enabled 

man to take tremendous steps forward in his 

engineering quests using domes and arches. The 

simple stone arch was discovered to be a remarkable device and has offered important construction 

and engineering advantages to civil and military 

engineers for centuries. Arch type construction is 

commonly seen in Quonset huts and larger arched 

hangers and field houses which are everpresent on 

most of our military installations today. However, 

geodesic domes are not as widely accepted as the 

simple arch. But they should be! 

A dome is actually an arch that extends into a 

circular base instead of the conventional rectangular base of the simple arch. The geodesic dome, if 

properly understood, is very simple, strong and 

lightweight. For theater of operation construction, 

strength and weight are important considerations. 

Once a geodesic dome is constructed, it requires no 

intermediate supports and it can be partially 

disassembled or repaired without collapsing. The 

structural members, known as struts can be made 

of wood, pipe, or other suitable rigid material. The 

struts are fastened together at their ends to form a 

triangular network that curves into a domelike 

shape when completed. The particular triangular 

network desired can be derived with spherical 

geometry. Two methods are pictured : 

DOME: 

The finished dome network can be covered with a 

variety of materials ranging from temporary 

tentage to more permanent steel reinforced concrete. 

Domes can withstand wind, rain, and extreme 

temperatures if properly constructed. The United 

States DEW line system in North America has 

utilized geodesic domes to house delicate equipment for almost two decades. The Navy has 

recently constructed large domes in Anarctica to 

protect men and equipment working in that region. 

Domes in these environments have withstood 

extremely cold temperatures and winds up to 220 

miles per hour! 

With all the facts known about geodesic domes, 

the current T/0 structures should be revised to 

consider this tested and proven system. The 

Quonset hut has definitely been a boom to military 

construction, but its parts must be prefabricated 

and transported to the erection site dismantled. 

Then, if all the factory parts are on hand, it can be 

assembled. Throughout the current inventory of, 

metal structures this is a problem. A metal 

geodesic structure would have the same problem, 

except that a dome can be airlifted after assembly 

from a central location without damaging the 

structure. This theory has been considered by the 

Marine Corps for assaults from helicopter landing 

"3-WAY GRIDII METHOD "LAMELLA" METHOD 

36 
ships and subsequent movements inland. 

The geodesic dome has four other important 

advantages that must be carefully examined: 

First. A given volume can be enclosed with 

less surface area using a sphere, than with any 

ot her shaped surface; this provides far more space 

or dollar spent for exterior surfacing. 

Second. A dome structure transmits loading 

through compression and tension evenly along the 

surface to the base; this allows for lighter materials in the structure and a simple foundation 

design. 

Third. A dome can be constructed from small 

modular components enabling unskilled workmen 

to quickly accomplish the construction without 

heavy equipment. 

Fourth. A dome affords ideal air circulation 

and is compatible to centrally located utilities. 

Consider th e following comparison of a conventional structure and a geodesic dome: 

Q 

N 

1 

• 20' - " 

IA-.. _ 

CONVENTIONAL DOME 

4,100 Square Feet Exterior Surface Area 4,100 Squa re Feet 

1,000 Square Feet Interior Floor Space 2,100 Square Feet 

22,400 Cubic Feet Interior Volume 36,000 Cubic Feet 

Note that with equal amounts of exterior surface 

material, a 100% larger floor area and a 60% larger 

volume can be obtained with a dome system. 

Research indicates that domes exhibit excellent 

resistance to both air blast or ground shock waves 

if buried. A geodesic dome ferro-cement bunker 

may be a possible application for smaller domes. 

Domes are practical and feasible but may seem to 

aste space due to the curved shape, however this 

shape can be altered to meet a variety of 

requirements such as vertical sidewalls or multilevel storage. areas within the structure. The 

possible configuration of domes or clusters of 

domes are endless, and all such structures would 

posses the same basic advantages. The future 

should see widespread use of domes in the theater 

of operations construction. Overall considerations 

of economy, strength, and ease of construction 

make the geodesic dome design a potentially 

limitless tool for the military engineer. 

There are many wonders of nature that have 

been tapped for mankinds use. The geodesic dome 

is simply an extension of the natural forces that 

enable a soap bubble or an egg shell to keep its 

shape. Certainly the marvel of the geodesic dome 

has yet to be fully appreciated. While architects 

and city planners are envisioning domes to cover 

out modern cities, our military planners should 

consider domes for our modern forces in the field. 

1-- 52' 011 .. - ......--_·1
 5Cii:ir 

J
 

Captain John H. Robertus is a 1968 graduate of the 

University of California, at Riverside with a B.A. 

Degree in Physics. He was commissioned in the 

Marine Corps in Nov 68 at Quantico, VA and 

received his military engineer training at Camp 

LeJeune, NG. He was then assigned to the 11th 

Engineer Battalion on Okinawa. After two years 

as an instructor/troop leader in the Second 

Infantry Training Regiment, Camp Pendleton, 

California he attended Engineer Officer Advanced 

Course 1-73 at Fort Belvoir, VA. Upon completion 

he was assigned as an instructor in the Department of Engineer Science, Structures Branch, 

USAES where he is presently stationed. 

37 
Have you ever had a need for light and lots of 

it? Well the men of the 2d Infantry Division 

stationed along the DMZ of Korea, "Freedom's 

Frontier", have learned the value of a good light 

bulb many times over. The troops had the mission 

of preventing infiltration by the North Koreans 

along a 24 KM sector of the Korean DMZ. The 

accomplishment of this mission was thwarted by 

rough hilly terrain, bitter cold winters, monsoons, 

vegetation and personnel shortages. On the positive side was the idea that good fences make good 

neighbors and the 2d Division had a good fence. 

The structure, called the Barrier Fence, was six 

feet high chain link, with three rows of conertina 

wire along the top. The only problem with the 

fence was that it was useless unless someone 

watched it and that is where the 2d Division had 

difficulty. Guarding the fence in daylight was 

relatively easy as the sentries could sit on ridge 

tops and observe in any direction. But at night 

things were different. The guards now had to be 

doubled and unlike the daytime, when a sentry had 

good observation and felt secure, the soldier was 

alone with the night and its sounds. Besides, 

sitting in a foxhole looking at a fence all night in 

some of the world's worst weather does not raise 

the re-enlistment rate. Many soldiers took up the 

doubious hobby of counting the holes in the fence; 

the record was 523,285. When the troops on night 

duty began putting in 18 to 20 hours a day, 7 days 

a week, the sense of mission began to stretch thin. 

Things finally carne to a peak when the North 

Koreans infiltrated the American sector for 2 

surprise raids by actually cutting through the 

Barrier Fence without being detected. To help the 

2d Division, Night Vision Laboratory (NVL) was 

asked to provide a lighting system for the fence. 

In response to the Army's request, NVL agreed 

to design a remote Area Lighting System (RALS). 

After an on site inspection and an agreement on 

the design requirements, a proposal was submitted 

by Luke Burkstrom, MVL design engineer. His 

design was accepted and through competative 

bidding a contract was awarded to the VARO 

Corporation of Texas. Tests of the system were 

conducted and VARO was soon in Korea ready for 

the installation. Speed was to be a real plus on 

this project. 

VARL's arrival in Korea consisted of one man, 

Al Hussong. Mr. Hussong recruited a ten man 

Korean crew and soon had the first RALS in 

operation. With his speed crew and despite a late 

monsoon season, all nineteen systems were quickly 

in operation within eleven months from the time of 

initial request. 

The RALS makes one claim that has earned it 

the engineer's everlasting gratitude; it is simple. 

Simple to install, simple to operate, simple to 

Lighting 

Freed 

maintain, and simple to understand. 'When you are 

the only engineer in an infantry brigade with eight 

lighting systems, simplicity is very high on your 

priority list. 

The RALS system consists of the following six 

major parts: Two standard 10 KW generators, one 

of which is used for backup; three kw constant 

current regulators from the US Air Force, to 

insure long bulb life and to prevent overloading of 

the generators; one hundred and thirty-eight 12 

volt , 35 watt sealed beam headlights, the same as 

those found in a car using a 12 volt system; one 

hundred thirty-eight 6.6 amp transformers to 

isolate each lamp of the series circuit; one hundred 

forty-seven connector kits to insure weather-tight 

wire splices; and 15,000 feet, 8 gage stranded wire. 

With the lights spaced 30 feet apart, one RALS 

provided light for 1.26 km of front. Each system 

38 
10m's 

Frontiers 

CPT Larry L. Austin 

has three circuits, each controlled by a constant 

current regulator. Each of these circuits has 46 

lights connected to 46 isolation transformers. So if 

a problem does develop, it is automatically narrowed to a section of 46 lights. 

The design requirements of the system include 

recognizing an intruder at up to 50 meters with the 

unaided eye, denying an intruder the ability to see 

a sentry who is more than 15 meters behind the 

lights, providing a backscattering of light to aid 

the sentries in movement and unaided maintenance 

by the using units. 

In the systems first six months of use, it 

successfully met those requirements. Any intruder that could normally be detected in daylight 

was also detectable at night within the 50 meter 

range, even with bad weather and poor terrain, 

--the exception being heavy fog. In addition, light 

om the system greatly aided night vision devices 

beyond the 50 meters. Any intruder approaching 

the fence had to look into a continuous row of 

headlights, completely denying him observation of 

the sentries behind the fence. In fact, it was 

impossible to detect a sentry who was standing 

directly behind the fence, mid-way between the 

lights, not a recommended practice for sentries. 

The reflection of light from the fence made the 

sentries movement over rough terrain much 

easier. Once the system was installed, operation 

and maintenance was performed by the Infantry 

Battalion stationed on the DMZ. Complete instruction on the system was given to personnel from the 

battalion in less than one hour including demonstrations on start up and shut down procedures, 

changing of bulbs, splicing wire, and trouble 

shooting. The US Army does have a draft TM, 

DTM 11-5840-351-14, dated February 1971, that 

gives detailed instruction in installation, operation, 

organizational maintenance, DS and GS support, 

shipping data and any other information a using 

unit would need to know. 

Probably the greatest asset of the system to 

the unit commander is its flexibility. Each light in 

the system has the ability to be individually aimed 

both in the horizontal and in the vertical directions. 

Also the spacing of the lights is up to the installing 

unit. Many times lights were spaced 15 feet apart 

to light a ravine or ditch. Modification after 

installation is also possible, but care must be taken 

not to add too many lights and overload a circuit. 

Even with this simply system, two problems 

developed. One was the operation and maintenance of the generators and the second was the 

daily changing of burnt out bulbs. Command 

concern quickly solved both of those problems. In 

the first six months of operation, two transformers 

went out. In both cases the cause was found and 

replacement made in less than an hour. Later, one 

of the main circuit wires was, accidentally, shot 

out. This repair required about ten minutes and a 

spare connector kit. 

The RALS was not the final answer to 

problems in the 2d Infantry Division's anti-infltration mission in Korea, but was a step toward 

success. The night sentry could now see to his 

front and sides, thus making him feel he was a part 

of a team with help always close at hand. Officers 

and NCO's moving up and down the fence checking 

th e men found movement easy. with the backscattered light, and the number of firing incidents 

by nervous sentries was greatly reduced. 

To the men of the 2d Infantry Division standing 

their lonely vigil on Freedom's Frontier, the RALS 

has helped make a difficult task a little easier. 

Captain Larry L. Austin is a graduate of the 

2-73 Engineer Officer Advanced Course. 

39 
CPT Ced I Greene equipment available. Usually. these fortifications

When a cartoonist wants to depict a soldier in a 

funny situation, he often draws a picture of a GI 

digging a hole in the ground. But the holes now 

being dug in the ground at the Modern Army 

Selected Systems Test, Evaluation and Review 

(MASSTERl are a very serious business. These 

holes may help other soldiers protect themselves 

better on future battlefields. The holes and 

structures are all part of a test being conducted at 

MASSTER to examine new types of underground 

bunkers and protective shelters. 

There is nothing really new about the requirement for different types of field fortifications. In 

all previous wars, field fortifications have been 

emplaced as a necessity by the people and 

are very hastily built and not necessarily structurally sound for they are often constructed for 

immediate protection only and then abandoned. 

The need for the future is basically the same. In a 

future mid-intensity conflict, basically conventional 

warfare and short of nuclear war. there may not be 

sufficient time to prepare elaborate defenses. Still, 

soldiers must have positions from which to fight 

and defend themselves. 

The Army's basic field fortifications structures 

have changed little since World War II. However. 

military weapons and tactics have changed considerably in the last 20 years, and the old style 

bunker system may not lend itself to a highly fluid, 

mobile situation in future conflicts. This is why 

there is a need to find out what new concepts and 

developments are available for the Army to use. 

The tests in MASSTER are only a part of a 

larger. Army-wide examination of field fortifications. The Army program itself involves a mix of 

40 
research, conferences and evaluations to determine 

specific requirements for different situations. 

Various Army schools and centers throughout the 

country are now evaluating the adequacy of 

standard field fortification structures and determining camouflage requirements. Thus, in the 

tests at MASSTER, the Army is finding out the 

.. answers to some basic questions. First, they are 

evaluating the design, techniques and tactical 

application of different protective structures. 

Second, they are determining th e requirements for 

manpower. equipment and time to construct the 

different structures. Finally, they are discerning 

how much training is needed before soldiers know 

how to build the structures correctly. 

With these goals in mind, MASSTER personnel 

will be reviewing both old and new concepts of 

underground bunkers made of new materials such 

as fiberglass. aluminum and plastic. Several new 

ideas relating to the use of bunkers for headquarters command posts will be studied. These ideas 

r ange from providing a covered hole in the ground 

to airlifting prefabricated modules that are then 

buried in the ground. Other structures involved in 

the testing include such single things as small 

box-like cages that are lined with plastic, filled 

with dirt and then stacked like blocks. Corrugated 

aluminum sheeting and reinforced plastic is also 

being used to form thick earth-filled walls for 

above-ground fortifications. 

Several other shelters and fortification kits. 

such as those being used by the British Army and 

the US Marine Corps will also be evaluated. These 

kits work somewhat like the familiar erector set, 

with interconnecting pieces that allow several sizes 

or shapes of structures to be built and covered 

with earth. When the structures are no longer 

needed, they can be disassembled and transported 

elsewhere for re-use . 

One key consideration in the MASSTER test is 

the assumption that combat troops will have to be 

able to build and emplace all the different protective structures because trained engineer troops 

may not be readily available in a combat situation. 

Therefore, as part of the MASSTER test. all the 

structures will be assembled and disassembled at 

least two times by engineer troops and two times 

by non-engineer troops. Two groups from Second 

Armored Division units, the 17th Engineer Battalion and the Second Brigade. will provide personnel for th e test. 

Evaluation of the different structures in the 

MASSTER test will be made by more than 100 

combat experienced soldiers from MASSTER and 

other units at Fort Hood. Texas. The evaluators 

will examine the structures and rate them on 

suitability, protection provided and several other 

factor s. When this first stage of test and evaluation is completed, th e accumulated results will be 

presented to a group of general officers at Fort 

Benning, Georgia, sometime in February. After 

this meeting, more specific attention and testing 

can be directed toward those shelters and fortifications that show the most promise for development. 

So, in the future. soldiers may be glad that the 

serious business of digging and construction is 

being done by MASSTER now. 

Captain Cecil Green is the Information Officer 

for Project MASSTER, Fort Hood, Texas. 

41 
I I r 

r: 

LT Joseph H. Hottes 

I I Although in sandy soil the combat engineer 

T II vehicle (CEV) can knock over trees that are 

several feet in diameter with only a slight grunt, p and while the bark of its demolition gun can 

II l. seemingly reduce anything to rubble, the CEV, 

I I I I like any military system, has its limitations. The 

purpose of this article is to focus on some of these 

limitations so that engineers can investigate these 

problem areas or users can consider them as they 

plan for the employment of this vehicle. 

As envisioned in FM 5-1, the CEV is intended 

to assist the combat arms in a hostile environment 

by allowing its crew to perform pioneer tasks p while being protected by armor. During a coordiE nated attack, CEVs will be with the assaulting 

elements. This use is highly likely in attacks on 

fortified or built-up areas. In the movement to 

contact, one could expect to find CEVs in the 

advance guard. The CEV, with its crew of four ­

commander, gunner, loader, and driver, has four 

tools to use to accomplish its mission - a 

demolition gun, dozer blade, winch, and boom. 

The demolition gun will play a key role in 

reducing field fortifications. TC 17-14 notes the 

42
 
Limitations of the GEV
 

£
 

crew must be able to "rapidly and accurately" 

engage target s, yet they must estimate the range 

to a tar get since no range finder or similar device 

is available. Cant, which is caused when one tr ack 

is higher than the other, results in range and 

deflection error. No equipment is provided so that 

the crew may reasonably estimate the effect of this 

situ ation. Target acquisition is partially the gunner's r esponsibility. The field of view from his 

osition is so severely limited that other crew 

nembers must guide him to th e target, Troops 

operating near a firing CEV should know fra gments from the exploding round can travel up to 

1000 meters in any direction from the point of 

impact, and the maximum effective range for 

planning purposes is only 750 meters. The actual 

maximum effective range, however, is probably 

somewhat greater than 750 meters. 

Since the crew's visual access to the dozer 

blade's immediate work area is somewhat restricted, feedback on t he effects of its operation 

and guidance on its utilization are best provided 

from troops located outs ide the CEV. Individuals 

operating outside the vehicle must assist in t he 

employment of the boom or winch. If the boom or 

winch is used, dismounted troops or crew members 

are potentially exposed to hostile fire. The headlights are not recessed, and trees can easily knock 

them off while the CEV is clearing abatis. Since 

movement of t he CEV over dry ground throws a 

steady stream of dust over t he vehicle, goggles are 

a must. Communication with the crew by way of 

the phone system on the rear of the vehicle is 

difficult due to the noise the vehicle makes and the 

lack of sufficient means for alerting t he crew to 

'ncoming calls. 

According to doctrine, t he CEV should not be 

employed as a tank. However, detailed advi ce 

concerning its emplo yment is not given in FM 5-1. 

F or example, FM 5-1 notes t hat other armored 

vehicles must protect the CEV against antitank 

fir e, but the manual does not explain how a CEV is 

to maneuver with tanks. Ev en though school 

training for the CEV commander is available, 

according to ATP 5-25, all crew members, including the commander, may be unit trained. Proficiency in MOS 12F requires that the individual be 

knowledgeable in the operation of both CEVsand 

armored vehicle launched bridges (AVLB). Most 

units that have a CEV do not have an AVLB and 

vice versa. Therefore arrangements must be made 

to share equipment if the men are to receive 

training on both vehicles. Crews firing for familiarization are to fire only four target practice 

rounds per crew member. Although a target 

practice round or subcaliber round will most likely 

cost less than a HEP-'l' round, none are presently 

in the Army inventory. 

The CEV may have its limitations, but it 

increases the like lihood combat engineers will be 

able to accomplish t heir mission. Recognizing t he 

limitations of an y item of equipment is an important step in evaluating its effectiveness. 

LT Joseph H. Hottes is presently a platoon leader 

with Co C, 682d Engr Bn. He received his MS from 

Iowa State University. LT Hottes has served with 

the Iowa National Guard since 1967 and as a 

commissioned officer since 1969. He is a graduate 

of the Engineer Officer Basic Course and recently 

graduated from 2-74 Engineer Officer Advanced 

Course. 

43 
NEW PAMPHLET 

BEING DISTRIBUTED 

TO ENLISTED PERSONNEL 

A PERSONAL COpy OF new DA Pamphlet 624-1 (Your Pathway to Success: The Enlisted 

Promotion System) will be distributed to all Army enlisted members this fall. 

The pamphlet - prepared by MI LPERCEN's Enlisted Personnel Directorate - is designed to 

provide the soldier and his supervisor with a comprehensive, easy-to-follow approach to how the 

enlisted promotion system works and how it is supported at the various levels, from the unit on up to 

Department of the Army. 

MI LPERCEN's enlisted career managers consider the document important enough to distribute 

a personal copy to every soldier on active duty, especially at this time when the volunteer Army is 

attracting increasing numbers of career-minded men and women who want to know all they can 

about advancement in the ranks and what they must do to get promoted. 

Divided into four sections, the new pamphlet addresses both the individual soldier's responsibility and the Army's efforts to maintain an equitable and steady system of advancement within the 

enlisted ranks. 

The first section contains general information and stresses the Army's reliance on a wide range 

of factors when considering the soldier for promotion the "whole person concept." It also lists simple 

steps that the individual can take to improve his chances for promotion and describes the militar 

and civilian educational opportunities available to servicemen. These include training and testing i 

his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) and the Non-commissioned Officers Education System 

(NCOES), and Army-assisted degree completion programs for civil schooling. 

Section Two details each level of the current promotion system - Decentralized (initiated by the 

Unit Commander for Grades E-2 to E-4), Semi-Centralized (made in Grades E-5 and E·6 by Field 

Commanders and DA, working together) and Centralized Promotions (coordinated for Grades E·7 

through E-9 at DA level). Included are the requirements and factors of work on each level of the 

Promotion system and a summary of the centralized promotion board procedures. 

Section Three familiarizes the soldier with the installations which support the Enlisted Promotion 

System. Functions of the U.S. Army's Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN), in Alexandria, 

Virginia, and the Enlisted Evaluation Center (EEC) and Enlisted Records Center (ERC), both 

located at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, are described in detail. The soldier is also provided 

with specific information on his official military personnel file and instructions on which of the three 

agencies to contact should he need to resolve personnel-related matters. 

The fourth section contains appendices to the main body of the pamphlet; lists related Army 

Regulations, Circulars, and Pamphlets to be consulted for further information; and includes actual 

reprints of the Promotion Points Worksheet and Letters of Instruction to both the E-9 and Advanced 

NCOES Selection Boards. 

Field units will be able to requisition individual copies for all unit members via pinpoint 

distribution. A world-wide message containing requisitioning instructions for DA Pamphlet 624-1 will 

be released as soon as the pamphlets have been printed and are ready for distribution. 

Females may participate in nine additional MOS s. bringing the total of 437 of 479 enlisted MOS's 

now available to WAC personnel. 

Additional details appear in DA message DAPC-PM 141200Z May 74. 

44 
I 

NEW HANDBOOK PREPARED BY 

MILPERCEN ENLISTED DIRECTORS 

THE NEW /JHANDBOOi~ FOR PREPARING SOLDIERS TO MOVE OVERSEAS" has been 

distributed to all CONUS installation/activities requesting port calls. The handbook was prepared by 

the Enlisted Personnel Directors, US Army Military Personnel Center, to assist the administrative 

personnel responsible for POR processing by providing a single reference guide for use in 

determining eligibility for oversea assignment. 

All information contained in the guide is current as of Aug . 1, 1974. 

OPMS SPECIALTI ES ADDED 

TO OFFICER MASTER FILES 

THE PRIMARY OPMS SPECIALTIES for lieutenant colonels were added to the Officer Master 

File maintained at the US Army Military Personnel Center effective Aug. 15. Each record in the file 

now shows the LTC's primary specialty; alternate specialties are programed for inclusion by 

mid-October. 

PERSONNEL ASSISTANCE POINTS 

TO BE ESTABLISHED 

SOLDI ERS ENROUTE TO OR returning from oversea assignments will get better attention once 

the Army Personnel Centers (Fort Dix, Fort Jackson and Oakland Army Base) and the ReturneeReassignment Stations (Travis AF B, McGuire AF B and Charleston AF B) are reorganized and 

converted into US Army Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN) Personnel Assistance Points. 

Conversion of these currently independent centers and stations to Personnel Assistance Points will 

begin on or about October 1. 

The reorganization/redesignation of these points into field operation activities of MILPERCEN 

will give soldiers a direct point of contact with MILPERCEN while they are traveling to or from 

oversea duty stations. The offices will be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and staffed with 

"extremely well qualified people," according to MAJ George Fasching, Chief, Personnel Movements 

Branch, MI LPE RCEN. 

"About 30,000 soldiers pass through these terminals each month; until the idea of Personnel 

Assistance Points evolved, they had no way of contacting us on a timely basis, just as we at 

MI LPE RCE N had no real way of contacting them while they were enroute. We have designed the 

Personnel Assistance Points to counteract this problem - to give the soldiers direct contact with 

MI LPE RCEN while they are in a travel status." 

The Personnel Assistance Point officials will not only have the authority to coordinate directly with 

enlisted assignment managers and compassionate review and policy offices at MILPERCEN; they 

will be able to verify assignment, administratively amend orders, extend emergency leave and 

terminate it when the soldier reports in, help with compassionate problems and offer personal advice 

to those in a travel status. 

Prior to the development of the Personnel Assistance Point, if a soldier had a personnel problem, 

he was attached to the nearest installation, and waited until that problem was resolved through 

channels. By being located where the soldier needs it most, the Personnel Assistance Points will be 

Detter able to assist him in moving oversea or returning stateside with a minimum of delay. 

4S 
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

THE ENGINEER MAGAZINE 

Pos tag e and Fees Paid 

Dep a rtment of the Army 

000-314 

[IJ.. 

USA ENGINEER SCHOOL 

FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060 First Class U.S.MAll 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 

THE ENGINEER MAGAZINE
 

USA ENGINEER SCHOOL
 

FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060
 

Include present mailing address below when FOLD 

completing this questionnaire 

Did you move? 

Old Address: New Address: 

(Attach Mailing Label) 

How many copies do you receive?
 

How many copies do you wish to receive?
 

FOLD 

What type(s) of article(s) would you like to see in 

the ENGINEER? (Please include your name and 

phone number for possible expansion of your idea). 

Additional Comments: