I THE MAGAZINE FOR ARMY ENGINEERS SPRING 1'985 


TDl A ,DOF SUCCESd 

ALSO: G~LL 7 OBSTACLE BREACHINb 

181 jlNEERlNGO IEW FUSION -
A Personal Viewpoint 

by MSG John M. Hall 

As General Wickham stated: "We 

face a more complex and diverse 

threat and must continue the forward~ 

looking doctrine with an expanded role 

for the Reserve forces.'' the 464th 

Engineer Battalion headquartered in 

Schenectady, NY, continues to train as 

li.c u1iI1 he reqi~ircdto fight. 

When I was first assigned as a full 

time manning, active army operations 

sergeant to a reserve Engineer battalion, you might say I had sevcral 

reservations . . . long hair, poor 

uniforms, and u-eek~enddrills to train 

an Engineer hattalion to fight in 

Europe and accomplish a CAPSTONE 

nxission. 

Well, after several niontlis of evalua~ 

tion and training, I found that these 

reserve force so1die1.s itre as well^ 

trained and capable of accomplishing 

their mission as active units, given the 

limited tl.aining time and limited 

amounts of funds, ammunition, equipment, and-most itnportant-tirne to 

train. Needless to say, I had my work 

cut out for me and went to work using 

all the knowledge and experience that 

I have obtained over the years. 

As the year went along, I found that 

these soldiers wanted the same things 

as the active force. They wanted to be 

challenged with training that was 

tough and demanding. This we have 

done and will continue to accomplish. 

Here is what this battalion, as a 

reserve unit, has accomplished and 

continues to accomplish: 

Built a timber-trestle bridge for the 

Vanhornsville, NY school system. 

Have crew-served weapons and demolition firing for the entire battalion 

a1 Fort Drum, NY. 

Havt! battalion-wide STXICPX for 

the commanders and staff, under the 

CAPSTONE mission doctrine. 

Have n sustained ll-day annual 

trnining period at Fort Drum, NY, 

with company AIlTEPs evaluated by 

the ARTEP Branch, Fort Belvoir, VA, 

and 1stArmy with success and niission accomplishment. 

Have annual weapons-qualification 

and hand-grenade training at West 

Point, NY. 

Have regular joint training with the 

3rd Field Engineer Regiment (Canadian Army). 

Have an overseas deployment for 10 

days in the mission area with visits 

and reconnaissances to the actual 

niission areas. 

'Have battalion quarterly training 

meetings, commanders conferences, 

and BTMS reviews. 

Participate in MAPEX '86 with the 

entire corps CAPSTONE units and 

active forces. 

Have smoke operations and decontamination operations for the AT85 

training period at Fort Drum, NY 

with company ARTEPs. 

Attend all Commander and CSM 

CAPSTONE conferences and keep 

the units current on doctrine and 

how to fight in the Combined Arms 

areas. 

Finally, this unit, which is a part of 

the 1209th U.S. Army Garrison and the 

98th Division (Training) in peacetime 

and the 329th Engineer Group for 

CAPSTONE will help rebuild the Engineer training area at Fort Drum, NY. 

A tall order for a reserve Engineer 

unit, however, u,e will acmmplish the 

mission. 

Yes, this battalion is capable of 

accomplishing its wartime CAPSTONE mission with limited resources 

and knows how to fight under the most 

current and up-to-date doctrine and 

CAPSTONE mission guidance. It truly 

is a pleasure, as well as hard work to 

be a part of the Total Force and to 

understand that the 70 percent reserve 

Engineer force is capable and willing 

to fight when and if called upon to do 

scr Our motto for this-year is TOTAL 

FORCE . . . ESSAYONS. 

MSG John M Hall was the Engirreer 

Ofice NCOIC to the British Arm.y of the 

Rhir~eand Northprn Army Group. 59th 

Ordnance Brigade Staff Element in 

Moer~chengladhach., Germany His 

other assignements in. Germany were 

the 275th Engineer Company in Stuttgart, the 237th Engineer Battalion in 

Heilbronn, and the 78th Engineer Battalion in Ettlingen. MSG Hall was also 

assigned to tire US. Army Engineer 

School and attended Virginia Tech and 

the Com bat Engineer Advanced Course 

LTC John M.Paris ZZZcommands the 

464th Englneer Battallon (CBT) 

(CORPS), ISG Ogden T~rttle1s the 

Command Sergeant Major 
\ "	 I , 15 5 i .- p.r: 

UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER 

AND FORT BELVOIR, VA 

COMMANDER/COMMANDANT 

MG Richard S. Kern 

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

COL Ralph T Rundle 

CHIEF OF STAFF/DEPUTY 

INSTALLATION COMMANDER 

COI. Peter D. Stearns 

COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM Charles T. Thcker 

DIRECTOR OF TRAINING 

AND DOCTRINE 

COL Don W. Barber 

CHIEF OF PUBLICATIONS 

Stanlpy Georg~s 

EDITOR 

Marilyn Fleming 

MANAGING EDITOR 

ILT Louis J. Leto 

ASSISTANT EDITOR 

Donald Srhmoldt 

CONTRlBUnNG EDITOR 

CPT James M. Althouse 

DESIGN DIRECTOR 

'Thomas Davis 

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT 

SP4 .lean Tale 

Special thanks to ILT Cayleen Braodenhr~rgfor all her help in coordinating and 

planning this issue. 

On the Cover 

SFC Stephen C. Strong ensure$that EOBC 

students are teehnieally competent by 

teaching them the proper conrtrurtion of a 

double-story medlumgirderbridge(photoby 

ILT 1.I. Leto). 

~~'KIN(; 1 ~ 

FEATURES 

12 	Force Structure, Management, and Equipment Change 

...but Not Engineer Standards 

by LTG E. R. HeibergIII 

14 Airfield and Base Camp Construction in Honduras 

by CPT Don C. Young 

18 	Leadership Development in EOAC 

b,y MAJ Don Riley, CPT Mark Buck, CPT Richard Crocker; 

CPT Jerome Rosperich, and CPT Joseph Schroedel 

22 	Preparing for Your DEH Assignment 

by Tim Ketchum 

24 	Engineer Platoon Leader at NTC 

by CPTDavid R. Frick 

27 	The Subject Matter Expert Program 

by MAJ David 71 White 

30 	Gallant Eagle '84 

b.y 1LTKenneth.A. Kennedv 

33 	Beefing Up the MGB 

by ILT Steven W Chandler and SGTDauidJ. Mohan 

36 	Dismounted Complex Obstacle Breach Course 

by CPTKenneth A. Harshbarger 

38 	Reserve Engineers in Korea 

by MAJ Gar?. L. Groat 

40 	History and Military En~neering Design: An 18th .. - - century ~xam~le -

by MAJ Steven H. Myer and MAJ JeffersonJ Iruin 

44 	IEW Fusion for the AirLand Battle: Engineer Echelons, 

Corps and Below 

by MAJ Michael A. Lytle and 1LT Mark ?I Banigan 

DEPARTMENTS 

Inside Front Cover: A Personal Viewpoint 

2 News and Notes 11 Letters to the Editor 

4 Clear the Way 23 Hotline Q&A 

5 Bridge the Gap 35 Engineer Problem 

6 SchoolNews 47 Engineer Solution 

48 Career Notes 

ENGINEER (ISSN 0046-19891 ia an authorized publication of the US Army Engineer Center and Fort Belwi+ VA. Unless specilieally staled, material appear 

ina herein does not necesaarilv reflect official polici. thinkinanor endorsementh anvaxenniof the U.S. Amy. The words he, hirn,or. his are used to represent 

pe;sonnel of either sex. All photographs con&& herein ire official US. phot&gr& unless otherwise credited. The use d Rrndr for printkg this 

. I. ,ti, I ua ippr .$.>dh\ Hcudquarret~. D~parimrnt ui thr Arm". .duly 22.1!W1 Mdrtrl.al hrrrln mnv he repr~niedif cred~rir gh,en :o FSc.I.Sf:f:Ii 

I,. I in !h- ;~~r.lorF\;CIS?'I{ i ih:erther me ro prclvndoa li,ruw lur thk v~rllangr14nlens. to tnhnrm and muttvote ana to ornntn:e :ne protesilnn.,. C.vI 

10~!.1 1 iII I~#,.#?~'>I.T: i~ifh~, . . ENti1NE:E:K #a;rlrthur#rrd Iro.ll'e~. .~ltercLI .tir .<ILI 

11

\rmv cnc#necrcumrnuntrv Odrrcr cnrrcitxtndrt,c6 v~th .trc.l I.~C~,~I~%CPI! - commentaries. manuscripts, photovaphr and general correspondence should be sent to: ENGINEER Magazine. ATZA~D-PSiup 291U. Fort Belroil: VA 

22060-5291. Phone: (703) 664-3082. AV 354. ENGINEER may be fomarded to personnel in military unlts. Address changes should be sent to ENGINEER. 

Subscriptions to ENGINEER are available through the Superintendent of Dacuments, U.S. Government Printing Off~ce. Washineon, DC. 20402. A check 

or monev order oavable to Suoerintendent of Daurnents. must aeeomoanv . , all subsmintion reouests. Rates are $11.00 for domestic lineludine APO and FPOi

address& and $1375 for foreign addresses. Individual ebpies are available at $3.00 per copy ;or domestic addresses and $3.75far foreign ;:dresser. Second 

Class postage paid at Fort Belvoir, VA, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTFK: send address changes to ENGINEER. ATZATD-P, Stop 2YIU. Fort 

Belvoir, VA 22060-5291 
- I News G Notes

Fuels and is followed, according to Mr. LePei,, ..L,.Lt of packaged lubricants and fluids 

the next news on long-term manage- will be all good. 

Lubricants D5B Dozer Parachuted 

There IS good news and bad news in 

the recent status report by Maurlce , LePera of the Belvoir R&D Center on 

the Army's efforts to improve management of packaged fluid, lubricant and 

grease products entering the military 

supply system. 

The bad news is that a proliferation 

of proprietary products, now in excess 

of 25 percent, continues to plague 

logistical and supply personnel, impair 

readiness, and increase military costs. 

The good news is that DARCOMI 

AMC Regulation 750-11, Maintenance 

and Supplies-Use of Lubricants, Fluids 

and Associated Products, can remedy 

the problem. All that Army equipment 

managers, specification writers, and 

program managers have to do is to 

adhere to it. 

The realation's bieeest bonus is that 

it establishes the ~eyvoir R&D. 

as the Army Material Comma 

point on proper selection and use* 

packaged products it goveras. In t 

role, the Center's Fuels and Lubricant 

Division provides the coordination 

approval necessary to ensure 

lubricant orders and technical manua s 

"Ontain Only current standardized 

duct specifications. A 15-ton D5B dozer hdonging to C Compan.~, 27th Engineer Bn. (CBT) 

Guidance in the regulation (ABM 82nd Airborne Division, floats to the ground at Camp Blanding, 

FL. The airborne earthmover is the first D5B to have ever been dropped random introduction of proprietary pro- during actual operations (photo by CPT Peter Esehbach). ducts. It curtails former ~rocedures 

that have allowed contractors and A claim for a "first time ever" was exercise. 

developers to specify them. entered recently as a D5B bulldozer The exercise, called Dragon Team 

The regulation accomplishes this by was parachuted during an exercise at 1-85, involved an emergency deploy^ 

requiring justification for use of non- Camp Blanding, FL. ment readiness exercise (EDRE) which 

standard products as opposed to those Performing thls "first" was the 27th moved the Engineers from Ft. Bragg to 

qualified in accordance with military Engineer Bn. (CBT) (ABN) of the XVIII Camp Blanding. There, the 27th, along 

and federal specifications or purchase Airborne Corps at Ft. Bragg, NC with other elements of the Airborne 

descriptions; imposing MIL-STD-836, While the D5B dozer, which welghs 15 Corps, parachuted personnel and 

Lubrication of Military Equipment, on tons, has been dropped in the past equipment onto a small sand-covered 

all designs, developments, and acquisi- under test conditions, a spokesman drop zone. 

tions; and insisting that all procure- said this was the first time it had been After the landing, the D5B dozer was 

ment requests, solicitations, and done during an actual training used to construct a field landing strip. 

contracts have lube-orderltechnical 

manual approval before first unit 

acceptance. 

If DARCOMiAMC Regulation 750-11 
Bridge Erection Boats 

The Army's Belvoir Research and tion of North Charleston, SC, for the 

Development Center has awarded a production of 96 ribbon bridge erection 

contract worth more than $12 million boats. The award is the first installto the American Development Corpora- ment of a mnlti-year purchase of 554 

Engineers Clear Hurricane 


For most peopla a trip to Wilmington, 

NC, means relaxing and basking in the 

sun at one of the area's numerous 

beaches. 

However, for some soldiers of the 

264th Engineer Co.; A Co., 27th Engineer Bn.; and A Co., 548th Engineer 

Bn. at Ft. Bragg, a trip to Wilmington 

meant 15 days of hard work clearing 

fallen trees and debris caused by Hur. 

ricane Diana. 

The task force consisted of 39 soldiers 

and 22 pieces of equipment, including 

scoop loaders and five-ton dump trucks. 

Working from sunrise to sunset six 

days a week, the soldiers found little 

time to indulge in activities offered by 

the resort area. However, they expressed 

no concern about the lack of recreational opportunities. 

Engineers can build the ribbon 


bridge in shallow water because 


of the new boat's 22-inch draft 


(US. Army photo). 


boats, with an option to buy 262 more. 

Constructed of welded aluminum and 

powered by two diesel engine-driven 

water jets, the 25-foot boat features a 

22-inch draft and a top speed of 31 

mph. It can be transported to the crossing site and launched by the same 

vehicle that carries the ribbon bridge. 

The ribbon bridge's modular design 

reduces the logistical problems associated with the old M4T6 bridge which 

took 260 men five hours to erect a 

400-foot span. With the ribbon bridge, 

50 men can build the same span in less 

than an hour. Delivery of the boats 

should begin next fall and be completed in 1989. 

Debris 

"It feels great to be operating my 

equipment:' said SP4 Rob Leak, a scoop 

loader operator from the 27th Engineer 

Bn. He added that it was a good opportunity to practice with the clamshell 

attachment for the scoop loader, which 

is used for grasping trees and brush. 

According to Felix Cooper, New Hanover County Manager, the assistance 

was greatly needed to reduce the county's financial burden. He explained that 

the county was not prepared to fund 

such a large clean-up operation. 

Camouflaged vehicles rumbling 

through the streets were welcome sights 

to local residents who had debris to be 

removed. "This is fantastiq" commented 

one happy resident. "I really appreciate 

all the work the Army is doing," 

Some local elementary school students even approached the soldiers and 

asked them for autographs "This made 

the troops feel like real heroes:' said 

MAJ.Cbarles Simons, the officer in 

charge. 

PFC Kenneth Hauer clears trees 

(photo by PFC Dennis 

McMahon). 
LEAR THE WAY 

by MG Richard S.Kern. Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School 

Leadership. . . TacrticaU Proficiency ... *echnic=a!Competency 

The Triadof Engineer Success 

As our Army better organizes itself to fight the 

AirLand Battle, the courses which train our Engineer 

leaders are being structured to provide the leadership, 

technical, and tactical skills needed to win. Our 

recently improved Advanced NCO Course (ANCOC) 

and the new Engineer Officer Advanced Course 

(EOAC) made the Engineer School the forerunner in 

providing high-quality training for company grade 

leaders. It is important that these courses do this, 

since few branches require such a wide range of 

abilities from their leaders as do Engineers. 

Today our technical challenges stem primarily from 

automation and equipment modernization. The Army 

in general and the Corps of Engineers in particular 

are ever more dependent upon high-technology hardware such as computers to accomplish their missions 

in both peace and war. To do our jobs, Engineers must 

understand the benefits and the constraints of 

automation. Further, as new Engineer combat equipment is fielded, we must learn to effectively employ 

it and to properly maintain it. 

Keep in mind that these are tasks above and beyond 

those we presently encounter. We must surely continue to maintain our capabilities in Combat 

Engineering and in designing and building the 

facilities necessary to support the Combined Arms 

Forces in the Theater of Operations, just as we have 

done in the past. But technical competence is only one 

of the traits we require. 

We must also be adept at performing tactical tasks. 

AirLand Battle doctrine provides a demanding, 

dynamic operational framework in which Engineers 

have great responsibilities. The newly structured light 

and heavy divisional Engineer battalions create formidable challenges on that battlefield. Scarce Engineer resources dictate that we must be especially skillful in knowing when, where, and how to use our assets 

in supporting the maneuver commanders. Tactical 

proficiency is a vital trait, then. However, it is also 

insufficient by itself. 

Competence in blending tactical precepts witb 

technical skills may be the most important trait we 

can have. Our full understanding of how all this 

knowledge and many skills are woven together to form 

the fabric of our jobs is essential. Military leaders 

throughout history have been confronted with this 

problem. But never before have leaders been required 

to master so many diverse skills or so much technical 

knowledge. This is the crux of the problem for the 

Engineer School: how do we teach our leaders all that 

they need to know and train them to do all the tasks 

required of them, while keeping them out of the Army mainstream for a minimum of time? Our favorable 

experience with the revised EOAC makes us think 

that we might have the answer. 

After two weeks of training in our leadership fundamentals, the 14-week core phase of the new EOAC 

devotes six weeks of instruction to tactics, followed by 

six weeks of technical engineering. Some peripheral 

topics are included in the training during the last 12 

weeks, so the new course provides fewer hours for tactics and engineering than did the old. It is the quality of training-not the quantity-which is important, 

however. This is where the new course greatly outpaces the old. 

The revised EOAC emphasizes small-group exercises 

where knowledge and skills must be successfully integrated by the students to complete their assigned 

tasks. It was not often that the prior course made our 

officers think and act with this broadened perspective. 

This simultaneous application of the students' leadership, technical, and tactical skills creates the energy 

that makes the new course a superior training vehicle. Those who are best trained to combine these skills 

will win the AirLand Battle. 

Incorporated with other engineering topics in this 

issue of ENGINEER is an article about the revised 

EOAC. The article should be read especially by those 

officers who will return to Fort Belvoir within the next 

few years to attend the Advanced Course. Also, senior 

Engineer leaders will find it useful to know what 

training recent EOAC graduates in their units have 

received. 
 

?R!DGE THE GIby CSM Charles T. Tucker, U.S. Army Engineer Center & School 

%da)r's fiIC0: Leader, Student, Teacher 

Only through strong leadershb, technical competence, and 

tactical proficiency willsoldiers follow NCOs onto the battlefield 

Today's senior Engineer NCO plays a very important role in supporting the AirLand Battle. He must 

not only be able to provide the maneuver commander 

with mobility, countermobility, survivability, and 

general engineering; but he must also ensure that his 

men are properly trained and proficient in their jobs 

as well. 

But with all of the roles which the Engineer NCO 

must play in today's Army, he must remember that 

the role of senior trainer is probably the most important. Regardless of his MOS, the NCO must be prepared to execute all of the technical Engineer tasks 

and still train his soldiers to the highest standards. 

Coupled with tactical competence, technical proficiency is essential in a successful leader. Only if you, 

as NCOs, are technically proficient in your specialties 

and know how to survive on the battlefield will your 

soldiers follow you, fight for you, and perhaps even 

risk their lives for you. These main ingredients (technical proficiency and tactical competence) must be 

blended together to make effective leadership. And 

then all three must be interwoven to comprise the 

triad of success. 

Soldiers must understand that it isn't enough, however, to be technically proficient in engineering tasks. 

They also must be able to apply these skills in various 

structured organizations. To have an NCO move from 

a combat heavy Engineer battalion to a corps Engineer unit and then to a mechanized divisional Engineer battalion, and to expect him to apply his skills 

to best improve the organization's effectiveness has 

always been one of our greatest challenges as Engineer NCOs. 

With the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer 

Course at Fort Belvoir, the Field Engineering Branch 

of the Department of Military Engineering accepted 

the challenge of providing the technical skills which 

all NCOs need. The new instruction program adopted 

by the Engineer School enables our senior NCOs to 

receive training on common engineering tasks. This 

training teaches skill level four tasks and reinforces 

the skill level one, two, and three tasks by showing 

the NCOs how to organize and manage these skills. 

They are instructed on techniques which are used in 

performing these tasks. They are also provided with 

technical instruction on the equipment which they 

may encounter and how to properly employ this 

equipment. 

Therefore, the Engineer common core teaches NCOs 

more than just standards. It provides ideas and alternatives in meeting these standards. As Engineers, the 

individual NCOs must add their own ingenuity and 

resourcefulness and make the finest product from the 

tools they have been given. 

With an ever-changing environment and with new 

equipment constantly being introduced into the Army's inventory, it is no longer just a wise move for an 

NCO to learn about this new equipment. Now it is 

a necessity. For example, the article, "Beefing Up the 

MGB:' which appears in this issue shows how this 

bridge has had to undergo changes to withstand the 

weight of new vehicles and equipment such as an M-1 

Abrams tank. Our soldiers, especially 12Cs, will be 

trained and totally proficient with changes such as 

the new Link Reinforcement Set. There is simply no 

room for incompetence on the AirLand Battlefield. 

Another article about a new obstacle breach course 

shows us other ways in which we can be more efficient 

in the Combined Arms Team. It is vital that our soldiers are fully trained in tasks such as this. CPT 

Harshbarger shows us how important time, speed, and 

agility are and that we, as Engineers, must make 

breaching obstacles another one of our specialities. 

Success on the AirLand Battlefield is by no means 

an easy task. Engineer NCOs must not only ensure 

their soldiers can fight, but they must also make certain their soldiers are totally proficient in their MOSS. 

Leadership, technical proficiency, and tactical competency are the vital ingredients for that success. 
Department of 


Combat Developments (DCD) 


Cou~~terohstacle Vehicle: Contractor testing of two Counterobstacle Vehicle (COV) test beds 

began in March at Ft. Indiantown Gap, PA. The test bed design is based 

on the hull and chassis of the M88A1 recovery vehicle and is intended 

to provide a future replacement for the Combat Engineer Vehicle (CEV). 

The COV will have excavating, bulldozing, lifting, hauling, and 

breaching capabilities to provide a rapid and effective means of completing both countermine and counterobstacle missions. Countermine 

tasks will be performed by a track-width mine roller or plow, a full-width 

mine plow with automatic depth control, or a towed projected line charge. 

A Vehicle Magnetic Signature Duplicator (VEMASID) can be used for 

magnetically fuzed mines. 

For counterobstacle tasks, the COV will be equipped with one or two 

arms with digging, lifting, grappling, pavement breaking, tree cutting 

and anger attachments, and a heavy-duty winch and dozer blade converted from the full-width plow. 

Test bed delivery to the government is scheduled for late May, to be 

followed by testing and evaluation ending in April 1986. 

Department of 

Combined Arms (DCA) 

Army Writing Program: Because tomorrow's Army must have leaders who can read well, think 

critically, and express their thoughts with precision and clarity, the Army 

Chief of Staff recently approved an Army writing program. Its goal is 

to ensure that all officers, warrant officers, and NCOs possess effective 

communications skills. 

The Directorate of Combined Arms has established a writing office 

to coordinate the Engineer School's writing program. This contains diagnostic testing, remedial training, and core curriculum instruction in communicative skills, which include not only oral and written abilities, but 

also the reading comprehension necessary for effective communication. 

Beginning in March, EOBC will have 16 hours in this new program, 

EOAC will have 24 hours, and ENCOA will include self-paced instruction as part of its curriculum. 

A staff of military and civilian educators has designed a writing program that blends the best education resources available in the local community with a series of reading, writing, and speaking requirements that 

use military situations to reinforce instruction. 

The Engineer School POC for this program is MAJ McLaughlin, AV 

354-2274, commercial (703) 664-2274. 
EOBC Changes: The EOBC Training Detachment has made significant changes in the 

five-day field training exercise (FTX) for its student officers. 

The new ARTEP-based FTX stresses independent actions and decision 

making by a task force Engineer in a maneuver battalion. 

EOBC students take part in weekend training with the 16th Bde. (SEP) 

Virginia Army National Guard, at Ft. A.P. Hill as one of these changes. 

The Brigade provides one AVLB and one CEV, with crews, to add realism 

to the FTX platoon missions. 

Field Circular: Field circular, "The Task Force and Brigade Engineer;" has been scheduled for distribution at the end of the fourth quarter by the Tactics and 

Operations Division of the Department of Combined Arms (DCA). The 

new circular will define the duties and responsibilities of staff Engineers 

at task force and brigade levels. 

Through this, the Engineer School hopes to better integrate Engineers 

into Combined Arms operations by discussing staff planning. In addition, both field Engineer and maneuver units have requested clarification of the Engineer staff officer's role. 

Both active and reserve units provided information, and further comments can be given to CFT Milt Seekings at AV 354-3280, commercial 

(703) 664-3280. 

The new circular will be distributed automatically to all active duty 

and reserve units. 

New Branch Created: The Tactics and Operations Division is organizing an Engineer Operations Branch, which will be responsible for developing and writing doctrinal literature pertaining to Engineer tactical operations. The new 

branch is being organized because of revisions to the School Model '83 

realignment. 

Directorate of 


Training and Doctrine (DOTD) 


51T Basic Technical An Air Force Career Development Course, CDC 55350, Engineering 

Course Selected: 	 Assistant, has been selected as an interim technical engineering supervisor basic technical course for MOS 51T. This correspondence course 

is available to active Army and Reserve Component E6 soldiers in MOS 

51T and to E5 soldiers in MOSs 51G, 81B, and 82B. 

The course consists of eight subject-area volumes and will he used 

primarily as a merger training for 51T soldiers and cross-training for 

the soldiers in the feeder MOSs. Subject area volumes include: Introduction to Civil Engineering; Applied Mathematics; Surveying; Soils Analysis 
School News 


Directorate of 


Training and Doctrine (continued) 


51T Basic Technical and Testing; Pavements Analysis and Testing; Drafting; Engineering; and 

Q'nureSelected: General Contingency Responsibilities. All volumes are to be completed in 12 months and require a satisfac- (rontinuecl) 	 tory grade on an end-of-course examination in order for students to 

receive credit. An Army Correspondence Course Program catalog or any 

Army education office should be referred to for enrollment instructions. 

update 	 due for a major update starting in FY 85. FM 

1Plannc.d: 	 5-101, Mobility, has been forwarded to the DA printer with a release date 

to the field in early spring. Keystone manuals which will follow during 

the summer and fall are FM 5-102, Countermobility; FM 5.103, 

Suruiuability; and FM 5-104, General Engineering. 

FY 86 will see continuing emphasis on getting doctrine to the field 

with scheduled pnblication of FM 5-205, Engineer lbpographic Operations; FM 5-541, Military Soils Engineering; FM 5-25, Explosiues and 

Demolitwns; FM 5-34, Engineer Field Data; FM 5-210, Military Float 

Bridges; and FM 20-32, MineICountermine Operations, Company Level. 

Supporting drills and field circulars for FY 85 publication are TC 5-101, 

Mobility Drills; TC 5-102, Countermobility Drills; and two new field circulars, Brigade Engineer/Task Force Engineer and Airfield Damage 

Repair. For FY 86, the schedule calls for publication of TC 5.103, Suruivability Drills; TC 5-104, General Engineering Drills; and TC 5-105, 

Topography Drills. 

~n~~llc.er ~ ~ ~ Engineer t doctrine ~ i ~ ~ 

Topographic Engineers Many new training products and classes will be available to 

Oblnin New Training Topographic Engineers in FY 86 and FY 87, according to the Topographic 

P~.oductsand Classes: Element of the Directorate of Training and Doctrine. 

Both TM 21-33-1, Vegetation Analysis, and TM 21-33-2, Surface Configuration, will be fielded in FY 86. The coordinating draft of FM 5-10, 

Topographic Operations, will be ready in the third quarter of that year. 

Coordinating drafts of TM 5-240, Compilation and Color Separation of 

Topographic Maps; TM 5-245, Photo Lithography; and TM 5-232, 

Elements of Survey; are planned for FY 87. 

The SQT 83F4, Lithographer, will be tested for the first time in FY 

85. Three SQTs will be tested for the first time in FY 86. These are 81C4, 

Cartographer; 81Q, 2,3, and 4, Terrain Analyst; and 82D4, Topographic 

Surutyor. 

Many TEC and ACCP lessons will be fielded in the next two fiscal years 

in each of those MOSS, including TEC lessons on the operation and 

maintenance of the Heidelberg press and other new equipment in the 

topographic support system. 

Many graphic training aids (GTAs) will be ready in FY 86, including 

a protractor that can be used with USGS maps, proportionate scales, 
Boat Operatorsto be 

Awarded ASI: 

School Secretary 

Reorganized: 

Arimuth-BearinglGrid Magnetic Azimuth Conversion Charts, and Perform Maintenance on the Heidelberg Offset Press. 

Resident courses in advanced lithography (BTC)will he offered in FY 

86, and Topographic common core ANCOC courses will he available in 

FY 87. The Topographic Engineering Branch is now under operational 

control of the Defense Mapping School and has been designated the U.S. 

Army Topographic Element, DOTD. 

Either CIYT Davis or CW4 Maxwell can be contacted for further information at AV 354-1831, commercial (703) 664-1831. 

Operators of the newly introduced Bridge Erection Boat-Shallow 

Draft (BEB-SD)will be awarded the 12C Additional Skill Identifier (AS11 

according to recommendations made by the Engineer School. 

Because training requirements for the new hoat have proved more 

demanding than those for the hoat it replaced, a three-week course will 

be given, open to selected 12C10 OSUT graduates, beginning in 1988. 

In the meantime, plans are being developedto award the AS1to presently 

qualified operators. 

Since the BEB-SD was originally developed as the United Kingdom 

Combat Support Boat (UKCSB), two Engineer School NCOs have 

attended the six-week Royal Engineering School's Craft Operator 

Specialist Course in Great Britain, before developing the new course. 

The newly introduced BEB-SD is a transportable hydrojet-propelled 

aluminum hull boat used to maneuver floating bridge components. Introduced into the system in 1981, it has replaced the 27-foot diesel-powered 

bridge erection boats in most Army units. While the old 27-footer is still 

used in reserve units, it is gradually being replaced by the new boats. 

TRADOC has approved the recommendation for the ASI, and DA 

approval is expected in October 1985. 

The Engineer School Secretary has been reorganized to form both a 

Central Resource Management Office and a Support Division. The consolidation between DOTD and the three training departments brings 

G-1 and G-4 functions under one contact ~oint. 

Th(: School Secvernvy continues to nl;trirge the Schoul lil)lnvy and the! 

Acndrlllic Ilcord; 1)ivision.The nen ('t,ntrnl OFFice \viII 1i:rndle bi~duot 

and manpower programming and determine the number of instructors 

needed for each School course. 

The School Secretary's Support Division will add the Text Distribution Warehouse. That division will also do maintenance coordination and 

coordinate between all School elements and Ft. Belvoir on major logistics 

actions. 

All School directorates will remain the same, although there will be 

some reorganization with the Directorate of Training and Doctrine, the 

Department of Combined Arms, and the Department of Military 

Engineering. The directorates and the departments are listed below with 

their AUTOVON (354) numbers. 

Directorate of Training and Doctrine, COL D. Barber, 2188 

Directorate of Combat Development, COL T. Vander Els, 4177 
(j ScClool News 

Directorate of 

Training andDoctrine (continued) 

School Secretary Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization, COL D. Karrer, 3668 

Reorganized: Department of Combined Arms, COL J. Fesmire, 2907 

( continuedj Department of Military Engineering, COL P Chinen, 2628 

Department of Military Logistics, LTC. R. Strom, 3144 

School Secretary, LTC M. Bowe, 2413 

POC for the Engineer School Secretary, CPT Woodward, 3771 or 3216. 

These changes, which are being made to further meet School Model 

'83 guidance, should be completed by April. 

Department of 

Military Engineering(DME) 

PF,and ETT Study Study materials for the Professional Engineer (PE) and Engineer in 

Materials: Training (EIT) exams will be distributed by the U.S. Army Engineer 

School until current stocks are exhausted. A recent comparison to commercially available material showed that the Engineer School's material 

needs considerable revision. In the future, the Engineer School will continue to provide assistance to students with exam applications. The 

National Society of Professional Engineers has provided a select 

bibliography of study materials and home-study courses. This 

bibliography can be obtained by sending a written request to: The Commandant, USAES, ATTN: DME, Professional Engineer Program Coordinator, Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-5331. 

Concrete Mobile: Several reports have come to the Engineer School of field units having trouble with the M-919 Concrete Mobile. While many difficulties 

are caused by incorrect operation or maintenance, some units have found 

unique problems in placing concrete. 

If you have a problem that goes beyond the scope of normal operations, 

help is available from the Structure and Utilities Branch. You can contact them through the Engineer Hotline, AV 354-3646, commercial (703) 

664-3646. Correspondence should be directed to the Department of 

Military Engineering, ATTN: ATZA-TE-SU,Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-5331. 

ADSPEC 23 Training: CAPT Charles Wilkins (USMC), chief of the Structures and Utilities 

Branch, has been named coordinator of the FacilitiesiContract Construction Management Course, which is designed to prepare officers for 

assignments with Corps of Engineer districts or installation Directorates 

of Engineering Housing. 

Those interested in the course should call CAFT Wilkins at AV 

354.279713806;commercial (703)664-279713806.Requests to attend the 

course are made through channels to MILPERCEN Education Branch, 

ATTN: DAPC-DPA-E, 200 Stovall St., Alexandria, VA 22332-0400. 
w betters to the Editor 

The Division Engineer-Counterpoint 


I must commend LTC Nahas on his 

article entitled "TheDivision Engineeq 

A Personal Viewpoint" which appeared 

in the ENGINEER Summer 19% 

issue. It was an excellent attempt to 

outline the responsibilities for the Division Engineer on today's battlefield. 

However, there were several areas 

brought out in the article that deserve 

further discussion. 

Contrary to LTC Nahas' stated viewpoint, the Division Engineer battalion 

commander's command responsibility 

will not be reduced during wartime. In 

fact, I would strongly argue that his 

command responsibilities will be far 

more demanding in wartime than in a 

peacetime environment. The Engineer 

battalion commander wears two hats 

both in wartime and peacetime. While 

he may have diff~culty in exercising 

command and control (C2) in wartime 

due to the positioning of his battalion 

on extended battlefields, the requirement to maintain C2 remains an absolute if the Engineers are to contribute 

to influencing the battle. 

While based on the Engineer Estimate, each brigade may receive a 

Direct Support (DS)Engineer company 

(the key word here being may), the 

Engineer battalion commander never 

relinquishes command or control of his 

subordinate DS Engineer companies. 

They remain his responsibility and can 

(if not fully committed) in fact receive 

missions directly from him in addition 

to receiving missions and priorities 

from the supported brigade. 

The days of "fire and forget" Engineer support where Engineers are 

fragmented and piecemealed into ineffectiveness must be terminated given 

the fact that Engineer requirements 

will almost always exceed capabilities. 

Engineer personnel and equipment 

must be actively commanded by the 

Engineer battalion commander to 

ensure that Engineer support is always 

maximized. The maximum Engineer 

effort starts with the Division 

Engineer's Engineer Estimate prior to 

hostility and continues throughout the 

battle. 

The Division Engineer has both the 

brigade and S-3 sections and in the 

heavy and motorized divisions a brigade Engineer section to assist him in 

planning for Engineer support activities. In addition, he may receive the 

assistance of an Engineer group or 

corps battalion to provide additional 

Engineer planning. 

While the Division Engineer provides basic guidance on Engineer activities, to include the division commander's priorities of effort and other 

tactical conside~.ations, it is the staff 

that produces the actual estimate and 

ensuing operation orders. This frees to 

a great extent the ability of the 

Division Engineer to don his other hat 

as commander, allowing him to exercise his command and control responsibilities. PointICounterpoint. 

MAJ Dana Robertson 

Program Manager, 

Survivability 

Army Development and 

Employment Agency 

Fort Lewis, WA 

Caption gets NO GO-Magazine gets GO 


One of the many keys to becoming a 

successful leader is to "know your men 

and your equipment." It is with this in 

mind that I direct your attention to the 

caption in the lower right on page 17 

ofyour Fall 1984 issue of ENGINEER. 

The soldiers ~ictured are carrvine- "normal balk." Long balk does not 

exist. The three types ofM4T6 balk are 

" 

tapered, short, and normal. 

I'm not trying to be critical, but having spent two years on the trail at Fort 

Leonard Wood, I quickly learned that 

the best way to teach soldiers how to 

correctly perform a task is to show 

them first. Identifvine M4T6 comno- " u 

nents 1s a task included in the C.E.T. 

at TA 204, and any soldier who idenEngineer Command Update 

tifies "normal balk as long balk would 

receive a NO GO for that task. 

I do, however, enjoy reading 

ENGINEER, and I find it extremely 

informative. Keep up the good work. 

SSG David M. Barnes 

U.S. Army, Engineer 

HQ, 2nd Engineer Group 

ENGINEER will publish its annual Engineer Command Update in the Summer 1985 issue. Readers 

are encouraged to submit the names of commanders and command sergeants major of Engineer brigades, groups and battalions to: 

ENGINEER Magazine 

ATTN: ATZATD-P Stop 291D 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5291 
-- - - - 

Force Structure 


I Management 


and 
 I 

,&~~uipmettt=
=. 

Change . . . but Not Engineer Standards 


0th because of my position and my 

!'-bpersonal concerns, I am especially 

interested in changes that affect Army 

Engineers. I review here some recent 

developments that are important for 

you to know about. I also will highlight 

a few areas that remain unchanged. 

After extensive studies of its force 

structure over the past year, the Army 

has decided to keep most of its Engineers. The Army was seriously considering cutting Engineer forces by 22,000 

before the Army Vice Chief of Staff 

hosted a force structure functional area 

assessment last November. However, 

after reviewing the Engineers' role and 

mission, the Army decided it could not 

afford to lose so much Combat Engineering support. As a result, the Engineers will lose significantly less than 

first considered, although there will be 

some painful cuts. The Engineer troop 

ratio of active component (AC) to 

reserve component (RC) will continue 

to be about 30 to 70. 

Several changes resulted from the 

assessment. Some AC Engineer units 

-primarily utility detachments-will 

be inactivated to allow for high priority Army initiatives. Other AC companies from corps combat battalions 

and combat heavy battalions will he 

moved to the RC as roundout units. In 

addition, there will be some conversion 

of selected RC Engineer units as a 

result of revised allocation rules. For 

example, some dump truck companies 

by LTG E. R. Heiberg 111 


Chief of Engineers. U.S.Army 


will convert to panel bridge units. 

The AC Engineer strength is 

unlikely to grow under the Army's 

imposed AC strength of 781,000. 

Where there is a shortage of Engineer 

forces, one of our future challenges is 

to offset this through host nation support or contracting. This involves 

finalizing host nation agreements and 

ensuring that contracts are in place. 

This is a difficult challenge, but it has 

to be met if we are to ensure adequate 

Engineering support. 

Another area of change is in the way 

the Army manages its officers. In an 

effort to meet the future needs of the 

Army, the Officer Personnel Manage. 

ment System (OPMS) will be finetuned to emphasize branch-a return 

to pre-1974 policy. The recent OPMS 

study will mean a number of changes 

to Engineer officers over the next three 

to five years. 

Engineer officers will be managed 

and developed only by the Engineer 

branch. Engineers, therefore, will not 

serve in areas such as maintenance 

management and material services 

management which become areas of 

concentration within the Ordnance 

branch and the Quartermaster branch. 

By the same token, officers from other 

branches will not be developed in 

Engineer areas of concentration. 

In order to meet Army field grade 

requirements in each branch, some officers will branch transfer at the third 

and eighth years of service. Officers 

from overstrength branches will transfer to the Engineer branch and the 

Combat Support Arms and Combat 

Service Support branches. Among the 

combat arms, only the Engineers 

require more field grade officers as the 

officers are promoted. All the other 

combat arms decrease their requirements as the officers in those branches 

gain seniority. For the Engineers, this 

is highlighted by the large command 

opportunities for lieutenant colonels 

and particularly colonels. And this 

need is further emphasized by the 

Engineers' challenge to produce 

qualified Directors of Engineering and 

Housing at field grade levels. 

Officers will no longer be required to 

have two specialties. The OPMS study 

found that the current system takes 

qualified officers away from Comhat 

Support and Combat Service Support 

assignments just when the need for 

these officers is increasing. Under the 

new system, branches with multiple 

specialties will have those specialties 

consolidated. Our current Engineer 

specialties will become four areas of 

concentration within the Engineer 

branch. 

The current specialty code 21, Combat Engineer, will become areas of concentration 21A (General Engineer) and 

215 (Combat Engineer). Specialty code 

22 (Topographic Engineer) will become 
21C, while specialty code 23 (Facilities1Comhat Construction Management) will become 21D (Construction 

Engineer). Multiple career patterns 

will be permitted so that some officers 

may single track in Engineer areas of 

concentration while others may dual 

track, switching between assignments 

in Engineering and in functional areas 

such as comptroller or research and 

development. 

What remains unchanged are the 

Engineer soldiers' high standards of 

excellence, professionalism, and integrity. As we get new doctrine and equip^ 

ment, we are especially challenged to 

maintain our professional standings 

and capabilities. Reserve components, 

who make up 70 percent of the Engineers, have a special challenge to maintain readiness with only limited training time. New training initiatives are 

going to stretch the RC soldier even 

further. For example, in the future, RC 

officers will be attending - certain parts 

of the officers advanced course instead 

of completing the course through 

correspondence. 

Because you in the RC have so many 

demands on your time, I encourage you 

to use your time well and to use your 

military duty and civilian work to 

enhance each other. Civilian experiences are an opportunity to learn, grow 

and perform at your best; they can be 

part of preparedness and readiness 

training. And use your military training and experience to enhance your 

leadership potential in civilian life. I 

encourage you particularly to help 

those of us on career active duty. We 

need the input, insight, and breadth 

you can offer. We welcome your wisdom 

and experience. 

During these changing times, we in 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers continue to do all we can to suvvort . . the 

Engineer soldier. In fact, everything 

the Corps does in one way or another 

supports the Engineer soldier-both on 

and off the battlefield. 

My work with the Army staff and 

other Army commands ensures Army 

Engineer units are properly equipped, 

organized, and manned. The Corps' 

military construction program creates 

the environment in which the Army 

operates, from training ranges to housing. And our civil works program, 

together with our military designlconstruct mission, keeps a strategic 

reserve of Engineers, hoth uniformed 

and civilians, trained in managing 

large construction projects should the 

nation ever have to mobilize in a 

national emergency. That strategic 

reserve cadre across the United States 

and overseas also provides a "bank" of 

Engineer-related skills we would need 

in an emergency: real estate and procurement specialists, lawyers, fiscal 

and administrative experts, and a host 

of others. 

Engineer equipment is an area that 

is changing for the better, although 

sometimes progress is slow. We are seeing new equipment, both tactical and 

construction, entering our Engineer 

units, hoth AC and RC. Some of our forward battalions are receiving the 

M-113 Armored Personnel Carriers 

made available as the infantry and 

cavalry receive the new M-2iM-3 series 

of Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Testing 

of the M-9 Armored Combat Earthmover is underway. A small emplacement excavator (SEE) is in production. 

And new minelcountermine equipment 

continues to be supported by Army dollar decisions. I expect the Army's need 

for modernized Engineer forces to continue to be recognized in the years 

ahead. 

I challenge all Engineers to continue 

to bring your best to the job. Continue 

to maintain our high standards of 

excellence, professionalism, and integrity. I also ask that you support each 

other. Share your enthusiasm and 

energy with other Engineers as well as 

with your staffs and co-workers. We 

need to nurture a sense of responsibility for the Engineer Family and the 

whole Army Family. Tb have an Army 

that works, each of us must he committed to each other's success. 

LTG E. R. Heiherg 111 challenges Engineers to maintain standards of 

excellence, professionalism, and integrity (photo by Donald R. Jones). 

ng the 118th Annual Er 

er and Castle Celebratic 

I I 

Fri ..."z . MacKenzie Hall, For! Belvoir, VA 

Officers Only 

Mess Dress Blues, Whife! 

or Tuxedo with Black Bar T'-

RS VP Protoco 1 Office 

17(13) 664-3C136; AV 3! 

The Is1 

Thursd 

MacKe 

Active, Reserve Component, 

Engineer Officers and their St 7 ~r...~~~ 11 Civilian ." ":.-- lnjvrmr 

Iieserva tlons by M 

Contact Protocol 0 
Ai~fief J and Rose C~mp 

by CPT Don C. Young 

Or.c,l.300 aircraft used the parking aprons and taxiway of the San lr,lrnzo airstrip constructed for Big Pine 11. 

A major problem during construction was the basic soils equation of DIRT LRATER=MUD (photo by 11,TSamuel 

Burkett). 

1 entral America has become a AHUAS TARA I1 (Big Pine 11)in Hon- Lack of specific plans from the host cmajor news-breaking area in the duras. Three Engineer task forces were nation. 

past several years. Millions of US formed to accomplish these five mis- .Lack of topographic maps and 

dollars are budgeted for this area an- sions at San Lorenzo, Comayagua, and information. 

nually The rise of Cuban activities in Aguacate. Each site encountered a Long acclimatization period required 

Nicaragua and Grenada has certainly variety of construction problems, and for soldiers. 

opened many Americans' eyes to the 

security threat from Soviet intervention into Central America. Honduras, 

approximately the size of Tennessee, 

has become an important ally in Central America due to its location and 

political status. 

The 46th Eneineer Battalion (CBT) 

the task forces developed interesting 

techniques to overcome these problems 

throughout the exercise. 

Non-standard mill lumber. 

Excess water during the wet season. 

Limited availability of civilian construction equipment repair parts. 

Mountainous terrain and substanAirfield Construction 

The San Lorenzo airstrip project was 

located two miles north of the San 

Lorenzo base camp. Construction 

began Sept. 15,1983 during the heavy 

rain season. Daily rainfall caused 

mucky soil conditions that cut equipment utilization time to less than half 

(HVY) from Fort Rucker, AL, con- dard road conditions. a day. 

structed two C-130 medium-lift dirt Limited availability of standard The airstrip design criteria was 

airstrips and three base camps during U.S. Code electrical and plumbing taken from TM 5-330,Roads, Airbases 

the 179-day Joint Service Exercise materials. and Hellports in the Theater of Opera-
tions. All transverse and longitudinal 

grades were set at maximum values 

achievable to ensure effective drainage 

from the heavy rainfall. Parallel 17.type 

drainage ditches carried the runoff to 

trapezoidal open-channel ditches at 

each end of the airfield. These openchannel ditches carried the runoff to 

existing stream beds. 

Clearing, grubbing, and stripping 

operations were done with bulldozers 

and scrapers. Approximately 30,000 

cubic yards of organics were moved 

before hauling fill for the runway, and 

16,000 compacted cubic yards of CH-SC 

type soil fill were cut from the drainage 

areas and used to build the runway. 

The runway supported its first C-130 

landing on Nov. 10, 1983. Over 300 

sorties of C-130 and C-7 aircraft used 

the airstrip before the end of the exer. 

cise (ENDEX). The runway sustained 

minimal landing and takeoff damage. 

An access road, taxiway, and parking 

apron were con~pleted by Dec 20,1983. 

Their dimensions were modified 

slightly to fit onto the available land 

space. 

Major problems encountered during 

the San Lorenzo airstrip project 

included working with the basic soils 

equation of DIRT i-WATER = MUD 

and keeping critical pieces of Engineer 

equipment operational. Late afternoon 

rainstorms (daily at 1600-1800 hours) 

caused extremely mucky soil conditions even with site drainage estab~ 

lished daily. The sun would dry out the 

top layer by midday, allowing the crews 

to work until the next rainstorm. 

Bulldozers were primarily required 

to strip the organics because of the lack 

of traction with the scrapers. The 

bulldozer push-method was used whenever scraper traction was satisfactory. 

Soil stabilizing additives such as lime, 

to dry out the mucky soil, were not 

available in-country. The large quantity of lime required for this airstrip 

project would not have been cost-effective if sent from the United States. 

Lack of repair parts for Engineer construction equipment caused problems 

throughout the exercise. Turn-around 

time using normal exercise maintenance channels was too long, and incountry construction equipment 

dealerships could not provide parts. 

Besides cannibalizing repair parts, the 

only other requisition system was to 

telephone Fort Ruckel; AL, and order 

the required parts. The rear-detachment maintenance element would 

immediately acquire the parts and 

send them on the next available supply plane to Central America. 

The most critical piece of Engineer 

construction equipment was the highspeed compactorlmotorized sheepsfoot 

roller which is essential for compacting 

each layer of fill. Because there are 

only three compactors organic to a combat heavy Engineer battalion, a major 

construction problem occui-s when the 

battalion is working on more than one 

airfield or earthmoving project 

simultaneously. 

Equipment breakdown and lack of 

spare parts caused construction delays 

by having to shuttle compactors from 

one site to the other. As a result, a 

change of the Modified Table of Organization and Equipment (MTOE) was 

submitted at the end of exercise to add 

a minimum of three additional highspeed compactors with transport-hauling capabilities (tracto~=trailers). 

The Aguacate airstrip project was 

located in the mid-northeastern sector 

of Honduras, approximately 70 kilometers west of the Nicaraguan border. 

No prior planning had been done by 

the Honduran civil engineers for this 

airstrip. Therefore, the S-3construction 

section researched, designed, coordinated, and laid out the airstrip design 

according to TM 5-330. 

The major missions for the Aguacate 

task force were to build the runway 

through suhbase, establish a base 

camp, and install a 10,000.foot PVC. 

pipe waterline. The short time of the 

exercise prevented the completion of 

the runway as it was originally 

designed. However, a clay cap was 

installed to render the subbase runway 

C-130-capable as built. 

Again, all transverse and longitudinal grades were set at the maximum 

values allowed to assure effective 

drainage from the heavy rainfall. Construction began Oct. 6, 1983 with the 

stripping of organics through swamps, 

farm fields, streams, and rice paddies 

along the designated airstrip centerline. Approximately 200,000 cubic 

yards of cut (organics) and fill (GP-type 

soil) were hauled to finish the subbase 

of the airstrip by the end of the 

exercise. 

The mountainous terrain surrounding the Aguacate airstrip made 

drainage construction extensive. The 

drainage plan included four culverts 

that were ~nstalled underneath the 

airstrip to carry runoff and stream 

water away from the project. Two 

36-inch diametel; single barrel, reinfoi-ced concrete culverts and two 36- 

inch diameter, triple barrel, reinforced 

concrete culverts were placed underneath the airstrip. Upstream and 

downstream soil-cement sandbag headwalls were built at each culvert site. 

An efficient. field-exoedient method 

A high-speed ro~np;~ctorlniotorized sheepsfoot roller was thr most critical of installing 4-foot concrete culvert secpiece of Engineer construction equipment at the two airstrips in Hon- tions was brainstormed by SGTDavid 

duras (photo by ILT Samuel Burkett). Coleman of C Company, 46th Engineer 

ENCINEERIS~II~~~ 1985 15 
.. ..=. _ * * - Is-

,-w . . .us,.& *.;;.ii..

L % 

.. .-

Engineers from the 46th Engineer Battalion install culvert sections at a triple-barrel siteto carry runoffand stream 

water. To save time, materials, and money, the Engineers also constructed a trapezoidal channel to carry water 

from the runway (photo by ILT Samuel Bnrkett). 

Battalion (CBT) (HVYI. Instead of materials, and cost that would have paring a G.P. medium tent and a Cusing the traditional method of lifting been expended to install another triple- HUT. In almost every case, the inside 

each section with a crane and pushing barrel culvert site underneath the temperature of a C-HUT was 20 to 25 

the section into place with manpower, airstrip to carry stream runoff. degrees cooler during tests in the heat 

a 2%-cubic-yard bucket loader with a of the day. 

multi-purpose (four-in-one1 bucket was Base Camp Construction The basic C-HUT unit (16 x 32 feet) 

modified by securing a 4 x 8-inch post The vertical construction platoons wasconsidered a squad level construcin the bucket with a chain and hinder were tasked to build a number of base tion mission. It normally took a vertiIn essence, a field-expedient forklift camps at San Lorenzo, Aguacate, and cal construction squad six to seven days 

was created that increased the installa- Comayagua. The facilities included to complete one C-HUT from footers to 

tion rate of 36-inch diameter concrete clearing hospitals, AAFES post the tin roof. However, prefabrication 

culverts from 2.5 sections per hour exchanges, road culverts, ammunition yards were set up to build doors, steps, 

(crane method) to over 6 sections per storage points, mess halls, hunkers, stud walls, and roof trusses that were 

hour. Therefore, with each culvert obstacles, helipads, observation towers, hauled to the building sites as needed. 

length averaging between 220 and 280 latrines, shower facilities, orderly With a prefabrication yard in operafeet, a significant amount of construc- rooms, and offices. tion, it normally took a vertical contion time was saved during the culvert- Each base camp development plan struction squad two to four days to 

installation activities. centered around the constl.uction of complete one entire C-HUT. However, 

An extensive open-channel ditch was tropical buildings, nicknamed CAT- one vertical construction squad from B 

cut around the northeastern end of the HUTS or C-HUTS for Central American Company completed an entire C-HUT 

airstrip to carry a large wet-season Tropical Huts. Approximately the size in one day at Comayagua base camp. 

stream away from the runway. A of a G.P. medium tent, each building On several days, the vertical squads 

trapezoidal channel was designed cost about $1,500 in materials to build were broken down into technical 

according to TM 5-330 standards with in Honduras and will certainly outlast advisor teams to assist in self-help conthe deepest cut about 21 feet into the any canvas tent in tropical climates. struction of C-HUTS by other supporthillside. Construction of this open- The battalion aid station conducted a ing units. 

channel ditch saved construction time, series of inside temperature tests com- The overall design of the C-HUTS 
proved very effective for a tropical 

climate. The design improved living 

conditions immensely and allowed for 

easy expansion. However, several modifications were made to ease construction and improve living conditions. 

Recommended modifications included 

lowering the wall height from 8 to 7 

feet, placing roof trusses every 8 feet 

on-center instead of 4 feet on-center, 

and installing canvas rolls above 

screens for use during rain and dust 

storms. During the entire six-month 

deployment, less than 30 percent of the 

battalion personnel lived in C-HUR. 

The G.P. medium tents were home for 

the soldiers located at Aguacate and 

Comayagua. 

AHUAS TARA I1 provided a unique 

opportunity for the battalion to train, 

survive, and build in the austere conditions of Honduras. A remarkable 

improvement in leadership skills, 

operator skills, maintenance, and MOS 

qualification at all levels was,realized. 

Training Summary

.Movement from CONUS. 

.Equipment operator skills. 

9 Maintenance operations.

.Convoy procedures. 

'Secure communications equipment. 

Water purification. 

Construction and topographic survey 

'Soils analvsis. 

lems, the battalion accomplished all 

assigned missions and provided a 

smooth transition for the follow-on 

Engineer unit, the 864th Engineer 

Battalion (CBT) (HVY) from Fort 

Lewis, WA. 

CPTDon C. Young is the commander 

of the 586th Engineer Company IAFBI 

at Fort Benning, GA. He kd the QuaC 

ity Control Team attached to the Mobile 

District and lst/7th Special Forces 

Group duri11.gthe construction of the 

Regior~alMilitary Pai~tin.gCenter near 

Trlljilla Honduras. He redeplored to 

Honduras with the46th Engineer Battalion ICBT) IHVYJ. CPT Young compieced the Engineer Officer Advanced 

Course and has a degrpe in civil 

engineeringfrom Vanderbilt University 

CPT Young wishes to thnnk the folloxirig people for their assistance in 

gathering information: CPT Michael 

Flannga~t.ILT Samuel Burketl, ILT 

John Guntec ILT Michael Rorez ILT 

Jomes Balocki. SFC Lewis Hamilton, 

and Blake Peck. 

Top, soldiers align girders on C-HUT footem. A squad from B Company 

romnlnted .. an entire 1fixZ-foot buildinein a record time of one dav. Bot- - v 

tom, completed C-HUTS at one of the base camps provide effective shelter 

in tropical climates (photos by ILT Samuel Burkett). 

Vertical construction skills. 

.Reconnaissance of roads, airfields, 

and bridges. 

Survivability. 

Command and control operations. 

Despite internal and external proh-
Leadership Development in 


by MAJ Don Riley 

CPT Mark Buck 

CPT Richard Crocker 

CPTJerome Rosperich 

CPTJoseph Schroedel 

Captains Mike Candelaria, Jay Parker, and Hilly Fortner give a student 

briefing on their scheme of maneuvers to their team and Team Leader 

(U.S. Army photo). 

At his periodic counseling session, CfYI' J's Team Leader encouraged 

him to work on his ability to think on his feet and act quickly. This need 

became evident in CFT J's last briefing when he relied heavily on his briefing charts. 

When CFT J's next chance to brief came, he was sure that he would 

impress the team with his well-prepared overhead slides. His briefing went 

well until his Team Leader turned off the overhead projector and asked 

him to proceed. 

CFT J was surprised, stumbling for a few moments. But he pressed on, 

knowing why he was confronted with this situation and realizing that 

his teammates' expectations of him were high since he was one of the few 

with company command experience. 

The open critique which followed helped to reassure all on the team 

that they were there to help each other and that open, honest feedback 

is one of the best aids to learning a skill. This was a meaningful learning 

experience for both CPI' J and all of his teammates. An opportunity was 

provided for a team member to practice his leader skills, for team 

members to reflect more on their own capabilities and limitations, and 

to promote team cohesion through candid evaluations. 
I

n the Winter 1983 issue of ENGINEER, CFT Ralph Graves described 

the development strategy for the new 

Engineer Officer Advanced Course 

(EOAC). Driving this strategy was 

the Engineer School's need to better 

develop professional officers and 

leaders as described in the key manuals, FMs 100.1, 100-5, and22-100. The 

mission-train leaders to fight and 

win. 

It's tough to do this training in the 

classroom, but many positive steps can 

be taken to develop the skills and attributes needed in our leaders. The small. 

group instruction and exercises, total 

fitness, team building, and Team Leaders are all'integral parts of our leadership development program. These 

efforts build upon the leadership 

instruction presented by the Leadership Branch in the first weeks of the 

L""'ac. 

The key to the program is the reinforcement, application, and appraisal of 

leader skills and attributes within the 

small-group environment. 

Course Design 

The design of a leadership develop. 

ment program began with a study of 

the most current standards, doctrine, 

and research to determine the leader 

shills (what we must do) most critical 

to our training ohjective-to fight and 

win. The number of skills was limited 

to allow for efficient management of 

the program and to give adequate feedback to the student (Figure 1).These 

skills were integrated through training, application, assessment, and individual plans for improvement; and 

feedback is given at each step. 

The design ofthe program to develop 

leadership attributes (what we must be) 

was tougher-how do you reinforce 

qualities like honesty, creativity, and 

flexibility? The keys are honest feedback from hoth the %am Leader 

and team members, Team Leader. and 

instructors who set the example, and 

a classroom environment which promotes these qualities. Attributes were 

selected in much the same way as 

leader skills. A worksheet with attribute definition and appraisal criteria 

was then developed to appraise team 

members. 

However, the real impact is made in 

the smalLgroup exercises designed to 

integrate leader, tactical, and technical 

skills. These exercises were examined 

Figure 1. 


Leader Skills 


Take risks 

Act quickly 

Make decisions 

Write effectively 

Contribute to teamwork 

Use initiative 

Motivate subordinates 

Manage time 

Communicate effectively 

Think on feet 

Solve problems 

Manage stress 

Conduct briefings 

to determine which situations best presented the student with an opportunity for application and practice. A plan 

was then developed detailing in which 

lessons the skills would he trained, 

applied, and appraised. 

Also, team building is reinforced 

throughout the program. This hoth 

improvec the potential for the team 

members to learn and places them in 

a very realistic team environment. To 

promote team building, careful consideration was given to all course 

requirements, lesson sequence, composition of work and briefing teams, 

and physical and competitive activities. 

To support leadership development, 

the total fitness program was designed 

around basic instruction in personal 

and unlt conditioning, lifestyle 

improvement, physical training, and 

personal programs for improvement 

based on a battery of assessments, all 

oriented to developing leaders to fight 

and win. 

Leader Skills 

Besides ensuring understanding of 

the course subject material, the Team 

Leaders assess student development of 

leader skills during small-group exercises, leadership and fitness lessons, 

and physical training activities. 

The strategy to develop these skills 

follows a competency model developed 

by the Army Organizational Effectiveness School. Students are initially 

informed of the criteria, shown examples of good and poor skill application, 

and instructed (formally or informally) 

in each skill. Following an initial 

assessment, students practice the skills 

within the context of the course curriculum. Additional opportunities to 

practice and reevaluate the skills 

precede the final step-applying the 

skills in future assignments. 

For example, one element of "thinking on your feet" is recognizing a 

change in the situation. This "change" 

may be prompted by the Team Leader 

as in the example of CPT J.Individual 

student weaknesses form the basis for 

this prompting. Standard appraisal 

criteria are then used to provide students with immediate feedback as one 

focus for periodic counseling and eventually as input to the Academic Evaluation Report. 

Leadership Attributes 

The leadership-attributes assessment is closely related to the leaderskills appraisal. Attributes are qualities which make us what we are, and 

good leadership depends both on the 

development of leader skills and the 

internalization of leadership attributes. We develop the skills through 

practice and feedback; improvement in 

leadership attributes is fully the student's responsibility. His observed 

weaknesses are identified by both his 

Team Leader and peers and remain his 

responsibility. 

An assessment considers 23 leadership attributes, each with five descriptors which characterize a particular 

level of behavior. A carefully worded 

definition explains each attribute and 

its accompanying descriptors, for example, "judgment" (Figure 2). 

The assessment is used both by the 

Team Leaders and peers. Usually there 

is a close correlation between assessments made by several students of the 

same individual. In any case, the information is provided to the student for 

his personal use. Further advice is provided to those who are interested. 

The students are very receptive to 

the feedback. They usually agree with 

the assessments made, although they 

may have not previously recognized 

that aspect of their behavior. Also, they 

have shown a desire to improve both 

their leader skills and attributes as 

leaders. 

Small-Group Exercises 

After receiving initial instruction in 

a given subject (such as tactics and 
Figure 2. 

Judgment 

The ability to see the essential elements of a problem, logically weigh facts and 

possible solutions, assess priorities, and base sound decisions upon these 

considerations. 

5. Sound Shows consistently sound, well-founded, logical 

judgment even in difficult situations. 

4. Reliable Can generally be relied upon to produce sound 

judgment in most circumstances. 

3. Measured Sometimes unsound. Apt to overlook some aspects. 

2. Hazy Has difficulty in marshalling facts, determining 

possible solutions, and making logical decisions. 

1. Unreliable Inclined to rush into hasty, illogical conclusions 

without full consideration of all the facts. 

(This formatwassuggested by MAJ Rod McKinnon. Australian Exchangeofficerto the 

Engineer School, who worked on a similar project at the Australian Command and 

Staff School.) 

engineering) in the more traditional 

fashion of a lecture, the students move 

to their team rooms for practical application. Often the team is broken down 

into smaller work groups. Role-playing 

as a commander, an S-3,or a brigade 

Engineer allows for realistic application. The primary instructor (the 

author of the exercise) provides technical expertise. The Team Leader fimctions in two roles, that of facilitator of 

the exercise and instructor. 

In most exercises, the students develop two products-a written assignment and a military briefing. The students also brief and critique each other 

Our experiences with the smallpoup instruction show that greater 

learning takes place in small groups. 

The students prefer to work and learn 

in the team environment. They learn 

to rely on each other's experiences, and 

they exhibit greater enthusiasm and 

effort (including those students who 

already have a good grasp of the material and who often participate less in 

other methods of instruction). Some of 

the best learning occurs as a result of 

the peer interaction within the team. 

Team Building 

In EOAC, we build team cohesion 

through efforts to develop bonds of 

mutual trust, respect, confidence, and 

understanding. This begins by selectively con~posing teams of officers who 

The varied background of a team presents a challenge in group dynamics, 

but greatly increases the potential for 

learning through the sharing of experiences. Additionally, the students have 

responsibility for team administrative 

matters providing a structure to promote team cohesion. 

The Team Leader guides and coaches 

the team. Hegltides the team through 

the successive stages of team development. He provides the initial structure 

for the team, assists in establishing initial norms, sets standards of performance, and establishes systems for 

feedback. As a coach, he meets with 

each team member periodically; and he 

uses a combination of his observations, 

the student's academic performance, 

and peer evaluations to provide meaningful feedback to the student. Familiarity with the course content and the 

student's values and goals allows the 

Team Leader to place the student in 

situations which reinforce strengths 

and overcome weaknesses. 

Also, the small-group exercises are 

designed to facilitate team building. 

Different team members are placed in 

charge of subgroups for graded and 

ungraded exercises. The added component of a group grade requires the student leader and team members to work 

together and reflects how well the student leader organizes and motivates 

the team members. The student leader 

gains an appreciation of group dynamics and how it contvibutes to team 

building. Every opportunity is taken to 

translate this experience to teamwork 

in units and how to build a team spirit 

in units. 

Competitive athletic events and 

social activities during the course help 

to speed the development of team cohesion. After these activities, team membeis are friendlier, less inhibited in the 

classroom, and more candid in their 

conlments. 

This deliberate effort to build teams 

is evident in the improvement in student learning of both the subject matter and the benefits and constraints of 

working together as a team. 

Total Fitness 

The abilities to lead, think clearly, 

and act decisively are enhanced by the 

leader's total fitness. In EOAC, the 

'. 


CPT Rich Jennings, and MAJIbraham Hassan (Jordan) (U.S.Army photo). 

ENGINEERIS~II~~ 1985 
rudiments of total fitness (mind, body, 

and spirit) are presented cognitively 

(lectures, readings, and class discussions) and experientially (practical 

exercises, physical exercises). The basic 

framework of the instruction uses simple equipment; standard facilities; and 

current Army manuals, pamphlets, 

and training guidance. 

The students receive instruction for 

improvement at a personal level and 

guidance for applying the same teehniques to soldiers in their future commands. All the instruction is practical 

and simple. The honest assessments, 

plans for improvement, and final 

results are easy for students to use in 

their future units. 

Ph,ysicalfitness is assessed in the first 

week of instruction. Each student 

takes the Army Physical Readiness 

Test (APRT), measures his flexibility, 

and determines his blood pressure and 

pulse rate. With this data, he assesses 

his current level of physical fitness. He 

then develops an exercise plan which 

incorporates mandatory EOAC physical activities with the team and 

additional individual activities emphasizing a balanced program of endurance, strength, and flexihility. 

Goals for improvement are set, student progress is monitored, and an 

evaluation is made at the end of the 

course. Students must score at least 50 

aerobic points during each of the final 

twelve weeks of the course and are 

strongly encouraged to set high goals 

for the final APRT. 

Instruction is presented on the basics 

of exercise, flexihility, exercise considerations, and unit fitness. Organized 

physical training includes relay races, 

water polo, exercise circuits, parcourses, basketball, soccer, guerilla 

drills, team runs, and volleyball. 

Health is also emphasized during the 

first weeks of the course. Students have 

their body fat content measured; analyze the composition and caloric content of their diets; have their blood 

tested for cholesterol, uric acid. elucose. . - and tryglyceride levels; take a total life 

stress assessment; and evaluate their 

risks of heart attack in relation to their 

lifestyles. With his Team Leader, each 

student assesses and evaluates his 

state of health, plans any needed 

improvements, sets goals, and monitors 

his progress. 

Instruction is presented on nutrition, 

weight control, cardiovascular fitness, 

ENGINEERlSpring 1985 

and stress management. Students are 

given practical guidance on diet and 

stress reduction techniques. At the end 

of the course, a subsequent blood test 

helps to measure any effect of lifestyle 

changes. 

The physical fitness plan and lifestyle improvement begin progress 

towards lifetime total fitness for each 

student, thereby developing more effective leaders for the Army. 

Results of the new course will take 

time to measure, and the Engineer 

School's Directorate of Evaluation and 

Standardization has begun an extensive program to evaluate the course 

and its graduates. 

However, we are confident that by 

presenting opportunities for the students to apply leader skills; to form and 

work together as teams; to improve 

their total fitness; to receive feedback 

on their performance and observed 

attributes; and to make assessments, 

set goals, and measure progress, the 

new EOAC provides a great opportunity for leadership development. 

MAJ Don Riley is a graduate of the 

US. Military Academy and has a 

master's degree in engtneering from the 

UniuersiQ of California, Berkeley. He 

serued with the 7th Diuision nt Fort 

w 

Or4 CA; the US. Army Engineer District, Far East; and the General Staf 

US. Army Engineer School. 

CPT Marh Buch is a graduate of the 

US. Military Academy. Heserved with 

the 54th Engineer Ballalior~ in Germany and the 3rd Battalion at Fort 

Beluoir; VA. 

CPT Richard Crocher is a graduate 

offinn State Uniuersily. He serued with 

the 19th Engineer Battalion in Germany, was a Facilities Engineer in 

Kitzigen, Germany, and served with the 

30th Engin,eer Battalion at Fort Beluoir; 

VA. 

CPT Jerome Rosperich is agraduate 

of OCS and the Combined Arms and 

Services Staff School. He served with 

the 10th. Engineer Battalion in Germany and the Directorate of Training 

and Doctrine at Fort Belvoic VA. 

CPT Joseph Schroedel is a graduate 

of the US Military Academy and has 

a n~aster's degree in civil engineering 

from the Uniuersitj of Illinois. He 

served with the20th Engineer Brigade 

at Fort Bragg NC, and the 82nd Engt 

neer Battalion in Germany. 

(The authors were Team Leaders for 

EOAC Class 1-85, Department of Military Engineering; US Army Engineer 

School.) 

ENGINEER HOTLINE 

I-: 1 I 


Problems, questions, and comments relating to Engineer doctrine, 

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

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

days a week. You should give your name, address and telephone 

number, followed by a concise question or comment. You'lireceive 

a reply within three to 15 days. The Hotline is not a receiving 

agency for formal requests. 

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

3646; or AV 354-3646. 

Correction 

The article, "Developing Our Junior Officers:' by COL Samuel J. 

Ady incorrectly stated " . . .the 4th and 1st Engineer Battalions at 

Fort Riley," and " . . . the 4th and 5th Engineer Battalions at Fort 

Knox" (Fall 1984, page 24). This should have read " . . . the 4th 

Armored Battalion of the 37th Armored Regiment and the 1stBattalion of the 63rd Armol' and " . . the 4th Battalion of the 5th Infantry and the 5th Battalion of the 41st Field Artillery!' 

1 I 

21 
 tin^ lirirhom discusses pr.orlocti~-it,?- and efiirirnr:~ with stude~~rs attending the Facilities Enginrcring Manage. 

ment Course at the Engineer School (U.S. Army photo). 

Preparing for DQM 

I

s there a DEH ass~gnment in your 

future? Are you prepared to move 

into one of the most challenging jobs 

in the Army today? 

You say you are. You've had the right 

assignments along the way. You've had 

the normal schooling-EOBC, EOAC, 

possibly graduate school. You've gotten 

your company command under your 

belt and have served at various positions in several Engineer units. All 

. , 

given you confidence in dealing with 

soldiers in a military environment. 

But has your previous experience 

prepared you for the challenges of 

being a director of engineering and 

housing or an operations officer with 

the DEH? Chances are, if your career 

has followed the normal progression, 

the answer to that question is no. 

Why aren't you ready? What's so different about the DEH business than 

YOW 

Assignment 

the other assignments you have had? 

To begin with, in today's monetary 

terms, the DEH is big business. Looking at a standard size CONUS installation, the DEH controls an average 

yearly budget of $45 million. This 

accounts for about 50 percent of the 

base operations money spent on that 

installation. The DEH work force comprises about 30 percent of base operations personnel. 

Aside from the sheer magnitude of 

the job and the responsibilities, there 

are several other new problems you 

will encounter. One of the most frustrating of these, especially when coming from a military environment, is 

by Tim Ketchum 

dealing with a predominantly civilian 

work force. In a typical DEH organization of 300 to 400 people, there may 

only be two or three people wearing the 

green suit. 

Now you are confronted with the civil 

service system. Your first reaction 

would he to treat the organization like 

any military one and assume you have 

great flexibility in dealing with personnel matters. But soon you are bogged 

down in the rules and regulations on 

hiring and firing, rewards and disci- 
pline, promotion, merit pay, hiring 

freezes, grievances, and all the other 

factors which affect your ability as a 

manager to get the job done. 

Associated with the challenges of a 

civilian work force is another organization you have not had to deal with in 

the past, and that is the employees' 

union. 

When you look at how the DEH 

accomplishes its mission, yon will find 

that over half the work is performed by 

civilian contractors. You have now 

moved into a new dimension of time 

and space, the twilight zone of procurement rules and regulations. You are 

challenged by trying to get the lowest 

bidder on a job to give you a quality 

product on time. You are introduced to 

new players in the game: contracting 

officer, legal counsel, and small business administration. You are able to 

increase your vocabulary with new 

terms such as termination fordefault, 

cure notice, cost-plus award fee, and 

change ordel: 

Just when you thought there could 

be no more challenges left, you face 

another problem unique to the DEHcustomer satisfaction. 

For every project you get, every work 

order that comes across your desk, 

there is someone out there-the 

customer, the user-who wants that job 

done yesterday. You have to he a good 

juggler, balancing your limited resources of money and people against the 

unlimited requirements of your customers and the desires of your 

commander. 

The most highly visible part of the 

DEH is the H . . . Housing. Under the 

previous facilities engineering organization, the FE was responsible for the 

maintenance and repair of family housing. Under the DEH organization, the 

management of the housing function 

has been added. Providing adequate 

housing is essential to the quality of 

life for the soldiers and their families. 

These are just some of the challenges 

awaiting a new DEH. It is obvious that 

the more preparation you can make 

before assuming your new job, the 

faster you can take control and the less 

on-the-job training you will require. If 

one of your previous assignments was 

in a Corps of Engineer District, you are 

probably better prepared than individuals who have spent all their time in 

tronn ~- - - irnits. L~ 


What training is available? The U.S. 

Army Engineer School offers a three- MI: Tim Ketchurn is the Chiei; Engiweek Facilities Engineering Manage- neering and Housing Management 

ment Course (FEMC), a DEH Execu- Division, Department of Military Engitive Course, and seven different hous- neering, at Fort Beluoi~ VA. He has 

ing management courses. You should worked in the Directorate ofEngineerattend FEMC before starting your ing and Housing, Military District of 

assignment. This course will provide Washington and for the Ofice of the 

you with the latest guidance in the Chief of Engineers, Housing Diuiuision, 

DEH business and valuable contacts and the Facility Engineer Support 

with the various functional experts. Agenq. A firmer Engineer oficer; Mr 

Other training available at your own Ketchum has associate degrees in data 

installation includes supervisor processing and business management 

courses which familiarize vou with the from Northern Vireinia - Communitv 

civil service system and contracting College, a bachelor's degree in civil 

courses which will give you the basics engineeringfrom Virginia Tech, and a 

in government procurement. master's degree in engineering adminFor additional information on the istrationfrom George Washington Unb 

DEH courses available at the USAES, uersity He is a registered professional 

call AV 354-4195, FTS 544-4195, or engineer in Virginia. 

commercial (703) 664-4195. 

U I 

O. My question deals with the triangular tank ditch. We have 

information from an Engineer pamphlet which states that the spoil is 

placed on theenemy sideof the tankditch. Does it go on the friendly or 

enemy side? 

A. The spoil is placed on the enemy side of the tank ditch and not on the 

friendly side becauseofthe factor ofworkeffort required in construction. If 

thespoil wereto be placed on the friendly sideoftheditch, it wouldrequire 

thediggingteamtoliftthespoiloverthe 1.5 meter high wallofthefriendly 

side. In addition, the spoil reduces the traction of approaching enemy 

tanks and affords good soil cover for antitank mines. This information can 

be found in FM 5-1 5. Field Fortifications; FM 5-34. Engineer FieldData; 

and the Engineer pamphlet. Tank Dirches, dated May 1982. 

Q. I would like to know when ARTEP 5-35,Engineer Combat Battalion, 

Corps, will be available. 

A. ARTEP 5-35 was fielded February 1985. It can beorderedfrom the US. 

Army AG Publications Center. 2800 Eastern Boulevard. Baltimore. MD 

21 220. 

0.I an- trying to find the NSN for the overhead foxhole covers. How 

can I order them? 

A. The NSN is: 4200-00-444-71 18. The covers can be obtained through 

normal supply channels. 

Q. We have received thelink reinforcementset forour MGB. However, 

we have not received any guidance as to how to employ it, nor can we 

find any information in any DA pamphlets about this kit. 

A. TM 5-5420-21 2-1 2-1, Link Reinforcement Set for the Medium Girder 

Bridge(LRS1, is availablethrough normal channels. An additional chapter 

covering the LRS will be included soon in TM 5-5420-21 2-12, Medium 

Girder Bridge. A mobile training team from Ft. Belvoir, the office of NonResident Training, can also be requested for Army Reserve or National 

Guard units. The AUTOVON number is 354-3008, commercial (703) 

664-3008. 

I I 
Engineer

Platoon 

Leader 

at 

vou graduated from EOBC 

- - three months ago in the top 20 

oercent of vour class. You took a 

quick 30-day leave to relax and then 

reported to your unit ready to start 

work with the "Real Army!' 

After a hasty introduction, your 

new company commander briefed 

you on all your additional duties, 

told you that you would be taking 

over second platoon, and said that 

the company would be leaving for 

Fort Irwin, CA, to provide support 

to 3rd Brigade at the National 

Training Center. 

It's now the fourth day of a 14-day 

rotation through the training center. Since the exercise kicked off, the 

task force that your platoon is 

supporting has conducted a night 

attack, a deliberate daylight attack, 

and is currently preparing to 

defend to retain a battle position. So 

far, your platoon has not been 

actively involved in any of the 

operations. 

The S-3 has approached you 

several times for information he 

needed to write the Engineer annex 

to the task force operations order; 

hut for the most part, you just 

attend the briefings, try to understand where your platoon fits into 

the order of movement, and then 

follow the vehicles in front of you to 

the objective. You are beginning to 

wonder when you will get a "real 

mission" so you can show these 

tread-heads what the Engineers 

can really do. 

At 0330 you receive word to attend 

a warning order briefing at the task 

force TOC in 30 minutes. As you 

arrive, the S-3 is going over the 

general situation: The task force 

has received a reflex mission and 

will conduct a hasty attack NLT 

0800. The various members of the 

staff go through their portions of 

the briefing as you settle hack and 

by CPT David R. Frick 

mentally wonder how you're going 

to get all your vehicles topped off 

with fuel before 0800. 

After the artillery finishes their 

portion of the hriefing, you expect 

the 5-3 to stand up and tell everyone 

what the Engineer mission is. Normally in an offensive operation like 

the one just received, the 5-3 will 

say something about the priority of 

Engineer effort as being to "provide 

mobility support as required" and 

then move on to coordinating 

instructions. 

However, this time it's different. 

Instead of the S3, the task force 

commander gets up and explains 

that for the last two operations, the 

task force has been criticized in 

after-action critiques concerning its 

utilization of Engineers. The ADC 

will he observing the attack in the 

morning, and the task force WILL 

function as a cohesive and coordinated Combined Arms unit. The TF 

commander proceeds to outline the 

type and size of threat-force 

obstacles to be expected and then 

turns to you and says, "What do the 

Engineers say about how we should 

breach obstacles in a situation like 

this?" 

You stumble to your feet as your 

mind races for an answer to his 

question. Your momentary silence 

provides an opportunity for others 

in the TOC to bring up their own 

questions. 

"Shouldn't we he attaching a squad 

of you guys out to each of the company teams?" 

"Who actually controls you 

anyway?" 

"What exactly can you do that the 

grunts can't do?" 

"What kind of special breaching 

assets do you have?" 

The commander calls for silence 

and waits for your response. You 

mention that most of your mine 

detectors were working before you 

left for NTC. Also, your platoon 

sergeant brought some fiberglass 

probes and enough demolitions to 

blow the mines in place once you 

detect them. 

The S3 then asks how you plan to 

solicit volunteer detector operators 

for the upcoming assault under 

direct fire. . . Silence. ..Anxiousto 

get yourself out of the line of direct 

fire, you fall hack on the old cop-out 

you learned at the basic course and 

mutter, "Sir, I'll look into it and get 

hack with you ASAP' 

The S-3 shakes his head, and the 

sergeant major gives you a look 

that would freeze tequilla. You sit 

hack down and for the first time 

since graduation seriously consider 

\!our ilnrlt. I.:cldie's offer to ioin his 

insurance firm after you get out. 
adly enough. the situation de-

!, scribed here has occurred more 

often than we as Engineers would care 

to admit. The reasons it occurs are 

many, and the solutions are neither 

simple nor easy to implement. The purpose of this article is to focus some 

attention on key areas and identify 

some actions that will assist the platoon leader in overcoming or at least 

minimizing some of the problems. 

'Ib begin, the role of the Engineer platoon leader must be clearly understood. 

Unlike his infantry or armor counterpart, the Engineer platoon leader has 

two separate roles that he must fill: 

Platoon Leader-That of leader, 

manager, and supervisor of a small 

unit. 

Staff Officer-That of Engineer 

advisor and "expert" on the task 

force staff. 

Understandably, this is a tremendous 

responsibility for anyone with the 

experience and knowledge of a second 

lieutenant to be expected to fulfill. The 

task is made even more difficult because most rnaneuvel. commanders and 

S~3sare not proficient in planning for 

the use of Engineers. 

The result is that many times at 

NTC,Engineer support is relatively 

ineffective. Obstacles are not placed to 

support the tactical plan and are easily 

bypassed. Obstacle breaching and 

fighting position construction is conducted by maneuver forces alone when 

the bulk of the effort should be performed by Engineers. 

So, how can a lieutenant with six 

months time in service have any 

impact on task-force operations in a 

realistic combat environment? Several 

points outlined below can contribute to 

Engineer performance at the task-force 

level and are within the power of the 

lieutenant to implement. 

Be technically and tactically 

proficient. Know what your platoon's 

capabilities are in providing mobility, 

countermobility, and survivability support in a Combined-Arms operation. 

You're not expected to be a walking 

field or technical manual, but you 

Engineers must coordinate with 

their supported maneuver units. 

The minefield emplaced by Engineers is being closed by the withdrawing Cavalry unit (US.Army 

photo). 

should have a firm grasp on what your 

platoon's mission is and what its 

capabilities and limitations are. You 

also need to be aware of how the 

maneuver force plans to fight. 

Here again, you are not expected to 

be an expert tactician, hut you should 

be able to intelligently assess the 

effects of Engineer effort in the overall 

tactical plan. Characteristics and capabilities of U.S. weapon systems should 

come as second nature. Becoming proficient in this area requires a lot of individual effort on your part. EOBC gave 

you a basis to serve in a wide variety 

of Engineer assignments. Once you 

find yourself attached to a combat unit, 

the responsibility falls to you to ensure 

that you are professionally competent. 

Seek out and insist upon joint train-
ing with your supported maneuver unit. 

Engineers cannot expect to train in a 

vacuum and then function effectively 

when thrown together with a combat 

arms unit at the last minute. Get to 

know the commanders that you will he 

working for. Understand how they 

operate and what they expect of yon. 

Let them know who you are and what 

you can and cannot do for them. 

Practice drills with your supported 

units and within your platoon for certain actions that are expected to occur 

on the battlefield For example, your 

platoon may want to have breaching 

teams established with individual roles 

and actions defined and equipment 

identified. This ensures that everyone 

knows what is expected and eliminates 

a lot of planning and preparation time 

when actually in the field. 

Take an active part in the task force 

planning and briefing sessions. Don't 

hold back and wait to be tasked with 

something to do. Seek out the S-3 and 

offer to write or assist in writing the 

Engineer annex and obstacle plan for 

the task force operations order. You are 

the Engineer expert and have much to 

contribute to how the commander 

plans his operations. 

Use your subordinates effectiuely. Your 

platoon sergeant has a tremendous 

amount of experience that is there for 

the asking. Use him and your squad 

leaders effectively and don't try to do 

everything yourself. While you're 

involved with the planning process 

(which will occupy a large part of your 

time), let the platoon sergeant run the 

platoon. Provide guidance and followup supervision as appropriate. 

Develop a "leader's booh."Compile a 

list of commonly referred to data and 

checklists that will assist you in the 

performance of your mission. You can't 

carry all your FMs and TMs to the 

field, so just include the information 

that you feel will be critical. The idea 

is to have something readily available 

that will jog your memory and keep 

you from forgetting important 

responsibilities. 

As the senior Engineer in a battalion-size unit, you have a tremendous 

responsibility to fulfill. You must make 

the effort to become proficient in your 

profession as quickly as possible. Most 

commanders will understand your situation and will assist you as much as 

possible However, there is no excuse for 

incompetence. Remember, what you 

lack in experience must be made up in 

motivation. 

CPT Duuid R. Frick is an instructor 

assigned to the Field Engineering 

Branch, Department of Military 

Engineering, at the Engineer School, 

Fort Beluois VA. He has served in 

Engineer trcup and staff assignments in 

Germany and CONUS CPTFrick has 

a bachelor's degree in chemistry from 

The Citadel and a master's degree in 

business administration from Boston 

University. 

The siting and construction of fightingpositions is another example of the close coordin;~tion requircd betacen 

Engineers and their supported maneuver units. The tactical commander knows where to position his weapon 

systems while the Engineer knows how to construct the positions (U.S. Army photo). 

26 ENGINEERlSprlng 1985 
The 

a, 
 Fubkct Matter Exne1t7t
 %A 

The Subject Matter Expert Program, which may not be understood outside of the TRADOC command, is an effort by the TRADOC 

schools to improve the quality of the 

doctrinal manuals and other training 

products exported to the field. The U.S. 

Army Engineer School wholeheartedly ~~L. Lj~:- ~~~~-p~-~~~
 suppvrw rnls program. 

The Subject Matter Expert Program 

is designed to simplify, standardize, 

and institutionalize the responsibilities 

for writing and staffing doctrinal and 

training publications, answering questions from the field, and accomplishing 

other tasks related to particular Engineer subiect areas. 

A subject Matter Area (SMAI is an 

area or topic that is considered so 

important by the Engineer School that 

it has made a concerted effort to institutionalize the expertise. The School 

Program 

bv u 
MAJ David T. White

has identified various departments and 

directorates to maintain the required 

expertise. The training departments 

are responsible for the majority of the 

subject matter areas. 

Within the three training departments, the SMAs have been assigned 

primarily to the instructional divisions 

or branches. In most cases, the SMAs 

are closely related to the subjects in 

which the branch provides instruction 

in one or more of the resident courses. 

The SMAs for the three training 

departments are shown in Figures 1, " -...I" *, a,," 0. 

A Subied Matter Ex~ert . ISMEJ is an 

instructor within the branch who has 

responsibility for a particular SMA. 

The SME could be an officer, an NCO, 

or a civilian. The SME has been 

assigned by the branch chief as the 

General Engineering 

Combat Enginaerlng 

Brltlsh Royal tngineerr 

Engineer ANCOC 

I 

<. 

point of contact or action officer for all 

tasks related to the SMA. The SME is 

expected to continually update and 

build on his expertise in the subject 

area. 

This program is of tremendous benefit to the Engineer in the field. He now 

has an identified point of contact 

within the ~n~ineer~chool for all the 

subjects that might concern him. The 

areas cover the spectrum of leadership, 

tactical, and technical subjects. 

The instrncforslSMEs in the 

branches divide their time appropriately to handle both teaching the suhiect and authorine " doctrinal literature 

hr training products related to the subject. The project could be an FM, 

ARTEP, SQT, POI, or some other training product. The number of soldiers in 

the training departments at the EngiI I 
 I

Field Engineering Bridsing Slrvcturst L 

Branch Branch Util8ties 

-

Branch 

-
1 I 


ROldf 8 Engln8B115 Manlg(~l(fll 

A~rfltlds Housing Management 60AC ADM 

DIYiSlO" Branch Branch Olvlsion 

LiHidd M!m/ AFCS 

Cons6uction Cantract Mansganent 

Asphalt Production F8ctl8ty Managomant 

L paving Housing Management 

Constr~dio~Eq~ipment 

oust Control 

Geology 

EIT/PE 

Quarry a Crushing 

Opsrationr 


Railroads 


Airfield Damage Tnining Development 
 Repair Computer-Based instr~~tton 


Road Oesirn/Conrtrurtion CPM
 Soils AOP I"ltl"~tl0" 
 Tunneling 


Mabilitr fixed Bridging 

Countcrmabilitr Float Bridgtng 

Survivability Nonrtandard 

Booby Traps Bridging 

Camouflage 

Oemoliti~nr 

Englnesrr in U"l!T 

Engineer Reconnaisuncs 

Field Fortifications 

Mlne Wsrfaa 

Obstacles 

Soviet Engineer Opmtiont 

...... . .., Concrete Constrvction 

EIBE~IIC~IConstruction 

Pipcllnes a POL 

DitIr#b~t#onS~~temf 

stwerage 

Water Systems 

SC23 Course 

FIGURE 1. Department of Military Engineering Subject Matter Areas, 
DCA Combined Arms Training 

I 


Command 


Division 


Engineer Pre-Command Course 

Leadership 

Training Management 

Personnel Management 

Military Justice 

Communicative Arts 

History 

SGM Academy Common Core 

I 

I 7 

Tactics & 

Operations 

Division 

Tactics 

Engineer Planning g Estimating 

Engineer Support of the 

Combined Arms Team 

NBC 

Communications 

Threat 

Terrorism 

AirLand Battle 

I -

EOBC 

Division 

EOBC Course 

FIGURE 2. Department of Combined Arms Subject Matter Areas. 

('l?'i\:~ron iltrsh, it ,stzt;jcct rn;lttrr. ccsprrt in hot11 drainage and equipn~cnl irtilizntion. ptv3pares lesson plans. He 

is ass;g.nr.d to the Roads and Airfields Branch, DME, at the Engineer School (17.5.Arn1.y photo). 

28 ENGlNEERlSpring 1985 
neer School that exclusively instruct 

has been dramatically reduced through 

this program. 

Since all of this work is related, 

quality is improved in all areas. The 

key to the concept is the continuous 

interaction with the field in the 

classroom. The instructorlSME is constantly getting feedback from the 

students enroute from Engineer 

assignments all over the world. The 

feedback-plus the reference effort 

made by the instructorISME-improves 

both the instruction at the School and 

the doctrine and training products the 

School produces. 

The U.S. Army Engineer School has 

published Fort Belvoir Regulation 10-1 

to publicize this program to the Engineer community. It details all of the 

Engineer SMAs and the responsible 

agencies. Requests for this regulation 

should he sent to the Directorate of 

Evaluation and Standardization, 

ATZA-ES,Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5271 

or call (702) 664-3668 !AV 354-3668). 

Questions, comments, or concerns on 

any of the SMAs can be directed to the 

appropriate department. 

Department of Military Engineering 

responsibility can be sent directly to 

the department, ATTN: ATZATE, 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5331 or call 

(703) 663.262813998 (AV 354-26281 

3998). 

Department of Combined Arms 

responsibility can he sent directly to 

the department, ATTN: ATZA-TC, 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5341 or call 

(703) 664-290712093 (AV 354-29071 

2093). 

Department of Military Logistics 

responsihility can be sent directly to 

the department, AITN: ATZA-TM, 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5351 or call 

(703) 664.314413303 (AV 354-31441 

3303). 

MAJ David I: White is the Assistant 

Directo~Department of Militaq Engineering, at the Engineer School, Fort 

Belvoi,: He is an Armor officpr who 

gmdaated from the Armor Officer 

Advanced Course in 1978 and the 

Facility/Contract Construction Management Coarse in 19R3. He has been 

selected to attend the Command and 

General Staff College. MAJ White has 

serued in Engineer assignments at Fort 

Bragg and in Armor assignments in 

Europe and at Fort Hood. He has a 

bachelor of science degree in Civil 

Engineering from West Virginia 

Universi2y. 

Logistics Training 

New Equipment Systems 

Utility 

Equipment 

Repair 

Branch 

Refrigeration 

Air Conditioners 

Heaters 

Bottle Cleaning Charging 

Station (Stinger) 

I 

52D I I 52F 

Magic Mast I 

Power 

Generation 

Repair 

Branch ? 

Logistics 

Management 

Branch 

Turbine Engine 

Generator 

Repa~rBranch 

-

Supply Management 

Maintenance Management 

Transportation Management 

Generators (5-100 KW) Generators for 

Arc Welders Patr~ot 

SGT York 

FIGURE 3. Department of Military Logistics Subject Matter Areas. 

Starting with the Summer 1986 issue, ENGINEER will 

feature "Past in Review." This new department will focus on 

eignificant people and events in the Corps of Engineers 

throughout American history. Readers are encouraged to 

eend manuscripts and photographs to ENGINEER. Please 

include author's biographical sketch, address, and telephone 

number. Photos and manuscripts can be returned upon 

request. 
! 


u 


7 by 1LT Kenneth A. Kennedy 

9 
 ~~. 9 

9 

Gallant Eagle '84, a joint readiness 

exercise sponsored by the U.S. Central 

Command, involved units from the 

XVIII Airborne Corps, the 1st Infantry 

Division, and elements of the Air Force. 

The battle was fought in several training areas throughout the Mojave 

Desert in southern California, each 

command playing off a similar OPFOR 

Scenario' 

Planning 

The l0lst received the Corps 

OPLAN on July 31,1984, but planning 

had begun long before. A brigade task 

force with all its supporting elements 

was deployed from Ft Campbell, KY. 

The brigade's supporting Engineers 

were supplemented at NTC by units 

from the 20th Engineer Brigade to 

increase the amount of "heavy" equipment available for operations. For most 

ofthe exercise, the task force had the 

support of thirteen bulldozers, seven 

scoop loaders, four scrapers, and over 

400 Engineers (not the normal task 

force complement). 

The obstacle plan designed by the 

Brigade Engineer, CPT Roy Hightower, 

called for immense amounts of Class 

IV barrier material. The plan consisted 

of five linear, cross-compartment obstacle traces that ran two to three kilometers across the valley. An in-depth 

terrain analysis, CPX, and on-theground reconnaissance (TEWT) before. hand confirmed the feasibility of the 

plan. 

Time would be a major factor. What 

work rates could the bulldozers maintainin desert soil? How long could man 

and machine operate efficiently in a 

very hot, dry and dusty environment? 

As final preparations were completed, 

the Brigade Engineer made a final 

tabulation of the necessary Class IV 

amounts: 4,000 rolls of concertina, 212 

rolls of barbed wire, 5,000 pickets, and 

10,000 simulated mines. 

n.ansportinp the barrier material 

8+& 

!? 
 u.'
 nits from the 1st Infantry Division got a taste of Engineer 

handiwork at 0400 hours on Sept. 8, 

1984. Facing them was a desert 

Maginot Line that stretched from one 

side of the Valley of Death to the other. 

As Gallant Eagle '84 continued, the 

value of solidly constructed, well-placed 

obstacles became apparent. While the 

infantry and field artillery chalked up 

estimated casualties caused by "notional firepower," the Combat Engineers of the lOlst Airborne Division 

(Air Assault) demonstrated the effectiveness of real combat multipliers. 
over 2,000 miles would be a problem in 

itself. The 2%-ton dump trucks organic 

to an air assault Engineer battalion 

would have to be loaded with Class IV 

material instead of the normal complement of squad tools and personal gear. 

If the mines had been actual training 

mines insteadof sandbags, transportation planning would have been even 

more constrained. This illustrates the 

fact that the Engineer obstacle plan is 

likely to he limited by transportation 

of barrier material, rather than by 

available manpower. 

Deployment 

Heavy Engineer equipment was 

deployed by rail in mid-August from 

Fort Campbell to Georgia, then 

transported by ship 3,000 miles to 

California. The bulk of the task force 

equipment, including the Engineer tactical vehicles, was sent directly to 

California. The remainder ofthe Engineer tools and equipment was loaded 

into MILVANS and convoyed to the 

NTC. The medium-lift helicopters of 

the task force self-deployed, while 

others used MAC for support. 

Finally, the troops of the task force 

were transported by military and civilian aircraft with the final flights arriving on September 3. Logistic support 

teams at key points coordinated billet. 

ing and made medical and dining 

arrangements for soldiers involved in 

the loading and unloading operations. 

Obstacle Construction 

The task force commander, COL 

Harding, gave the release to begin 

obstacle preparation on September 3. 

Four days later, five linear traces lay 

across the Valley of Death. Each trace 

consisted of concertina-filled antitank 

ditches (11 kilometers total length), 

simulated minefields, and nonstandard 

concertina obstacles. 

The plan called for tank ditches to be 

dug concurrently with the installation 

of minefields by the troops. A D-5 

bulldozer and a scoop loader working 

in tandem were the most efficient. 

Work rates of 25 meters per hour were 

accomplished with this combination. 

Because of the underlying rocks at 

NTC, it would be advantageous to use 

heavy bulldozers (D-7 or D-8) with rippers to precede the smaller bulldozer1 

scoop loader combination. 

The Engineers cut a standard rectangular ditch and deposited the soil 

on the friendly side bank. The situa~ 

tion did not allow for much experimentation, but consideration should be 

given to a tank ditch with an angled 

enemy side (rather than perpendicular 

to the ditch floor). This would make it 

much more difficult for enemy tracked 

vehicles to cave-in the banks and 

bridge the obstacle. 

Whenever possible, the traces were 

tied into small hill masses on the 

valley floor and wadiis running off the 

Tiefort Mountains and Furlong Ridge. 

Gaps left in the traces were later closed 

with crate~<ng charges once all forward 

ground units had withdrawn to the 

rear. The closed gaps had to be rein^ 

forced with additional material later 

due to the energy-absorbing characteristic of the loose, desert soil. 

Maintenance problems that did arise 

during construction seemed more 

related to extended use and vehicle age 

than environmental factors. However, 

tires did receive excessive wear traversing rocky terrain. Filters and wheel 

seals were replaced frequently. Hydraulic system failures were a major 

problem-bursting hoses were 

commonplace. 

Because of the low density of Engineer equipment, many of the parts 

needed during the exercise could not be 

procurred through the supply system, 

but had to be fabricated or locally procurred. One solution to the problem 

involved using a Class A agent to procure repair parts commercially. This 

solution is particularly effective at the 

NTC where the nearby city of Los 

Angeles has many vendors of heavy 

equipment parts. 

Once the countermobility operations 

had been nearly completed, several 

survivability positions were constructed for the task force TOW and 

DRAGON weapon systems. The lack of 

overhead-cover materials was overcome 

by using portable fighting shelterspreformed fiberglass shells reinforced 

with a covering of sandbags. 

The Exercise 

Although the exercise officially 

began on September 5, the OPFOR 

main attack started at 0400 hours on 

September 8 as a mechanized team 

from the 1st Infantry Division began 

probing the lOlst sector. After several 

smoke-filled minutes, they withdrew 

east. The defenses were as formidable 

as the 1st Infantry Division commander had suspected. A full-scale 

attack the next day eventually 

breached all of the obstacle traces. The 

l0lst Infantry, in conducting an Air 

Assault delay, slowly withdrew to the 

rear of the battle area. 

An M-88tank recovery vehicle tows two threat force vehicles which have been "drstro\-ed" hy fiicndly fire during exercises at the NTC, Fort Irm'n, CA (photo hv MAJ Robert Somers). 
At MOPP 0.\cI 4. this soldivv 

looks for enem) mines with a 

mine detector (photo by MAJ 

Robert Somers). 

According to one Engineer platoon 

leader, "We sat on top of one ofthe hills 

overlooking the valley and watched the 

smoke pop (simulating the explosion of 

the mines), but the OPFOR tanks kept 

coming." It is reasonable to assume 

that any obstacle requiring 35 minutes 

to breach would be highly successful 

when covered by real-lifp direct and 

indirect fire. 

At this point, the task force established an air assault defense in preparation for air assault deep attack 

against two objectives in the enemy 

rear This was especially challenging 

because the air assault was conducted 

under the cover of darkness. Once the 

objectives were taken, friendly forces in 

the south linked-up with the air 

assault forces, concluding the exercise. 

Engineers from the 20th Engineer 

Brigade performed several successful 

missions during the exercise, including 

an airstrip-denial mission and an 

airstrip-construction mission. 

Endex was called at 1000 hours on 

September 10. Following a number of 

"hot washes" and after action reviews, 

redeployment began. Previous arrangements and prior experience made plan^ 

ning for the redeployment much easier. 

Lessons Learned 

The Engineers came hack from NTC 

with much information about operations in the desert. Many of the points 

stressed by LTC John Mennig("Getting 

Up To Speed" ENGINEER, Fall 1983) 

were confirmed. Some of the comments 

made by the Engineer units in their 

after-action review include: 

The logistics hurden was eased 

through the use of containerized 

deployment system drops and helicopter slingloading.

.Mines should be surface-laid in 

nonstandard patterns. Using simulated mines, however, does not adequately give realistic installation 

time or manpower requirements. 

Antitank ditches where rock is lying 

three feet below the surface of the 

ground require the use of bulldozers 

with rippers. 

Concertina must be solidly anchored 

to the ground, thereby preventing 

easy removal with rope and grappling hook. 

.Prefabricated position shelters are 

necessary when no natural cover 

materials are available. 

Obstacle gaps should be turned over 

to the infantry immediately. This 

frees Engineers to continue work on 

Engineer tasks. 

'Maintenance units deploying with 

the task force must be able to service 

heavy Engineer equipment. Also, 

they should have the capability to 

fabricate hoses and fittings for 

hydraulic systems. 

Aircraft-lifting capability is greatly 

diminished in the desert-especially 

at midday. 

The principle lesson learned during 

Gallant Eagle '84 was that light, air 

assault infantry, when supported by a 

detailed and well~executed obstacle 

plan, can be effective against mechanized forces in a desert environment. 

ILT Kenneth A. Kennedy is thc 

liaison officerfor the Assistant Division 

Engineer of the lOlst Airborne Diuision 

iAirAssa111t) ntFort Campbell KY He 

is n graduate of the United States Milb 

tary Academ,y. 

Although the D-7 dozer clears obstacles and digs tank ditches, the M-9 ACE would greatly improv" Engineer 

capahility which is vital on the AirLand Battlefield (photo by MAJ Robert Somers). 

32 ENGlNEERlSpring 1985 
by ILT StevenW. Chandler and SGT David J. Mohan 


1. Add far reinforcement anchorag~ 

2. Add first links and far reinforcement post 

, , 

3. Add additional links, support by light tackle 

4. Continue booming, add links, near reinforcement post and anchorage 

5. Complete launch and jack down, release light tackle 
6. Reinforcement posts pulled towards vertical and pinned Illurtrationr courtety of Fairey tngineerinc LID 

s'
lnce its ~ntroduction more than a decade. ago, . the Medium Girder 

Bridge (MGB) has gained rapid accep1:tnrc throudh ,r~rNATO as .I r:i.rlcnl 

1ixt.d-hrida~ne .., u :tssrt of ~11,~tu311f.d

simplicity, reliability, and speed of construction. As a complement to the 

proven Bailey M-2 panel bridge, the 

MGB rounds out our inventory of standard fixed bridges and will undoubtedly see extensive service for years to 

come. 

Developed by Fairey Engineering of 

Great Britain, the MGB permits the 

rapid construction of Class 60 spans as 

long as 103 feet (31.4 meters) without 

the need for intermediate supports. In 

recent years, however, the U.S. Army 

and its NATO allies have produced new 

families of armored vehicles with military load classifications nearing Class 

70 (the M-l Abrams tank, for example). 

This fact, coupled with the desire to 

increase the maximum unsupported 

gap-crossing capability of the MGB, 

prompted efforts to provide a means of 

quickly and easily reinforcing the 

bridge. 

To this end, the U.S. developed and 

type-classified the Cable Reinforcing 

Set (CRS) in September 1978. It never 

\vent intr product),11. lrow~!,er.0t.c I~I;C 

tht, .i.Y.L~.III nrottd unw~~.ld\, The ('I<$

was difficult to construct, and funds for 

procurement were not available. Additionally, the cables themselves supported a major portion of the load, 

thereby preventing a good shared-load 

distribution. 

Further efforts on the CRS were 

dropped when Fairey Engineering 

developed the Link Reinforcement Set 

(LRS). The set alleviates the problems 

observed with the CRS and extends the 

single span Class 60 capability of the 

MGB to 163 feet (49.7 meters). It also 

pi.ovides a Class 70 capability up to 145 

feet (44.2 meters). 

Construction Process 

As the far end of the bridge passes 

over the launching roller beam (LRB), 

the far reinforcement anchorage is 

pinned to the first bottom panels 

(Figure I). 

As construction proceeds, the assembly crew adds the remaining links and 

reinforcement posts and anchorage. 

Light t:arklr s used lo tv~!~poror~ly su--

nend th(. I~nk. until tc,nsiun ~.aoolird. .. Upon completion of the launch, the 

bridge is jacked down and the tackle 

released. During the decking and 

ramping drill, the reinforcement is ten^ 

sioned using Tirfor jacks attached to 

the reinforcement post mechanisms. 

The reinforcement posts are then 

pulled nearly vertical and pinned. The 

effect is a slight upward bowing of the 

center of the bridge, with a portion of 

the load being transmitted through the 

links. 

Construction Time 

Fairey Engineering contends that 

installation of the LRS will not appreciably increase building times of a comparable unreinforced bridge. However, 

practical experience shows that construction times should be increased 

approximately 10 percent for trained 

troops. 
Fielding Plan 

The LRS worked well during the test w 


phase after a slight modification of the Engineer Problem 

rollers. A contract was let in February 

1983 for seven sets, with an additional 

18 sets scheduled for procurement by 

FY 86. 

Each MGB company will be authorized two Link Reinforcement Sets. The 

first seven sets have been issued to the 

264th Engineer Company (MGB), at 

Fort Bragg, NC; 516th Engineer Company (MGB), Hanau, Germany; 38th 

Engineer Company (MGB), Kornwestheim, Germany; and the U.S. Army 

Training Center, Engineer, Fort Leonard Wood, MO. 

1LT Steven U! Chandler is a fixed 

bridge instructor at the US. Army 

Engineer School. He was a platoon 

leader and company executiue oficer 

with the 902nd Engineer and HHC 

companies ofthe 11th Engineer Battalion ICBT)(HVY)at Fort Beluoir; VA. He 

is a graduate ofEOBC and has a master's degree in systems management 

from the Uniuersity of Southern 

California 

SGT David J. Mohan, reassigned to 

Germany, was a fixpd and float bridge 

instuctor at the US. Army Engineer 

School. He was previously assigned to 

the 10th Engineer Battalion, Kitzingen, 

Germany, and is ugraduate ofPNCOC, 

BPTC, and ITC. 

Your unit has to construct five tank turning pads that are to be 1 

feet each (see illustration below). The con1 :rete mix Iproportion 

one cubic yard batch are: 

---,.- Cement 786 lbs or 8.4 sm~ns 

Water 275 lbs or 33 gallons 

Fine aggregate 893 lbs or 8.1 cubic feet 

Coarse aggregate 1,971 lbs or 20.8 cubic feet 

1. IDetermine the amounts of matel lired for tl >is task. 

2.1rhefineaggregate has 4.5 percer rface moil iture. The1 :oarse --.-.-. L. a A:. &L aggregare nas one percent free surrace rnolsrure. nujusl me mix 

proportions for the moisture on the aggregi Btes. 

3. You are to mix the concrete using 16-S mixers. Adjust ttbe mix 

proportions accordingly. 

Plan V 

Typical C:ross Secti ion 7 

--TI T b: 

RIEFERENCES: FM 5- 35; TM 5-742 

(Problem/Solution submitted by CPT Rob tert J. lrby!,Departn lent of 

Military Engineering). 

The U.S. Army and its NATO allies harr produced nrw families of armored vehirlrs precipitating the nerd for 

a good bridge reinforcement system (U.S. Army photo). 
Complex 

cOhstacbe 

Breach 

bv CPT Kenneth A. Harshbarger 

The Dismounted Complex Obstacle 

Breach Course was constructed 

by the 2nd Engineer Battalion to train 

dismounted Combined Arms forces on 

obstacle-breaching and lane-marking 

operations. The course represents 

anticipated defensive ohstacle systems 

that trooos could encounter during dis- u 

mounted breaching operations. The 

course consists of ten obstacles 

emplaced in depth, four enemy bunkers, six demolitions pits, and one safety 

bunker. 

After an obstacle is detected, the 

advancing Combined Arms force is 

organized into four separate elements: 

The hreaching force which breaches and marks a foot path through the 

course. This force is composed of 

Engineers. 

The assault force khich neutralizes 

and destroys enemy forces in the 

breach area and on the objective. The 

assault force can include Engineers 

along with the infantry. 

The support force, composed of 

infantry, which provides over-watching fire and command and control of 

the operation. 

The Engineer deliberate hreacbing force which widens and remarks the initial breach to allow 

vehicle traffic. 

The course is divided into six obstacle 

system zones. Each zone must be 

breached and secured before a force 

AirLand Battle doctrine has changed the priority 

of battle tasks and focused training on mobility 

operations. These operations require well-trained, 

coordinated and integrated Combined Arms teams. 

The teams are physically and mentally trained to 

use the element of surprise and initiative in breaching the depth of defensive obstacle systems. Time, 

speed, and agility are essential to synchronize combat firepower and mobility of forces through 

barriers. 

Although bypassing an obstacle is still the 

desired course of action, breaching an obstacle will 

sometimes yield preferred results by avoiding 

threat kill zones and friendly force channelization. 

I 

Concealed by smoke, the breaching force marks a lane through the 

minefield (photo by CPT Kenneth A. Harshbarger). 

deliberate breaching force then follows, 

widening the lanes. 

The breaching and assault forces 

enter the hitial Obstacle System Zone 

and breach a footpath through an 

enemy minefield consisting of antitank 

and antipersonnel mines 50 meters 

in depth. The breaching force must 

breach and mark a lane through the 

minefield while concealed from enemy 

observation and fire by darkness or a 

smoke screen. As the breaching force 

marks a lane through the obstacle, the 

rock obstacles distributed 75 meters in 

depth. The hreaching force breaches 

and marks a dismounted lane through 

the obstacles, while the support force 

maneuvers to provide cover. Meanwhile, at the start of the course, the 

deliberate breaching force begins to 

widen the lane for vehicles to pass 

through the enemy minefield. 

The Rear Obstacle System Zone con-

.sistsof a seven-footelectric cattle fence, 

a triple standard concertina fence, 

an antitank ditch, and two enemy 

continues to the next zone. The course assault force maneuvers through the emplacements. The support force pronrovides realistic battlefield conditions zone. vides direct and indirect fire to clear 

that include both smoke and opposing 

forces. Soldiers are required to wear an 

armor vest and MILES equipment. 

As the breaching and assault forces 

breach and secure a zone, the support 

force maneuvers through the course 

providing direct and indirect fires for 

the breaching operation. The Engineer 

The Forward Obstacle System Zone 

consists of a triple standard concertina 

fence and a seven-foot electric cattle 

fence. Still concealed by night or under 

a smoke screen, forces breach and 

mark both obstacles. 

Next, the Main Obstacle SystemZone 

presents a series of dragon's teeth and 

~ ~~ ~ ~~ 

the enemy hunkers. Afterwards, the 

breaching force breaches and marks a 

dismounted lane through the wire 

entanglements and negotiates the antitank ditch which is mined and boobytrapped to prevent the assault force 

from using the ditch as a fighting position. At this point, the deliberate 
breaching force widens the forward 

zone for vehicle traffic 

The Defensive Obstacle System Zone 

consists of an enemy minefield 50 

meters in depth and a 10-foot antitank 

wall with two enemy emplacements. 

The support force and assault Force 

neutralize the enemy bunkers before 

the breaching force breaches the minefield and negotiates the antitank wall. 

A lane through the minefield is 

breached and the antitank wall negotiated to allow the assault force to continue forward. 

The Final Obstacle System Zone consists of a triple standard concertina 

fence. A dismounted lane through the 

wire entanglements is breached and 

marked. Then, the breaching force, the 

assault force, and the support force 

maneuver through the lane and set up 

a perimeter securing the far side of the 

obstacle system. 

At this time, the deliberate breaching 

force breaches one of the dragon's teeth 

and one rock obstacle using reinforcedconcrete breaching charges. They then 

mark a vehicle lane through the Main 

Obstacle System Zone. The training 

exercise ends with the destruction of 

the dragon's teeth and rock obstacle. 

Well-coordinated and integrated 

Combined Arms mobility operations 

are necessary for successful AirLand The 10-foot antitank wall is no 

Battle operations. Success requires problem to the breaching force 

detailed planning and rehearsals in in the Defensive Obstacle System 

assembly areas before such an opera- Zone (photo by CPT Kenneth A. 

tion begins. The 2nd Infantry Division Harshbarger). 

identified the need for a dismounted 

Combined Arms force obstaclebreathing and lane-marking course. It 

was constructed by Company C, 2nd 

Engineer Battalion in Korea. The 

Army now has a Dismounted Complex 

Obstacle Breach Course for soldiers 

and leaders to use for training. 

CPT Kenneth A. Harshbarger is a 

graduate of the Engineer Oficer Advance Course and commands Company 

C, 2nd Engineer Battalion, in the 

Republic of Korea. CPT Harshbarger 

has served as aplatoorz lendel: company 

executiue ofice,: and S-4 staffoficer.in 

the 326th Engineer Battalion, Fort 

Campbell, KY 

Note: Complex obstacle breaching doc 

trine for heavy divisions is outlined in 

FM 71-2J (Dram The Tank and 

Mechanized Infantry Battalion 

Task Force, and FM 5.101, Mobility. 

Light unit breaching doctrine is still 

under development. This article is one 

way a unit trains for dismounted obstacle breaching as an expedient method 

to meet training needs. 

Soldiers breach and mark triple standard concertina and an electric cattle fence in the Forward Obstacle System 

Zone (photo by CPT Kenneth A. Harshbarger). 
he Total Army Team is alive and 

well, as exemplified by the 416th 

Engineer Command's increasing Engineer support of the Eighth U.S. Army 

(EUSA) in the Republic of Korea. 

Through the CAPSTONE program, the 

416th Engineer Command (ENC0M)-

the largest Engineer organization in 

the force structure with over 8,000 

Engineers-has acquired global 

responsibilities. The area of operations 

ranges from the Persian Gulf to Korea 

and the Western Pacific. If hostilities 

were initiated, ENCOM's commander, 

MG Max Baratz, would become the 

EUSA Engineer. 

Engineer Needs 

The Eighth U.S. Army and its 

Republic of Korea allies have a common goal, the maintenance of peace in 

Northeast Asia. General Robert W. 

Sennewald, former Commander of U.S. 

Forces Korea (USFK), has stated that 

these forces must be able to take the 

fight to the enemy in depth should 

South Korea he attacked by North 

Korean forces. 

The small, tough EUSA force combined with other U.S. armed forces and 

Republic of Korea forces provides an 

effective deterrent to aggression with 

a high state of combat readiness. However, because of its economy-of-forceprofile, EUSA relies on the availability of 

other active and reserve forces should 

the growing North Korean military 

threat break into open hostilities. 

The ability to swiftly reinforce EUSA 

with combat, service support, and 

logistical units is an essential part of 

the total deterrence. The lean EUSA 

force is reflected in its limited 

availability of Engineering support, 

both unit and non-unit. 

In early 1983,after discussions with 

the USFKEUSA Engineer on how the 

ENCOM's broad range of Engineering 

skills and depth in personnel could 

assist in their missions, tbe Third U.S. 

Army approved the involvement of the 

416th in Korea. Discussions culminated later that year in a formal agreement to provide continuing ENCOM 

support for USFKIEUSA Engineer 

activities. 

Initial efforts focused on several 

areas including: 

Reinforcing USFKiEUSA Engineer 

personnel.

.Taking the lead in the preparation of 

the Civil Engineering Support Planning components. 

M11.l Keith Wedgcx<.sarninesan igneous basalt mrk outcrop duringa geologic evaluation of a suspected North Korean infiltration tunnel site (U.S. 

Army photo). 

.Providing Engineering support for 

the USFK POL system.

.Establishing a USFK program for 

the continuation of peacetime maintenance support during hostilities. 

Preparing the 416th ENCOM for 

deployment to the Republic of Korea. 

Establishing and maintaining close 

communicationslliaison with the 

USFKIEUSA. 

Since that formal agreement, 416th 

ENCOM support has increased at a 

steady rate. One indicator of this 

growth is the number of Reserve Engineer person trips to the Republic of 

Korea. Starting with zero person trips 

in FY 82, the rate has grown to 65 person trips in FY 85. 

Engineer Tasks 

Although the 416th has become 
involved in a variety of Engineer tasks, 

it may be useful to focus on how 

Reserve Engineers are contributing to 

the front-line efforts of the EUSA. 

Three such tasks are the ENCOM's 

Civil Engineering Support Planning 

fCESP); Reception, Staging, and 

Deployment (RS&D) Master Planning; 

and Geologic Support Team efforts. 

CESP Con~poneots 

Civil Engineering Support Planning 

(CESP) is primarily a planning tool 

used to test the feasibility of proposed 

operations plans in terms of required 

facilities construction. It also identifies 

specific actions required to improve the 

feasibility of a specific operational 

concept. 

The results of the CESP analysis 

became an appendix to the logistics 

annex of that operations plan. CESP 

compiles and extracts Engineering 

information that allows Western 

Pacific Command (WESTCOM), Pacific 

Area Command (PACOM), USFK, and 

EUSA to coordinate the efforts of subordinate units in base development. 

Using the CESP-G computer program to manage the data, 416th 

ENCOM planners identify the Engineering support required to provide 

mission-essential facilities to support 

specified operation plans. Such facilities include seaports, airports, roads, 

railroads, supply depots, maintenance 

installations, administrative facilities, 

and troop installations. CESP also 

identifies the Engineering effort 

required to I-epair essential facilities in 

a theater of operations. 

ENCOM planners are involved in 

CESP activities from planning and programming to the execution of the 

annex documents. To ensure effective 

CESP planning, each product must 

involve coordination with all levels of 

senior command-the Secretary of 

Defense, all military departments, the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff, WESTCOM, 

USFK, and EUSA. Besides providing 

the CESP planning support for EUSA, 

the 416th performs similar services for 

PACOM, U.S. Central Command, and 

WESTCOM. 

RS&D Planning 

The 416th ENCOM has established 

a facility master planning team to 

identify and plan the RS&D sites and 

facilities to receive and process 

designated EUSA reinforcements 

essential to EUSA's wartime operations. ENCOM planners are identifying alternative facility sites and 

developing required facility lists, by 

type and quantity, for a variety of 

potential troop populations. 

The RS&D master planning efforts 

cover a wide range of Engineering 

disciplines necessary for programming 

an installation for today's Army and 

tomorrow's needs. The final product of 

this effort will he detailed masterplanning documents that will guide 

construction of required facilities. 

(:rologir Support 

A team of 416th ENCOM geologists 

and geotechnical experts directly supports EUSA's Tunnel Neutralization 

Team (TNT) whose job is detecting 

North Korean Peoples Army efforts to 

tunnel beneath the Demilitarized 

Zone. The 416th continually works on 

specialized geologic evaluations of 

suspected infiltration sites. The 

analysis is aimed at characterizing 

each site geologically before site 

testing by a geophysical work crew. 

These crews bore holes and insert 

subterranean geophones and cameras 

to listen and look for signs of tunnel 

construction. ENCOM team geologic 

analysis is designed to establish the 

required number of holes and their 

locations and to recommend optimal 

depths for geophone and camera 

monitoring. 

In these days of economy of active 

forces, expanding global responsibilities, and need to maximize the 

combat arms deterrence, it is essential 

to mobilize our Total Engineer Force to 

defense objectives. 

MAJ Kurt Carlson and SP4Tatia 

Payne examine a microwave/ 

signal facility at Camp Long, 

Korea (U.S. Army photo). 

As the 416th ENCOM's direct support of "front line" comands grows, its 

title "Reserve" has increasingly 

become simply a payroll designation. 

With hundreds of professional engi~ 

neers, architects, and other specialists 

at their disposal, the 416th ENCOM 

and other Reserve Engineers stand 

ready to make major contributions to 

the Total Army efforts. 

MAJ Gaq L Groat is a staff officer 

with Headquarters, 416th Engineer 

Command IUSARI. Chicagq ZL. He 

lvas an advisor in the Construction 

Diwctorate Milttar?, Assistance Command Vietnam /MACVl and a company 

commander u!ith the 24th Engineer 

Battalion in Germany As a prqiect 

manager with the Washington, DC. 

office of De Lec~ulCather; and Company 

la part of the Ralph M Parsons Corporation), he specializes in transportation planning MAJ Groat has a bachelor's degree in architecture from the 

University of lllinois, a master's degree 

in science from the Uniuersity of Wisconsin, a postgraduate diploma fivm 

Edinburgh University /Scotland), and 

gradrcaled from the Command and 

Gmeral Staff College 

by MAJ Gary L. Groat 
xistorv
 t' 


and 

VV.itaryRagineering Design: 


An 18thCentury Example 

Figure 1 parapet 

Cross Section of Simple Fortification / 

,terreplain 

interior of 

his art~cle applies the principles of adeslyn , 'of French 18th century fortification to modern field fortification 

and obstacle design, hut it has the 

broader purpose of advocating history 

as a fertile source of design ideas. The 

first example provides a short ilustration of using history to discover principles useful in design and sets the 

stage for the more in\rolved 18th century example. 

The Belgian fortifications near Liege 

did not perform well during the German onslaught of August 1914, despite 

having been designed by one of the 

19th century's leading fortification 

theorists, General Brialmont. The 

forts, built in the late 1880s. gave inadequate protection against 1914 artillery; the concrete walls were too thin, 

were not reinforced with steel, and 

were made from a weak concrete mix. 

The forts were sited poorly, so that German siege artillery could bombard 

from positions out of sight of the 

defenders. Ventilation within the forts 

was so poor that men asphyxiated dur~ 

ing the smoke and dust of battle. 

In addition, when the German shells 

began dropping around the forts, the 

garrison was cut off from access to its 

food supply and latrines. Noting the 

latrine problem, the Belgian General 

Leman said: "Brialmont's military 

genius had an academic bent, and he 

forgot that his works were made for 

human beings. He left out of account 

a natural function of mankind which 

does not cease during bombardment: 

quite the reverse" (The Architecture of' 

War by Keith Mallory and Arvid 

Ottar). 

This tale of disaster taught soldiers 

in 1914 that fortresses required strong 

concrete walls, inner battlement 

latrines, and inner battlement storehouses. The tale provides today's 

soldier with more enduring principles 

of design. Defense must remain current 

with enemy technoloby. The human 

needs ofthe defending soldier must be 

met under battle conditions. A study 

of 18th century fortification highlights 

some similarl,~ derived universal 

principles. 

The 18th ceutwv fortification radically differs from the more familial; 

earlier castle. The high towers and 

masonry walls of the castle hecame 

obsolete when accurate cannon were 

developed. The lower profile and thick, 

earth-filled walls of the 18th century 

fortress have interesting modern 

implications. 

Attacker's Viewpoint 

Assume you ai-e an attacker attemptinga frontal assault against a li~rtress 

(Figure 1).You charge across 80 >aids 

of bare ground (the glacis1 siihjected to 

gazing fire from infnntry on the 

covered way and artillery fire from the 

ramparts. If you successfully storm the 

covered way, the jagged fortress outline 

ensures that infantry and artillery on 

the ramparts can now hit you with 

enfilading lire along your attacking 

lines. 

Your men have to either jump down 

12 feet into the ditch or jam through 

narrow staircases, covered by defensive 

fire, into the ditch. The ditch is also 

enfiladed by fires from walls on the 

jagged fortress outline. At the opposite 

end of the ditch, you have to climb a 

30-foot wall to the ramparts on 40-foot 

ladders you somehow transported to 

the ditch. The defenders have prepared 

covered routes for counterattack forces, 

which can assault you any time along 

the hazardous path from covered way 

to rampart. 

Dimensioning 

Let's look first at what determined 

the thickness of protective berms and 

the dimensions of the obstacles: the 

ditch and parapet. The thickness of the 

parapet was set at 18 feet because a 

24-pound shot from enemy cannon penetrated 15 feet into a berm. Berm protection from direct fire and overhead 

protection from indirect fire must 

exceed in thickness the penetrability 

of enemy shells. 

In 1700, the fortifications were 

designed and built by persons other 

than the individual soldiers manning 

the ramparts. This is not true today. 

The contemporary soldier designs and 

constructs his own individual position. 

He needs to know that the required 

thickness of the berm in front of the 

individual foxhole is equal to the 

length of an M-16 for the purpose of 

stopping the enemy equivalent of a .50 

caliher shell. 

Soldiers need to understand the dif~ 

ference in safety between compacted 

and loose berms and between piled 

rocks, loose sand, and tight clay. Foxholes must be taught as fairly complex 

structures designed for maximum protection and utility, not as camouflaged 

pits. The same type of information and 

emphasis must be applied to design 

and construction of hull-down positions 

for APCs and tanks. 

The development of 18th century 

ditch and escarpment dimensions were 

also set by enemy breaching capability. 

Escarpment heights exceeded practical 

ladder dimensions. Ditch dimensions 

were set by balancing two factors: making the ditch deep enough to protect 

the base of the escarpment from plunging fire and making the ditch wide 

enough to exceed enemy expedient 

bridging. 

Modern obstacles should also be 

explicitly tailored to enemy breaching 

capability, and recent obstacle design 
cal values. For example, FM 5-102, 


Counterrnohility, states: 


.ditches 3 meters wide exceed a tank's 


self-bridging ability: 

*cross-country slopes of 45 percent 

reach the upper limits for tanks; 

'vertical steps 1.5 meters high stop 

tanks; 

'trees with diameters of 20 to 25 centimeters and spaced 3 to 5 meters 

apart stop tanks. 

Such data are vital obstacle design 

aids, but may be seductively oversimplified. Simplicity was acceptable 

in the 18th century fortress where the 

terrain constituting the field of battle 

was largely unvarying and man-made 

The fields of fire (glacis) were graded 

and cleared by hand. Also, the opposing weapons system did not change for 

two centuries. The terrain of our battlefields changes radically, and our 

primary adversary changes weapons 

systems at least each decade. 

First, consider how the variability of 

local conditions affects desi~m. Trees 20 

to 25 centimeters wide and less than 

5 meters apart will stop a tank. 

Logically, if you reduce the diameter 

and increase tree density, you might 

still have a viable obstacle. Similarly, 

if your enemy had to make a run uphill 

into your stand of trees, lesser diameters and spacing might be adequate, 

Enemy vehicle approach speed may be 

important.. 

A computer fed such data should be 

able to provide estimates that could he 

transforlned into design charts and 

consolidated on a card like the demolitions card. The charts would force consideration of important factors that 

might otherwise he ignored. How many 

Combat Engineers would bother to 

place charges at a breaching distance 

up from the ground, if that factor did 

not appear in the calculations? That 

simple improvement in placement 

halves the required explosives. 

Likewise, if a tank attacking at high 

speed can breach your obstacle by bulldozing, leaping, or shearing, that is 

useful information. You then have a 

strong incentive to precede your obsta 

cle by something which will slow a 

tank down. Charts that illustrate the 

reinforcing action of slope, soil, and tree 

density will greatly aid obstacle siting, 

particularly for deliberate barriers in 

long-range planning. 

Second, how changes in 

affect design. The Prime 

threat the lath fortress was 

the lnuzz1e-loaded 24~~ound cannon. 

The cannon was inaccurate at 

exceeding 200 yards. The length of the 

glacis, the maximum fortress 

wall length, the 1enGhs of ditch 

and soon were all set at less 

than 200 yards. These did 

change in design for 200 Years 

because for Years, new cannon 

~ubstant~allyimprwedon the existing 

z4-Ponnd cannon. 

The Russians produce a new tank 

every 10 years, and therefore critical 

obstacle dimensions must he adjusted 

for each new generation. The T62, for 

instance, is configured so that its 

leading edge precedes the tread. Its 

step-climbing ability is limited by the 

slope of the forward edge of the chassis 

to 55 degrees. The leading edge of the 

T-72 is the tread, and it can climb vertical steps much easier. The T-72 is 

heavier and can generate more force at 

its leading edge and thus should be 

able to shear trees and bulldoze obstacles easier than the T-62. 

it ioould be interesting to know koul 

lanh type affect.$ data Iikc those given in 

FM5-102, uhich are onlaheled hy tank 

type. The diferences ma,v or may not bc 

signifirnnt. In any canc tagging such 

data ton sp~rijicgeneralion ofuvapons 

system aulonzaticallji faould provide 

flags when the data are outrlaled. 

Sequencing 

Sequencing of obstacles was as 

important as dimensioning in the 18th 

century example. The reason the 

30-foot escarpments of the 18th century 

fortification were difficult to assault is 

not that 30 feet exceeds the maximum 

ladder length. The attacker's problem 

was that a 4O~foot ladder could not be 

transported safely across the open 

areas to the ditch and escarpment. 

other words, the rearward obstacle (the 

vertical escarpment wall) was shielded 

from breach by the forward obstacle 

(the long, cleared fields of fire of the 

glacis). This principle has interesting 

implications. The sequencing of 

obstacles should be set to progressively inhibit the enemy's capability to 

breach rearward obstacles. 

Imagine a tank ditch preceded and 

followed hy minefields. The enemy's 

main breaching capability for minefields consists of vehicle-mounted mine 

rollers and plows. The enemy assaults 

through the lead minefield behind the 

rollers and plows. The lead vehicles are 

stopped by a properly designed ditch 

because their rollers and plows substantially hamper the bulldozing and 

rocking action needed to breach a 

ditch. 

Following tanks are forced to fan out 
to cross the ditch. When these tanks do 

Lulldoze their way across the ditch, the 

rollers and plows are no longer leading, 

and the assaulting force takes many 

more mine-induced casualties in the 

minefield after the ditch. Logically, the 

highest concentration of mines should 

be placed along the forward edge of the 

ditch, far enough back so the ditch is 

not partially filled or breached when 

the mines are exploded. This protects 

the ditch from breach and catches 

tanks forced to leave the protective 

trails of the rollers and plows. 

Cleared fields of fire preceding the 

ditch serve the same purpose as the 

18th century glacis. The cleared area 

greatly inhibits the transport of 

breaching equipment to the tank ditch. 

Priorities of fire set to eliminate 

AVLBs first (as was done by the Israelis 

on the Golan Heights in 1973)protect 

the inkpit? oithe ditch as :I!, obir;iclc. 

The nleln point here is that intcll~. 

gent sequencing of obstacles can create 

a harrier much more difficult to breach 

than the simple sum of the harrier 

components. Design hinges on thorough knowledge of enemy breaching. 

tactics and technology and the application of this knowledge in the creative 

siting and sequencing of obstacles. 

Masking 

Finally, 18th century obstacle masking techniques can be used to postulate 

improvements to an obstacle. Imagine 

that you were standing on the leading 

edge of the glacis in the open country 

(Figure 1).You could see nothing of the 

ditching that protects the fortification; 

you could only see the gun embrasures 

on the main ramparts. The progressive 

rise of the glacis masked the location 

and geometry of the obstacle system: 

the ditches. The attacking commander 

was forced to perform daring, detailed 

reconnaissances before initiating siege 

maneuvers. 

In this day of satellites and aerial 

reconnaissance, hiding a tank ditch 

from an enemy division commander is 

probably not possible. Hiding the ditch 

from an individual tank driver is possible. Assume the tank ditch spoil is 

piled on the enemy side of the ditch and 

graded towards the enemy, in the manner of the glacis, and made to look like 

surrounding land (or vice-versa). If you 

do not have time to seed the spoil, tear 

up the area ahead of the spoil. 

The attacking tank column, under 

fire, not being able to see the far edge 

of the ditch, will not be able to judge 

where the ditch is cut. The column hits 

the ditch. The lead tanks cannot cross 

with their roller attachments; and the 

following tanks, having been drawn in, 

must run diagonally instead of straight 

through the high-density mine zone 

near the ditch. The increased length of 

the diagonal path increases the chance 

of a mine casualty. Additionally, a tank 

commander who cannot see a ditch is 

also less likely to approach at speeds 

necessary to bulldoze or leap the ditch. 

Low berms graded towards the 

enemy and preceding point obstacles 

can be employed in the same way. The 

spoil from a crater, or destroyed bridge 

abutment, can he shaped to hide from 

an approaching attacker the far edge 

of the gap created. However, just like 

the glacis in 18th century fortification, 

the berms must be covered by commanding fires. Otherwise, the berms 

provide cover to the attackers. 

A few important points should be 

reiterated. In the 18th century, the fortress was static, and the individual 

soldier had no design responsibilities. 

The king's chlef military engineer 

derived the fortress layout and dimensioning from a coldly rational analysis 

of the explosive power, breaching ability, and assault tactics of the enemy 

forces. 

Today, the same knowledge is needed 

to design our own field fortifications 

and obstacles, but now squad leaders 

are frequently designers. Engineer 

squad leaders must be experts on 

enemy attack formations, breaching 

technology, the penetrability of enemy 

munitions into protective shelters, and 

the reinforcing effects of combined 

ob?taclc strurturc :ind terrnin. Forri~lg 

considr~.ntior~of these ndditionnl i.0~-

tors in obstacle design prevents possibly disastrous over-simplification and 

aids creativity. 

As a final note, this discussion is 

meant to encourage the search through 

history for ideas applicable to current 

design. 

MAJ Steven H. Mver is an assistant 

professor of mathematics at the US. 

Military Academy and serued as a platoon lender in the 127th Infalltry Battalion, 25th Infantry Diuision in 

Hawaii. He was compa1t.y commande,: 

1/504th Infantry and msistant G3 OPS 

in the 82nd ABN Diuision at Fort 

Bragg NC. MAJ Myer has a bachelar's 

degree from the US Military Academy 

and a master's degree from Stanford 

Uniuersih 

MAJ Jefferson J Iruin is an assistant 

professor of geography and computer 

science at the US Military Academy 

He serued as a platoon leader and company commander in the 94th Engineer 

Battalion in Germany. MAJ Iruin has 

a bachelor$ degree tfom the US. 

Milifup Academy and a master's 

degree from Stanford Uniuersity 
..' ----- "* Fusion 


for the 


- --rhnd Battle 


Engineer Echelons, Corps and Below 


by MA] Michael A. Lytle and ILT Mark T. Banigan 

'Ilhe Army 1s undergoing rapld and neer or Mllltary Intelligence, were only corps and below (h'ABP 

revolutionary change in both force an inkling. Larger, unanswered ques- Intense concern for these matters at 

structure and doctrine. FM 100-5, tions loom! That is to say, where is the the 420th Engineer Brigade (CORPS) 

Operolions, August 1982,provides the clear and coherent refinement of the led to the creation of a self-directed, 

authoritative statement of the U.S. perceived inadequacies in Engineer- experimental test-bed, which over the 

Arn~y's combat doctrine in the form of lntelligence and Electronic Warfare (E- past two years has been studying and 

AirLand Battle. IEW) support, doctrine, organization, attempting to define and remedy this 

This doctrine seeks to exploit the full operation, and procedures at echelons, doctrinal void. Engineer and IEW relapotential of U.S. forces by blending two 

concepts-attacking the entire enemy 

force to its full depth and synchroniz. Figure 1 

ing all available combat means. To Brigade BlCC ensure unity of effort and success in 

combat, all three areas of engagement 

(deep, close-in, and rear) must be con- Battlefield 

sidered part of one battle. Information 

AirLand Battle doctrine provides the Coordination 

foundation for the U.S. Army to exam- Center 

ine future concepts. These ideas and 

notions permit the Army to move for- S-2 LTC. MI 35A 

ward deliberately-developing doctrine, designing forces, and ohtaining I resources from which to field these I I forces. 

Much rethinking and retooling is Collection Management Analysis and Production 

already evident within the Corps of and Section 

Engineers, as doctrine and combat Dissemination Section 

developers anticipate present needs Tactical. All Source 

and future fighting capabilities. Fre- Intelligence Sergeant Intelligence Officer 

quently in the dynamics of organiza- E8. 962 CPT. MI. 35A5M 

tional change, as evolutionary concepts Intelligence Analyst Topographic Officer 

and new dimensions become acceler- El. 96B 1LT. EN. 22A 

ated, certain subcomponents are over- Clerk/Typist E4. 71L Terrain Analyst 

shadowed. The realm of intelligence E7. 819 

and electronic warfare (IEW), as a com- Intelligence Analyst 

ponent of the Combat Engineer pack- E6. 968 

age, may be receiving little or no Intelligence Analyst 

attention. E5. 968 

Recent opportunities for the Engi- Terrain Analyst 

neer community to comment on the E5. 819 

merit of branch coding the Engineer - battalion S-2position, either as Engi- 
tionships have been examined at various Engineer organizational levels in 

the EAB, while anticipating factors 

such as battlefield realities, information requirements, and the mission 

tasking expected of Engineer units by 

the AirLand Battle doctrine. 

The 420th studies placed heavy reliance on simulation. Extensive literature reviews, staff conferences, internal 

CPX play, corps-level FTX play, and the 

preparation of an interim concept 

paper, have all tried to clarify the 

unknown and to create a contemporary 

and prototypic E-IEW system. 

A major research hypothesis of these 

studies recognizes the inadequacy of 

the S-2 role and staff section manning 

for IEW in Engineer units EAB. Simply stated, the brigade tables of organization and equipment (TOE) for the 

S-2 staff section were viewed as an artifact, seemingly designed for supporting 

construction and general engineering 

in the communications zone, but failing to keep pace with the demands of 

either Engineer or IEW operations, 

concepts, or tactical assumptions for a 

likely engagement scenario. 

The Engineer brigade, in a fully 

developed and committed corps, is 

likely to be one of the largest major 

subordinate commands. It should he 

stipulated that a fusion of Engineer 

and IEW systems is necessary to 

ensure timely and integrated efforts in 

concert with combat operations. 

This fusion aids rapid, responsive, 

and reliable dissemination in time to 

affect the battle. The Engineer brigade 

as a fusion center and Engineer groups 

as suhfnsion centers, in coordination 

with supporting IEW organizations, 

must be prepared to operate in a setting which has been variously describ~ 

ed as a 24-hour, all-weather,target-rich 

environment characterized by shifting 

axes of attack and high levels of mohility and lethality. 

Deliberate, yet unfinished findings of 

the 420th analysis are as follows. 

First, the intelligence staff sections 

in Engineer organizations at brigade, 

group, and battalion require extensive 

modification to deal with the threat, 

battlefield C31CM realities (command 

and control communication intelligence countermeasures), and new tactical doctrine. 

Second, the Engineer brigade must 

develo~a Battlefield Information Coordinatibn Center (BICC) and organic 

ENGINEERISpnng 1985 

Battlefield Information Centers (BIC) corps and to provide the 5-2 with the 

at the Engineer groups, absent a IEW assets required. 

brigade support element from the MI Located at the tactical operation 

group (CEWI) as is now assigned to cer- centers of these Engineer units and 

tain other comhat, comhat support, and staffed by assigned MI-trained personcombat service support units in the nel of modified 5.2 staff sections, these 

Figure 2 

Group BIC 

Battlefield 


Information 


Center 


S-2 MAJ. MI 35AM 

I 1 I 

Collection Management Analysis. Production 

and and 

Dissemination Element Reconnaissance Element 

Intelligence Analyst Intelligence Sergeant E7, 968 E8. 962 Terrain Analyst Clerk/Typist E4. 71L E6. 81Q 

Reconnaissance Sergeant 

E6. 128 

Reconnaissance Specialist 

E3. 128 

Figure 3 


Battalion S-2 Section 


Battalion S-2 Section 


S-2 CPT. EN, 21 

I 


Intelligence Sergeant 1LT. EN. 21 

E7. 968 Reconnaissance Sergeant Clerk/Typist E4, 711 E6. 128 

Reconnaissance Specialist 


E4. 128 


Reconnaissance Specialist 


E3. 128 

Centers would give the S-2s the capa- with the Corps' All-Source Analysis 

bility to fully realize their role in the Center and Division TOC Support EleIEW system. In actual practice, Army- ment. The magnitude of collection, 

wide, BICCs and BICs provided the analysis, and production requirements 

dcta1lt.d control and conrdinntinn of generiltcd from lntelligencc. Prep;ira. 

intc.llirrc.ncccollection. or~duct~w~. and tion ol'the Rilrl Ielield 11PBlatFIICIIIPPI- " ,. . . 

dissemination. They have been suita- echelons, corps and below, for instance, 

bly described as "management enhan- is integral to such a linkage. 

cers" which actually extend the Finally, serious study is required to 

capabilities of the S-2 sections, while clearly define and articulate vertical 

liberating the 5-2 from extensive rou- and horizontal E-IEW system architectine and detail, to better develop ture, communications requirements, 

and manage the overall intelligence and dynamic flow at EAB for the evenactivities. tual adoption of sound doctrine. 

Third, inmased recognition must be FM 34-1,Intelligence and Electronic 

given to the need for closer E-IEW link- Warfare Operations, August 1984, 

ages and information interdependency clearly illustrates the fusion process. 

Figure 4 

E-IEW System Architecture 

Fusion Level 

Corps Staff Engineer 

Corps ASK lo Section 

Corps RAOC Other Units' BlCC 

S-2 BlCC 

DTOC Support Other Units' 

BlCCs 

Division RAOC Supported Units 

I S-2 BIC 

Collection/Utilization Level 

Other lEW Other Units' 

BICCs. BlCs 

Elements Supported 

Units 

S-2 Section 

Other IEW 

upporti Adjacent Units 

Elements 

For our purposes, the most attention 

must he placed in IEW at the Engineer 

brigade level, as the greatest fusion of 

tactical and strategic intelligence 

occurs at echelons abovecorps (EAC)or 

at corps. Here, strategic intelligence 

received from EAC integrates with the 

tactical intelligence for use by the corps 

commander and for dissemination to 

other tactical levels. At the same time, 

tactical intelligence for use at strategic 

levels is integrated, formulated, and 

transmitted by the corps. 

Engineer-derived or dependent tactical intelligence, IPB products, and 

other source data centrally place the 

Engineer hrigade in the information1 

intelligence flow at EAB, and a major 

contributor as a corps major subordinate command. 

The Engineer brigade's role in IEW 

outweighs in volume, time dimension, 

and area of interest that of the groups 

or battalions and calls for a greater 

density of specialist talent for its BICC. 

The brigade BICC and groups BICs 

generally vary only in size, scope, and 

depth of functions, with the exception 

of a reconnaissance-collection capability retained at the group BIC. 

Their peacetime mission is IEW support, contingency planning, and training directed to the hrigade or group's 

mission within the corps. During tension phases, these centers begin 

increased collection and analysis missions to satisfy the commander's Priority Intelligence Requirements (PIR). 

During hostilities, the centers interface 

with the doctrinal EAB-IEW system 

architecture, supporting the battle 

coordination-deep, close-in, rear, or in 

combination. 

As described in FM 34-1,whether in 

static, tension, or hostility phases, the 

brigade BICC or groups BICs serve to: - Develop and coordinate collection 

planning. 

Prepare and transmit tasking messages and requests for information to 

satisfy collection management. 

Develop and maintain various data 

bases for 5-2 formal intelligence 

estimates. 

Process intelligence. 

Disseminate combat information and 

intelligence. 

Provide intelligence support to EW, 

operations security (OPSEC), and 

tactical cover and deception (TCLD). 

As mentioned, the evolution and 

eventual refinement of E-IEW system 
architecture requires radical modification of existing S-2 staff section TOES 

to create the necessary brigade BICC, 

group BICs, and vertical dimension to 

the system. 

The 420th studies support the adoption of the organization schemes at 

Engineer brigade, group, and battalion 

(Figures 1, 2, 3). 

Modified TOES for Engineer units 

EAB are mediatingfactors in the development of the larger E-IEW picture. 

The 420th studies of corps operations, 

viewing the requirements for situation 

development, target development, the 

intelligence cycle, and the existing 

corps IEW functional resources which 

are linked into an interlocking organization at each level of command to 

provide IEWIOPSEC/TC&D support, 

give rise to a type E-IEW functional 

structure. 

The 420th studies synthesized the EIEW design which allows the Engineer 

unit S-2sto support their commanders; 

see deep; reduce battlefield uncertainty; develop targets and situations; 

identify vulnerabilities; provide support to command EW, OPSEC, and 

TC&D; and provide that Engineer 

units are prepared for the next battle 

(Figure 4). 

"Hip pocket" or "shoe string" doctrinal developments in the field, at the 

Engineer brigade, may be incomplete 

and certainly contain many limitations. Diligent study and deliberate 

action is needed to fill the E-IEW doctrinal void in the AirLand Battle force 

and what lies beyond in merging fighting capabilities. Yet, the initiative and 

experimentation on those problems 

provide a prototype, a foundation for 

further steps by those carrying the 

standard for Engineer proponency. 

MAJ Michael A. Lytle (MI, USAR), 

the Special Assistant to the Chancellor 

(Federal Relations), the Texas A&M 

Uniuersily Syslem is a poliq scientist 

with specializations in national and 

international seeuri@affairs and lrgislntioe processes. He is S-2, 420th Engineer Brigade (CORPS), Bryan, TX. 

MAJ Lytle has been awarded an additional specialty of Combat Engineer: 

ILT Mark T Banigan (EN, USAR), 

is a telecomm~~nicationsmarketing rep 

resentatiue in Anstin, TX, and a 

graduate of Texas A&M University, the 

Engineer Officer Basic Course, and the 

Motor OfficerCoarse He is with the S-3 

Plans Section, 420th Engineer Brigade 

ICORPS). 

ENGlNEERlSpring 1985 

wEngineer Solution 


1. Materials required: 

a. Determine project volume for one turning pad. 

V = (18')(36')(1') + '/2(3')(.5')(96') = 720 c~:bicfeet 


= 26.7 cubic yards 


b. Add waste factor: WF = 10percent for projectsraquiring 200 cubic 

yards or less of concrete. 

Adj. V= I) - 29.3 cubic yards 

C. IMaterials I 

Cement:: (786lb/cy)(29.3cy) -23.030 lbsor245 sacks 

Fine Ebggregate: (893 lb/cy)(29.3 cy) = 26,165 lbs or 13 tons 

Coarseaggregate: (1,971 lb/cy)(29.3 cy) = 57,750 lbs or 29 tons 

Water is used for mixing, cleaning. and preparing forms. As a rule, 

8 gallons per sackof cement will provideadequate water forthese 

operations. 

2. Mix proportion adjustments for free surface moisture. 

a. Determine the weight of water on the aggregates. 


Fine aggregate: (893 lbs)(0.045) = 40 lbs 


Coarse aggregate: (1,971 lbs)(O.Ol)= 19.7 lbs 


Total weight: 40 lbs + 19.7 lbs = 59.7 lbs 


b. Reduce the mixing water. 


275 lbs - 59.7 lb = 215.3 lbs/cy of concrete or 25.8 gallons 


c. Adjust aggregate quantities. 


Fine aggregate: 893 lbs +40 lbs = 933 lbs/cy of concrete 


Coarse aggregate: 	1.971 lbs + 19.7 lbs = 1,990.7 lbs/cy of 

concrete 

d. Adjusted mix proportions (for one cy of concrete): 


Cement: 786 lbs or 8.4 sacks 


Water: 215.3 lbs or 25.8 gallons 


Fine aggregate: 933 lbs 


Coarse aggregate: 1,991 lbs 


3. Adjust the cubic yard mix proportions for a 16-S mixer (batch 

capacity = 16 cf). 

Cement: 16x 8.4 = 5 sacks or 468 lbs 

27 

Water: 16x 275 = 163 lbs or 19.6 gallons 

27 

Fine aggregate: 16x 993 = 588 lbs 


27 


Coarse aggregate: 	 I Ibs 

NOTE: ..^nrl..--. 	 ...* ,.In. If redu,. ,,...,... .,......,..,,..,. ....,.,.lumber of sacks, 

reduce the inmount t( 	 ack and adjust the other 

components according 
Career Notes 


Commissioned Officers' Branch 

Post-Advanced Course A recent policy change in post-advanced course assignments will mean 

Assignments: that officers attending advanced courses in 1985 will know not only 

where they are going, but what their next job will be. The change, 

announced by Army personnel planners, will make this information 

available during the 10th week of the course the officer is attending. 

Currently, officers learn of their projected assignment locations before 

arriving at school. 

The new policy will also identify their duty positions or types of unit 

to which they will be assigned halfway through the course, officials of 

the Military Personnel Center's Officer Distribution Management and 

Mobilization Branch said. 

"Revision of the Officer Advanced Courses means we have to identify 

an officer's next projected assignment for training purposes:' said Diana 

Lueker, program manager for the Officer Advanced Course Advanced 

Assignment Program. 

When the schools such as the new EOAC begin to add branch-specific 

modules to the advanced courses, some officers will stay in school longer 

than others. The newly revised officer advanced course is 20 weeks long. 

Also, there will be from one to six weeks of intensive, job-specific, follow-on 

training available after EOAC," she said. 

About six weeks before the advanced course begins, officers will be 

asked to tell the Army where they would like to he assigned after training. Approximately two months before courses begin, assignment 

managers will write to officers concerning their tentative assignments. 

"Branch assignment managers who visit within the first two weeks 

of each advanced course will talk with the officers and make changes, 

if any, to the original assignment," Ms. Lueker said. 

Shortly thereafter, requests for orders will be sent to gaining commands. These will decide which type of unit or duty position each officer 

will be assigned. The schools will then decide what follow-on training 

is needed for the officers to do their jobs. 

Details of the new policy are listed in a November message sent to 

major commands. Officers should visit their local military personnel officers for more information or contact CPI Dwieht Durham at 

MILPERCEN, ATTN: DAPC-OPF-E, 200 Stoval st.,-~lexandria, VA 

22332-0400. The telephone numbers are AV 221-75041750517506, commercial(202) 325-75041750517506. Officers may also contact CPT Thomas 

Milo at AV 354-218411048 or commercial (703) 664-218411048 before arriving at Ft. Belvoir. 

Corrected Number: The correct number for officers to call to get a copy of the new pocket 

guide for officer record briefs is AV 221-8140. The pocket guide was issued 

January 11. 
NCO &Enlisted Soldiers' Branch 

Article 15 Transfers: The chance for some NCOs to have an Article 15 moved from their 

performance fiche to their restricted fiche of their Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) will expire Oct. 31, 1985. 

Non-commissioned officers who were in grade E-6 or above on Nov. 1, 

1982, must make their request to the Department of Army Suitability 

Evaluation Board (DASEB) before Oct. 31,1985. After October 31,NCOs 

can only petition the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records 

(ABCMR). 

Robert R. O'Connor, Chief, Personnel Actions Branch, United States 

Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center, Ft. Benjamin Harrison, 

IN, said, "Considering the publicity given this administrative 

mechanism to help the soldier improve his or her record before review 

by DA Promotion Selections Boards, the argument that the applicant 

was not aware of the opportunity to make an earlier request of the 

DASEB may be difficult to 'sell' to the ABCMR:' 

If a request is denied, a copy of the letter is entered on the performance 

fiche to show the selection board that the NCO has made some attempt 

to improve his record. The procedures for petitioning the DASEB and 

its address are contained in paragraph 3-43,AR 27-10, Military Justice 

O'Connor said the letter, in military format, should be directed to the 

DASEB from the NCO. The letter does not have to go through channels. 

"Preferable, the letter should be accompanied by letters of support from 

the NCO's commander or supervisor and any other signed documents 

attesting to outstanding performance and professional development," 

O'Connor added. The letter should state why the soldier feels the intent 

of the non-judicial punishment has been served and why it is in the 

Army's best interest to transfer the Article 15. 

The board normally returns petitions without action unless at least 

one year has passed and one non-academic evaluation has been received since the Article 15. 

Toll-Free Number: The toll-free number established last year to aid enlisted soldiers in 

contacting the Information and Assistance office located in the Enlisted 

Personnel Management Directorate at MILPERCEN has changed. 

Soldiers seeking personnel assistance should now call 1-800-255-ARMY. 

SFC Dana L. Seegel designed and submitted last issue's 

Engineer Problem/Solution. Although the problem was mathematically correct, readers should remember that mine warfare 

doctrine allows only five total mines in the IOE with one 

antitank mine. The problem was intended as a practice 

exercise only.