Operation Snowflak ,. e 

nrl nJ rli 
 
l)SAES 

Commandant ' 

MGJames' l! ~. l<

Assistant Commandant 

BG Charles J.Fiala 

NUMBER 1 , Dep.~ty 'Assjs~ant Comm~ndant

'C0 L R. S. KUbby , 

. ,CQmmand Sergeant Major" , 

..• CSM .Lucien U.,'Cowart . r •. GEORGE.\,vASHINGTON;' ENGI~EEfL .'.~ '." ". " ",' byDA'VIDM; CLEARY••/., , ". ',' 

-.',;-.:~' - .,' ./. -~"

,FAMECE ' ,DEPARTMENTSl DIREd r ORATES ? " • '. ' byCPT FRANK a: MOOR'E ".';" and 1LT DONALD f),CANTWELL 

Directorate of 'Combat' 10 ",THE ARMY;APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM ' , Developm~nts ' by SANIJ8.A RlTTE;NHOVSE

COL Thorwald' R. Peterson '
 , 1:4', THREE BRlDGESAT QUANG TRI
 

by COL PHILLIP WEIN.E.,RT 

'Engineer C9'(lter Brigade:: "


'cot G. H. ffiU ' '
 

", f1 ~~ ~R n. I·';: " COL Edward ·K,Wintz " 

,· .i~ ..":;,;' ;'

v, u b ff ft ce

MAJ.Sandor 'Ii Ketzts 

c 

EDITOR 

Jerome J. HIH 
From the Editor
 

As your new editor, I take this opportunity to say a few words about myself, about 

THE ENGINEER, and about you who belong to the US Army Engineer family. 

I am a professional journalist with eight years of experience in newspapers and publie information, but this is the first chance I've had to work with a periodical. So, don't 

be surprised if the next three orfour issues of THE ENGINEER reflect that combination 

of experience-inexperience. I set high standards for myself and I fully expect to meet 

those standards-in time. I'll need your cooperation and assistance, but I'm told that 

members of the Army Engineer Corps stand ready and willing to lend a hand. That's a 

big plus right off the bat. As you know, teamwork, effort, and leadership is a tried and 

true formula for getting the job done. 

Apparently, THE ENGINEER has experienced somewhat of a stormy life, marked by 

numerous changes in editorial and administrative personnel and pollcies. But let's forget the past and look to the future. Changes in content, format and design are needed 

to keep abreast of changing times. I assure you such changes will be carefully planned 

and executed over a period of several issues. There won't be any radical changes 

overnight. 

Finally, the lifeblood of any publication is Its readership. Obviously, without readers, 

a newspaper, magazine, or newsletter has no reason to exist. So I want to hear from 

you. I want to know what you like and dislike, what you think of this issue of THE 

ENGINEER, what you would like to see in future issues. If you believe you have a good 

idea for a feature article, give me a call or drop me a note with a brief outline of the 

idea. You'll notice that this issue has no "Letters to the Editor," a regular department 

of most periodicals which is virtually essential to good, two-way communication. And, 

after all, communication is the sole purpose of THE ENGINEER. So if you have something to say, let's hear it. You'll not only be doing me a favor, but yourself as well. 

THE ENGINEER 1 
Engineer Training Materials 

This will be a banner year for the 

production and distribution of Engineer training materials, including 

Soldier's Manuals, Commander's 

Manuals, Skill Qualification Tests 

(SQTs), and Army Training and 

Evaluation Programs (ARTEPs) . 

The first of 67 Engineer Soldier's 

Manuals, developed by the US Army 

Engineer School, was distributed to 

the field in April, with subsequent 

distribution scheduled through 

March, 1979. (See Chart 1) 

The Soldier's Manual will provide 

guidance for the administration and 

evaluation of training for each 

MOS. Manuals provide a uniform 

training base for each MOS so that 

soldiers receive the same instruction 

for each skill level, whether the instruction is institutional (such as 

Advanced Individual Training) or 

unit-conducted (such as extension/ 

on-the-job) training. 

The Engineer Soldier's Manual is 

designed to inform the soldier which 

ta sks must be performed to meet 

MOS qualification. Once the soldier 

masters each task and becomes more 

proficient, he may progress to positions of greater responsibility and 

qualify for promotion to the next 

higher rank. 

The first of 32 Commander's 

Manuals will be distributed to the 

field during the third and fourth 

quarters of Fiscal Year 1978. Commander's Manuals are designed to 

provide commanders, senior noncommissioned officers, and/or 

trainers with adequate information 

to plan, conduct, and evaluate individual training for each MOS. The 

Commander's Manual contains a 

listing of all critical tasks the soldier 

2 

at each skill level must be able to 

perform. It describ es the life cycle 

training plan for an MOS and establishes the location and method used 

for training in each task. Commander's Manuals will be published 

for each MOS, except those appli ­

cable to grades E-8 and E-9. 

Skill Qualification Tests for 

Engineer personnel will begin in 

January 1979 with Career Management Field 12, Combat Engineering 

(less MaS 12F), and end with MaS 

35E of Career Management Field 

29, Electronics Maintenance. The 

SQT for each CMF will be administered over a six-month period. (See 

Chart 2) 

Unlike the old MOS test, the SQT 

will include hands-on training modules (up to 40 percent of the test). In 

order to achieve MOS qualification, 

soldiers must study the reference 

materials in the Soldier's Manual, 

and adequately perform tasks as 

outlined in the SQT notic e. 

The Army Training Evaluation 

Program (ARTEP) establishes minimum training objectives keyed to 

acceptable degrees of proficiency 

and levels of performance, and provides flexible guidance for attaining 

those objectives. If weaknesses in 

certain areas are noted during an 

evaluation, the commander may require additional training in those 

areas until the unit is proficient. 

The ARTEP has significantly 

helped commanders in training their 

units. Currently. there are 11 published programs, but additional 

ARTEPs are scheduled for distribution to the field shortly. 

To summarize, published training 

materials should have a great impact 

on the individual soldier and unit 

this year. If used properly, they 

should improve the quality and proficiency of the Engineer soldier in 

today's Volunteer Army . 

CH ARl I 

Soldiers Manual 

OistriblJlion Schedule 

Time Frame MO S 

Third & Fo u rth Qua rters	 UB . 12C. 12( , 62B 

Fiscal Year 1978 

Second Quarter rv 79	 -15E. Sill , 51C, 51G. 

SI N, 51M. SIR . SIT, 

52C. 52D, 62E. 62f. 

62J. 62N, Si ll, R2B. 

OOB 

Thu u Quar ter t y 7t.)	 411l. HI e, H2D. 

~3 K1F 

C HA RT 2
 

SQT T C$I Period'
 

Career Manageme nt f ield T est Period 

CM F 12 I Jan 79-3 0 Jun e 79 

eMf 51 I July 79- .11 Dec 79 

CMf' 81 I Oc t 79- 31 Ma r RO 

eM f 63 I Tan 7g 1D June 79 

e Mf- 29 I .lan so- JO hlllL ~O

Tips to the Trainer 

Installing the standard pattern 

minefield or any type of conventional minefield is a labor intensive 

and time consuming exercise. usually 

done during field training exercises . 

However, units can easily maintain 

proficiency in siting, calculating, 

and recording all types of minefields 

without consuming unnecessary 

time and do it just about anywhere 

during normal training periods by 

using the "Mini Mine Kit." 

The kit includes a simple box or 

other container with the following 

contents: small mines fabricated 

from old or excess broom or mop 

handles; a compass to record and 

shoot azimuth directions; a tape 

SPRING 1978 
measure to scale distances; minefield 

recording forms; a ball of string to 

layout centerlines and lanes; and 

FM 5-34, Engineer Field Data. 

The number of mines included in 

the kit will vary depending on how 

large you want your minefield. A 

recommended number would be 

about 600 pieces (slices) which are 

painted according to function: 400 

blue mines for AP fragmentation 

(M-16AI), 100 green mines for AT 

plastic (M-19), and 100 unpainted 

for AT metallic (M-I5). 

You can increase the variety of 

your collection by cutting more 

pieces and painting them different 

colors. For example, you might 

paint some red for AT tilt rod 

(M-21), and others yellow for AP 

blast (M-14). 

Once the kit is assembled, it may 

be used to develop both individual 

and collective mine war fare skills 

from the individual squad member 

to the highest member of the command who participates. The kit 

allows all to see the Giants Eye View, 

at a scale of two inches equals one 

meter / pace. 

To demonstrate the versatility of 

the Mini Mine Kit, suppose you 

want to train a squad of engineers in 

the company dayroom. No problem. 

Just site your minefield between the 

pool table and the ping pong tablea likely OPFOR avenue of approach. 

The distance between the pool table 

and the ping pong table is about 20 

feet when converted to scale of two 

inches equals one meter /pace equals 

132 meters. Depending on density, 

you're ready to calculate from FM 

5-34. After your calculations are 

complete, layout and record the 

minefield, using the compass, tape 

measure, and string. 

• 

It is realized that specific handson skills such as arming and antihandling device installation will not 

be exercised in the dayroorn example above. However, such a simulation technique will undoubtedly 

educate all members of squads and 

platoons and when the real task is 

accomplished later in the field, the 

"Giants View" provided will make 

all members more knowledgeable. 

(Editor's Note: The mini mine kit 

training idea originated with the 

13th Engineer Battalion, Fort Ord, 

THE ENGINEER 

Sergeant Bruce Baker prepares to fire a Surface Launched 

Fuel Air Explosive Mine Neutralizer (SLUFAE) during testing 

at the Cold Regions Test Center in Alaska last Winter. The 

tests were conducted to determine how well the SLUFAE 

functions under the stress of the cold regions. 

California. If your unit has developed innovative training techniques , 

please let us hear from you so that 

we can share them with others in the 

field. Forward your suggestions to 

Commandant, US Army Engineer 

School, ATTN: ATSE-TDC, Fort 

Belvoir, Virginia 22060.) 

Pamphlets to Circulars 

The Engineer School has decided 

to convert Task Training Pamphlets 

(TTPs) to Training Circulars (TCs). 

There will be no difference in appearance or contents following the 

conversion, but distribution and 

identifying numbers will change. 

Since TCs are DA publications, 

they will be distributed through the 

pin point distribution system. If 

your unit does not receive enough 

copies, submit a DA Form 17 as you 

would for any other Army publication. 

Special attention should be given 

the TC number now that the TTP 

program is being converted. The 

first digit in an engineer Training 

Circular is always 5. The second and 

third numbers indicate specific 

ARTEP tasks. For example, TC 

#5-6-17 is engineer task 6-17, Cratering a Road. 

Program Update 

The USAES has recently updated 

a program previously distributed by 

TRADOC. The program is listed as 

-7B-051-0183-B, Training Management: Engineer Case Study (Jan 78), 

with a running time of 17:20. For a 

direct replacement of the earlier version, send your cassette copy to the 

USAES, ATTN: ATSE-TDS (ETV). 

If you have not seen this program, 

you can obtain a copy through your 

TASC. 

3 
George Washington,
 

by David M. Cleary 

George Washington, born 246 years ago, has long 

been called "first in war, first in peace," as well as 

"first in the hearts of his countrymen." 

But few Americans realize how closely the wartime 

and peacetime roles of "The Father of His Country" 

were related-and the profound influence he had toward 

industrial and technological development of a fledgling 

nation in an uncharted wilderness. 

Yet, thanks in large part to Washington's leadership, 

the United States grew into an industrial giant which: 

-Wrested world trade leadership from England, although the British homeland had many years head start 

in the Industrial Revolution. 

-Has created a standard of living which is the envy 

of the world. 

-Became the "Arsenal of Democracy" in World 

War I, and supplied armaments to such allies as Russia 

and China in World War II. 

Though often described as a " surveyor," George 

Washington was one of the New World's earliest engiEngineer
 

neers. Certainly he was the first influential American to 

alert his countrymen to the need for technological 

development. 

Largely because Washington repeatedly recommended 

the training of engineers, the United States now boasts 

roads, factories, pipelines that carry oil across the nation, and a host of technological industries in chemical, 

electronic and many other fields. It is engineers who 

apply scientific knowledge to useful purposes. 

Shortly after he was named Commander-in-Chief on 

June 15, 1775, Washington warned the Continental 

Congress that success in a war against England would 

depend on good engineering: knowing how to build 

forts, and how to storm those held by the British, andmost important of all-moving troops across countryside that had few roads, against British force s which 

controlled waterways on which soldiers could be moved 

by ships, small boats and barges . 

Such a war could be won, Washington said , only 

through extraordinary feats of engineering. 

4 SPRING 1978 
The newly-appointed General spoke from experience. 

Twenty-one years earlier, at age 22, he had built a fort 

in Western Pennsylvania-then part of Virginia-as an 

officer of the Virginia militia engaged in the French and 

Indian War. And he had applied sound engineering 

principles in managing his family estate at Mount Vernon, which had become one of the most successful farming enterprises of the New World. 

Washington's appointment came a full year before 

the "Thirteen Colonies" declared themselves independent of England. But fighting had already broken out at 

Lexington and Concord, and the Continental Congress 

had been hastily formed to deal with that crisis and the 

impending war. 

Unfortunately, the Continental Congress had neither 

the inclination nor the wherewithal to provide engineers 

to General Washington. Washington's army suffered 

humiliating defeats-at Trenton, Princeton, Philadelphia and elsewhere-and were forced to take refuge, 

during the grim winter of 1777-78, at Valley Forge. 

History tells how close we came to losing the Revolutionary War that winter. Washington's troops were 

often "barefoot and otherwise naked." Deserters often 

outnumbered new recruits in a given week. 

It was in the late Spring of 1778, just ten days before 

leaving Valley Forge to engage the British in what later 

became known as the Battle of Monmouth, N.J., that 

Washington decided to educate engineers among the 

officers already serving with his pitifully small forces. 

On June 9, 1778, he issued the General Order now 

recogni zed as the first proposal by any American to 

establish a school of engineering on the North American 

continent. 

It would be nice to report that the "Corps of 

Engineers" formed in 1778 helped win the War of Independence. Americans hazy on their history may even 

imagine that Ethan Allen of Vermont was among the 

first of Washington's students, and learned how to capture Fort Ticonderoga. 

Nothing of that kind happened. 

Fort Ticonderoga at the northern end of Lake 

Champlain, had been built by the British to prevent the 

French, who held most of Canada, from invading via 

the lake and the Kennebec and Hudson rivers to reach 

New York. 

And it was on May 10, 1775-the same day the First 

Continental Congress convened-that Ethan Allen and 

some men obtained the surrender of Ticonderoga from 

a British commander who had no orders from his 

homeland identifying the colonists as enemies to be 

resisted. 

History also indicates that Washington's own most 

impressive feats of military engineering during the 

Revolution preceded his desire to form a Corps of 

Engineers. 

While the colonists still held Ticonderoga (before the 

THE ENGINEER 

British recaptured it) Washington gave Benedict Arnold 

a force of 1,100 men and instructions to go north from 

Ticonderoga and capture Quebec . Although that mission was not accomplished, Army units moved artillery 

pieces from Ticonderoga to Boston, where the British 

had neglected to occupy Dorchester Heights, overlooking the city and its harbor from the south. 

Moving those guns across rugged terrain was a maj or 

task, since Washington's Army had no power other 

than men and horses, and not enough food for either. 

Only because the ground was frozen solid, early in 

1776, were the men and horses able to move those heavy 

guns to Boston. The British General, Sir William Howe, 

had 20 veteran regiments in Boston at that time, and 

had he placed some of them westward along the Charles 

River, could have captured the guns enroute. 

But nobody expected movement of such heavy items 

in such cold weather, any more than anyone had expected Hannibal to use elephants to cross the Alps many 

years earlier, and Washington was able to emplace those 

guns from Ticonderoga on Dorchester Heights . 

The British naval commander, seeing his ships in Boston harbor threatened by those guns, demanded that 

Howe attack the position. But bad weather disrupted 

Howe's attack, and the British fled Boston on St. Patrick's Day of 1776, leaving behind 200 cannon and huge 

stores of small arms, munitions and foods which Washington's forces badly needed . 

Other major engineering feats of the War of Independence occurred long before Washington's order of 

June, 1778. From then on, there were few surprise attacks, and the most successful of Washington's tactics 

were based on his observation that the British Redcoats 

moved clumsily when separated from waterways that 

carried supporting naval units. 

So Washington repeatedly enticed British army units 

away from water, and the famed "minutemen"-called 

from their farm s and other civilian pursuits on short 

notice-picked off the easily identified "Redcoats" one 

at a time. 

It was through those tactics that the colonists convinced France that their cause was not futile, and in the 

Spring of 1778 France declared war on England, as an 

ally of the American settlers. 

Not until June of 1788 was the U.S. Constitution ratified by the required nine states, and even then New York 

and Virginia were holdouts of such importance that the 

national government was not established until 1789-six 

years after the peace treaty-with Washington as its first 

president. 

Meanwhile, the colonial "army" had virtually ceased 

to exist, and so had Washington's ability to set up a 

Corps of Engineers, and a school of engineering, within 

that army. 

(Continued on page 28) 

5 
FAMEC
 

by CPT Frank J. B. Moore 

and JLT Donald D. Cantwell 

Modern warfare has transformed the battlefield into 

a complex, fast moving and increasingly lethal area of 

operation. New weapons systems have extended ranges 

and as a rule, can hit and destroy any visible target. This 

is particularly true if the target is stationary or fully exposed . Future conflicts may see US and Allied Forces 

engaging a large, sophisticated, and highly mechanized 

enemy in a short-term, high-intensity war. In order to 

win the first battle, outnumbered in both manpower and 

equipment, US Forces must be able to move and to fight 

from protected positions. Combat engineers provide the 

means to do this. 

The objective of winning the first battle places renewed emphasis on the combat engineer. In both the 

covering force and main battle area, engineers will have 

to move and fight directly with maneuver elements . In 

response to the engineers' increased role and required 

contributions in the forward battle area, the requirements of mission capability for engineer equipment have 

changed. No longer can there be a great difference between engineer equipment and that of the forward 

maneuver forces in their ability to move and to survive. 

This recognition has led to the Army's development 

of the Universal Engineer Tractor (UET) and the Family of Military Engineer Construction Equipment 

(FAMECE). These two new systems, in combination 

with present military equipment, meet the requirements 

for engineer effort wherever it is called for-in front, 

within, and to the rear of the main battle area. 

The four major missions of combat engineers include 

mobility, countennobility, survivability and general 

engineering. Engineer equipment must be able to accommodate these missions wherever required . 

Mobility is defined as the reduction or elimination of 

The Family of .\ 

Construction B 

natural or manmade ob stacles to enhance the mobility 

of US Forces. Common tasks include reduction of obstacles, con struction and maintenance of combat trails, 

assault fording or bridging of streams and rivers, and 

clearing of rubble in built-up areas. 

Countermobility is defined as reinforcement of the 

terrain to delay, disrupt, canalize, or kill the enemy . 

One of the key objectives is to increase the time for target acquisition and engagement, thereby enhancing the 

effectiveness of our weapons. Mobile enemy forces will 

bypass kill zones or pass through them too rapidly unless the engineers can canalize and slow advancing formations with well-placed obstacles. 

Survivability means providing friendly forces with 

protected positions. Engineers are employed to dig-in 

and often to cover positions and reduce the effectiveness 

of enemy weapons. Thi s includes development of earth 

berms, dug-in defilade positions, overhead protection 

and counter surveillance measures. A tank in hull defilade has a 50 percent less chance of being killed by a 

Russian Sagger missile than if fully exposed. Given the 

high density of Warsaw Pact artillery, unprotected 

forces may well suffer defeat before the close-in battle is 

ever joined. 

General engineering encompasses engineer efforts 

which do not directly contribute to the mobility, counterrnobility, and survivability of committed maneuver 

units, but which are essential for their firepower and 

logistics support. 

Presently, all engineer units found in the Corps area 

have equipment with similar mission capabilities. Divisional, Corps Combat, and Combat Heavy units arc all 

equipped with what is essentially commercial construction equipment with minor modifications. This situation 

6 SPRING 1978 
Military Engineer 

quipment 

in order to doze, scrape, load, carry, place and compact 

earth in support of combat operations. 

The FAMECE sectionalization feature enhances 

mobility by increasing the options for moving equipment. Each section can be airlifted as an external load 

by the medium lift helicopter (section weight is 15,000 

pounds or less) and functional (coupled) vehicles can be 

air transported, low altitude parachute extraction system (LAPES) delivered , air-dropped or self-propelled at 

road speeds up to 30 mph. Each section has been developed to maximize use of common family components 

and parts. 

is not compatible with Army requirements which clearly 

define different needs-for differing missions-at different areas on the battlefield. The VET and FAMECE 

will provide a solution to this dichotomy for they recognize the dissimilarities of equipment needs for Divisional, Corps and Combat Heavy engineer units. 

The requirement for especial military engineer equipment is based on the unique engineering needs in the 

forward and division rear areas. Engineers employed in 

the Corps rear area will have construction type tasks, 

many of which are large size projects, such as airfields. 

Thus, efficiency on the job site is the most important 

equipment requirement for rear areas. Combat heavy 

units normally will accomplish engineer work in the 

Corps rear area, and can effectively use the current military adapted commercial construction equipment. 

Logistic support is another factor that must be considered with engineers employed in the forward battle 

area. Current engineer equipment suffers from a wide 

diversity of makes and models which translates to low 

densities and often results in long "down-time" waiting 

for repair parts. The problem is compounded by recovery and availability limitations in the combat zone. Historically, the logistics system has not been able to adequately support the diversity of engineer equipment in 

the forward battle areas. In a short term high intensity 

conflict, support and availability of engineer equipment 

becomes critical. 

FAMECE will meet the unique requirements for engineer equipment in divisional and corps combat units. It 

is an earthmoving equipment system that will support 

the engineer role in a combat environment. The family 

concept results from the use of a standard power section 

THE ENGINEER 

POWER 

The heart of the FAMECE system is the power section which is common to all eight vehicles. It includes a 

Cummins diesel engine, a Clark four-speed transmission, main hydraulic components, 180 degree rotating 

operator's station, and an articulated steering mechanism. The power section is capable of independent 

movement for short distances over typical terrain for 

coupling to a work section. This is accomplished by two 

small dolly wheels located at the coupling end of the 

power section. The hydraulically operated wheels are 

retracted during vehicle (coupled) operations . 

Power and work sections are joined or separated 

through the use of a simple, functional coupler system. 

This coupler consists of a male and female housing. 

Coupling is accomplished when a lock ring is hydraulically activated . The mating surfaces of both the power 

and work sections are impregnated with a permanent. 

dry Teflon-type lubricant to avoid attracting dirt to the 

coupler. The coupling assembly also includes quick disconnect hydraulic, air and electrical lines. 

Coupling assemblies are grouped so that lines have 

only one connection for each type. The power section 

can be connected to any work section in less than 30 

minutes. The entire operator's station on the power section can be rotated 180 degrees in order to place the 

operator in the appropriate push/pull position for a 

particular work mode to be employed. Control mechanisms peculiar to a particular FAMECE vehicle (grader 

controls, for instance) are connected to the power section by an umbilical line when in the working mode and 

stored on the work section when the vehicle is sectionalized. 

7 
DOZER 

The Dozer section is fitted with a semi-U blade, adjustable for both tilt and pitch. It has a dozing capability 

comparable to the present light DB? crawler tractor and 

is not intended as a replacement for the medium DB? 

crawler tractor. In the dozer mode, the vehicle has fourwheel drive and can exert a drawbar pull of 20,000 Ibs at 

1.5 mph. A hydraulic winch with 35,000 pounds line 

pull capability is fitted on the dozer . Ground pressure of 

the dozer is 4D psi to enhance soft-soil mobility. 

BUCKET LOADER 

The Loader section is fitted with a heavy-duty, multisegmented 2X-cubic-yard bucket with replaceable teeth 

and edges. With all-wheel drive, the loader can perform 

in a clam shell mode for loading odd-shaped objects, or 

as a dozer. The loader can load 250 LeyIhr when working from a stockpile of sandy-clay soil, and has a lifting 

capability of 7,500 pounds. The loader also has a drawbar pull of 20,000 pounds and a ground pressure of 

40 psi. 

GRADER 

The Grader is an adaptation of the Austin-Western 

commercial design. It features mechanical drive and 

Ackerman steering for the front wheels. The grader is 

equipped with a side shifting 13-foot blade capable of 

assuming any position required for ditching or bank 

cutting. It .has a 20,ODO-pound blade pull , mounts a 

scarifier and is capable of grading in reverse. 

SCRAPER 

In the Scraper mode, the work section is of the positive-ejector type with a bowl capacity of 10 CY struck. 

The control system provides hydraulic power closing of 

the apron, power down pressure on the cutting edge, 

positive ejector-gate control and a fast-drop bowl for 

pump loading. The scraper can maintain a speed of 20 

miles per hour on a 2.5 percent grade with a full load. A 

hydraulic motor rear-wheel drive feature is utilized to 

enhance self-loading. The scraper is highly efficient at 

self-loading and can be effectively loaded without a 

pusher. 

DUMPER 

The Dumper vehicle is designed for on and off-road 

and has a payload capacity of 10 tons. It features allwheel drive, a 3D-foot turning radius and can maintain 

20 miles per hour traveling up a 2.5 percent slope while 

fully loaded and can travel in convoy at speeds of 30 

miles per hour. The rear dumping body is designed for 

top loading of soil and rock. It is capable of dump 

spreading while moving forward with the tail gate at 

either a top or bottom hinged position. The dumper bed 

is configured to permit use for general cargo hauling 

and for transporting squad personnel with tools and 

equipment. It can also tow standard military trailers. 

DISTRIBUTOR 

8 SPRING 1978 
The Distributor has a capacity of 2,500 gallons of 

water and is capable of self-loading in 10 minutes. It can 

maintain convoy speeds while fully loaded and has an 

all-wheel drive capability. The Distributor can spray 

water from the rear in a spray pattern adjustable from 

20 to 70 feet in width. The spray heads can be ind ividually controlled from the operator's station. 

The FAMECE Compactors are similar in overall 

design, but are of two separate types. There are two tandem compacting axles on each compactor, with the center axle being hydraulically lifted. The trailing axle ha s 

six non-powered, pneumatic tires for either compaction 

or road travel. Th e leading axle of one compactor is 

fitted with a tamping-foot roller which is power driven 

during operation. 

COMPACTOR (SO) 

The leading axle of the other compactor section 

has a smooth cylindrical steel drum with an internally 

mounted, hydraulically operated eccentric weight vibration mechanism capable of producing 1,500 vibrations 

per minute and dynamic forces of 25,000 pounds. Each 

compactor can adjust the axle loads to provide full loads 

on either side axle or loads proportioned on both compacting axles. Both compactors have a ballast box 

equipped with an end-dump capability. 

FAMECE provides an increase in capability and 

availability for the combat engineer. In creased capabilities in the family include the lO-ton dump truck, the 

2,500 gallon water distributor, self-propelled compactors, and the self-loading scraper. Standardized parts 

and components, and the ability to replace deadlined or 

battle damaged individual sections provide increased 

availability. 

The increase in mobility is a great advantage, especially for airmobile and airborne engineer units. All 

combat engineer units will benefit from the roadability 

and air delivery capabilities provided by FAMECE. 

Currently, FAMECE is air transportable in C130, Cl41 

and C5 aircraft and can be airli fted by the Army meTHE ENGINEER 

dium lift helicopter. The ability to convoy to job sites 

without tractor-trailers will reduce total travel time by 

eliminating equ ipment loading and unloading, and 

transport schedule problems. FAMECE can also use 

trails not trafficable by tractor-trailers. 

One of the greatest benefits will be the reduced logistic requirements. FAMECE eliminates the need for 

about 30,000 engineer peculiar parts from low density 

equipment. Many of these parts are designed for equipment with low availability rates. Thus a 6: 1 total parts 

reduction advantage has been ach ieved. In addition, 

FAMECE's greater capabilities provide a 30 percent 

overall gain in work production for the same number of 

equipment items. 

Clark Equipment Company, awarded the development contract in December 1974, has delivered all prototype vehicle configurations for testing. The PQT-G 

phase of Development Test II is now underway at Fort 

Belvoir, VA. Operational tests were scheduled to begin 

this spring at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. A procurement contract award is scheduled in Fiscal Year 79 with 

an initial operational capability set for Fiscal Year 81. 

FAMECE will be issu ed to divisional, corps, combat, 

and engineer combat support equipment units. The 

basis of issue plan has not been finalized, but FAMECE 

will generally replace wheeled construction equipment 

in those units. FAMECE will not replace commercial 

construction equipment (CCE) organic to Combat 

Heavy Battalions. 

FAMECE is one of the new engineer systems that will 

provide the combined arms team with the combat multiplier needed to win the first battle. Its capabilities are 

essential if combat engineers are to keep pace with 

maneuver units and make their full contribution. 

FAMECE together with other new developments such 

as the UET, Family of Scattcrable Mines (FASCAM) 

and the Surface Launched Unit, Fuel Air Explosive 

(SLUFAE), will give combat engineers the means to 

meet the challenges of the modern battlefield. ~t

Captain Frank J. B. Moore received a BS degreefrom 

Washington State University in 1973. He is also a graduate of the Engineer Officer Advanced Course. Captain 

Moore 's previous assignments include the US Army 

Combat Developments Experimentation Command at 

Fort Ord, CA. and the US Army Engineer District, Far 

East, Korea, where he was assigned as a Project Engineer. Captain Moore is currently stationed in Korea. 

1LT Donald D. Cantwell is currently assigned to 2nd 

Engineer Group in Korea. He is a graduate of West 

Point and the Engineer Advanced Course. He hasserved 

in the 197th Infantry Brigade (SEP) and the 43rd Engineer Battalion (Combat Heavy). 

9 
The Army
 

Apprenticeship
 

Program
 

Skills -10 4 

ClWJ 

by Sandra Rittenhouse 

Education and training bene fits have always been important motivators for recruiting and retaining Army 

personnel. Emphasis in the past has been on soldiers obtaining academic credit while serving in the militarywhether or not the credit happened to be MOS-related. 

The Army Apprenticeship Program directly relates 

MOS skills to civilian crafts or trades. The program provides the soldier with the opportunity to document his 

MOS skills and have them recognized by civilian trade 

unions and craft organizations through Department of 

Labor certification of military training and work experience. The Army Apprenticeship Program serves a dual 

purpose-it enhances the soldier's civilian employment 

potential whether he leaves the Army after three years 

or after 20 years, and it increases the soldier's motivation to imp rove his performance in MOS skills while he 

serves in the Army. 

The Army Apprenticeship Program (AAP) is not 

new. The concept for gaining recognition of Army training and skills by civilian craft organizations was first 

conceived by the Engineer School in the early 1970s as a 

method of recruiting personnel into an all-volunteer 

Army. Discussions with the Bureau of Apprenticeship 

and Training (BAT), US Department of Labor (DOL), 

revealed a willingness to support an Army Apprenticeship Program. Th e Department of Labor looked upon 

the military as a source to provide badly needed craftsmen for the civilian work force. The Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training provided the Engineer School with 

samples of establi shed civilian programs that spelled out 

the key points of all app renticeship programs. All BAT 

programs require: 

• Completion of a work process schedule containing 

categories of tasks which must be mastered prior to the 

achievement of journeyman status. 

• Completion of formal instruction related to the 

trade. 

• A record of the individual's progress in the program kept on standardized forms. 

10 SPRING 1978 
~1J entation equals 

'ia recognition 

By careful comparison of MOS task lists and military 

courses of instruction with the civilian training programs, Engineer School personnel developed four Army 

Apprenticeship Program dements for the operating 

Engineer tr ades: Plant Equipment Operator, Grading 

and Paving Equipment Operator, Universal Equipment 

Operator, and Heavy Duty Equipment Repairman 

(Construction Equipment). 

The program elements were forwarded to the Bureau 

of Apprenticeship and Training for coordination with 

appropriate craft organizations. Subsequently, program 

elements were approved by BAT, thus insuring recognition of military program participants' experience. In 

March 1975 the program elements were formally registered with BAT, DOL, and the pilot program was inaugurated for what is now an Arm y-wide apprenticeship 

program. 

The responsibility of enrolling AAP participant s was 

given to Education Services Officers (ESOs) at local 

Army Education Cent ers. A central registry of all new 

THE ENGINEER 

enrollees and for offi cial records of hours accumulated 

by pro gram participants was established both at The 

Adjutant General Center (TAGCEN) and BAT, with all 

education centers reporting enrollments to TAGCEN. 

The pilot program was successful. Within three years 

over 1,000 soldiers enrolled in the program. In November 1976, a new Army regulation, AR 621-41, Army 

Apprenticeship Programs, was publi shed giving each 

service school the responsibility of developing and implementing apprenticeship programs. 

Service schools responded by developing 44 program 

elements encompassing 100 MOS by September 1977. 

The Engineer School presently has 15 program elements 

(see Chart) . Each program element has been approved 

by BAT and is publi shed in a separa te 621 series DA 

Pamphlet. Each DA Pamphlet lists the MOS which are 

eligible to participate in that program element, and a 

work proce ss schedule of related instru ction for that 

particular program elemen t/trade . 

Most program elements/ trades require 6,000 to 8,000 

hours of hands-on performance as specified in the work 

proce ss schedule with 432 to 562 hours of classroom or 

correspondence cour ses as listed in the schedule of related instruction. Cr edit can be obtained for experience 

gained prior to registration in a program element. Credit 

for up to half of the required hours in the wor k proce ss 

schedule can be awarded to an individual at the time of 

program enrollment. In order to receive credit, an individual must have his prior supervisor (s) certify completion of tasks directly correlated with tho se in the work 

proce ss schedule. Credit for related instru ction can also 

be granted an individual upon presentation to the ESO 

of certificates of completion of formal training courses 

and correspondence courses. 

To clarify operat ional procedur es in the current AAPI 

the responsibilities of the proponent service school, unit 

commander, supervisor , program par ticipant, and Education Services Officer are outlined below. 

The Service School evaluates individual program participant's experience and training gained prior to registration and provides a written verification of credit 

awarded to the requesting ESO . 

The Unit Commander should be familiar with the 

contents of AR 621-41 and with 621 series DA Pamphlets pertaining to MOS held by personnel in his unit. 

In conjunction with the installation ESO, he informs 

personnel in his unit of the program . He periodically 

checks program participant's progress and the supervisor's verification of program participant' s hours completed toward the work schedule. 

The Pro gram Participant's Supervisor should be 

familia r with the contents of AR 621-41 and should gain 

thorough und erstanding of work process schedules 

listed in the 621 series DA Pamphlets pertaining to program participants under his supervision. He determines 

which tasks performed by program parti cipants can be 

11 
credited towards requirements listed in the work process 

schedule. He verifi es hours of work acceptably accom ­

plished by program participants by initialing weekly and 

signing monthly each individual's Apprenticeship Daily 

Work Experience Record Forms which are pro vided in a 

log book issued by the ESO . 

The Program Participant enrolls in the appropriate 

AAP element through the installation ESO. He records 

hours of work that satisfy work process schedule requirements and related instruction requirements in the 

log book issued by the ESO . He hand carries verified log 

book back to the ESO for a periodic (preferably each 

quarter) progress check. And he enrolls in cour ses fulfilling the related instruction requirement. 

The Education Services Officer promotes the Army 

Apprenticeship Program locally. He registers appli cants 

and forwards names and personal data to TAGCEN. 

He requests evaluation from the appropriate service 

school of individual program participant's experience 

gained prior to registration in the AAP element. He 

issues log book forms to program participants for record keeping . And he reports each part icipant's progress , 

as documented on log book forms, to TAGCEN. 

Skills documentation is the key to Army App renticeship Program participation and subsequent civilian employment. Properly maintained, the log book constitutes 

a record of training and work experience which is required for employment in an apprenticeable trade. The 

skills documentation system is recognized by trade 

union s, civilian industry and the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training in Department of Labor. 

Although it is primarily the program participant's 

responsibility to maintain a record of his/her progress, 

it is up to the supervisor to insure that documentation is 

accurate-that the hours claimed are neither inflated 

nor deflated in comparison to the individual's actual 

performance of MOS related duties. Since the AAP is 

still in its infancy, it is particularly important that documentation be precise. The Engineer School has been using a maximum of 1,800 hours per year as a general 

guideline when evaluating experience gained prior to 

program registration. 

Senior NCOs have expressed the thought that the 

AAP has come along too late for them to participate. 

This is not true . Supervisory NCOs can still take advantage of the program by attaining their supervisor's certification of hours of work completed in earlier years. 

The Education Center, charged with admini stration of 

the program, will explain procedures for gathering 

necessary information to verify prior experience, and 

the Engineer School will assist by evaluating the documentation submitted. 

The rewards of program participation ar e substantial. 

If an individual completes an Army Apprenticeship 

Program element, he receives, in addition to the record 

of hours he ha s accumulated in a trade, a certificate of 

completion from Department of Labor that verifies his 

journeyman status in the trade . 

If a soldier is unable to complete the program during 

his military service, he still receives a certificate from 

Department of Labor verifying the amount of hours he 

has completed toward a trade. The certificate, coupled 

with documented experience, will help the soldier enter 

a civilian apprenticeship program at a higher level than 

if he had not participated in the AAP. 

In summary, the Army Apprenticeship Program has 

made civilian recognition of engineer skills a reality. 

Participation by eligible personnel should be encouraged. ~~

US ARMY ENGINEER SCHO OL
 

ARMY APPRENTICESH IP PROGR AMS
 

MOS ELIG lll LE PR OGR AM
 

ELEME NTS Old MOS New MOS (EPMS) PUBLICATIO N
 

Plant Equipment 62D 62H DA Pam 621-76
 

Operator 62G/62H 62G
 

Grading & Paving 62E/ 62H/62J 62E DA Pam 621-77
 

Equipme nt Operator 62K/ 62L162M
 

Heavy Duty Repairman	 62B 62Il DA Pam 621-78 

Universal Equipment 62F 62P DA Pam 62 1-79
 

Operator
 

Ca rpenter	 51A151B/51D 51B DA Pa m 621-84 

PlumberI Pipelin er	 5 l AI5 1K/5 1N 51N DA Pam 621-85 

Electrician	 5 1A/5 1R 51R DA Pam 621-86 

Litho gra pher (Offset 41K 41K DA Pa m 62 1· 112
 

Press Operator) 83E/83 F 83E/ 83F
 

Drafter 81A/81B 81B DA Pam 621- 113
 

(Architect ural)
 

Rclrigeralion A/C 51L/ 5 1A 52C DA Pam 621- 115
 

Repairer-Servicer
 

Fire: Fighter	 51M 51M DA Pam 621- 116 

Industrial 52E/ 52J 52E DA Pam 621-117
 

Electrician Repairer
 

Power-H ouse/ 52E/52H 52E DA r am 621-118
 

Electrician Repairer
 

Surveyor (Engr)	 8l A 81A Publication Date82B/ 82D 82B/ 82D Jun e 1978
 

Rigger	 12B/12CI51A 12BI1 2C Awaiting final
 

5IC/S IF/ 5IJ 51C/5 1H approval
 

Sill
 

AR 621·4 1, Army Apprenticeship Prog rams, Nov 76, is the ba sic regulation gov erning all 

program elements. 

Sandra Rittenhouse is an Education Services Specialist in charge ofall Army Apprenticeship Program development and implementation for the Engineer School. 

She currently works for the Fort Belvoir Army Education Center and is assigned temporarily, for program 

development purposes, to the Operations and Evaluation Branch, Individual Training Analysis and Design 

Division, Directorate of Training Developm ents in the 

Engineer School. Mrs. Rittenhouse has served in education centers for five years. She holds a BS Degree in 

Secondary Education and an MEd Degree in Guidance 

and Counseling. 

SPRING 1978 

w · 

12 
Anofher year, 

a different season 

Thousands of Army Reservists receive two weeks of 

active duty training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 

each summer. This year, however, the commander of a 

training brigade from upstate New York, decided to try 

something different-annual training during the winter 

and spring. 

Colonel Dean L. Linscott, commander of the Third 

Brigade, Engineer Advanced Individual Training, 98th 

Division, headquartered in Ithaca, New York , broke 

with tradition for two reasons. 

First, he wanted to present his troops with a new set 

of challenges-mud and cold weather. And second, 

many of the 98th Division reservists have seasonal occupations which require their full attention throughout the 

summer months. 

" It 's difficult for many of our men to get away from 

their jobs during the summer," says Linscott. " They 

either have to be excused or defer their tours to a later 

date with another unit." 

One increment of the Third Brigade trained at 

Leonard Wood in March, another increment received 

training during April, and another increment was 

scheduled to undergo annual training in May. Of course, 

large segments of the 98th Division are still scheduled 

for annual training at Leonard Wood this summer. 

The Third Brigade's manning chart indicates that the 

plan is working. Excusals have been minimal. Morale is 

considered better than ever. The change appears to have 

stimulated more interest in training and working with 

their Regular Army counterparts of the 2nd Training 

Brigade at Leonard Wood. 

Another indication that the change has been accepted 

by personnel of the Third Brigade is the "retention 

posture" reported by the unit's S-l section. That report 

states that the retention rate of the Brigade has steadily 

improved throughout the past year. 

Annual training during cold and wet weather months 

might not work for many Reserve units , but there's no 

question that it is working for the Third Brigade, 98th 

Division. 

THE ENGINEER 13 
Three bridges 

at Quang Tri 

A study in contrasts 

by COL Phillip D. Weinert 

Contrasts between old and new ways of build ing ar e 

often made but rarely is th ere an opportunity to witness 

the differences in practice. (Such an opportunity presented itself in South Vietnam from February to June 

1969 in the northern province of Quang Tri.) Wh ile 

modern technology and equipment have improved both 

methods and quality of structures, it is good to be reminded of what can be accomplished in the absence of 

modern technology and equipment. The combat 

engin eer is often faced with a request to make do with 

the means readily available. 

As a result of the Te t offensive in 1968, many of the 

bridges in the area were destroyed. One bridge in a village ju st north of the Quang Tri province capital had 

been replaced by an adjacent class 12 floating bridge 

as an interim mea sure. On route 560 leading to the 

coastal port of Cua Viet through rich farm land, the 

bridge was an important factor in getting produce to 

market in the province capital of Quang Tri. Recognition of this gave rise to a project by the public works 

office in Quang Tri to rebuild the existing reinforced 

concrete bridge. 

At the same time, the US and Sou th Vietnamese military for ces in the area embarked on a general upgrading 

of route 450 from Quang Tri to Cua Viet to provide a 

more immediate imp rovement to travel in and out of the 

area by the local population. This work was part of an 

overall road construction effort to improve secondary 

roads throughout the province. A great value of the 

road was increased stability of the area by improved 

commerce. This road project included a timber pile bent 

brid ge between the floating bridge and older reinforced 

concrete structure. 

When the US/South Vietnamese military project got 

underway, the existing floating bridge with wood pontoons and wood deck structure soon proved inad equate 

to carry the heavy loads of road con struction equipment 

crossing it. The decision was made to replace th at floating bridge with one of greater load capacity so that construction could continue uninterrupted. This option was 

selected because of the immediate requirement to maintain traffic for construction farther north on route 560 

while the timber brid ge was bein g constructed. 

The old floating bridge was repl aced with little difficulty, and as traffic was carried by the new bridge with 

rubber pontoons and aluminum deck , work was underway by the joint US and Vietnamese Army engineer 

force s on the pile bent bridge and the public works personnel on the reinforced concrete structure. 

At this point, the contrasts were dramatic. Heavy 

equipment and Vietnamese civilians mingled in cro ssing 

on the floating bridge as Army Engineers and public 

works force s drove piling for the respective bridges. 

Army for ces used conventional pile dri ving techniques. 

A diesel hammer was used to drive l4-inch timber piling 

spliced with steel collars. The public works personnel, 

working from a timb er platform and using a steel derrick arrangement for pile leads, drove precast concrete 

3D-feet sections by hand . The timber platform rested on 

timber piling hand-driven into the soft bottom. To drive 

the concrete piles, a steel hammer was raised using a 

hand winch and then a ratchet tripped to allow the ham ­

14 SPRING 1978 
OLD EIFFEL TRUSS
 

EXISTING "T" BEAM SPAN
 

EXISTING "T" BEAM SPANS 

/~

: CD :


I 

I I 1 I

I I I I i 1 I .

1:=t> 'T-=.b 

! I CD :! 

I I I 1
 

I I-PRECAST-' I
 I I : I
 

I 1 I I
 I I I I
 I I I I
 

'yl './ 

CONSTRUCTION SE~ NCE

mer to fall. Through this laborious process, piling was 

driven nearly flush with th e working platform. 

At this point, the tops of the concrete piles were prepared for continued driving by exposing the steel. Forms 

were built in sections and placed around the initial precast section. The sections were so constructed that concrete could be poured by hand on top of the existing 

piling. A cage of reinforcing steel was placed in the 

forms and tied to the exposed steel of the first section. 

Concrete was mixed on the timber platform by hand 

using coarse and fine aggregate from nearby alluvial 

deposits. Mixed in small batches, it was lifted by hand 

to openings in the forms and placed in a continuous process. 

Workers used false work supporting the forms to 

keep up with the increasing height of the concrete in the 

piling. When the concrete placement was completed for 

the pile extension, the forms and false work were removed and the derrick brought back in place to resume 

driving of the piles. Approximately two 30-foot lengths 

were driven in this manner. The last section of piling 

was cast in place leaving the steel exposed at the top for 

tying in to the cap . Each of the two reconstructed bents 

was built in this manner. The caps for the concrete bents 

were cast in place as were the last sections of the bent 

posts. 

After construction of the two bents, an old Eiffel 

truss about 45 feet in length was snaked out on top of 

the new bent s. The old concrete "T" beam spans were 

repaired with curbs and railing and the bridge was 

opened to traffic . The construction sequence is shown in 

THE ENGINEER 

the drawing above. The Eiffel truss was evidently salvaged from the old bridge which had been destroyed 

and is a type commonly used in South Vietnam. 

While the public works personnel completed the concrete work and moved the truss into place, the South 

Vietnamese and US Army team finished the timber 

bridge. Piles were joined with 3 x 12 timber bolted for 

diagonal bracing and caps installed. Stringers were laid 

and a laminated 3 x 12 decking placed. The bridge was 

finished with placing of cur bs and railings. Once the 

timber trestle bridge was completed, the combined RVN 

and US Army team removed the adjacent floating 

bridge. 

Public works construction personnel showed dedi cation and ingenuity. At the time the timber bridge was 

completed, reconstruction of the concrete bridge was 

well underway and completed soon afterward. 

Observing the simultaneous construction of the two 

bridges revealed how much is possi ble through ingenious 

use of available materials and equipment, and hard 

work. Combat engineers, who must often seek alternate 

solutions due to a lack of desired resources, should be 

reminded of the three brid ges at Quang Tri .~

Colonel Phillip D. Weinert, graduate of Texas A&M 

University, is currently assigned to the US Army Facilities Engineering Support Agency, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. 

He is a registered Professional Engineer in Washington, 

D.c., Texas, and California and is an active member of 

the National Society of Professional Engin eers and the 

Society of American Military Engineers. 

15 
Operation
 

Snow Blow II
 

Crying and shivering, the old lady slosh ed through six 

inches of sea water to answer the persistent knocking at 

her front door. When she saw the green uniform and 

combat boots, she clasped her hands above her head 

and exclaimed, "Thank you God, the Army is here. I'm 

okay now." 

The poignant scene abo ve took place in Revere , Massachusetts, a subur b of Boston th at was ravaged by 

hurricane-force wind s, rain, sleet and snow during the 

first week of February. But it might have been any number o f communities throu ghout New England where the 

worst wint er storm on record wreaked havoc for more 

than 25 hours. 

Houses caved in, ca rs bobbed helpl essly in ice-choked 

wate r, snow drifts grew to 10 feet. All movement 

stopped . At least 30 peopl e were killed during the storm 

or as a result of it. 

But the devastation could have been worse if the military services had not reacted to the call for help with 

speed and precision. 

At the direction of Forces Command (FORSCOM), 

active engineer units fro m Forts Devens, Bragg, Belvoir, 

Benning, Stewart, Hood, and Polk joined force s with 

National Guard and Reserve units throughout New 

England to conduct " Operation Snow Blow II," a rescue and snow moving operation of massive proportions. 

More than 1,100 active duty Army personnel and 71 

Na vy Seebees were flown into New England to assist 

more than 6,000 National Guard personnel and more 

than 500 Army Reservists activated to combat the catastrophe. More than 1,247 pieces of heavy equipment, 

including tru cks, trailors, ambulances, wreckers, dozers, graders, and scooploaders, were manned around 

the clock in frantic exhausting efforts to clear snow and 

abandoned vehicles from highways, airports, and other 

16 SPRING 1978 
Army engineers help New England recover 

from worst winter storm on record 

traffic arteries. 

Much of the equipment was flown into the area 

aboard Air For ce C-5-As, C-130s, and C-141s from 

Hunter, Pope, and Andrews Air Force Bases. In essence, Operation Snow Blow II was an undertak ing 

based on the Total For ce concept. 

And, although many units encountered problems of 

one sort or another, the overall operation must be considered a whopping success. More than 375 miles of 

highway and street s were cleared of snow. More than 

5,500 abandoned vehicles were removed from streets. 

More than 1,370 stranded persons, many of them 

women and children , were evacua ted to safety . 

Massachu setts, Conn ecticut, and Rhode Island were 

the states hardest hit by the blizzard , necessitating a 

three-prong attack against the forces of nature. Task 

For ce Alph a, consisting of men and equipment from 

Fort s Devens and Bragg, concentrated on the Boston 

area. Task Force Bravo, made up of men and equipment from Fort Hood, zeroed in on Hartford; and Fort 

Belvoir engineers of Task For ce Charlie, bulldozed their 

way into and out of Provid ence. 

The storm struck on Mond ay, February 6, and by 

midafternoon of the next day, portions of Massachu ­

setts , Rhode Island, and Connecticut were declared Federal Disaster Areas. Colonel Forest Rittgers, Command er of Fort Devens, was named the Disaster Control 

Offic er. 

Based on requests from sta te officials and members 

of the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration, Rittgers' primary job was deciding where and when federal 

troops and equipment would be deployed. It wasn't an 

easy job. 

THE ENGINEER 17 
The 39th Engineer Battalion of Fort Devens was the 

first unit to respond to th e emergency, due to Deven s' 

proximity. Alerted late in the aftern oon of February 7, 

the 39th Battalion's first convoy arrived in Revere 

around 2 a.m. the next morning, Wednesda y. It had 

taken the convoy six hours of tr aveling to rea ch Revere-five hours long er than normal. "We drove our 

asses off that night, " said Private First Class Mike 

Pyrne of the 39th . 

That same day, men and equipment from Fort Bragg, 

Fort Benning, and elsewhere began arri ving in Hartford 

and later from Fort Belvoir to Providence. Upon their 

arrival, they found Guardsmen and Reservists already 

hard at work, evacuating citizens stranded without heat, 

electri city, food and water. 

Ironically, men and equipment from Fort Hood were 

delayed in their departure for New England because of 

icy runways, snow and fog . 

When Op eration Snow Blow II ended, almo st a week 

after it began, order had been restored and a semblance 

of normalcy had return ed . Th ere was still mu ch work to 

be done , particularly in the coastal communities. But 

the imminent danger of a few days earlier had been 

eliminated , thanks to the efforts of thousands of volunteers, National Guardsmen, Reservists, and active duty 

Army, Na vy, and Air Force personnel who proved that 

the Total Force concept really wor ks. ~i:~

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Material for this article was 

compiled f rom numerous reports and accoun ts of Operation Snow Blow II. The Engineer appreciates the cooperation of all who provided information that went into 

the reporting of this story. However, no attempt was 

made to mention all military units which participa ted in 

the operation because the task of docum enting such information would have been virtually impossible.) 

THAN STAT .CO . ICUT 

o DO ~N~W DIGGE S Fp 78 

18 SPRING 1978 
Games
 

soldiers pIay
 

by CPT Denis Gulakowski 

Since the end of the Vietnam war, the expense of conducting field training exercises in terms of mone y and 

area has risen high er than the price of Coors beer east of 

the Mississippi . In sea rching for alternatives that were 

less draining but as meaningful as the FTX, Army 

thinkers resurr ected an old technique that was generally 

more popular with hobbyists than military tacticians. 

Wargaming dates back to the first sand tabl e caveman 

used in planning to make off with his neighbor's daughter and ha s varied in complexity and acceptance as mu ch 

as the poll results on a campaigning poli tician . 

The Army 's approach to exportable systems consists 

of two types: stri ctly manual and computer assisted. 

Manual exercises are designed for maneuver units from 

platoon through corps and are similar in format to some 

o f the more detailed commercial wargames available a t 

the local hobby shops . The major differences lie in the 

complexity and sophistication of the tr aining devices. 

With the exception of the company and platoon level 

exercises, none of the game s can be played by fewer 

than a dozen individuals and each has provisions to 

demonstr ate the lethality, fluidity, and confusion that 

will be found on the next battlefield. 

Computer assisted exercises are tar geted toward the 

commander and his staff at battalion through corps 

level and use electr onic computers to take over computations and records in support of manually maneuvered 

combat forces. Th e same sophistication of fluidity, confusion and lethali ty of the manual game s is found in 

the se with the computer assuming the chores of engag ement resolution, indirect fire and air support outcomes 

as well as numerous other repetitious activitie s that may 

otherwise slow dow n play . 

Five manual battle simulations and three computer 

assisted simulations ar e presentl y available. The following are the names of the exercises and a brief description 

of their operations and components. 

Manual Simulations 

FIREFIGHT is a platoon level system with a hexagTHE ENGINEER 

onal grid gameboard, unit designa tor counters or 

pieces, and weapons systems effect data. Pla yers move 

friendly and enemy units across variable terrain, engage 

in indirect and dir ect fire encounters and experience the 

impact of terrain , suppression, and long range weapons 

lethality on a unit 's abilit y to perform in simulated combat. The game has already been shipped to the field for 

evaluation, and a production decision is expected later 

this year. It may be played by two people, requires no 

cont rollers and takes one to three hours to pla y. 

DUNN-KEMPF is an exercise which pits a US armormechanized infantry team against an OPFOR reinfor ced battalion through the use of a scaled terrain 

board and miniature vehicles and equipment. It is a freeplay, open-end simulation whereby opposing sides 

maneuver, engage and conduct operations against each 

oth er in an attempt to accomplish the mission. Realism 

is ensured through the rules which prescribe scale mo vement , indirect fire and air support activity, dir ect fire 

engagement and obstacle impact. DUNN-KEMPF is 

already in production and is scheduled for distr ibution 

to all maneuver battalions in active and reserve status, 

ROTC regions, and service schools. It may accommodate from eight to twenty players, requires one controll er, and tak es a minimum of four hours to complete 

a scenario. 

PEGASUS is the battalion and brigade level command post exercise aimed at enabling brigade and bat ­

talion commanders and thei r staffs to train in controlling and coordinating combined arms operations that 

would occur in a conflict involving battalion, brigade, 

or regiment size units . It is the lowest level exercise that 

provides the capability of direct participation by nonmaneuver members of the combined arms team such as 

engineers, artillerymen and communications personnel. 

The action tak es place on control boards which are 

enlarged mapsheets overprinted with a hexagonal grid 

and involves movement, observation, direct and indirect 

fire , obstacles, and engagement resolution. Controllers 

manipulate unit counters in accordance with operational plans and orders issued by the commanders and 

19 
staffs as dictated by the mission. Communication is by 

tactical radio or wire and staffs can function in separated and removed areas. Opposing sides respond to 

each other, providing free play, while scenario inputs 

may be introduced to stimulate execution of Brigad e 

Command Group ARTEP tasks. PEGASUS requires a 

minimum of four controllers, at least 14 player/ contro llers, and 8-12 hours of playing time. 

FIRST BATTLE is the simulation currently available 

for use at the division level. It is similar in format and 

procedure to PEGASUS with a US division opposing an 

OP FOR Army. Engagement possibilities are related to 

unit combat power rather than weapons systems but, as 

with the other exercises, also provide the commander 

with helicopter and tactical air support and indirect fire 

support. FIRST BATTLE can be played as a free exercise although a European scenario is provided . It is 

played with one controller, at least 12 pla yer/ con tr ollers, and takes about 12 hours. 

WAR EAGLE is the Corps level exercise now being 

developed and is basically an arrangement of multiple 

FIRST BATTLE simul ations matching a US Corps 

against OPFOR Armies. Th e number of controllers and 

player/ controllers is variable while a minimum of 12 

hour s must be allocated to complete the garneplay. As 

with PEGASUS and FIRST BATTLE, WAR EAGLE 

may be set up in garrison or in a field tactical operations 

center with staffs functioning as they would in a combat 

situation. Fifty kits are planned for const ruction, with 

distribution this summer . 

Computer Assisted Simulations 

BATTLE (an acronyrnn for Battalion Analyzer and 

Tactical Trainer for Loca l Engagemen ts) is the lowest 

level computer assisted simulation in use. It is almost 

identical to DUNN-KEMPF with miniature vehicles being maneuvered on a scale terrain board as a US task 

force opposes an OPFOR regiment. Th e computer 

keeps track of logistics, th e chronology of ind ividual 

engagements, probability determinations, engagement 

resolu tions, indirect fir e plans and a history of the entire 

conflict. Action is visuall y displayed on a Cathode Ray 

Tube (CRT) or printed out, thus allowing play ers a type 

of instant replay. BATTLE is a limited production item . 

Only two are available-one at TRADOC Systems 

Analysis Agency (TRASANA), White Sands, New Mexico, and the other at the Combined Arms Center (CA C), 

Fort Leavenworth, Kan sas. The latter is used as part of 

the Command Designe e Refresher Course to bring brigade and battalion commander designees up to date on 

the latest tactics and concepts of combined arms operation s. CAC has conducted a survey of TRADOC schools 

and agencies to determine if a need exists for more than 

the original two systems. BATTLE requires a minimum 

Manual Simulations 

No. Players Level Playing Time 

FIREFIGHT 2 Platoon 1-3 Hrs. 

DUNN·KEMPF 8-20 Battalion 4-6 Hrs. 

PEGASUS 14 Bn/Bde 8-12 Hrs. 

FIRST BATTLE 12 Division 12 Hrs. 

WAR EAGLE Variable Corps 12 Hrs. 

20 SPRING 1978
of eight players, four controllers, one computer terminal 

operator and several hours, although actual time required may vary considerably. 

CAMMS (Computer Assisted Map Maneuver System) 

is the brigade/battalion computer supported simulation 

available for infantry, armor mechanized infantry and 

cavalry maneuver units supported by normal combat 

and combat service support elements. It is similar to 

BATTLE in that the computerized fun ctions served a re 

the same, but differs to the extent that unit counters of 

the PEGASUS variety are employed instead of individual vehicles. The probabilities, resolutions, engagements, administration and logistics capabilities are 

retained as is the instant replay of the conflict. The computer program allows for employment of friendly units 

from platoon to brigade size and of OPFOR units equal 

to two motorized rifle divisions and a tank division. The 

speed of the feedback results of BATTLE is dupli cated 

with CAMMS and reduces the time con suming mechanical processes. CAMMS is available on a worldwide 

basis via a timeshare program. Terminals located at the 

exercise site and linked by telephone and satellite communications to the computer mainframe are available at 

a selected number of Training Aid s Services Centers. 

Computer Assisted Simulations 

Level 

BATTLE Task Force 

CAMMS Brigade/Battalion 

CATTS Battalion/Staff 

CA TTS (Combined Arms Tactical Training Simulator) is a sophisticated computer driven battle simulation system int ended to train mechanized and light infantry and armor battalion commande rs and staffs in 

combined arms operations in a command po st format. 

The system simulates the actions of combat units, and 

calculates visibility, ranges and weapons effects while 

also maintaining an ongoing status of fuel, munitions, 

materials, equipment and personnel of the two forces. 

It, too , is a limited production item. There is only one in 

existence, at th e Com bined Arms Center. 

Engineer Games 

Engineer related simulations and games are still in the 

developmental phase. However , there is engineer pla y to 

some extent in all of the TRADOC simulations. PEGASUS, BATTLE , and CAMMS are the lowest level exer ­

cises where engineers can participate as engineer staff 

officers, while all simulation s provide the maneuver 

commander with engineer cap abilities of mobility, 

counterrnobility and sur vivability at the level appropriate to the game. 

THE ENGINEER 

The Engineer School, in addition to developing and 

improving engineer play for the TRADOC simulations, 

is also developing a Combat Engineer Game for the 

company leadership and the Engineer Staff Exercise, a 

battalion staff assessment and training exercise. The 

Combat Engineer Game (CEQ) is a self-contained board 

type exercise designed to test the player in basic military 

knowledge and develop his planning skills required in 

essential engineering missions. Despite the name, the 

game is applicable to both combat and combat heavy 

units and challenges the squad and platoon leader in its 

execution. The Combat Engineer Game is scheduled for 

prototype production and, if approved, should be 

fielded at battalion level late this year. 

The Engineer Staff Exercise (ESEX) is in the conceptual phase of development and will provide the commander a means of assessing his staff in terms of performance of critical staff function s. Developers anticipate 

that it will be a self-contained unit capable of being implemented with organic personnel assets and being 

played in one working day's time. Research in support 

of this task is on going with the prototype production 

tentatively scheduled for Fiscal Year 1979. 

What It All Means 

For engineers, th e tech niq ue of sim ulation presently 

means two things. Participating as members of the co mbined arms staff advising the maneuver commander of 

all the benefits he can accrue from engineer effort and 

assisting him in such planning is the most obvious advantage. A secondary opportunity takes the form of 

playing the lower echelon exercises as designed for 

maneuver personnel thus improving tactical knowledge 

and gaining a better in sight to the operations that engineers will support . With training goals now turning to 

combined arms integration at all levels, individual 

branches will be unable to isolate themselves from operat ion s with other different units. Rather, the far-sighted 

commande r or trainer will be searching for relatively inexpensive, yet realistic alternatives to field exer cises and 

will be taking action to identify and employ them with 

his un it. Battle games and simulations is one of those 

alternatives. ~i\l

Captain Denis Gulakowski is an Infantry Officer 

currently serving as the Engagement Simulations Project Officer for USAES. His assignments have included 

platoon leader, company commander, battalion training 

officer and post level project officer. While in Vietnam, 

he served as District Senior Advisor and Province Engineer Advisor. He has a BS degree in Engineering from 

the US Military Academy and is completing work on an 

MA in Behavioral Science from Catholic University. He 

is a graduate of IOBC and IOA C. 

21 
-- Back to basics 

Emphasis on basic Combat Engineer skills 

in revised Engineer Officer Basic Course 

by LTC R. J. Rethlake 

and CPT R. Potter 

The Engineer Officer Basic Course at Fort Belvoir, 

Virginia, recentl y und erwent a major revision designed 

to immerse newly commissioned engineer officers in a 

training environment where the emphasis is on dynamic, 

performance-oriented, hands-on training. The foundation for this comprehensive revision stems from the concepts emphasized by General William DePuy, former 

Commanding General of Training and Doctrine Command. 

In an effort to maximize training effectiveness, the 

Commanding General of the US Army Engineer School 

established an Ad Hoc committee in January 1977 to 

review the existing Engineer Officer Basic Course program. The committee's charter was to determine the 

need for and the extent of course modification and to 

pro vide the Commanding General with appropriate 

recommendations. By late spring of 1977, the committee 

produced recommendations which led to a complete 

revision of the course. The new EOBC program was institut ed in July 1977 with Class 5-77. 

The revised course has a significantly different orientation than the previous version. The dominant thrust 

of the new course is to place new junior offi cers into an 

environment of complete involvement, encompassing 

tasks that soldiers in combat engineer platoons must be 

capable of doing . In pra ctice, thi s means that new lieutenant s learn the ARTEP skills of a private, squad 

leader, and platoon leader, in that orde r. At each skill 

level, the student must demonstrate a mastery of the required tasks before advancing to progressively more 

challenging ta sks. The basic skills of a Combat Engineer 

(l2B), with some emphasis on infantry and construction 

skills, form the core of the program. It is important to 

note that only tho se tasks considered critical for a Combat Engineer Platoon Leader have been included in the 

course. Altogether, the lieutenant must successfully 

22 SPRING 1978 
accomplish 141 unique ta sks on a go, no-go basis. Failure to acc omplish any task requires the student to restudy and retest the area. Th e student is allowed three 

attempts to achieve a "GO. " Repeated failure is possible cause for administrative elimination from the 

course. In addition, leadership ability, attitude and 

motiv ation are closely scrutinized throughout the 14 

week course . 

To complement the new approach , the traditional 

ranking system of honor graduates and distinguished 

graduates has been discontinued . In addition, indi vidual 

involvem ent in th e course has been increased . Student 

leadership roles have been expanded and student leaders 

given mo re responsibility. Students dem onstrating a 

particular expertise participate as assista nt instructors 

for their classmates-an approach which has resulted in 

greater utility for all students. And each student is required to pr esent peer instruction during the course. 

To impl ement course revision, the Director of Training of the Engineer School created a new division : the 

EOBC Training Division. It is responsible for all student 

activities except military justice and administrative functions. With in this new division, a new co ncept- platoon 

trainers-is util ized. Each EOBC class is divided into 

platoons-each platoon is assign ed two captains and 

one senior Non-Commission ed Officer as trainers for 

the duration of the cycle. The y are responsible for 

pr esenting approxima tely 50 percent of th e course instruction, monitoring instruction pr esent ed by other 

departments and guiding and counseling the students 

con tinuously. It is desirable that at least one of the Captains has successfully commanded a Compan y, has an 

Engineering Degree, and has served overseas; preferably 

in Euro pe . Th ese trainers serve as the proctors and mento rs of approximately 40 EOBC students. A dialogue is 

established between the students and the trainers which 

enhances the students ' awar eness of the standards and 

conditions in active Army Engineer Platoons and Companies. Engineer Officer Advance Course students func­

"

I 

THE ENGINEER 

tion particularly well as platoon tr ainers because normall y they have previous experience in the field . 

Th e EOBC course includes three phases of instruction: general/in fantry phase; combat engineering phase; 

and construction engineering phase. Each phase is designed to int erface with the others in such a fashion as to 

illustrate the interdependence of ea ch and the need for 

the En gineer Lieutenant to be knowledgeable in all 

areas . Field training exercises conducted after each 

phase insure that students can apply the learned tasks in 

a realistic , fluid, field environment. 

The revision of th e course has thus far met with great 

acceptance by both fa culty and stud ents . Initial indi cations from th e field and evaluations at the USAES indicat e th at th e performance-oriented environment makes 

the student more receptive to instruction and significantly more confident in his ability when he graduates. 

Th e final results are not yet in, but if th e new approach produces a more confident and po sitive platoon 

leader, then.the revision of EOBC can be stamped an 

unqualified success.1iil 

LTC Rethlake is the Chief: Engineer Off icer Basic 

Course Division, Directorate of Training at Fort 

Belvoir, Virginia. He is a Field Artillery officer with a 

BA f rom Purd ue University, an MA from Central 

Michigan University, and he is a graduate of the Armed 

Forces Staff College. 

CPT Potter is currently a student in the Engineer 

Officer A dvanced Course, Class 3-78, and is serving as a 

Platoon Trainer for the Engineer Off icer Basic Course. 

He is a 1973 graduate of the US A rmy Military Academy at West Point. He was stationed at Fort Carson, 

Colorado, prior to his current assignm ent. 

23 
Colonels 

Physicals are an important part of 

the career files. In the grad e of Lieutenant Colonel and below, the entry 

on the Officer Record Brief under 

"PULHES /Date" and "Heightl 

Weight" is the only record that 

MILPERCEN has or needs as long 

as medical board action ha s not been 

indicated. Once selected for Colonel, 

however, a copy of the physical 

should be placed in the official file. 

Selectees should insure that the 

ph ysical clearly states their name, 

grade, SSN, physical status and date 

of the physical. The copy sent to 

Headquarters, DA mu st be clear and 

readable to be of valu e. Change 29 

of AR 490-501 states that physicals 

are required in the birth month at 

ages 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39,41,43, 

45, 47, 49, and annually thereafter. 

The age rules differ for officers on 

flight status. For Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels (Promotable) , 

duplicate copies should be sent by 

the serv ing Medical Department Activity to He adquarters, DA (DAPCPSR), Hoffman II Building, 200 

Stovall Street, Alexandria, Virginia 

22332 . 

Captains 

The Major, AUS, Selection Board 

was scheduled to convene on 21 

March 1978. The primary zone of 

consideration included officers with 

a date of rank of 30 Septernber 1970 

or sooner. The secondary zone of 

consideration included officers with 

a date of rank of 1 October 1970 to 

30 June 1974. Good luck to all senior 

captains. 

Warrant Officers 

Under the Chief of Staff's recently 

announced combat exclusion policy, 

57 of the 59 warrant officer specialties are open to women. The only 

two remaining closed are MOS 

100E, Attack Helicopter Pilot, and 

MOS 224B, Short Range Air Defense Systems Technician. Qualified 

women are encouraged to submit 

applications for warrant officer appointment. Procedures are outlined 

in DA Circular 601-73. 

Officer
 

career info
 

The Regular Army (RA) program 

will be relied upon to provide the 

Army with tenured warrant officers. 

Upon termination of the Managed 

Tenure Program, the last cycle of 

which is now in progress, the Army 

will ceas e retention of nonregular 

warrant officers beyond their 20th 

year of active service. All nonregulars already approved for entry into 

tenured status will be permitted to 

serve out the approved period, but 

thereafter all warrant officers who 

are not members of the Regular 

Army upon completing 20 years 

service will be mandatorily released 

from active duty as provided in 

paragraph 3-31b, AR 635-100. Replacing the Managed Tenure Program will be an RA "decision point" 

process that will be explained in a 

forthcoming circular. 

The American Council on Education (ACE) is nearing completion of 

its study of the warrant officer program. This study was contracted for 

by HQ DA as part of the Army's 

general educational development 

program. Via publication in the 

ACE Guide, the Council is recommending that colleges, universities, 

technical institutes and vocational 

schools grant specified credits to 

Army warrant officers for the learning they have demonstrated through 

assignment and experience in their 

MOS . Use of the ACE recommendations will provide warrant officers 

a greater degree of mobility toward 

achievement of MOS-r elated 

degrees. 

OPM D Contacts 

•	 Colonels Division (DAPC-OPCAE) 

Engineer Assignments, LTC 

Lin Lufkin, x 787 1 

.. Lieutenant Colonels Division 

(DAPC-OPL·AS) 

Engineer Assignments, LTC
 

Thomas Fisher, x 0423
 

•	 Majors Division (DAPC-OPM-A) 

Engineer Assignments, MAJ
 

Gary Woodham, x 8109
 

•	 Combat Support Arms Division 

(DAPC-OPF-E) (Company 

Grade) 

Engineer	 Branch Chief, LTC 

Norm Kuklinski, x 0650 

CPT Assignments, MAJ Mike 

Foster, x 0651 

LTC Assignments, CPT Matt 

Dominy, x 7434 

•	 Warrant Officers Division 

(DAPC-OPW-AU) 

Engineer Assignments, CW3 

Frank W. Russell, x 7837 

Note: Commercial telephone line:
 

Listed numbers preceded by Area
 

Code 202-325.
 

Autovon line: Listed number pre­


ceded by 221.
 

If you cannot call, please write to
 

the following address: Commander,
 

US Army Military Personnel Cen ­


ter, ATTN: (appropriate office sym­


bol) , 200 Stovall Street, Alexandria,
 

Virginia 22332 .
 

Microfiche Files 

Some officers are wondering why 

they haven't received copies of 

microfiche personnel files, according to MILPERCEN officials. The 

reason is that all officer files have 

not been mailed yet. 

Files have been mailed to general 

officers, colonels, warrant officers 

and, since late last month, to captains, except those in the Medical 

Corps. 

Files are scheduled to be mailed to 

MC captains by March 15, to lieutenant colonels by April 30, to majors by May 31 and to lieutenants by 

June 30. 

As microfiche copies of Official 

Military Personnel Files (OMPF) 

are received, discrepancies or ques ­

tions on the copies should be brought 

to the attention of local MILPOs, 

officials advise. 

24 SPRING 1978 
New Assignment Policies 

Department of the Army has anno unced the imp lementation of new 

assignment po licies designed to reduce personnel turbulence and associated costs while providing the 

soldier greater tour stability. Key 

policies include: 

• No PCS moves in CONUS 

solely du e to passage of a stipulated 

period of time. 

• Assignmen t procedur es to permit to ur completion and encourage 

volunta ry tou r extensions . 

• First-te rm, 3-yea r (or less) 

mem bers will be given only one assignment after initial traini ng un less 

requ ired to serve a sho rt tour, in 

which case two assign ments are permitted . First-term, 4-year (or more) 

members are eligible for two assignment s after training, regardless of 

tour length. 

• Emphasis on career personnel 

assigned to an unaccompanied hardship tour area being provided a 

homebase or adva nced assignment. 

• General officer assignments will 

be for a minimum of 2 year s. 

• In-so-far as possible , CONUS 

assignments will be for 3 years or 

more. This will not apply to individua ls ordered overseas. For officers 

selected to attend Senior Service 

College , a 2-year minimum assignment will apply. 

• Thr ough th e gra de o f 0 -5 for 

officers and E-8 for enlisted members, promotion will not be the sole 

reaso n for PCS reassignment prior 

to tour completion . 

• Individu als declared excess at a 

particular installation will be reassigned at the same installation in 

the ir secondary or substitutable 

skills or, if not possible, to the nearest installation capable of using their 

skills. 

• Hawaii is now included as part 

of the CONUS sustaining base for 

purposes of selection of overseas replacements . 

Re-up Bonuses 

Some National Gu ard and Army 

Reserve units can now get first-term 

reenlistme nt bonuses of up to 

$1,800. The award of bonuses has 

THE ENGINEER 

Enlisted
 

career info
 

been established as a test prog ram 

for 11 Reserve Component uni ts 

that will be conducte d from I January 1978 through 30 September 

1978 and is aime d at bolstering Reserve Component strength figures. 

Under the program, a ma ximum 

of $1,800 will be paid to first-termers 

who reenli st fo r a minimum of six 

years . Payment of the top bonus will 

be made by a lump sum of $900 at 

the time of reenlistment, and in $150 

pa yments at the end of each year of 

sa tisfactory service. 

The units eligible for the bonuse s 

are National Guard unit s in Kansas, 

Georgia, North Dakota, Oregon, 

New Jersey, Michigan , and West 

Virginia, and the followi ng Army 

Reserve units: the 96th ARCOM, 

Utah; the 76th Division, Co nnecticut; the 94th ARCOM , Massachusetts; and the 205th Infant ry Brigade, Minnesota. 

Photos 

All 6 -6s and above are reminded 

that a current photograph of themselves is required to be in their official military personnel files. They 

ar e also reminded th at the photograph must be updated every five 

years , with the new photograph being taken during th e month of their 

birth . 

Male soldiers must be photographed in the Ar my gree n unifor m 

with their basic branch insignia in 

place , low quarter shoes , and wearing all permanently authorized rib ­

bo ns, badges, and tabs corr ectly 

displayed. 

Women soldiers must also wea r 

the Army green un iform-coat and 

skirt-with the insignia of their permanent branch in place, black 

pumps, and with their permanently 

authorized ribbons, badges, and 

tabs properly displayed. 

The official photograph has taken 

on increased importance, and the 

soldiers concerned should ma ke an 

extra effort to insure that their 

photograph pictures them in the best 

light. 

Test Scores 

MOS Te st scores will no t determine reen listment eligibility in 1978, 

according to new DA guideline s, 

which also list alternatives to using 

those sco res. 

SQT scores of 60 percent or higher 

or in the II th percentile will replace 

a minimum MOS test score of 70 for 

soldiers reenlisting in 1978. Soldiers 

who do not meet the minimum require ments will be allowed to extend 

for one year for rete sting or retrainmg. 

Reenlistment Qualifica tion Tests 

(RQTs) will be used if SQTs are not 

available in the [\lIOS for which a 

soldier is reenlisting. RQTs are written tests that resem ble the past MOS 

tests, and they are available in most 

MOSs. Soldiers who fail an RQT 

will be allowe d to take another test 

after 30 days. 

MI LP ER CEN will determine reenlistment eligibility for tho se so ldiers who have neith er SQTs nor 

RQTs available to them, or who fail 

those tests. 

Career status soldiers who are reenlisting for a thir d tour or more 

will have their reenli stment qualifications determined by thei r SQT 

scores. If SQTs are not available, 

their mo st recent MOS test score will 

be used . Career soldiers are also eligible for on e-year extensions for retr aining or ret esting. 

Recla ssified soldiers ma y reenlist 

based on their SQT scores in th e cur ­

rent MOS s. Those with new MOSs, 

who do not have eno ugh time in 

thei r new MOSs for testing purposes, 

ma y reen list if th eir applications are 

approved by MILPERCEN. These 

cases will be han dled on an individual review basis. 

25 
(EDITOR 'S NOTE: This section is 

devoted to an exchange of information between the NC Os of the Engineer Schoo l and field units. Ideally, 

the point ofcontact for this program 

sh ould be the Command Sergeant 

Maj or of the Engineer School and 

Command Sergeants Major ofEngineer brigades, groups and battalions. This channel of communication will deal with rapidly changing 

Engineer doc trine and its imp act on 

the professional Engineer NCO.) 

Engineer NCO Advanced
 

Course
 

Effective with the first class of FY 

78, new grad ing sta ndards were applied to Engineer NCO Advanced 

Course examinations. Students must 

pass each examination with a grade 

of 70 percent or higher to receive a 

passing rating. If a student fails on 

his first exam, he may be retested 

after addition al training. If he fails 

a second time, his academic record 

will be reviewed by the Professional 

Course Review Committee (PCRC) 

which ma y recommend on e of the 

following: 

• Administrative Pass (Graduation with Diploma). 

• Contin ue the course (Certificate of Attendance-unsuccessful 

compl etion). 

• Referral to the Faculty Board 

(Faculty Board ma y recom mend relief from the course). 

Experience with the first class of 

ENCOA studen ts under the new 

grading standard s resulted in a 16 

percent failure rate . Eleven of 67 

students failed the course. One student was relieved from the course, 

an d 10 were allowed to continue and 

complete graduation requirements 

by correspondence course. 

Seven students failed demolition 

exams primarily because of their inability to calculate demolition formulas. The remainder failed exams 

due to lack of basic engineer and 

general military subject knowledge. 

The following observatio ns by instructors will be of assistance to 

NCOs selected to attend ENCOA: 

• Studen ts must disregard the old 

stereotype engineer concept of being in a rear area. With the new 

equipment and weapo nry now being 

assigned to Engineers, the need for 

Engineers along th e FEBA is mandatory . The ro le of the Engineer o f 

the futur e is consta ntly being updated , and is a part of the combined 

arms team. Our contributions to the 

combined arms team are mobility , 

countermobility , survivability and 

general engineering. General engineering, although important, is not 

our primary mission . 

• Map Read ing-It is essential 

that personnel be able to orient a 

map and read an 8-digit grid-coordinate with moderat e speed, and 

operate a compass with complete 

accur acy. Most comba t type subjects tau ght at the Engineer School 

relate to ground operation s dealing 

with a map . The Engineer School 

does not teach map reading; advance students are required to kno w 

this prior to arri val. 

• Fighting Positions and Protection Facilities-Students sho uld 

review the basic concep ts of fighting 

positions, and what type of positions we curre ntly recommend for 

use. 

• Personnel Obstacles Non-Explosive-Students should review the 

types of wire obstacles th at are currently in use, and the various types 

of wire such as barbed wire, barbed 

tape, concertina , etc. Many times 

we find that students hav e never 

constructed an y type of wire obstacle and the feeling is that since they 

have not used it in the past-the 

same will be true of the future. 

• Demoli tion-Fir st we hope the 

student reviews current man uals 

concerning demolition and leave 

" That's not the way we did it in 

Vietnam or Kor ea" at home! Since 

the School teaches the NOW conccpt, it is important to have an open 

mind in the ever-cha nging area of 

militar y doctrine. 

• Mine and Counter-Mine-ALL 

students must know the hardware 

and basic terminology of mine war ­

far e before coming to this course. 

They should be famil iar with types 

of mine s, fuzin g and arming procedur es and they must be able to use a 

mine field recording form. 

• Equipment and Weapons-Personnel should know the capa bilities 

of the Dragon , TOW and common 

weapons associated with Engineer 

units. Th ey should also be familiar 

with the types of equipment that are 

found in an Eng ineer Battalion, including Comba t Heavy Units. You 

may ask why this is important. 

Many times during a class, questions 

arise as to wha t is a ten-to n tractor, 

scoo p loader, bac khoe, armored 

personnel carr ier, etc.! 

NOTE: Field Manua l 5-34 (Engineer Field Data) co uld be used as a 

guid e for self-evalua tion. This manual also lists the major topics of 

instruction in Field Engineering and 

could be used as a text for preparing 

the st udent for the Ad vance Noncommissioned Officer Course. 

Some advice to NCOs selected for 

the ENCOA cou rse: 

• Make sure you ar e proficient in 

basic math . 

• Be prepared to do some hard 

studying in Engineer subjects in 

which you are weak. 

• The School Staff an d Facult y 

will help you, individu ally, or in 

small groups, but they won' t pa ss 

you ju st because you are here. 

• Stand ard s are high; we are 

tra ining professional Engi nee r 

NCOs. 

Primary Technical Course 

PTC for 12C (Bridge Crewman) is 

alive and well at Fort Belvoir. Units 

interested in the course or having 

difficulty o btaining information on 

it, please contact the Comma nd Sergeant Major, US Ar my Engineer 

Schoo l. 

26 SPRING 1978 
Situation 

Imagine that you are the company commander of 

Company A, 2d Engineer Battalion, 2d Infantry Division. You have ju st been informed by the Battalion 

Commander that your company is to pro vide dir ect support to th e lst Battalion, 1st Infantry Brigade for one 

week to perform Engineer Sur vivability assista nce. 

The Battalion Commander discussed the Com bat 

Service support requirements you would have in addition to your organic support capability while in direct 

support to the Ist Battalion. He has instructed you to 

furnish the Battalion S-4 a list of combat service support 

services and assets you will need for the seven days. 

You return to your company and sit down with your 

company executive officer to begin planning. You refer 

to the Battalion SO P , which states that un its operating 

under your situation would be augmented with additional vehicles to haul Class III and Class IV supplies, 

and a company mess team. Your Battalion SOP also 

lists the classes of supply below: 

CLASSES OF SUPPLY 

I Subsistence 

II Clothing, equipment 

III POL 

IV Construction, fortifications 

V Ammunition 

VI Personal Items 

VII Maj or End Items 

VIII Medical 

IX Repair Parts 

X Non Military 

Problem 

You realize as you get into your planning that the 

support guidance outlined in the Battalion SOP is not 

enough. What additional combat service support assets 

would YOU request of your Battalion 5-4? 

Solution and Discussion 

An Infantry Rifle Battalion ha s three Class II1 vehicles (POL Tanks/Pods) and five Class V vehicles (cargo 

trucks) to support its own elements. Therefore, you 

realize they could not provide the support your unit will 

need. You would be justified in informing your Battalion S-4 that you will need additional Class III, IV, V, IX 

Ie and VIII to include a medi cal team. Additional vehicular support would be needed to transport your increase I in Class III, IV and V. I 

Under th e consolidation of administration at Battalion level (CABL) concept you may take personnel such 

as a mail clerk, supply clerk, a maintenance team and a 

dining facili ties support team from the Battalion 5-4 . Of 

course, these additional teams and/or personnel may 

depend on the enemy situation and local operating procedures. However, it is the detailed consideration of 

your requirements prior to "moving out," which will 

provide you with the mission completion capability you 

need ... and that is what it is all about. 

THE ENGINEER 27 
(Continued from page 5) 

Several times, as pre sident, Washington suggested 

setting up the school of engineering. But it was not until 

1802, three years after Washington died, that President 

Thomas Jefferson was authorized by Congress to establish a Corps of Engineers at West Point to "constitute a 

Military Academy." 

To this day, the U.S . Military Academy at West Point 

remains essentially a school of engineering. The highest 

ranking graduates are offered assignments in the Corps 

of Engineers, which achieved such major national objectives as the Panama Canal and the World War II 

"Manhattan Proj ect," which developed the atomic 

bomb. 

But the education of engineers had its setbacks at 

West Point, too, in the early 1800s. Engineers were then 

considered warmongers and subjected to public scorn. 

In its early days , West Point followed the example of 

other institutions of higher learning, most of which were 

under control of religious organizations, concentrating 

on teaching of the arts, languages and similar "gentlemanly" subjects. Virtually the only scientific study in 

those days was astro nomy. 

It was in 1815 that the training of engineers in North 

America got its major impetus. That year a 30-year-old 

captain of the Army Corps of Engineers, Sylvanus 

Thayer, sought leave of absence to go to France and 

observe teaching methods and research in the French 

Army 's Ecole Polytechnique. 

The request was sent to President James Madi son, 

who discussed the matter with his Secretary of State, 

James Monroe. Both had vivid recollections of Washington's many pleas for putting engineering on a sound 

footing. Capt. Thayer was sent to France. 

Returning in 1817, Thayer was appointed by Monroe, 

who had become president, as Superintendent of the 

U.S. Military Academy. It was a post he held for 16 

years, during which he made West Point a top-notch 

school of engineering-and the first in North America . 

Thus Sylvanus Thayer carried out, over many years, 

the ambitious plans advocated as early as 1775 by 

George Washington. Today the United States trains 

engineers in some 300 institutions, including Philadelphia's Drexel University, which granted its first degree 

in engineering in 1917. 

It will be exactly 200 years this June 9, since General 

Washington first proposed the education of engineers in 

North America, and that anniversary will not go unnoticed. 

Under chairmanship of Gen . Bruce C. Clarke (ret.) a 

West Point-trained Corps of Engineers officer whose 

defense of St. Vith, Belgium during the 1944 "Battle of 

the Bulge" led to full four-star rank, plans for the 

observance have been taking shape for six years. 

President Jimmy Carter-who received engineer 

training at the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis-has 

been invited to make the principal address. 

The observance will be at Valley Forge, under the 

sponsorship of the Freedoms Foundation, the National 

Society of Professional Engineers, and other engineer 

organizations. 

This will not be the first time George Washington has 

been honored in Pennsylvania as the early American 

engineer. In 1954, President Eisenhower and many 

other notables gathered at Fort Necessity, near Conf1uence, Pa . in Fayette County, to commemorate the 

200th anniversary of Washington's battle-he was then 

just 22, serving in the Virginia militia under the British 

Crown-against the French in the French and Indian 

War. 

Having explored the western reaches of Virginia 

(which then stretched to the Mississippi River) a year 

earlier, Washington was sent as second in command of a 

force raised by Virginia Governor Dinwiddie to warn 

the French against proceeding east from the Ohio River. 

While enroute to the Ohio Valley, Washington became commander of the force upon the death of his 

superior, Col. Joshua Fry. 

Historians disagree on the outcome of the Battle of 

Fort Necessity, but there is no doubt that Lt. Col. 

George Washington, then barely a lad, selected its site 

and supervised its construction by the simple method of 

felling trees and forming their trunks into a stockade. 

As some historians tell it, the site was selected because 

Washington knew the range of muskets carried by the 

French and Indians, and their practice of shooting from 

behind trees. He put his fort in a clearing known as 

Great Meadow, along what is now U.S. Highway 40, so 

large that the attackers would have to come into plain 

sight before they could fire effectively. 

But the French and Indians must have been able to 

maintain their concealment, because Washington was 

said to be unaware of how many casualties they had suffered . The battle ended in a draw with Washington's 

troops retiring to the east and the French and Indians to 

the west. Both sides then claimed victory, the French 

Commander saying he had forced Washington out, and 

American partisans claiming the eastward advance of 

the French had been stopped. 

Whatever the real outcome of that battle, it is clear 

that Washington, who had begun his career as a surveyor at age 16, became an experienced military engineer by the time he was 22, supervising the construction 

and defense of a fort. 

Small wonder that he went on to other important 

military service under the British Crown, was cho sen to 

lead all colonial military forces at age 43, and is now regarded as the first advocate of the training of engineers 

who made the United States a leader in world technology .~

(Reprinted with the permission of The Sunday Bulletin!
 

Discoverer of Philadelphia.)
 

28 SPRING 1978