7 

Md 

.* 

-. (Enginee -

HE PROFESSIONAL BUUmN FOR ARMY ENGINEERS 

THE WOLVERINE 

25thAnnzversam lssue 


J 

uartsrs. Deplamnemof the ~rmy 

3 Approved$or pubHc release; distribution isunlimited. 
By Major General Clair F. Gill 

Commandant, U.S. Army Engineer School 

This year marks the 25th anniversary of Enginee,: 

Since the first issue was published at Fort Belvoir 

in the spring of 1971, the format and content of our 

magazine have changed somewhat but the main purpose 

has remained the same-to provide an effective and 

responsive means of open communication between military and civilian engineers throughout the Corps of Engineers. In that first issue, Major General Robert R. Ploger, 

then Commandant of the U.S. Army Engineer School, 

clearly stated the reason for Engineer's existence: 

"We of the Corps of Engineers have long been waiting 

for the advent of a forum to air our ideas on current engineering problems-military problems as well as those 

within the civilian domain. 

We are optimistic that we now have such a vehicle, with 

the initial Issue of The Engineer making its debut on the 

engineering scene. 

Through this medium, we hope to trigger engineer 

thinking. We hope to stimulate controversial subjects; 

"cross-generate "-if you will-engineer viewpoints, with 

the objective in mind of progress in the profession. Certainly there are among us engineers who can rebut or 

reply to questions such as: 

Should engineers be generalists or specialists 

Can we attain trade union recognized proficiency for 

our MOS specialists... 

What is the best method of reducing response time... 

We would like to see such topics-and countless 

others-explored and we believe that this can be done 

effectively through future issues ofThe Engineer. 

Controversy for controversy sake? No-that is not our 

objective. What we are after is progressive engineering 

thought, and we fee/ that we shall be successful in reaching that goal. We see The Engineer as a reflection of contemporary thinking, engineering-wise. It will be edited with 

the aim of provoking the thought processes of the complete span of our personnel, from young enlisted men to 

career-oriented engineer officers. From them may well 

emanate new ideas, fresh approaches to existingproblem 

areas-solutions perhaps, to many of the technical barricades facing us. 

With that in mind, an epigram occurs to us (and we are 

speaking in terms of engineeringproblems): 

'Problems knownby allare prevented from growingtall.' 

In essence, this means that discussion invites solutions, 

and we want to stimulate discussion in The Engineer. 

Remember. The Engineer constitutesan open engineer 

forum. We hope that those who are in the business, will 

give us the business! Your help is solicited. Input is 

desired from aN engineers who wish to serve the Interest 

of ourArmy and nation. 

Let us hear from you!" 

As we celebrate this silver anniversary, I reflect with 

pride that MG Ploger's far-sighted ideas have served us 

well for a quarter of a century and are still valid today. Our 

readership is expanding to engineers in other services as 

the shift toward joint training and more frequent joint operations continues, and we welcome those new readers. To 

them and lo those in our traditional Army engineer family 

the Engineer staff and I extend a hearty 'Thank youl" for 

supporting our magazine. Engineerwill remain an effective 

forum for exchanging information within our engineering 

community as long as you submit your thoughts and ideas. 

so keep the manuscripts coming. This is your professional 

journal, and it will be as good as you want to make it. 

On a more serious note, I will speak briefly about the 

impacts of the President's ban on antipersonnel land 

mines. President Clinton announced a unilateral U.S. policy on 16 May 1996 that immediately endsthe use of nonself-destructing antipersonnel land mines by U.S. forces. 

The policy makes two narrow exceptions: 

We can continue to use the otherwise prohibited mines 

as "training aids" in countermine training and in 

humanitarian dernining training. 

Because of the unique challenge of defending Korea, 

we can use and train with the otherwise prohibited 

mines in this theater. 

While the policy is clear, the details and impacts are 

still being worked. Many issues, such as the "demilitarization" of prohibited mine inventories, are outside of Army 

engineer channels. Other issues, such as training the 

force in Korea and all other personnel and rewriting our 

mine-warfare doctrine, do involve Army engineers, and 

they are being discussed, coordinated, and resolved. Specific changes will be described in detail in future issues of 

Engineerand in other professionaljournals. Stay tuned for 

later developments! 
- --- -- 

'P=l w 

J dna?.ne~.?r
 F# 

August 1996 Headquarters, Department of the Army Volume26 Pi3 5-96-3 

UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER AND 

FORT LEONARD WOOD 

COMMANDEWCOMMANDANT 

Major General Clair E Gill 

MANAGING EDITOR 

Catherine Eubanks 

FEATURES EDITOR 

Shirley Bridges 

GRAPHIC DESIGNER 

Jennifer Morgan 

By Order of the Secretary of the Army 

DENNIS J. REIMER 

General, United States Army 

Chief of Staff 

Official: 

JOEL B. HUDSON 

Acting Administrative Assistant to the 

Secretary of the Army 

02261 

Cover: The cornerstones of engineer modernization for the heavy force, the Wolverine heavy 

assault bridge and the Grinly complex obstacle 

breacher, are featured on the front and back covers. 

Photo credits: Wolverine photos courtesy of General Dynamics Land Systems Division. Grizzly 

photos courtesy of U.S. Army Test and Experiment Command. 

FEATURES 

2 The Grizzly and The Wolverine: Alternatives to an 


Orchestrated Ballet of Farm Im~lements 


By Major Harry Greene 

7 Photo-Essay From Operation Joint Endeavor 

By Major Andrew Goetz 

12 The Engineer School: Providing Lessons Learned to 

the Force 

By Major David Brinkley 

17 Marine Engineers: Construction and Destruction on 

Demand 

By Captain Thomas Pratt 

24 Transitioning the Technical Engineer (SIT) 

By Sergeant First Class Tony Arnold and Staff Sergeant 

Kevin Keefe 

27 Snapshots From a Liaison Officer 

By Lieutenant Colonel Reinhold Hocke 

32 BCTP: Warfighter Exercises Strengthen Battlefield 

Performance 

By Lieutenant Colonel Gregory Stanley and Lieutenant 

Colonel David Snodgrass 

38 Shaping the Electronic Battlespace: The HEXJAM 

By Captain Dale A. Kornuta and First Lieutenant Brian R. 

Dunmire 

43 Maintaining the MlCLlC 

By Captain Joe Birchmeier, Sergeant First Class Terry 

Purdln and Sergeant First Class Ted Roberts 

DEPARTMENTS 

Inside Front Cover: Clear the Way 

14 Personal Viewpoint 36 CTC Notes 


23 Letters to the Editor 48 Engineer Update 


31 Book Review 49 Bridge the Gap 


ENGINEER (ISSN 0046-798901 85 prepared quanerly by ths U.S. Army of sxpenise for the purpose of enhancing their professional development. Views 

Engineer Smool, ATN: ATSE-T0.D-€8. Fon Leonard Wwd. MO 65473-6650. exprensd arethose oltheaumorand notthose ofthe Depament of Defenseorits 

Second Class postage is paid at For( Leonard Wood, MO. and addillonai maiilng elements The contents do not necersaniy reflea official US. Army pasltions and 

offices. do not chanos or suoersede information in other US. ~ ~ Armv oublicatlons. Use of PiSTMASTER: .. ~ ~~

Send address lo P,ohssjonal itek constitutes neither alflrmaaon of their accumq nor Produe 

ATN: ATSE-ID-D-EB. FonLeonard Wood. MO 65473-6650. 

CORRESPONDENCE, lettern to the editor, manusmipts, photographs, olfidal 

unit requests to receive copies. and unit addiess changes should be sent to 

Engineer at the preceding address. Telephone: (573) 563.4104. DSN 676.4104. 

me Engineer3 E-mail address is: EUBANKSCMWO0D.VINES.ARMY.MIL. Our 

Inter-net home page is located af: HTP/WOOD.ARMY.MIL. 

DISCLAIMER: Engineer presents professorial lnlormatian designed to keep 

Amy engineers iniormed of current and emerging developments within their areas 

August 1996 

endorsement.Engineer reservesme nght to sdll material. 

CONTENT is not copyrighted. Material may be reprinted if credit is given to 

Engjneerandthe aumor~ 

OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION is targeted to all engineer and engineer-related units. 

PERSONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS are available by coolacting the Superintendent of Documents. PO. Box 371954. Pittsburgh, PA 152507950. Address 

changes for personal subscriptions should also be sent to the Superinlendent of 

Documents. 

Engineer I 
The Grizzly and the Wolverine: 


Alternatives to an Orchestrated Ballet 


of Farm Implements 


By Major Harq Greene 

he activities ol' engineers in the 

breach have been descrihcd as 

"an orchestrated ballet of fam~ 

implements."' Dc capability of engincers to provide responsive mohilily 

support 111 the heavy division is a wellknown arca of concern. The Engineer 

Regiment's top two matcriel developrncnt priorities, the Grizzly and thc 

Wolverine, are designed to alleviate 

those concerns. The following scenario contrasts the "orchestrated ballet" 

of today to the future of the regiment 

with the Grizzly and the Wolverine. 

Circa 2006 

The 1st Brigade of the 8th lnfanrrj 

Division (Mechanized). supported by 

the 21sr Engineer Bartaliotr, is conducting u deliberare atmck. LTC 

Castle, commander of the 2lsr Enxineers, be~ins ro daydream as Ire 

worches the plan itnfold on the digital 

di.cplay in his comn~and sehicle. He is 

comparing today's plan with orre Ire 

e.~ecured I0 years l~efore as a coprain. 

Circa 1996 

The brigade was condricring o 

deliherote ntt~ck followed by a prtr.wit. 

Tlre inirial po~etratio~l hod gone well 

and rhc~ /,rigode wjas on the march. A 

Companh comma~rded 11y CPT Casrle, 

was srrpporring one of the leird rrrsk 

forces. Two bridges were ahead, but 

one was only milirrrq load class (MLC) 

50 and the other sponnrd a 20-meter 

gup. Bypasses of both brid,fes were 

not avoilrrble. The plan called for 

art armored vehicle-la~r~rchedbridge 

(AVLB) to replace rhe MLC 50 bridge 

and o nredirm~-girder bridge (MGB) ro 

replace the 20-merer bridge if ir was 

damaged 

The AVLB. As usual, the enemy 

didn't cooperate. He quickly disengaged and fell back to the far side of 

rhe firsr gap. The assalrlt and obsracle 

platoon leader led the AVLB larmcher 

fonuard. The plaroorr leader and the 

AVLB crew tried bur could riot keep rip 

with the arr~r~red task force. The task 

force had to wait nr rile gap fnr rhe 

AVLB to catclr up. Then !Ire)' emplaced 

tile briiip. 

Sirrrc the ]MI ro~rks e.rceedrd rkc 

rated capacil) of rh~ bridge. cro.s.singr 

were caution cro.s.ri~ig.s and rl~e Iierrten- 

' our became a bridge impector: Meanwhile, rhe enemy was busy developing a 

conrplex obstacle in the parh of rhe brigrule 's advatrce, using mine layers. 

ditching machines, and wire. The 

breach wo~rld be a dijjicult mission 

rerembling "an orchesrrated hallet of 

! fizr~n Cflplemerrts. " 

I Scouts quickly found the minefield, ' rlre wire, and the tank dirch. The lead 

rask force organized to corrducr an insrride breach. Tlre support ream begon 

to suppress the sire, while arriller). and 

ranks provided smoke. After the security 

was ser, an MI wirh a mine roller begon 

the breach by moving forward. When 

rhe roller encountered a mine, the MI 

stopped and backed out. A combat 

engineer vehicle (CEV), on one of its 

, last missions before retirenzenr, pulleda 

mine-clearing line charxe (MICLIC) 

fonvardatrdfired ir. Anorher MI with a 

truck-width ?nine plow pruofed rlre lane 

cream1 by rhe MICLIC and then moved 

nridc. A sqirud i,fsi~pperc in orr MI13 

arnrored person~rel carrier come forward ro breach rhe wire. The MI13 

moved acide, and an armored combat 

eartlrn~over (ACE) attucked the tank 

dirch. Mea~~wl~ile, the suppon force 
hours away. When the company 

arrived, the soldiers did their best, but 

the enemy rained artillery fire on the 

unprotected combat engineers building 

the bridge. They succesfully completed the bridge but not without the 

10s.~of blood of some of the builders. 

The task force that followed CPT 

Castle passed lines, giving A Company 

a well-deserved rest. 

was rapidly running out of direct-fire 

ammunition. Arfillery continued tofire, 

bur the fight was beginning to take its 

toll on the support force. The taskforce 

commander tried to see through the 

smoke to determine the progress of the 

various parts of the ballet. Afrer the 

Circa 2006 

LTC Castle's thoughts returned to 

the present. Conditions certainly had 

improved in the last I0 years. Although 

the mission today was nearly identical, 

the ease and speed of execution were 

much different. 

The MLC 50 bridge was not a problem. The Wolverines in his battalion 

The complex obstacle was much 

easier to breach. too. The Griulies 

were already task organized with the 

breachforce. The supportforce set the 

necessary conditions for the breach 

and then digitally tasked the A Company commander to send the Grizzlies 

could easily maintain the pace of the 

armored taskforce. Better yet, lieutenants did not have to be dedicated to 

keep track of them. The Wolverine was 

fully digitized. Nor only did the crew 

get the same directional information as 

the Bradley and Abrams crews, but the 

engineer and maneuver force leaders 

could track their progress on digital 

map screens without any effort by the 

crew. The Wolverine made it to the site, 

ACE cleared the tank ditch, the assault I into action. With a few keystrokes, the 

force began to pour through the obsta- company commander ordered the miscle. It hadn? been pretty, but good sion The Griulies moved forward, 

training and hard work got the task plowed through the minefield, and 

force through in true ESSAYONS spirit. I breached the wire with their blades. 

The MGB. CPT Casrk hoped the Meanwhile, the task force con~mander 

toughest part of his day was over; but it ' was receiving real-timefeedback on his 

wasn't The lend team radioed back screen on the location and progress of i tbat the 20-meter bridge was out. CPT the breach. Afrpr a Grizzly attacked the 

Castle had plannedfor this eventuality, tank ditch with its arm, the breach site 

but the MGB contpany was still a few was shown on diaitnl maus throuphout 

fielded, thesc two systems will accomplish complex obstacle breaches similar 

to the one that required CPT Castle to 

synchronize the use of inany different 

systems. The first Wolverine will be 

fielded in 2000 and the first Grizzly in 

2003. Both of them will be fielded to 

heavy division and corps mechanized 

battalions with a basis of issue of four 

Grizzlies and four Wolverines per company. These systems will greatly 

increase combat engineers' ability to 

provide responsive mobility support to 

Force XXI. 

The Grizzly: A Heavy Force 

Complex Obstacle Breacher 

the task force, Quickly, the task force 

was through the complex obstacle and 

on the move again. 

The 20-meter gap was not a problem because the Wolverines traveling 

I Grizzly Characteristics and Capabilities 1 

The Grizzly is designed to breach 

simple and complex obstacles 

(see chart below). Mounted on a 

modified MI chassis, the Grizzly feaI required to clear a standard antitank 

This scenario may sound like a pipe ditch in 5 minutes or less. 

MI Abrams chassis 

tures a mine-clearing blade equipped with the lead task force were easily ! with an automatic depth control. It can "Ie bridge the gap and pass the task clear mines at speeds up to 3 mph. The force. Using the under-armor launch 1 

I hlade also cuts wire ohstacles. It is capability and the short 5-minute complemented by an excavating 3rm launch time, the crew and task force i that can attack antitank ditches, log had minimal exposure at the gap. / cribs, and rubble. The system is 

dream from the Engineer School, but it 

isn't. Both the Grizzly and the Wolverine are in development with operational 

Full-width (V-shaped) mine-cleating blade with automatic depth 

control 

Power-driven arm for digging, grappling, and lifting 

The Grizzly will be a fully digitized 

member of the Army of the 21st century with a situational awareness simiCommander's control station with communications, enhanced 

vision devices, and area suppresslon weapons 

prototypes undergoing testing. When lar to that of the supported M1 tanks 

Mobility/su~ivabilityequivalent to the supported force 

Requires a two-man crew 

Breaches anfihank ditches and mineflelds 

rereived a digital command to emplace Clears urban rubble the bridge, laid the bridge, and sent a 

dinital report that caused the bridne to Initial system clears mlnes to 12inches in depth at 3 mph 1 

August 1996 Engineer 3 

- - show up on the task force's digital 

maps. 

Objective system will clear mines to 16inches in depth at 4.5 mph 
MSR le combat simulation, 

the 

Savc IP~~IY (+I IOIw Combat ven~cles- 7 tanks and 

11 BIFVs 

Returned 10 additional tanKS to 

the fight 

Reduced obstacle-reduction 

times by 16 minutes 

Allowed more rapid I 

of combat power on 

Source: Hours 31.1, CASTFOREM Gamlng, Grlnly C ,February 1996 

and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles. The 

Grizzly promises to provide the maneuver task force with arobust, survivable. 

and mobile breaching platform to use 

against wire, mines, tank ditches, and 

log cribs. 

The Grizzly's utility was highlighted by simulation results comparing 

it-operating alone-to the numerous 

systems we use today. The simulated 

side 

~raNonalE 

Figure 1. Grizzly Combat Effectiveness 

bstacle 

rs Analysis 

massing 

the far 

mission involved a brigade clearing a 

main supply route (MSR) (Figure 1). 

Using the Grizzly in this battle had a 

stunning impact. The main attack 

encountered a complex obstacle with 

mines, wire, and a tank ditch. The Grizzly breached this complex obstacle 16 

minutes faster than the currently used 

equipment. As a result, the task force 

was able to mass combat power on the 

- Grizzly breaches in stride 

Figure 2. Analysis of Grizzly's Impacts on Engineer Operations. 

4 Engineer August 1996 
Fe Characteristics and Capabilities 

MLC 70 

Carried on an M1 Abrams chassis 

Mobilitv and survivability equivalent to the supported 

f'orce 

. -a-- ---- ..- Spatts yap up to 24 meters 

Requires a two-man crew 

far side of the obstacle in less time, ~ 

which saved a company (+) of combat 1 

vehicles. In addition, the Grizzly I 

allowed 10 tanks equipped with i 

breaching equipment (rollers and 

plows) to return to the fight rather than i 

be committed to breaching duties. The I 

simulation results make a strong case 

for the Grizzly requirement. I 

The Grizzly will also have a dra- 1 

matic impact on engineer doctrine, i 

training, leader development, organi- 1 

zation, materiel, and soldiers 

(DTLOMS) as shown in Figure 2. 1 

Using the Grizzly-instead of the 

MI with roller and track-width mine 

plow, the MICLIC, the ACE, and the 

AVLB-will greatly simplify our 

doctrine, training, and planning and 

cxecution of complex obstacle 

breaches. The Grizzly should ease 

the logistics burden by replacing 

engineer-unique platforms with the 

common M1 chassis. Finally, soldier 

survivability for both the supported 

task force and the engineer force will 

increase due to the Grizzly's faster 

breach times. 

The Wolverine: A Heavy Force 

Assault Bridge 

The Wolverine is a heavy assault 

bridge designed to rcplace the 

AVLB on a one-for-one basis. It 

offers a substantial upgrade in capabilities compared to the AVLB. The Wolverine provides for a normal crossing of an 

MLC 70 vehicle over a 24-meter gap 

(see chart at left). The increased gapcrossing capability will allow the maneuver force to conduct assault breaches 

over gaps that require bridging to support ' lines of comlnunications (Figure 3). 

I The Wolverine features a horizonI tally launched bridge, which offers a 

! much lower profile than the vertically 

launched AVLB. Survivability of the 

i force is enhanced and their momentum 

I is maintained by the short 5-minute 

launch time and a 10-minute retrieval 

' time. The Wolverine also provides the 

! capability for launch from under armor. 

i further increasing crew survivability. 

8 The Wolverine has a dual-purpose 

1 spade that stabilizes the chassis during I 

i launch and provides the crew a means 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

SW As11 Latin Europe Korea 

merica 

AVLB 

Wolverine 

Figure 3. Analysis of Gap-crossing Capabilities of the AVLB and Wolverine for MLC-70. 

(Percent ofGaps Bridged) 

August I996 Engineer 5 
~ AnaGsE f il " "'~urrent5%iation: puiure~ ~ i ' f


Domains AVLB - Wolverine
 ..-- Doctrine - spans gaps to 15 meters; M ~ U - spans gaps to 24 meters 


spans gaps IS to 24 meters - Travels at M1 speed (35mph cross 


-Travels at one-third the MI speed (12 mph country) 


cross country) 


Training - Requires three weeks for all systam- - Requires three weeks 


- Decreased costs using a combin: tio on of 

system and simulation t raining 

*AA-- :-8-

- Planning and executior~ UIIIIGUILIUI yaps - Spans gaps up to 24 meLars III lass than 

greater than 15 meters: 5 minutes 


Leader - Security 


Development - Fixed bridging assets 


- Command, control, and communications 

complicated 


Organization - Gaps less than 15 meters = 1 ALVB crew I-Gaps up to 24 meters = 1 Wolverine crew 


- Gaps 15 to 24 meters = 1 MGB platoon 


Materiel - incompatible with current M1 fleet - Conipatible WIith current :MI fleet 


Soldiers - Crews suffer fatigue - Reduced cre\nI fatigue 


- Less survivable than tl -As survlva~le as the M1 

Figure 4. Analysis of Wolverine's Impacts on Engineer Operations. 

of cleaning mud and snow off the I newest tank, the Wolverine will have tank fleet (Figure 4). In the near future, 

bridge before retrieval. I the same embedded digltizatlon pack- the Wolverine will provide the Army 

Wolverine production will occur in age as that provided to the tank and with the world's premier assault bridge, 

conjunction with that of the MIA2 1 infanby fighting vehiclc fleet. The one capable of providing responsive 

Systems Enhancement Package. By 1 Wolverine will have armor protection bridging support to the maneuver force 

using the same production line as the ' and mobility s~milar to that of the of the 21st century. Y ' Description of engineer breaching operations by BG Scott Wallace, 

Commander, National Training Center, to BG Phillip R. Anderson, 

Deputy Commanding General, U.S. 

Army Engineer School, 16 April 

1996. 

Major Greene is chief of the 

Conzbat Mobility Division, TRADOC System Manage6 Engineer 

Combat Systems, U.S. Army Engineer School. He is a graduate ofthe 

Command and General Staff Oficer 

Course. Major Greene holds a doctorate in engineering from the University of Southern California and is 

a registeredprofessional engineer in 

Virginia. L Gnuly logo counrry o] United Defense timired

Wolverine preparing-1to launch. Pannrr?. 

6 Engineer August 1996 
Pho~o-Essay From 


OperaFion join^ Endeavor 


By Major Andrew Goeh 

The following photo-essay concerns the author's experiences in Bosnia during the period March to May 1996. It will be published in 

hvo parts, with this portion including an overview and information about force protection, mine clearing, and mine-dog teams. The fall 

issue of Engineer will include a discussion on base camps, the engineer construction effort, and hea y division engineer shortfalis. The 

photographs were taken by Major Goetz and the combat camera crews attached to TaskForce Eagle. 

Overview 

Iwas assigned as an enaineer observer with Combined Arms Assessment Team (CAATI II, Center for Anv Lessons Learned (CALL). 

Operation ~oiit Endeavor, in-Bosnia. The CALL operates out of Tuzla, with an office in the division tactical operations center ~bseiers 

out for several davs at a time to visit units, then return to Tuzla to write observations and ~ush them throuah the lenothv amroval Drocess. " " , ,, 

My brief two months in Bosnia did not make me an expert but did give me an opportunity to get a snapshot of engineer operations there. 

This "briefing" is based on events Ipersonally observed in Task Force Eagle and the 1st Armored Division Engineer Brigade. It provides an 

overview of engineer operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina, not a discussion on the political or military situation. 

Observations and lessons learned concerning events in Bosnia are available through the Center for Army Lessons Learned at Fort 

Leavenworth, Kansas, and through the Center for Engineer Lessons Learned at Fort Leonard Wood. Missouri. 

Force Protection 

Force protection is a major consideration that requires extensive 

engineer planning for perimeter wire, bunkers, towers, lighting, and 

fighting positions. The engineer battalion manages all construction in 

the brigade combat team sectors. The mission of managing the 

staggering quantity of Class IV materials was given to the 1st 

Armored Division Engineer Brigade. 

photo (left) 

Guard towers are a fixture at ail base camps. They are constructed primarily by the vertical platoons of the 94th Engineer Battalion. Because of poor soil conditions, a stable surface must be 

created to set them on. Compacted gravel, sandbags, and wide timber bases solve the problem. The towers are constructed with double 

Walls: sandbags fill the gap between the walls and cover the roof. 

To ensure that the force protection structures are safe, engineers 

Inspect every bunker and tower and post an inspection certificate on 

the facilily. me task force engineer takes the certification process 

seriously and had several structures rebuilt that did not pass the 

quality-control check. The construction management section attached to the division engineers provides quality assurance. Photo irioht) ,-, 

As the weather warmed, local citizens attempted to penetrate perimeter wire, apparently to steal material inside the 

base camos. To solve this Droblem. enoineers Dlaced tan- . - glefoot wherever practicai. In this photo, ta"glefoot is 

placed behveen the inner and outer perimeterfences. 

Perimeter lighting is used at some sites to keep 

locals out. Task Force Eagle wanted to light the entire 

perimeter of thelr base camp, but that was easier said 

than done. Power distribution for a large base camp 

requires up to 0000 wire, something even the prime 

power teams are not equipped to handle. Because portable light sets are too expensive for the entire perimeter 

lighting mission, most perimeters are not lit. Part of the 

challenge in figuring out how to provide perimeter lighting is determining what the commander wants. For 

example, is the desired effect to enhance night vision 

capability, illuminate wire, illuminate grazing fire, or prevent people from seeing inside the perimeter? 

August 1996 Engineer 7 
-- 

Photo (above) 


Hesco Bastions are used as helicopter revetments at Comanche Base, Tuzla Main. 


Mine Clearing in the Zone of Separation 

One of the divisional engineer brigade's missions is to supervise the "demilitarization of the 

zone of separation (ZOS)." This includes blowing 

bunkers, filling trench lines, and clearing minefields. The former warring factions are primarily 

responsible for completing this work, but U.S. engineers provide supervision to ensure that the work 

is done. The U.S, engineers do some tasks themselves, such as destroying bunkers. This series of 

photos is from a mine-clearing mission performed 

by Serbian engineers and supervised by 1st Platoon, A Company. 40th Engineer Battalion. 

photo (left) 

On this day, 1st Squad and 1st Platoon-with 

an interpreter, a medic, and two Bradleys-linked 

up with the Sefiian engineers-a lieutenant, two i 'r 

soldiers, and a driver-near the edge of the ZOS. 

We followed the Serb's truck to their trench line. 

When we reached a point where the road along the 

trench line was too muddy and steep to drive on, 

we dismounted and walked. 

8Engineer August 1996 
Photo (left) 

The trench line runs along a 

crest. The Serbs led the way to the 

rninefields we were to clear, which 

were about 2 kilometers from the 

dismount point. The platoon leader 

was very "situationally aware" of the 

mine threat. He knew that this section of trench line had never been 

occupied by anyone except the 

Serbs, so the mine threat on their 

side of the trench line was very low. 

On the far side, however, the threat 

was very high. The platoon leader 

instructed his soldiers to stay on the 

Serbian side of the trench line. 

Pliofo (above) 

A series of bunkers along the ridge iinks 

with the trenches. Fighting positions are 

spaced randomly along the trench line. Some 

bunkers are very basic, while others are completelyendosed with doors and windows. Pits 

behind the trench appear to have once held 

mortar andior small-caliber artillery The positions look across a large valley to the Muslim 

side of the line. At this point the Muslim trench 

line is several kilometers away: at other points 

it is as close as 30 meters. 

Photo (above) 

Minefields were recorded on Serbian mine data sheets, which show the location of the minefields, how many mines they contain, and whether any of them 

were detonated during the war. Here, the Serbian lieutenant and the 1st Platoon 

and 1st Squad leaders discuss the mine-clearing operation-how many minefields 

are here, how many will be cleared, and how the mines will be destroyed. The 

responsibility and coordination required to accomplish this mission are well above 

what we normally expect of a young platoon leader, much less a squad leader, but 

we ask them to do this type of mission every day. 

Photo (left) 

This Serbian mine-marking sign is written in Cyrillic. Part of the Dayton Accord 

requires the former warring factions to mark their minefields with a barbed-wire 

fence on all four sides. The Serbs frequently do not do this and can't be convinced 

it is necessary First, there aren't enough Serbs to carty the marking materials to 

minefields in remote locations such as this. Second, since they are taking mines 

out ofthe minefields, they don't see a need to mark them. Finally, they are hesitant 

to mark the Muslim sides of minefields because they don't know if the Muslims 

have mined them. 

August 1996 Engineer 9 
After reviewing the mine data sheets, this Serbian mineclearing team went in front of the trenches to look for mines. 

When they found the PMR-PA mines, they cut the wire, pulled 

the mines out of the ground, and threw them up the hill to the 

Serbian lieutenant. They wore no protective armor and were 

very casual about the whole thing. . -

vide their own demolitions. Later 

if the factions could not. 

photo (below) 

On the first attempt to destroy the mines, the blasting cap fell out of the plastic explosives, causing a misfire. 

The platoon leader wanted the Serbs to wait 30 minutes before approaching the rigged mines but could convince 

them to wait only 15 minutes. The Serbian lieutenant then checked the demolitions, re-rigged them, and successfully destroyed the mines. 

mines removed with the 

number shown on the 

Seven of them were 

destroyed during the war. A Serbian engineer said that eight more mines were 

installed but not recorded on the data 

sheets. A total of 42 PRM-2A mines were 

removed from the sector on this day The 

numbers conveniently added up, but it is 

impossible to determine if they are correct. 

This is why all minefields are considered 

active even though they have been 

10 Engineer August 1996 
Mine-Dog Teams 

Both the Swedes and the Russians have mine dogs in theater, and in April 

1996, our military police certified five mine dogs for use in Bosnia. They are the 

only mine dogs in the U.S. Army These photos were taken at a mine-dog training site outside of Tuzla. The buried mines have been defuzed. 

Photo (left) 

This dog has located a buried mine, and the handler marked it with a mine 

bonnet. The team is now looking for a bypass. The second soldier ma&ed the 

lane using a can of blue spray paint secured in long-handled holders. The lane 

marker sprays on both sides of the dog handier's boots. We should consider 

using this system for marking assault foot lanes through cleared minefields. 

(Utility companies use similar paint can holders to mark underground cables 

and pipes.) 

Photo (above, right) 

Here, the mine-dog team clears 

around a "casualty," and one soldier 

marks the cleared area with paint. 

After a lane to the casualty is 

cleared and the clearing team is out 

of the minefield, the rescue team 

moves along the lane to recover the 

casualty. The dog identified the A , mine next to the casualty; it is 

marked by a mine bonnet. 

Photo (.';!r r;ghl) 

Ths US,m~ne-clear~ngdog is allowed to go fotward on a long leash up to 20 

feet in front of the handler. (The Swedish team keeps their dogs on very short 

leashes.) The second soldier marks the lane with engineer tape that is staked at 

the entrance to the lane and dragged along with the team. This is not a very effective system. In fact, if the training lane was not marked and the engineer tape 

already staked out, the team would not have used it. This dog successfully located 

the buried mines in the training lane. 

Conclusion 

I hope that this photo-essay helps you appreciate the vast scope of ongoing 

engineer operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The experience gained from this mission is producing skilled, confident young engineer leaders for tomorrow's Army. 

Augrlst I996 

-. ~~p~~ --- ~ ~-p~~-

Major Goetr js clirrently atfending tile Com- 


mand and General Staff College at For/ Leaven- 


worih. Previous assignments include construction 


branch chief, U.S. Army Engineer School, Foil 


Leonard Wood, Missouri: company commander. 


826 Engineer Banation, during Desert Storm; main- 


tenance detachment commander, 3rd Engineer Bri- 


gade, 3rd infantry Division: and rniiitaaly observer to 


the U.N.mission in the western Sahara. 


Engineer I1 
The 

'- iProviding Lessons Learned to the Force 


By Major David Brinkley 

he U.S. Army Engineer School 

established a Lessons Learned 

Branch in the Department of 

Training and Doctrine in May 1995 to 

gather engineer lessons from ongoing 

operations and disseminate them to the 

field. The Lessons Learned Branch 

replaces a function formerly filled by 

the Directorate of Evaluation and Standardization, which was disbanded in 

1995. This article highlights the critical 

mission of the Lessons Learned Branch 

within the engineer community by 

examining a few significant lessons 

gathered to date from Operation Joint 

Endeavor in Bosnia. The branch is 

tasked by MG Gill, Commandant, to 

gather information in three key areas: 

countermine operations, bridging, and 

sustainment engineering. 

Countermine Operations 

he Engineer School's involvement with countermine operations focuses on mine-awareness 

training and the collection of countermine lessons learned. Early in Operation Joint Endeavor, school personnel 

became heavily involved with mineawareness training for units deploying 

to Bosnia. The Doctrine Development 

Division and the Depanment of Tactics, Leadership and Engineering 

jointly developed a comprehensive 

training program designed to "train the 

trainer." First we examined the existing 

doctrine, which was found to be sound. 

12 Engineer 

"Operation Joint 

Endeavor is a 

veritable gold 

mine of engineer 

lessons learned." 

Then we used FM 20-32, Mine Countermine Operations: FM 90-13-1. 

Combined Arms Breaching; and The 

Engineer Contingency Handbook to 

develop tactics, techniques, and procedures for the training program. 

LESSON LEARNED: The doctrine 

used for high-intensity conflicts is 

sound andflexible enough to be useful 

in contingency operarions. However; 

special publications, such the Engineer Contingency Handbook. are 

required for some areas of operations. 

The comprehensive training program was developed for the 16th 

Engineer Battalion, 130th Engineer 

Brigade. The training is based on doctrine for high-intensity conflicts and 

modified based on the situation in Bosnia. This training is intended for all soldiers. It focuses on the avoidance of 

minefields and unexploded ordnance 

(UXO) and extraction from minefields. The training is required for all 

civilian and military personnel deploying to Bosnia. 

When the 16th Engineer Battalion 

was called to participate in Operation 

Joint Endeavor, the Engineer School 

assisted in training units deploying 

froin the continental United States and 

the Southern European Task Force. A 

mobile training team from the school 

used the program to train deploying 

forces at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; 

Fort Rilev.,. Kansas: and Vincenzia. 

Italy. Their efforts reduced the backlog 

of units requiring predeployment training in USAREUR. The newly formed 

Countermine Training Support Center 

at the Engineer School continues to 

provide this type of service to the 

my. 

; LESSON LEARNED: Muinfain i 	 jointly prepared countermine training 

plans as an resource to 

facilitate the rapid developmenr of 

mobile training teams. Regardless of 

the source, the Engineer School should 

: 	collect and store these plans for we in 

firture contingency operations. 

The Lessons Learned Branch is 

aggressively collecting data from the 

1st Armored Division. Direct links with 

, the division's Mine Action Center, the ' Center for Amy Lessons Learned, and 

the combined ms assessment teams 

allow us to acquire emerging doctrinal 

trends and critical information. In 

return, we serve as adjunct staff for the 

1st Armored Division Engineer Brigade 

to assist with research, data collection. 

1 and analysis. School personnel also

1 work extensively with private industry 

August 1996 
and Army laboratories to develop new 1 lessons we are using to revise FM 90- I 

countermine systems. 13-1 and FM 20-32. I1 

LESSON LEARNED: Both Engineer School personnel and deployed SustainmentEngineering i engineer soldiers benefit from close 

1 

T 

communications before, during, and ue to Bosnia's war-tom infra- 1 afier a deploymenr structure, engineers in the 1st 

Armored Division are ~erform- , 

ing numerous missions to I 

Bridging support the force. They continue to 

clear and repair and damaged 

he world watched in awe as roads. ~ ~ ~ and ~ 

U.S. Anny engineers bridged facilities are nonexistent or 

the Sava River under dismal damaged alnlost everywhere and must 

conditior~s last winter. Their heroic be provided. All of this construction is 

efforts established one of the longest accomplished through a combination of 

float bridges ever built-and it's still military troop construction, the Logiscrossing Implementation Force (IFOR) tics Civil Augmentation Program , 

traffic today. (LOGCAP), and joint engineering. , 

In Operation Joint Endeavor, engi- Both Operation Joint Endeavor and 

neers successfully executed the largest Operation Uphold Democracy, in Haiti, 

military bridging mission since Viet- have identified a serious deficiency- . 

nam. To date, U.S,engineers in Bos- the lack of doctrine for joint engineer ' 

nia have built nonstandard fixed operations and combat heavy engineer 

bridges, assault noat bridges, a medium operations. To meet this requirement, 

girder bridge, Bailey bridges, and a Engineer School personnel, in conjunccommercially available British Com- tion with the Army Niltional Guard, 

pact 200 bridge. To quote Colonel will use the numerous lessons on infra- i 

I 

Steve Hawkins, Commander of the 1st structure requirements, force protec- , 

Armored Division Engineer Brigade, tion, and joint engineering from these i 

"U.S.engineers built aBritish bridge to operations to write a capstone combat ' 

support a Russian brigade.'' This heavy engineer operations field man- , 

diverse capability characterizes much ual. The school will also write a joint I 

of the bridging expertise in Bosnia engineer capstone publication. 1 

today. Engineer soldiers also have laid One concept that has emerged from ,

more than 20 AVLBs in support of the Operation Joint Endeavor is Force Pro- , 

1st Armored Division and, using tech- vider, a containerized base camp that 

niques seldom required in today's allows rapid construction of long-term 

Army, are repairing a railroad and a facilities. The Army organized Force 1 railroad bridge. Provider Companies in the Quarter- I 

The Engineer School routinely pro- master CovspQuartermaster person- , 

vides experts to assist in bridge con- nel deliver a base camp as a 

struction and has reaped benefits from commodity, and engineers assemble it. 

this tremendous bridging effort. The camp sites require substantial 

School personnel have collected les- preparation by engineers for site prepasons from bridging operations in Bos- ration, utility connections, and force 

nia and are incorporating them in the protection. After a camp is assembled, 

latest version of FM 90-13, River the Quartermaster Company operates it 

Crossing Operations. and the associated facilities. 

LOGCAP, another sustainment conLESSON LEARNED. School and cept, is a tremendous force multiplier 

field personnel should work together in Bosnia. It originated during Operation 

to rlpdate and revise doctrinr. Experi- Desert Shield, when contractors were 

ence ~ained in Bosnia has provided key hired to perform most sustainment engiAugust 1996 

neering and facilities services for the 

Army. LOGCAP was formalized in 

Halt1 and has come to matunty m Bosnia. Both LOGCAP and Force Provider 

are examples of emexinn . . concepts that 

the Engineer School has "captured" for 

use in contingency operations. 

LESSON LEARNED: Joint and 

civilian engineerr will be part of most, 

ifmtall, future military engineer ope?- 

ations. We must beron~e knowledgeable 

about i the ~construction ~ capabilities , and 

limitations of other services and civilian contractors and fully integrate them 

infuture operations. 

Operation Joint Endeavor is a ventable gold mine of engineer lessons 

learned. We are using the opportunity 

Bosnia provides to test the ability of 

the Lesson's Learned Branch to collect, 

analyze, and disseminate lessons to the 

field in a timely manner. For example, 

recently we received a lesson concerning the AVLB from the 2nd Infantry 

Division Engineer Brigade, in Korea, 

and immediately passed it to engineers 

in Bosnia. Our wish is to continue to 

provide that kind of service to the Engineer Regiment. 

We invite you to share information 

with us. Send your good ideas or lessons to Mr. Bill Blackwell, at blackwew@wood-vines.army.mil. We also 

encourage you to browse through the 

latest lessons learned and doctrine on 

the Fort Leonard Wood Internet Home 

Page, at http:///www.wood. 

LESSON LEARNED: More 

25,000 people have used the Engineer Home page service date. Let 

assist in vow next training exercise or u 

operation. Y 

Major Dnvid Brinkley served as 

ChieJ Doctrine Deve/opment Division, 

Department of Training and Doctrine, 

US. Army Engineer School, from May 

1995 to May 1996 He is currently 

attending the Command and General 

Staff College at Fort Leavenwonh. Previous assignnients include instructor/ 

writer at the U.S.Anny Engineer School 

and obsrrver/controller at tke National 

Training Cenfec Fort Irwin, California. 

Engineer I3 
Personal Viewpoint 

An Engineer Reconnaissance Platoon: 

A Proposal 

By Major Douglas Mr.Veese arrd Captain Steven Creighton 

F.. oo often during simulated combat, engineers mustpa~nstalungly"pull" crilical information from maneu-

-' - ver channels, only to receive reports that lack important 

engineer-specdic details regarding obstacles, enemy engineers, and terrain. To correct this shortfall, we propose that 

U.S. Army engineers implement a reconnaissance platoon that 

is organic to divisional engineer battalions. 

The proposed platoon would consist of three engineer 

scout squads that could be either independently sliced to task 

force (TF)scout platoons or operate together as a brigade 

reconnaissance asset. In practice and by doctrine, TF enginezrs attach combat engineers to their TF scout platootis to 

enhance obstacle identification and terrain analysis. The 

engineer reconnaissance platoons would support this effort 

three ways: 

Provide tactically proficient engineers who are trained ti? 

operatc forward of the forward edge of the baule area 

(FEBA). 

Promote habihlal relationships between scout platoons 

and their enginees. 

Clearly dctine the role of engineer squads when they support scout platoons. 

Current Engineer Reconnaissance: 

Practice and Doctrine 

uring most combat operations. con~betengineers support scouts and provide technical expertise about ter- - rain and obstacles-an asset usually welco~uedhy the 

scouts. However promising this arrangement may appear, the 

value added is usually minimal, and the shartcomings are no 

fault of the soldiers. Most combat engineers are not trained in 

scout tactics and thus lack the tactical expertise needed to 

integratc properly. Furthermore, no guidelines exist for engineers tasked to support scouts. Before we can expect top performance from our soldiers, we must determineWho commands and controls the engineer scouB 

If combat engineers should ride inside scout vehicles or 

operate their own. 

Ifhabitual relationships between scouts and engineers are 

desirable. 

The tasks combat engineer scouts should ii~cuson in 

offensive and defensive operations. 

Maneuver doctrine describes the engineer augmentation 

of TF scouts in detail, but engineer doctrine on the issue 

is vague. For example. FM 17-98. Scout Platuun, page 

6-12, states, "In reconnaissance operations, an engineer 

squad mav be plared in direct support of a scout platoon. " 

Six pages are dedicated to engineer capabilities and limitalions and 32 pages in the appendix address obstacles. Similarly. FM 71-2, The Tank and Mechanized Infantry 

Battalion Turk Force, page 3-47 (paragraph h), supports 

this by stating, "Elements of the supporting engineer unit 

are rn1pioyrd with the [srorrr platoon] to reconnoirer 

obstacles. " 

Unfortunately, the engineer response to these cxpectalions is not strong. Both T;M 5-71-100, Division Engineer 

Combat Operations, and FM 5-100, Engineer Combat 

Operations, repeatedly stress the importance of engineers 

in reconnaissance and the intelligence preparation uf the 

battlefield (IPB) process, but they fail to address methods 

of employment and command and control. FM 5.100. page 

44, states. "Engineers idmtib specific reconnaissance 

requi~amentrand augnlent dismounted pnrrols and scouts 

to identx~obsrucle charurterisrics." It goes on to say, 

"During the attack, engineer reconnais.~anceterrms and 

engineer units provide conlbruous surveillance along the 

routes of advance." Here. our doctrine clearly acknowledges the need to augment scouts and to establish engineer 

reconnaissance teams but says nothing . more-leaving

implementation a hodgepodge, makeshift element determined by the task force engineer. 

Mission and Employment 

he engineer reconnaissance platoon should have several intelligence-gathering missions. including: 

Terrain analysis. 

Deterrn~nationof trafficability on proposed routes. 

Determination of soil suitability for digging. 

Route reconnaissance, road reconnaissance, and hridge 

classification. 

Reconnaissance of specific named areas of interest, targeted areas of interest, and decision points that may contain ohstaclcs or he tied into obstacle plans. 

14 Engineer August 1996 
Identification of areas forward of the FEBA suitable for 

FASCAM minefields. 

Coven breaching and obstacle marking. 

Detailed reporting of enemy obstacles and overwatch 

positions. 

Identification of threat engineer equipment and capabilities. 

Information on threat engineer capahilities assists commanders and planners in determining the enemy's main 

effon, forward security element, and flank; and in confirming assumptions made during the IPB and engineer battlefield assessment (EBA). Enemy minefield reports should 

include length of frontage. depth, orientation, density, coniposition, and hypass inforn~ation.This detailed niineficld 

information usually is not reporfed by TF scouts hut is critical to engineers planning a brcach. 

Both scouts and engineers currently havc ton wide a spectrum of missions and tasks expected of them, which lilnits 

their ability to do any one niission well. For examplc, scouts 

are expected to be experts in all fonns of reconnaissance, 

enemy identification, counterreconnaissance. and enemy 

obstacles. Similarly, combat engineers arc expected to he 

experts in bridging, emplacement oi friendly obstacles. 

enemy obstacles, and reconnaissance. The introduction of 

enginccr recon units will prclducc more focused comhat engi~ 

neers and give both scouts and engineers o rrlorc atininnhle 

scope of mission requirements. 

Eqt~ipmentand Organization 

he vehicles currently used in scor~tplatoons arc armored 

HMMWVs and off-road tr~otorcycles.Of these, armored 

- - HMMWVs would bent suit the engineer rccon platoon. 

They arc fat, maneuverable. quiet, and easily maintained: provide small arms protcction: and have storage space and a turret. 

A recon squad might consist of eight incn and two HMMWVs, 

with four soldiers per vehicle. Additional equipmetit for the 

squad [nay include an MK-I9 grenade launcher, a .SO caliber 

machine gun, squad automatic weapons (SAW), AT-4s, ANPSS 12 mine dctcctors. global positioning systems (GPS), 

SINCGARS radios, AN-PVS~7night vision devices, handemplaced minefield-mark~ngsyslcrns (HEMMS). VS-17 panels, demolition kits, and Polaroid cameras. 

Comniand and Coritrol 

Tn a task force. the scout plritoon serves as the commander's eyes and ears on the battlcficld. The scoot pla-

- toon leader takes orders and sends reports directly to the 

TF tactical opcrations center (TOC). Similarly, the cnginccr 

recon platoon leader should scnd reporis dircclly to the engineer battalion TOC. This reporting procedure will provide 

brigade and TF engineers with direct links to cnginecrspecific intelligence forward of the ERA. Currently, brigade 

and TF engineers obtain that intelligence, often by pulling it 

secondhand through maneuver S2 channels or by finding it 

the hard way-such as running into an enemy mine. 

Engineer recon squads should be tied into brigade and TF 

reconnaissance and surveillance plans and employed in one 

of three ways: 

Sliced out, with each squad supporting a scout platoon 

As a platoon, working for the brigade engineer. 

As a niixture. 

In the last two scenarios, forward employment of an engineer reconnaissance element will require special measures 

for resupply, presumably by the same element that resupplics 

the scouts. 

Threat Engineer Reconnaissance 

F-7nginccr battalions in the former Soviet pact forces have 

used engineer recon platoons for many years. Their pla-

* --ltoons provide scluad-sized cngineer recon patrols 

(ERPs) that colocate with division and regimental recon 

pntmls. The ERPs send engineer-specific intelligence to a 

dircctor of engineers at both regirnent;il and division levels. 

Although the recon companies uf motorized riflc regiments 

atid tank rcgiinents consist of tnoto~ryclesand BMP and BRM 

arniored vehicles, thc enginccr rccon platoons havc BTR 

armored veliicles. The platoons also have DIM tmck-mounted 

mine dctcctors and VHF radios. 

Engineer Reconnaissance Training 

raining combat engineers to be qualified enginrer 

reconnaissance scouts would neither he difficult nor 

A - require an additional inilitq occupational specialty 

or time away from Fort Leonard Wood. The following program proposal is austere because comhat engineers often are 

rocticaily deficient tiot technicaily deficient when operating 

forward of thc FEBA. 

The Ions classroom hours spent in basic and advanced 

courses for engineer officers and NCOs (EOBC. EOAC, 

BNCOC, and ANCOC ) have produced well-schooled leaders. Howcver, training in tactics such as noise and light disciplines, stealth movement, breaking contact, and reporting is 

locking. Unfortunately, on-the-job training often leads to "the 

untrained leading the untrained" and specialty training in the 

Ranger and Scout Platoon Lender Schools is mainly for 

officers. Morcover, thc Sapper Leader Course at Fort 

Leonanj Wood focuses irn light operations. The following 

tiers would estahlish a sound training program for engineer 

scouts. 

1. Increase instruction for officers in EOBC to include 

task force scout operations (how they are cmployed and how 

engineer recon squz~dscan assist scouts with gathering intelligence). Continice to scnd lieutenants to the Scout Platocln 

Leader Course at Fort Knox aficr they graduate from EOBC, 
and add a combat engineer reconnaissance course to Fort 

Leonard Wood's program of instruction. 

2. Train NCOs at the proposed combat engineer reconnaissance course at Fort Leonard Wood. As a branch of the 

Sapper Leader Course, it would be similar to the Scout Platoon Leader Course but tailored for engineers. 

3. Provide motivated basic trainees desiring to be scouts 

with additional advanced individual training immediately 

after graduation. This special module would teach the basics 

of enemy obstacle identification and reconnaissance. Upon 

arrival at their units, these soldiers would receive additional 

training from NCOs trained at the combat engineer reconnaissance course. 

Meet the Challenge! 

he potential benefits of adding a combat engineer 

reconnaissance unit to our force structure is apparent 

at all echelons. Engineer recon platoons would assist 

scouts in gathering intelligence and significantly increase 

the level of combat engineer expertise throughout the Corps. 

Why not provide highly trained engineer soldiers tailored to 

meet the challenge! Implementing this platoon would be relatively simple, and soldiers from squad leader to division 

engineer would benefit. Essayons! 

The ENGINEER Writer's Guide 

We think engineers take a special pride in their 

profession, and Engineeris always looking for articles from readers who want to share their expertise, 

experience and ideas. 

If you're a potential contributing writer, here are a 

few "writer's guide" tips to steer you in the right 

direction: 

Articles may discuss engineer training, operations, doctrine, equipment, history, or other areas of 

general interest to an engineer readership. 

We're especially interested in articles that have a 

"how-to-do-it-better" theme. For instance, we're not 

looking for articles telling readers how you conducted a routine field exercise. But if you think you 

have a "new-and-improved" way of conducting a 

tactical operation, training exercise, or other operational procedure that may prove helpful to other 

engineers-that's what we need. 

Articles should generally come from contributors 

with firsthand experience with the subject being presented. Avoid theatrical writing styles like: "It was a 

dark and stormy night ...,"or "...the soldier blazed 

through the jungle on his lumbering D7, providing a 

trail of freedom for the other vehicles ..." 

Note: Since this article was written, the Experimental 

Force at Fon Hood has added a reconnaissance section to 

the engineer battalion headquarters as part of their organization. In addition, the Engineer School is currently writing 

FM 5.170, Engineer Reconnaissance, which will addresss 

many of the concerns in this article. The authors' concerns, 

however, are still valid and are provided to stimulate discussion. 

Major Douglas W. McNeese is assigned to the 

Headquarters, Engineer Brigode. 1st Armored Division, Bad 

Kreuznach, Germany. Previous assignments include tactics 

instructor at the Engineer School, Fort Leoanrd Wood, 

Missouri, and observer/controller at the Combat Maneuver 

Training Center; Hohenfels, Germany. Major McNeese is a 

graduate of the Command and General Staff College. 

Captain Steven L. Creighton is commander of the 68th 

Engineer Company (CSE), Fort Hood, Te-ras. He previously 

served in the 1st Armored Division Assistant Division 

Engineer section during the IAD BCTP Warfighter exercise, 

Baumholder; Germany (February 1994). CPTCreighton is a 

graduate of the Engineer Oficer Advanced Course and the 

Armor Scout Platoon Leader Course. He was a sapper 

platoon leader in the 40th Engineer Battalion (Baumholder; 

Germany) during numerous rotationr at CMTC. 

Articles should be concise, straightforward, and 

in the active voice. 

Length should range between 2,000 and 4,000 

words and text should be typewritten and doublespaced. Generally, each such page will contain from 

200 to 250 words. Provide a disc with the manuscript. 

Articles containing attributable information or 

quotations not referenced in the story should carry 

appropriate footnotes. 

Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and 

not under consideration by another publication. 

All submissions are subject to editing. 

Contributors are encouraged to include blackand-white or color photos, artwork, andfor line diagrams that illustrate information in the article. 

Include your full name, rank, current unit and job 

title. Also include a list of your past assignments, 

experience and education; your mailing address; 

and commercial daytime phone number. Send articles to: Editor, Engineer Professional Bulletin, 

ATTN: ATSE-TD-D-EB, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 65473-6650. 

If you have questions about an article you're working on-or considering writin~call Cathy Eubanks 

or Shirley Bridges, at DSN 676-4104, or commercial 

(573)563-4104. We look forward to hearing from you. 

16 Engineer Augusr 1996 
--- 

Marine Engineers: 


Construction and Destruction on Demand 


By Caprain Thomas Pratt 

With fewer resources and more missions, joint operations are now a way of life. To ensure the optimum 

use of assets and mission success in joint operations, all service members must become familiar with the 

capabilities that other services bring to the fight. The Marine 

engineer brings a unique contribution to present-day joint 

operations-expeditionary engineering, which supports the 

Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) in combat support 

and combat service support missions. This article presents 

the history of Marine engineering through its evolution as the 

Marine component of joint engineering. 

History 

n the late 1800's. the Marine Corps mission expanded as 

America's status as a world power grew. The new mission to seize and defend advanced naval bases required 

that Marines have their own construction, maintenance, facilities operation, and general service capabilities. As a result, 

the initial mission of Marine engineers was primarily combat 

service support. Their objective was to constmct, repair, or improve facilities in 

amphibious operation areas. 

World War I. During World War I, the 

Marines relied on the Army to provide what 

we now call combat engineer support. In 

1927, the Commandant of the Marine 

Corps, Major General Lejeune, further 

enhanced the role of the Marine engineer 

by publishing his vision of an organization 

within the Marinc division that would operate captured or newly constructed advanced 

bases until relieved by their Army or Navy 

counterparts. That vision remained the mission of Marine engineers until the end of 

the 1930s. Today, these duties are mostly 

associated with landing support activities. 

The development and organization of '' 

the Fleet Marine Force in 1935 gave birth 

to the Marine Corps' first force engineer 

companies. Engineers within these compatrine, training, and equipment. For military engineer 

schooling, Marine officers went to Fort Belvoir, Virginia, 

where they learned to apply civilian engineer knowledge in a 

military environment. In 1941, the Marine Corps established 

the Marine Corps Engineer School at Quantico, Virginia. A 

year later, the school was moved to Camp Lejeune, North 

Carolina. At this time, there were 58 military occupational 

specialties (MOSS) in the engineer field. 

WorU War II. When World War I1 began, the Marine 

Corps grew immensely. For the first time, it began to think in 

terms of brigades and divisions and, along with this, the need 

for larger service units. By 1942, the Corps decided that each 

division would have an organic engineer battalion and an 

organic pioneer battalion. Normally these battalions went 

ashore in the second assault wave and set up the landing 

beachcs. After the initial assault wave, they off-loaded materials and personnel. (The pioneer battalions are now called 

landing support battalions.) Later in the war, engineer regiments were formed with an engineer battalion, a pioneer hattalion, and a Navy Seabee battalion. Since there was no 

.. . 

-.* 

~ -. 

,,ies relied heavily on the A~~~ for doc. Marines from the 9th ESB pour a footing at Camp Foster, Okinawa. 

August 1996 Engineer 17 
Marines from MWSS-273 construct a temporary shelter in Jubail, Saudi Arabia 

standard table of organization and equipment at this time, all 

units were task organized to mcet the division commander's 

specific needs during thc island-hopping campaigns. The 

Marine "combat engineers" originated during World War 11. 

Assault engineer companies, created to breach the beach 

obstacles commonly found in the Pacific islands, were 

attached to regimental landing teams. These companies provided direct support to maneuver elements during landings 

and normally reverted to engineer battalion control when the 

battalion headquarters landed. Then they filled a generalsupport role for the regimental combat teams. 

Except for thc assault conipanies, employment of the 

engineer battalion in a purely combat support role was not 

considered. As a result, no combat-oriented doctrine or training was specifically developed for engineers. 'So compensate 

for this lack of training, infantry units normally reccived 

their engineer assets well in advance and trained thcm on 

assault techniques. On several occasions, Marine engineers 

applied their unique skills and equipment in assaults. Often 

an engineer or pioneer battalion was thrust into the defensive 

perimeter to free up an infantry unit. 

PostWorld War II. By the end of the war, the number of 

Marine engineers had increased more than 6,000 percent. 

Inevitably, they were hit hard by the postwar drawdown. In 

the late 1940s, the Marine Corps began a series of restructuring and reduction analyses to adopt a peacetime posture. In 

1947, pioneer battalions were renamed "shore party battalions" to more accurately reflect their mission. Many of the 

engineer MOSs for Marine officers and enlisted personnel 

I8 Engineer 

were combined or deleted. Between 1945 and 1950, the number of engineer MOSs dropped from 55 to 9; however, the 

number of missions did not drop. This lead to a "jack of all 

trades" phenomena that portrays Marine engineering today. 

Korean War: During the Korean War, Marine engineer 

efforts focused on the mobility and survivability of the force. 

Constructing and maintaining main supply routes and airfields, clearing roads, and constructing bridges were common operations. Engineers also performed specialized 

demolition missions to disrupt the North Korean lines of 

communications. No significant changes occurred in the 

engineer community during the conflict, but it became evident that new, more advanced equipment was needed to perform their missions. 

Post-Korean War: After the Korean War, the entire mission and structure of the Marine Corps was evaluated against 

the new threat-nuclear weapons. The popular thought at the 

time was that technology was becoming a more valuable 

resource than people. The enginecr community did not suffer 

as badly as others, but significant changes occul~ed in the 

following years. The Navy Seabees were removed from the 

Marine enginecr organization during the 1950s. although a 

strong link remained between the two services. To fill this 

void, a memorandum of understanding was written, and 

force enginecr battalions were created. 

The force engineer units had their roots in the aviation 

engineer battalions of World War 11. Their mission was to 

support the entire landing force, including the aviation element, and to reiniorce, augment, and expand the missions of 

Au~ust1996 
the division engineers. Therefore, the force engineer uniLq 

were larger and more heavily equipped than the division 

engineer units. Bridge companies that were independent of 

both division and force engineers were created. 

Wetnam War: In 1965, the U.S. military buildup in Vietnam began in earnest. The engineer effort there primarily 

involved humanitarian assistance. However, Marine engineers 

provided direct support in the aclual fight, participating in 

practically every combat operation, search-and-destroy mission, roughrider convoy, and fire base preparation. Typically 

the engineers were a small, task-organized team-seldom 

more than three to four men-attached to an infantry unit. 

Post-V~tnamWax Since the end of the Vietnam War, the 

Marine engineer community has undergone significant 

changes. In 1976, the division cngineer battalion was renamed 

"combat engineer battalion" to more accurately reflect the 

combat nature of its mission. Once again, the Marine Corps 

responded lo a postwar drawdown hy restmcturing the remaining active duty units. As a result, the force service suppon 

group (FSSG) was formed as the combat service suppon element of the MAGTF Many of the division support units were 

moved into the newly created FSSG. The conlbat engineer battalion remained within the division, the force enginecrs were 

located in the FSSG, and the wing engineers were in Marine 

wing support squadrons (MWSS). When a MAGTF is organized, it pulls engineer assets from one or all of these three 

organizations, depending on the mission. This organization 

remains the same today. Because Marine Corps enginecrs 

lacked their own doctrine, they adopted the Army's doctrine 

when the FM 5-100 series was published in the mid-1980s. 

While the Marine Corps still uses Army doctrine, servicespecific organizations are published in Fleet Marine Force 

Manual 13, MAGTF Engineer Operations. 

Training 

II Marine second lieutenants attend the Basic School 

at Quantico, where they are assigned an MOS. 

Assignments are hased on their class standing, their 

staff platoon commander's evaluation, and their individual 

desires. Upon completion of the Basic School, lieutenants go 

to their respective MOS schools. Engineer officers attend a 

13-week course at the Marine Corps Engineer School, where 

they learn the basic fundamentals that engineer platoon cornmanders need to know. However, engineer officers receive 

most of their training on the job. During fleet tours, engineer 

officers may be assigned to combat engineer battalions, engineer support battalions, or Marine wing support squadrons. 

Othcr assignments include the drill field, recruiting. facilities 

rnaintcnance, Marine Corps headquarters, Marine Corps 

Engineer School, and professional and graduate studies. 

Enlisted Marine Corps enginecrs are trained at several 

locations, depending on their specialty. They receive 

8th Engineer Support Battalion Marines construct a 

"falling block obstacle" (MONOLITH) at Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba. 

entry-level training and then return for two career-progression 

courses at the noncommissioned officer and staff noncommissioned officer levels. Combat engineers receive demolition, bridging, vertical construction, and mine/countermine 

warfare training at the Marine Corps Engineer School. 

Marines in the utilities fields of electrician, electrical equipment, and hygiene equipment receive all training at the 

Marine Corps Engineer School. Engineer equipment operators, mechanics, and engineer assistants (drafting and surveying) receive all levels of training at Fort Leonard Wood, 

Missouri. Metal workers and refrigeration mechanics train at 

Aherdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Bulk fuel specialists 

train at Fort Lee, Virginia. Enlisted engineers are assigned to 

Marine divisions, force service support groups, and Marine 

aircraft wings for duty. They may also become part of the 

inspector instructor staff at one of the reserve centers 

throughout the United States. Career enlisted Marines may 

receive assignments as drill instructors, recruiters, or Marine 

security guards. 

Present Structure 

hc engineer mission is hased on the way the Marine 

Corps fights-as a task-organized MAGTF consisting 

of four elements: 

Command element (CE) 

Ground combat element (GCE) 

Alrgusf 1996 Engineer 19 
Figure 1. Marine Combat Engineer Battalion 

Battallon 

Heedquerters 

Aviation combat element (ACE) 

Combat service support element (CSSE) 

If the mission dictates, Naval construction forces are 

attached to the MAGTF and become the fifth element. The 

Naval construction forces work directly for the MAGTF commander. Each element of the MAGTF has organic engineers. 

The Marine engineers' role is to support the MAGTF through 

operations in mobility, countermobility, survivability, and genHeadquatters 

and Service 

Company 

eral engineering. However. Marine engineer support to the 

MAGTF is of an expeditionary nature and does not include the 

infrastructure building or theater-level construction provided 

hy Naval construction forces and Army engineers. All cngineer missions center on support to the MAGTF mission. 

Command Element. The command element of a 

MAGTF includes the commander, the headquarters, and snpport required for command and control of the MAGTE The 

MAG11; engineer serves as a special staff officer to the 

MAGTF commander. If the engineer position in the command element is not filled, the senior engineer in the 

MAGTF assumes the job as a secondary duty. The MAGTF 

engineer is responsible for coordination between the subordinate element engineer officers and, depending on the task 

organization and mission, Naval construction forces or other 

U.S., allied, or host-nation engineer assets. 

Ground Combot Element. The ground combat element 

ranges in size from a battalion to one or more divisions. Engineers and their assets in the GCE are sourced from the combat 

engineer battalion (CEB) organic to the Marine division. The 

CEB consists of a headquarters and service company, an engineer support company, and fuur combat engineer companies 

(Figure I). The size of the engineer complement varies with 

the size of the infantry unit to be supported. Normally a company supports a regiment, the platoons support the battalions 

in that regiment, and the company commander becomes the 

engineer staff officer for the regimental commander. The missions of the GCE engineers include: 

Performing engineer reconnaissance. 

Assault breaching of explosive and nonexplosive obstacles from the high-water mark inland. 

Employing assault bridge systems and, when augmented, 

other standard bridge systems. 

Repairing and reinforcing existing bridges. 

Constructing simple and compound explosive and nonexplosive obstacle systems. 

Engineer 

SUPP~~ 

Company 

Performing demolition missions beyond the capability of 

other division units. 

Additionally, Marines from the CEB provide mobile electric power to division organizations not authorized generators by their table of equipment and provide augmentation 

power to the division when required. Division engineers 

have limited resources in water purification and storage, field 

hygiene equipment, and vertical and horizontal construction. 

Division engineers primarily exist to support thc maneuver 

of the ground combat element. 

Avidon Combat Element. The structure of the aviation 

ground support is contingent upon the quantity and variety of 

aircraft to be supported. The ACE may vary in size from one 

aircraft squadron to one or more wings. Aircraft in the ACE 

are-

* Rotaly-wing squadrons: UH-IN, AH-lW, CH-53D/E, 

and CH-46. 

Fixed-wing squadrons: FIA-I8CID Hornet, AV-8B Harrier, 

and C-I30 Hercules. 

The ACE may include one or all types of aircraft depending 

on thc mission. Engineer assets organic to the ACE are located 

in four MWSS in the Marine wing support group. Two MWSS 

are dedicated to support fixed-wing aircraft and two are dedicated to rotary-wing aircraft (Figure 2, page 21). Normally, 

one MWSS is located in a Marine aircraft group. An MWSS 

detachment supports a composite squadrun similar to those 

20 Engineer August 1996 

Combat 

Englnaer 

Company 

Combat Combn 

Engineer Englneer Engineer 

Company Company 
Figure 2. Marine Wing Support Squadron (V) or (R) 

Headquanen 

I 

deployed withMarine expeditionary units (MEUs). 

Wing engineers provide the ACE with limited vertical and 

horizontal construction capabilities. Airfield construction by 

elements of the MWSS normally is limited to 900 feet or 

less. Except for construction of forward area arming and 

refueling points, total engineer effort is focused on maintaining existing airfields rather than building new ones. When 

engincer requirements exceed the capabilities of the ACE, 

additional support may be obtained from the engineer support battalions andlor Naval construction forces. Wing engineer missions include: 

Performing engineer reconnaissance and survey. 

Repairing, improving, and maintaining existing road nets 

in the ACE tactical area of responsibility. 

Constructing and maintaining expeditionary roads. 

Constructing, maintaining, and improving verticallshort 

takeoff and landing sites. 

'Constructing and maintaining mission-essential base 

camp requirements (temporary bunkers, aircraft revetments. and strongbacks). 

Providing essential utilities support (mobile electric 

power, water, potable water production, shower and laundry facilities, and refrigeration services). 

Developing, improving, and maintaining drainage systems. 

Asscssing bomb damage and providing rapid runway 

repair. 

Supporting hasc material-handling operations. 

Additionally, engineers are the bulk file1 commodity 

managers. They not only receive, handle, store, and operate 

hulk fuel assets during airfield operations but also set up 

expedient refueling systems at expeditionary airfields and 

MPlSecuriV 

Detachment 

helicopter landing zones. They are capable of all testing 

required for fixed-wing and rotary-wing fuels. Explosive 

ordnance disposal assets are Located in the wing to support 

rapid runway repair and base recovery after attack missions. 

Combat Service Support Element. The combat service 

support element of a MAGTF ranges in size from a small, 

task-organized combat service support detachment to one or 

more force service support groups. The CSSE draws its engineers from the engineer support battalion (ESB) organic to the 

fotcc service support groups. The ESB provides expeditionary 

general engineering support and engineer combat service support to the MAGTF An ESB consists of a bulk fuel company. 

a headquarters and service company, an engineer support 

company, a bridge company, and three engineer line companies (Figure 3, page 22). The bulk fuel company receives, 

stores, and dispenses all Class I11 bulk fuel products for the 

Marine expeditionary force. Responsibility for the fuel begins 

when it crosses the shoreline. The engineer support company 

holds the battalion motor transport, utilities, maintenance, and 

earth-moving and material-handling assets. Platoons and companies deploying or training receive attachment5 from the support company as the ~nissiondictates. Combat engineers are 

located in the engineer line companies. 

The missions of the engineer support battalion include: 

Performing engineer reconnaissance. 

Pcfiorming deliberate vertical and horizontal construction. 

Providing utilities support to the MAGTF to augment its 

organic capability. 

Pelforming demolition and obstacle removal. 

Receiving, storing, and dispensing Class I11 bulk fuel. 

Perforlning counterrnobility and survivability tasks during defensive operations. 

SZ 

August 1996 Engineer 2 I 

I 

Airtieid 

Communic~tions 
Figure 3. Marine Englneer Support Battalion 

Performing beach preparation and throughput to augment 

the landing force shore party. 

Reinforcing combat engineer battalions. 

Employing standard and nonstandard bridging. 

Explosive ordmance dqmal is alsolocated with and managed by 

theengineersupportballalions. However, it is a MAGF asset and all 

&gs comefrom thecommand element 

Task Organizing a MAGTE Task organizing for deployment is essentially the same for all MAGTFs smaller then a 

Marine expeditionary force. Typically, a Marine expeditionary 

unit is used. Engineers in the ground combat element are 

sourced from the combat engineer battalion. Engineers in the 

aviation combat element are from the MWSS engineer operations section, while those in the combat service support element come from the ESB. Each element's engineer section 

reflects the parent battalion. Often, the parent engineer battalion cannot fill their quotas for the MAGTF due to other operational commitments or shortfalls in staffing. Engineers from 

the landing support battalion, the maintenance battalion, and 

the medical battalion can be sourced to fill these quotas. 

Recent and Current Operations 

Marine engineers deploy year-round. They are found 

in every MAGTF and participate in every major 

Marine Corps exercise. Engmeers most commonly 

deploy with a Marine expeditionary unit, as occurred in 

recent deployment operations to Lebanon, Grenada. Panama, 

Somalia, and Haiti. In Southwest Asia, Marine engineers 

played a tremendous role in the survivability, sustainability, 

and maneuverability of the MAGTF. Recent humanitarian 

assistance operations have taken engineers to places like the 

Philippines and Bangladesh to assist in recovery from natural 

disasters. In 1995, Marines from the 9th Engineer Support 

Battalion deployed to Sasebo, Japan, to relieve the droughtstricken Navy base. Marines from the East Coast assisted 

efforts during hurricane relief missions in Florida. Currently, 

engineers are deployed with three Marine expeditionary 

units. Other engineers are in Aviano, Italy, in support of the 

mission in Bosnia, while some are participating in training 

exercises. 

Looking Forward 

Every day there is something new that threatens to 

divert money, resources, and people away from our 

services. Many feel that each service must protect its 

own, or soon there will be nothing left to protect. We must 

overcome this fear and embrace the future of joint operations. Each service possesses skills and equipment that are 

decidedly unique. Awareness of the capabilities of each service and the proper use of these capabilities in a joint environment ultimately will save our nation's military engineers. 

Y 

Captain Pratt is the engineer doctrine officer at rhe 

Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, 

Virginia. Previous assignments include Commander; 

EngineerDetachment, Marine Erpeditionary Unit, Okinuwa, 

Japan; and Commande,: Alpha and Bravo Companies, 9th 

Engineer Support Battalion, Okinawa, Japan. 

Reference: 

Grelson. Captain J.D., USMC. "Up Front: The Evolution 

of the Marine Engineer," an unpublished research paper, 

1987-88. 

Note: This is the lust in a series of articles on engineers 

of other services. See also "Navy Seabees and the Civil Engineer Corps: Providing Skills to the Joint Environment," 

Eng~neegDecember 1994, pages 11-17; and "Air Force 

Civil Engineers: Building Air Power k Foundation. " Engineer, August 1995, pages 30-35. 

22 Engineer August 1996 
- 

Route Clearance We wish to thank CPT Floershein~ ! soldiers in the picture. Two soldiers 

for his inprlt to orrr article and for sug- : 	 appear to be exposed from the waist up. 

I the company commander of gesting an effective countermeasure. Not only is this wrong because they 

l6 EN and have been in the former As always, the situation dictates. Com- should never expose that much of their 

Repub1ic Of Yugoslavia since 27 bat engineers ,nrist always be alert to hodics, it is especially wrong if they are 

December 1995.My and 'Om- the rratlrre of the threats they face and searching for mines because, if they 

pany have 'pent many weeks 'learing rerpond accom'ingl). When U.S. sol- detonate a mine with the roller, it would 

routes though the ZOS [zone of =para- (iiers .riruatio,, he instantly kill them. Another problem is 

and 'learing bunkers and lrenches drscribed in Vielnnm, it mis .son~etime.~ that the cameraman is in front of the 

with the former warring factions. I have n,cessarv to tank. Normally tanks clear forward. 

worked with Green in theater and woundedpersonnel requiring imniediate which would put the cameraman in the 

feel that the he and Mr. Schneck medical attention fim mine-danzngeri 

, uncleared area. Unless he uscd a powwrote is and reflects many This as acconlplished by crful zoom lens, the cameraman is 

of the lessons learned that engineer units Passing WOl,nded ofthe probably in the blast radius of most 

here in Bosnia have sent the , vehicle. di.smoiotfi,lg onto the t,-uck left antitank mines. That is not good for the 

[Engineer, March 1996, pages 3-i0.1 by the vehicle, rmd following rhut track life span of the cameraman. The entire 

However, I take issue with the second magazine is devoted to mine awaresurvivability technique listed in Table 3 Willian~C. Schrreck ness, which is probably a good idea. If 

on page 9. The technique is a means of Briurr M. Gre?n that is the best picture we can find, we 

escape from a vehicular mine strike. definitely need to greatly increase mine 

The article suggests survivors "dis- Engineer School,r reply: awareness in the region. 

mount onto the road. Do not move onto The only good point about the pica damaged vehicle is not advisable 	 extraction is required, they should exir 

CPT Richard B. Stikkers ,,,,less one is in ambush and must move ! 	 from the rear of the vehicle and cnre- C Company, 2nd Engineer Battalion filly walk in the tracks the vehicle 

?he mine awareness training my com- Made mtering fhe minefield. 

Author's reply: 

pany developed for V Corps prior to I uppreciate CPT Srikkers' sharp deployment teaches survivors to wait for 1 - eyes. The picture was downloaded from 

extraction by personnel and equipment in :

~ the Public Affairs Of$ce net on the following vehicles or engineers called to Intertrer, and the caprion was included 

extract. A path from the vehicle to safety 1 Engineers in Bosnia: 

An Overview "phuro opportrmity. " The photo does 

not depict a tank acti~~ely proofing a

' 	 field for mines. The crew may have 

bucked the funk up along a previously 

proofed area to take a break. The 'belly 

lieutenant in 314 C-v lost a foot when 	 captionreads, "An Ahrams MI tank, scrape' marks in,front of the tank indihe stepped on an ~p 2 feet with mine roller attached, searches for 	 cute the area has already been proofed. 

For whatever reason, the crew was 

exposed because the tank njas not movMAJ David Treleoven 

August 19% 	 Engine, 
Transitioning the Technical 

Engineer (SIT) 

rSI ., By Sergeant First Class Tony Arnold and Staff Sergeant Kevin Keefe 
n September 1992, a Task Site 

Selection Board met to select critical tasks that would consolidate 

and streamline three military occupational specialties (MOSs): Materials 

Quality Specialist (51G), Technical 

Drafting Specialist (81B). and Construction Surveyor (82B). The board 

convened, voted, and released, and a 

new MOS-Technical Engineering 

Specialist (5113-was born. 

As with any new program, growing 

pains are lo be expected, and the 51T 

MOS has experienced its share. Two 

problems identified by field personnel 

in both the active and reserve components are-

* How to train soldiers who held one 

of the three feeder MOSs and who 

have a Y2 identifier. The Y2 indicates that a soldier is not qualified 

in hislher current MOS. 

How to qualify soldiers who want to 

be reclassified into the new MOS. 

Until recently there were no clearcut procedures to accomplish either of 

these objectives. This article answers 

the questions concerning thc removal 

of the Y2 identifier and qualifying the 

feeder MOS soldiers to 51T. Soldiers 

reclassifying into MOS 51T must follow guidelines outlined in AR 611-201, 

Enlisted Career Management Fields 

and Military Occupational Specialties. 

Five options are available to remove 

the Y2 identifier from the 51T MOS: 

51T Transition Training Course 

Active Component Basic NCO 

Course (BNCOC) 

On-the-job training program 

Civilian-acquired traininglskills 

Wait until 30 June 97, when the 

identifier is withdrawn 

51T 'Ikansition Training Course 

The best option is the 51T Transition Training Course, which is 

taught at the Regional Training 

Institute-North Dakota (RTI-ND) at 

Camp Grafton, hume of the 5th 

Engineer Training Battalion. The 

course has two phases: 

Phase I consists of 120 hours of 

instruction in soils, concrete. and conventional surveying. It runs for 2 

weeks-7 days a week. 8.5 hours a day. 

The course includes Campbell Pacific 

MC-I Nuclear Densimeter training and 

operator certification. 

Phase I1 also consists of 120 hours 

of instruction-84 hours of automated 

surveying, using the Geodi~iieter444 

automated integrated survey instrument 

(AISI), and 36 hours of computer-aided 

design and drafting (CADD), using 

AutoCad LT and the theater construction management system (TCMS). 

Additionally, RTI-ND will offer 

separate TCMS training once each 

Soldiers who held the 81B or 82B 

MOS must attend both phases of the 

transition course to acquire the automation training. The Commander, RTI-ND 

may waive the ACCP subcourse 

requirement for the 82Bs. Soldiers who 

held the 51C MOS are exempt from 

Phase I but must attend Phase 11. Completion of these requirements qualifies a 

soldier in the 51T MOS and removes 

the Y2 identifier. 

51T Basic NCO Course 

or qualified soldiers, the second 

option is to attend the active 

component BNCOC for MOS 

51T. Upon successful completion of 

this course, the soldier's Y2 identifier 

will he withdrawn. 

quarter beginning in FY97. 

The following courses from the On-the-JobRaining Program 

Aniiy Correspondence Course Program he third option is an on-the-job (ACCP) are prerequisites for Phase 11: tralnlng program. The only re-

* EN0591, Sirrveyir~gI 

EN0592, Surveying 11 

quire~nentis that the program be 

approved by the soldier's chain of 

command and the U.S. Annv . Eneineer - EN0594, Survej~ngIV School's Directorate of Tra~nlngand 

A student performs automated drafting in the RTI-ND computer lab. 

August 1996 Engineer 25 
Doctrine (DOTD). This option was difficult to accomplish until the recent 

release of the Skill Levels I and 2 Soldier's Training Publication (STP) and 

Trainer's Guide (TG). This manual 

serves as a guide to develop the unit 

training plan. 

To enroll a soldier in this program, 

the chain of command must submit a 

memorandum to the 51T senior training 

developer at DOTD. The memorandum 

should include: 

Tasks on which the sold~eris to be 

trained. 

Tasks for which the soldier already 

meets the requirements (include all 

supporting documents). 

Estimated time needed to meet the 

requirements. 

After DOTD approves the plan, it is 

returned to the requesting unit. Whcn 

the soldier meets the requirements of 

the STP, the unit will submit the soldier's name and social security number 

to remove the Y2 identifier. With this 

method, several soldiers can be trained 

at the same time. 

One drawback to the on-the-job 

training program is that it does not 

include certification with the Campbell 

Pacific MC-I Nuclear Densometer. All 

soldiers must complete the required 

training for the MC-I, which currently 

must he conducted by a qualified 

instructor or operator. 

In addition to the Transition Training Course, three options are available 

to personnel to meet the requirement 

for certification on the MC-I. The 

training plan should include one of the 

options listed below if the soldier has 

not attended the training previously. 

This certification is only required once 

during a soldier's career An operator's 

cenificate will be issued by the Engineer School or RTI-ND, and it is the 

only certificate authorized to represent 

validation as a certified operator on the 

MC-I. 

A mobile training team from the 

Engineer School or RTI-ND may he 

sent to the unit at the unit's 

expense. The unit must submit a 

request for training to the school or 

RTI-ND for this option. 

An interactive CD-ROM training 

course developed by the Engineer 

School will be available in late 

August 1996. This training must be 

conductcd at the unit by a previously certified operator. No cost to 

the unit is anticipated. 

A 14-hour block of instruction conducted during the SlT10 course at 

Fort Leonard Wood. The unit must 

coordinate with the 1st Engineer 

Training Brigade at Fort Leonard 

Wood to attend this instruction. 

Civilian-Acquired'Ikaining 

The fourth option available for 

training personnel is civilianacquired skills. Six credit hours 

of CADD training at a college or technical school meets the requirements for 

the drafting training. Materials testing 

training is available through the Corps 

of Engineers Waterways Experiment 

Station at Vicksburg, Mississippi. Survey training on the Geodimeter 444 is 

more difficult to obtain in the civilian 

sector. Howevcr, a new equipment 

training team contracted by the U.S. 

Army is providing the training to units 

Armywide. Soldiers who complete this 

training meet the STP rcquircments for 

tasks using the Geodimeter 444. Certification on the MC-I must be completed as described in the OJT 

program 

Waiting Until June '97 

A my Regulation 611-201 establishes the termination date for 

the Y2 identifier for MOS SIT 

as 30 June 1997. 

Conclusion 

While waiiig for the termination 

date to remove the Y2 identifier 

from a soldier's MOS is an 

option. it is not recommended by the Engineer School. This method will not produce 

well-trained and motivated soldiers. A combination of the other options may be 

approved by the schwl and, in many cases, 

completion of these options will qualify a 

soldier for MOS reclassitication. It is important for leaders to remember that whatever 

option(s) are chosen, prior coordination with 

the Engineer Schwl will speed the process 

and streamline the approval process.. 

Address questions conceming the Transition Training Course to: Commander, 

Regional Training Institute-North Dakota, 

5th Engineer Training Battalion. ATTN: 

SSG Kevin Keefe, RR 5, Box 278A. 

Devil's Lake, North Dakota 58237. SSG 

Keefe may be reached at (701) 662-0400 

or DSK 344-5226.extension 400. 

The point of contact concerning MC-I 

Nuclear Densometer training at the 1st 

Engineer Training Brigade, Fort Leonard 

Wood, is Mr. Ron Winrich, (573) 596-5410. 

For other information, contact SFC 

Walter Mortimer at (573) 596-0131, 

cxtension 37593, or DSN 676-7593; or 

SSG Tom Hylsky. (573) 596-0131,extension 37511, or DSN 676-7511. Y 

SFC Antold sprved as rhe SITsenior training deuelr,pcr. or rhe U.S.Amy Engineer 

Sch,wl. Fort Leonard Wwd Missouri, fmm 

1992 to 1996. P,~viousassignments include 

JIG' .senior blrrrucroc Forr Belvoir. Virginia; 

cr,mbal c,,n,nanccrim NCO. 44rh Engineer Brurolirvt, Koreo; technical enginee,: 84lh Engineer Burrolion. Hawaii. He is n gradcure of the 

SIT Baric NCO Cour.ce and the CMF 51 

Advowed NCO Cnurs~old holds aan urs~iare 

dtgrw iu c,~nrrruninnmonogcmenr fmm Park 

C,l//ejic.Parkvillc. Mirrouri 

SSG Keefe. rhe 51T NCOlC ar rhe 5th Engineer Twining Bartoliun, asrisrrd in the de.~ign 

and develo/>rnent,$the 517 Tmsitiotz Cr~urse. 

Pevious rrsrignm~nrrinclude squad leader. B 

Co~npnfry.397th Engineer Banoiion, LaCm,sse. 

WLrcnnrin. SSG KPPfC W(U. M insmcror for 

5IBIO and 5IKIO C~~u,un.es, Phare I1 ofthe 12 

CMF Basic and Advrmced NCO Courses, ond 

Pllrire I/ qf the 5IH Ba~icNCO Coune. He is n 

grndrrore of the SIT10 Advanced Individual 

Twining Course. 
Snapshots From a Liaison Officer 

By Lieutenant Colonel Reinhold Hocke 

Observations fmm the German 

Army Liaison Officer concerning the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and his 

four-year tour at the U.S. Army Engineer School. 

Throughout my military career. I 

have enjoyed many contacts 

with U.S. Army engineers in 

Germany. As a company commander I 

shared a unit citation with the U.S. 

partnership unit, Delta Company of the 

First Infantry Division (Forward), at 

that time stationed in Neu-Ulm, later in 

Goeppingen, Germany. ?he award was 

presented by CINC USAREUR, General Ksoesen. I share many memories 

with engineer officers and soldiers of 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who 

served tours in Germany. Cooperation 

with U.S. and allied army engineers has 

always been part of my life in the German military. 

During recent discussions, the Commanding General of the Engineer Center, Major General Gill, encouraged me 

to share some "snapshots" of my tour 

here with the readers of Engineer Information flow includes both receiving and 

giving. Having received so much from 

U.S. Army engineers in the last four 

years, it is a pleasure to give a little 

information back. First I will explain the 

mission and organization of the German 

Army liaison organization (see chart). In 

conversations with Americans, I am 

often asked to describe the German 

Army liaison officer's job. 

Army 

USA 1. FM Lt 

LISA 2. Fort SI 

re.. w, 

JSA 5. Fort RI 

JSA 9. Fort B< 

.--~2. 

G Liaisor nization in thc

0Army Maln Liaison Staff a aArmy Llaison Office- A Observerr~onxrouer(urr, 

@HHptVStab (USA) Forl U.S. Amy TraldwndWneCmd (TRADOC) 

HVStsb USA CAC FM Lasvnworih' U.S. Army Comblned Ann, Cenler 

HVSlab I 

aHVStab I 

HVStab L, -..-...., -,,nu, =L, 

HVStab I Avlatlon S 

HVStab I Infantry S. 

HVStab ~DI. I", run ass. Alr Defense Artlllq CMtr and SchooWSASMA 

HVO USA 4. Fort Hvaehuca lntellgns~Centn 

A HVO USA 6. Fort McClellan Chsmlcal School 

HVO USA I, Fort Ow&n Sigml School 

A HVO USA 8. Fort LeonardWood Englnsor Center 

A HVO USMA. Wed Palnt US. Milltary Academy 

HVO MII. Fwt B,.pg XVlll (US) AirborneCorl 

AOlC JRTC, Fort Polk Joint Resdlnas Tralnln 

Comblned 

fldd Mlll 

'my Llaison! 

L - .--. 

I Army Spt Cn 

Iery Contr an 

.--, 

Installations with a battle lab. 

Engineer 27 
The Commander of the German 'CThe mentality and think- I have a lot of admiration for the 

Armed Forces Command, United U.S. Anny.But I would not he frank if I 

States and Canada, is the superior for ing of .4mericans differ did not admit to some concerns 

all German soldiers in the United fro*] those of Germans or acquired during my dealings with U.S. 

States, excluding military attache per- Army personnel over the last few years. 

sonnnel. He is headquartered in Reston, other Europeans because 

Virginia. The German Anny Liaison the United States and its 

Organization, USA, is a subordinate 

element that is colocated with Head- armed forces have never 

quarters TRADOC, at Fort Monroe, really suffered from a lack 

Virginia. It provides a d~rectmeans of 

liaison between the German Ministry of natural resources." 

of Defense's Army staff with its subordinate elements and selected U.S. 

Army agencies and facilities. These 

include TRADOC, the Combined 

Arms Center (CAC), the National 

Training Center, the United States Military Academy at West Point, and the 

service schools and centers with battle 

laboratories. 

In addition to representing the interests of the German Army, the German 

Army Liaison Organization is tasked 

,nObtain, evaluate, and assess information on the latest developments 

regarding U.S. Army command 

and operational doctrine, organization, training, equipment, and 

logistics, and to report pertinent 

recommendations to thc Gem~an 

Army Office. 

Whcn invited, infonn and brief 

U.S. agencies and officer and NCO 

course students on the German 

armed forces in general or any particular combat engineer subject. 

Attend and reoort on authorized ~ ~ 

field exercises and trials. 

Carry out assignments in response 

to speciiic requests for information. 

While at Fon Leonard Wood I have 

written more than 100 reports to the 

German Ministry of Defense. Numerous letters, phone calls in country and 

to Germany, meetings, and TDY travel 

activities are also pan of the job. 

The liaison mission essentially is 

about communication between our 

respective armies. At Headquarters 

TRADOC, CAC, and those U.S. Army 

centers owning a battle lab, the German 

Army is reprcsented by a main liaison 

staff or by a liaison staff consisting of 

at least a senior lieutenant colonel and a 

sergeant major. Since TRADOC is 

scheduled to stand up the "Maneuver 

Support Battle Lab" at Fort Leonard 

Wood in October 1996, the German 

Anny will keep the sergeant major's 

position here. 

TI] many, the difference between a 

liaison officer and an exchange officer 

seems unclear. However it is vew simple: The liaison officer works for the 

organization that sent hun, and the 

exchange officer works for the organization he is attached to. For example, 

the German Army liaison officer works 

for the German Am~y,while the British 

exchange officer in the Directorate of 

Training at the U.S. Army Engineer 

Center works for the Engineer School's 

Director of Training. 

Let me now provide some imnressions. I have enjoyed my appointment 

at the U.S. Army Engineer Center very 

much and have seen and lcarned a lot 

about the world's only remaining military superpower, the U.S.Army, and 

the Army Corps of Engineers. Since 

1967, the German Army liaison staff at 

Fort Leonard Wood has always 

enjoyed working with open-minded 

people who are aware of the importance of sound allied relations. I have 

met very fcw people who were not 

interested in NATO, allied, and 

US.-Gcrman interoperability issues. I 

have always enjoyed open discussions 

whcre I could pass on information 

about the German Army that is relevant 

to U.S.-German Amy engineer 

interoperability. 

Doctrine 

ilitaq doctrinc is subject to 

many influences and parameters. Today's high technology 

obviously has a major influence on it. 

However, it was most interesting for me 

to learn and understand to what extent 

resources influence militaq thinking 

and doctrine. In this assignnient it was 

important for me not only to get 

acquainted with the US. armed forces 

but also to learn about Amcrican culture by traveling around the country 

and learning some of your history. I am 

deeply impressed to what extent the 

availability or lack of resources influences a nation's mentality and thinking. 

The mentality and thinking of Americans differ from those of Germans or 

other Europeans because the United 

States and its armed forces have never 

really suffered from a lack of natural 

resources. Think about that. 

Training 

he U.S. and German Armies are 

starting a cross-training program for engineer officers. This 

program will be relevant for career 

development and assignments such as 

liaison officers. The program's payoff 

will be a broader and better understanding of the capabilities and limitations of 

both our armies. As a result of this program, the effectiveness of hi- and multinational operations will increase. 

Germany sent the first students to 

the Engineer Precommand Course and 

the Engineer Officer Advanced Course 

(EOAC) at Fort Leonard Wood in 1996 

to gain a better understanding of U.S. 

Amiy engineer operations. On a reciprocal basis, the first U.S. Army engineer officers recently attended the 

German EOAC at Munich. I do not 

believe an inability to speak Gennan is 

28 Engineer A~yust1996 
The mine-clearing vehicle Keiler (orVWildBoar") in action. The Keiler successfully clears both buried and surface-laid 

land mines. It is employed with the German Army engineer contingent in Bosnia. 

an obstacle for this program. Many 

U.S. Army engineer officers are fluent 

enough in German and would have no 

difficulty attending courses at the German Amy Engineer School. 

Training is a main key to success. 

Learning about training in the U.S. 

Army and on Fort Leonard Wood 

makes me think about the influence of a 

nation's educational system in general, 

and vocational training in particular, in 

providing relcvant and useful trade 

skills. Most of the recruits joining the 

German armed forces (both regular soldiers and conscripts) are well trained in 

trade skills. So a plumber, mason, electrician, or carpenter has three or more 

years of vocational training when he 

joins the German Army Corps of Engineers. Because the German Army takes 

advantage of the soldier's civilian trade 

skills, it must provide training only for 

his military skills. 

I was frankly impressed by the 

efforts U.S. armed forces must take to 

provide well-trained soldiers with 

appropriate trade skills to complete 

their missions. The engineer Interservice Training Review Organization, 

recently established on Fort Leonard 

Wood and various Air Force and Navy 

bases, is the evidence. By realizing 

your training efforts, I have gained 

appreciation for the benefits that conscription provides in resourcing Germany's armed forces with well-skilled 

tradesmen. 

Army engineers cooperate with coalition forces sometimes down to the 

company level. This creates a demand 

for engineer officers and NCOs to have 

some knowledge of the capabilities and 

limitations of attached foreign formations. The Euro-NATO Engineer Training Center, hosted by the German 

Army Engineer School in Munich, has 

the mission to train militaly leaders 

from squad level up to battalion commander in engineer interoperability and 

standard NATO procedures. Many 

allied engineer NCOs and officers have 

attended these courses and should continue to do so. 

Sending students to allied nations 

for training is not just a question of diplomatic relations. Today, joint, combined, and multinational military 

operations are common. The success of 

these operations is closely related to 

the quality of cooperation within the 

multinational forces. At least the two 

binational USIGE-GWS Army Corps 

require appropriately trained officers 

and NCOs. Under such circumstances, 

it is essential that the participating military forces understand the capabilities 

and limitations of the national military 

forces being committed to these special 

task forces. 

Leadership 

What is leadership all about? 

Millions of words have been 

written about leadership, motivation, and counseling. For years scientists have tied to penetrate the 

human psyche to find more ways of 

getting the job done. 

A leader needsa Realism and imagination. 

a Receptiveness and strength of 

character. 

a Self-assurance and adaptability. 

Modesty and moral firmness. 

Patience and a sense of justice. 

Inward composure and excellent 

professional skills. 

Augusr 1996 Engineer 29 
Stamina and outstanding physical 

fitness. 

Leaders must decide quickly, courageously, and prudently; promote comradeship; strengthen the sense of responsibility in their soldiers; rake resolute action; and set an example. 

All of these pearls of wisdom are 

from just two pages of the German 

Army Field Manual 1001100, which is 

equivalent to the U.S. Army's FM 

100.5. Had I continued to turn pages, I 

would have found much more. Do you 

fulfill all those requirements? I don't! 

Nor did Frederick the Great, Blucher, 

Clausewitz, or Rommel. Did George 

Washington, Patton or MacArthur fulfill them all? 

Leadership means the ability to get 

other people to do what you want them 

to do. But there are two sides of that 

coin: First you must know what is to be 

done; then you must make your soldiers do the job. That involves more 

than simply issuing orders according to 

NATO and STANAG regulations. It is 

more, also, than the ability to inspire or 

force your will upon others. Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and other scoundrels of world history had those 

qualities. We lead free men and women 

who think and know their rights. They 

will fight for a just cause, but we must 

prove it is a just cause. They will not 

fight for justice if we treat them unfairly or fight for frecdom if we put 

them down. They will follow us if we 

prove our honesty and integrity, and if 

they experience our compassion and 

morality. 

How do we prove that? One simple 

four-letter word clearly describes what 

real leaders must do: care. We must 

care about our soldiers and care for 

them, because anyone who wants to 

lead people must like people. 

If you care, you listen to your soldiers. I don't mean the stilted baloney 

that some superiors ask: "How old are 

you, son? Where are you from? Thank 

you, next man." I'm talking about real 

listening-because a soldier probably 

will not tell you when everything is all 

1 wrong. He'll be a little hesitant. If you I

' ask a soldier how hc's doing and he just 

nods or shrugs, you know he's doing 

poorly and you need to dig a Little 

deeper. 

I You care if you really wonder what 

your soldiers do both on and off duty. 

If PFC Miller does not go to the movies with the rest of the squad, you care 

if you wonder why. You care if you 

wonder why PFC Jones bas flunked , 

I weapons inspection for the third tune in ' a row. And you care if you stand up and 

tell the commander that your men were 

not slow but your plan wasfaulty. 

You care if you share their prob- 1 lems, their hardships, and the" jokes. 

Your soldiers are as lousy as you let 

i : them he, and they are as good as you 

make them be. I 

You care if you make them proud ' and don't humiliate them. Your soldiers i 

1 won't be brave if you abuse and cower 

I 

I 

them-and they won't be strong if you

I break them. You know they won't be 1 

I respectful and obedient if you haven't / 

I treated them with the respect and dig- 1 

nity that fosters personal pride. i 

There is a very fine line between 1 

1 firmness and harshness, between strong ! 

I leadership and bullying, between disci- ~ 

1 pline and "chicken". We must find that 

1 line and we will-if we care! I I'm not sure that the following obser- I . ! vatlon IS correct, but I've noticed over ; 

1 the past few years that some military I 

1 leaders act more "boss-orientcd" than 

"mission-oriented." If we get the misi sion done properly, our boss will be , I happy. But keeping the boss happy does i 

not always mean getting the job done. ; 

Think about that. In my estimation. 

good leaders focus first on the mission. i 

Organization 

he U.S. Army is focused on 

Force XXI. In this scenario, we 

digitize the battlefield using 

high-tech, state-of-the-art electronic 

equipment to improve the combat 

power of [he force. Force XXI will 

consume a lot of energy and resources. 

But we Army engineers should not forget that most of the physical and 

mechanical missions will not be done 

by computers. 

For the foreseeable future, we will 

still need an adequate number of 

well-trained "damned engineers" to 

deal with mud, snow, land mines, 

river-crossing sites, etc. Planners sometimes forget that future wars, just like 

those in the past, will be determined by 

the adequately equipped combat engineer working side-by-side with his fellow soldiers of the combat anns. 

Reducing the number of combat engineers may lead to a loss in combat 

power. 

Materiel 

oday, the U.S. Army's credo is 

to fight and win the war by first 

fighting and winning the information war. This vision of "Army 

XXI" is focuscd on digitizing thc battlefield. In this arena the U.S. Army is 

second to none. A huge research and 

development (R&D) world is pushing 

this issue forward. While visiting U.S. 

Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine 

Corps R&D installations, I noticed 

some duplication and redundancy of 

efforts, which is nothing new for a 

super-sized organization. On the other 

hand, it may be prudent to focus R&D 

efforts more on users' needs. Let me 

explain. 

While visiting U.S. Army combat 

engineer units, I saw aging and 

worn-out engineer equipment that 

needs to be replaced. The U.S. Anny 

Corps of Engineers has struggled with 

this problem during all the years of my 

assignment at the Engineer Center. 1 

sincerely hope that urgently needed 

new equipment will he fielded within 

the next few years. If you need help in 

the interim, ask your fellow German 

Anny engineers for support. We have 

engineer equipment, such as the new 

mine-clearing vehicle Keiler, that may 

meet your requirements (see photo, 

page 29). 

30 Engineer August 1996 
Soldiers 

I 

Aresource all armies must handle very carefully is the soldiers. Belonging to an army 

that recruits female soldiers only to a 

limited extent, it was a new experience for me to learn about genderintegrated training and equal promotion opportunities lor female officers 

and NCOs. I have followed with interest the ongoing discussions about 

which positions should be opened to 

females or kept closed. 

I admire thc willingness and good 

morale of young American soldiersthey show pride in what they do. 

Recently I had an opportunity to visit 

U.S. engineer units in Bosnia. Even 

though I spent only a few hours with 

the Task Force Eagle engineers, I was 

deeply impressed by their discipline, 

confidence, and commitment. 

I am very grateful to the fine soldiers and officers I served with in the 

United States. I would go to war with 

American soldiers any time because I 

know that I can trust them. They are 

committed to readiness and dedicated 

to victoly. Many things are done differently over here, but I got reaffirmance 

again and again that we can rely on our 

U.S. allies. It has been a privilege to 

serve a four-year tour with the U.S. 

Amy Corps of Engineers. I thank all 

of you who I had the chance to meet ~~~ 

for your support and friendship. Auf 

Wiedersehen and Essayons! Y 


Lieutenant Colonel Hocke served as 

German liaison ofjicer to the US. Army 

Engineer School and Center; Fort 

Leonard Wood, from August 1992 to 

September 1996. He previously served 

as cornnlander of the German 6ist 

Engineer Battalion. 6th Armored Infan-

!r); Dii~ision;and st@ ofjicer engineer 

and senior combat engineer oficer; 

Book Review 

Breaching Fortress Europe: The Although other works have porStoly of US. Engineers in Normandy (rayed in detail the activities of 6 June 

on D-Day, by Sid Berger. KendalVHunt ! 1944, the author's focus on engineer 

Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa, 1994, ' cross-channel planning and engineer 

272 pages. support to landingforce preparation _PO_ and invasion-force marshaling and 

By Lieutenant General Daniel U! embarkation is unique and refreshing. 

Christman, Superintendent, United His description of the enemy's prepared 

States Military Academy. positions, stretching 2,400 miles with 

more than 15,000 fortified positions 

Assault landing on a laced with extensive mines and wire 

coastline, arguably an army's , , obstacles, provides a rich picture of 

greatest challenge and an engi- j unique engineer factors affecting the 

neer's greatest nightmare, has heen opention. BY highlighting the engineer 

masterfully captured by id B~~~~~ Units' participation, he leaves no doubt 

with insight, detail, and thoroughness as to the impoflance of their effort and 

honed through firsthand experience and sacrifice to the successful outcome of 

indepth research. A veteran of am- the entire 

phibious operations in Sicily, Italy, and Re inclusion of four 18" x 22" full-

~ ~ ~the ~ ~ , j ~ ,

color, top-secret Bigot maps of Omaha has written one 

of the most and compre. and Utah beaches, one of which the 

hensive accounts of Operation Over- author Personally used during his landlord. His focus on engineer units and ing On Utah beach, is especially notetheir tactics and techniques, so crucial wofihy. Also of interest are the many 

to the success of this opera. original drawings. illustrations, maps, 

tion, is unique and long overdue. and photographs that depict the varied 

hi^^ ~~~t~~~~ E~~~~~ is a and complex nature of the operations. 

definitive and accurate account of the A "must read" for the serious student of 

planning and execution of the militaly history; pure intellectual enjoyassault on omaha and utah beaches, ment for the rest of us. And for combat 

Sid Berger has produced a readable engineers, it is a pmicularly moving, 

story that an excellent balance emotional account of heroism that has 

between a narrative that is easily under- I~IYheen equaled in the annals of 

stood by nonengineers and one that is , 

warfare. 

technically useful to combat engineers Proceeds from the sale of this book, 

and military historians. nesignifi- which was produced the Society of 

cance of the book has been recognized Engineers:c, will be used to 

in several independent reviews, one of repair and maintain five engineer battle 

which was highlighted in the March1 On Omaha and Utah 

April 1995 issue of Military Review. beaches. These monuments are fully 

One quote from that review captures , described in an appendix to fhe book. 

Headqrrarters Allied Forces Central 

Europe. LTC Hocke is a graduate of the 

German General Staff Oflcers Course 

at the Federal Armed Forces Command 

and General Staff College in Hamburg. 

the essence: "Berger's book should he 

combined with S.L.A. Marshall's Night 

Drop and Cornelius Ryan's The Longest Day for the background and framework upon which these build." 

Note: Engineer is seeking insighel 

revi~sof books of special interest to 

military engineers. Contriburions are 

welcome. 
BCTP: Warf ighter Exercises 


Strengthen Battlefield 


Performance 


By Lieurenant Colonel Gregov Stanley and Lieutenant Colonel David Snodgrass 

he Battle Command Training Program (BCTP) is the 

Army's capstone combat training center. Initially 

formed to conduct realistic, stressful exercises for 

division- and corps-level commanders and staffs, it has 

expanded over the last three years to include exercises for 

National Guard brigades and the Army component of joint 

exercises. Thc following information describes recent 

changes in the BCTP and some perceptions (cunent trends) 

of the senior observers and ohserver/controllers based on 

recent corps and division exercises. 

BCTP Missions 

The BCTP consists of four lettered operations groups 

(teams). Operations groups A and B are responsible 

for thc traditional division and corps BCTP rotations. 

These groups conduct a seminar for the commander, primary 

... . 

staff. major subordinate commanders, and associated battle 

staff, ideally within the first 3 lo 6 months of a new command. The seminar is normally held at Folt Leavenworth. It 

offers a unique opportunity for a new commander to divorce 

himself from the daily peacetime activities of command and 

to focus specifically on warfighting, team building, and relating his warfighting philosophies to those of his staff and 

suhordinate leaders. Using an order similar to one to be 

issued during a subsequent warfighter exercise (WFX), the 

staff conducts portions of a deliberate tactical decisionmaking exercise. llis exercise is a vehicle for initiating professional discussions and information exchanges between 

unit personnel, observer/controllers, and senior observers. 

The senior observers are retired three- and four-star general 

officers who contribute their experience by mentoring the 

process. (Currently they are GEN(R) Cavazos, GEN(R) 

Lindsay, GEN(R) Rurba, GEN(R) Franks and LTG (R) 

- ~ 

BCTP organization 

Grange.) The actual WFX is conducted at the unit's home 

stltion 3 to 6 months after the seminar and pit? the unit 

against a world-class opposing force that fights from the 

National Simulation Center at Fort Leavenworth. A corps 

battle simulation (CBS) drives the WFX. (See box for recent 

improvements to CBS.) 

Another operations group, Team C, was added in the summer of 1993. It conducts two phases of realistic and challenging training for Arnly National Guard brigade and banalion 

commanders and their hanle staffs. In the first phase, the brigade commander, his subordinate commanders, and the brigade staff attend a five-day decision-making seminar at Fort 

Leavenworth. Ohserver-trainers lead the staff through the 

deliberate decision-making process and conduct workshops, 

a JANUS exercise with the battalions, and an after-action 

review (AAR). Approximately 3 months later the rest of the 

brigade command and control cells participate in a 30-hour 

hrigade battle exercise using a brigadeibanle simulation that 

is based on the plan developed during the seminar. Two 

AARs are conducted during this phase. The same group of 

senior observers mentor the brigade commander and staff 

during both the seminar and the brigadelbattle simulation. 

The fourth operations group, Team D, was formed in 

1994. It participates in joint exercises and provides assistance during real-world contingencies. While the other operations groups set up and control exercises, this team focuses 

on exercises developed and organized by major Amy commands and joint commands. Recent examples include Ulchi 

Focus Lens. in Korea; Frontera Libre, in Panama; and Unified Endeavor, with the Atlantic Command. Team D has also 

provided assistance with real-world contingency operations 

in Bosnia, Somalia, and Haiti and for the Southern European 

Task Force in Italy and the Allied Command Europe's Rapid 

Reaction Corps. In existence for less than two years, Team D 

has provided assistance tor 22 exercises and contingcncy 

operations. No other service has an cquivalenr organization, 

making this operations group highly sought after for its 

expertise in joint operations. 

1996 Perceptions 

ach year BCTP publishes perceptions of observations 

from WFXs. These generally are common trends coilected from recent rotations that identify areas in 

shich the Army should collectively improve. The following 

engineer-related observations are from 1995-96 division and 

corps operations. 

Integrate engineer effort into the entire battlefield 

framework. 

Perceph'on: Develop situational obstacles for the deep fight. 

Discussion: Scatterable minefieids emplaced to support 

the deep fight often lack a detailed plan for execution and 

synchronization with other operating systems to achieve a 

specific effect. As a result. helicopters and Air Force aircraft 

CBS Improvements 

CBS is constantly changing, and the Engineer School 

recently made several enhancements to improve the fidelity 

,f engineer play. For those who have not participated in a 

UFX recently, a summary of those improvements follows: 

Engineers now show up as separate icons and can be 

task organized. They used to be invisible and conducted work as engineer task teams (ETTs). Because 

engineer units and equipment now can be seen by 

opposing forces, intelligence simulation with engineers 

is greatly improved. This change also allows engineers 

to continue functions such as breaching while in contact. Formerly, the-ETTs would abort work upon any 

contact with the enemy. 

The number of engineer tasks that can be performed is 

expanded. Previous versions ailowed only one type of 

minefield. Now the simulation discriminates between 

surface-laid, buried, antitank, antipersonnel, and scatterable mines. Breaching can be done by various 

means, such as MlCLlCs or tanks with rollers and 

plows, which the operator selects. The time required to 

complete tasks is based on the resources on hand; the 

more forces available, the less time required. Multiple 

breach lanes can be established through all minefields. 

* Operations previously done by "work around" now are 

performed as integral parts of the simulation. (A "work 

around" is an action taken outside of the simulation 

through a specific set of rules.) For example, tactical 

bridges now can be constructed, removed, or 

destroyed. Fixed bridges can be destroyed or repaired, 

and runways can be cut and repaired. Point obstacles 

can be detonated on command. 

Survivability improvements allow specific units to be 

dug in, according to the survivability levels described in 

FM 5-103.In previous versions, engineers fortified a 

piece of terrain, and all units received additional protection by occupying terrain close to the dug-in unit. 

The simulation now calculates how much earth must 

be moved to dig in a piece of equipment and applies 

earth-moving rates to the pieces of engineer equipment allocated to the task. The time required depends 

on the assets available and what is dug in. The protection is directional and applies only to the equipment, 

personnel or unit supported. 

' 	Work-arounds have been added to allow for future 

engineer equipment tested during EXFOR warfighter 

rotations and Prairie Warrior. These include wide-area 

munitions, intelligent minefields, the Grizzly, and standoff-minefield detection systems. 

' Efforts are ongoing to drastically improve the corps battle simulation of terrain. Conceptually, rates of movement will vary depending on the slope, condition of 

the route, and vegetation. The flat terrain board of the 

current system will be replaced with a three-dimensional model that will affect both aviation and artillery. 
are placed at risk emplacing obstacles that have little impact 

on the enemy, and direct and indirect fires are not planned to 

take advantage of obstacle effects. Division and corps staffs 

should identify the named areas of interest (NAI), decision 

points (DP), and targeted areas of interest (TAI) to support 

scatterable minefields in the deep fight. The planning 

requirement for situational obstacles is the same as that for 

all obstacles; scatterable minefield delivery systems are just a 

faster method for emplacement. 

Perception: Anticipate the transition to the defense. 

Discussion: Division and corps staffs seldom plan for battle culmination. Additionally, they do not use the reverse planning sequence, startlng with actions on the objective and 

working back toward actions in the assembly area. As a result, 

engineers have a diflicult time successfully planning and conducting the transition to the defense. Changes to task organizations often are made without considering their potential 

impacts on current activities or the status of engineer units. 

During the planning process, units should identify the best tcrrain to defend throughout the offensive zone and the Class IV 

and Class V requirements for each potential line of defense. 

Engineers need that information to determine the task organization changes needed to supptt the transition. 

Perceptiun: Allocate resources to conduct general engineering tasks. 

Discwsion: Many onits sacrifice general engineering 

requirements in order to support close operations. This may 

not cause problems during a relatively short WFX conducted 

in a computer-simulated environment, hut it does not replicate the engineer support that maneuver units will expect 

over a long duration in a deployment. To train as we will 

fight, units must balance the rcquirements of the close iight 

with the general engineering tasks required to sustain units 

over an extended time period. 

Exploit engineer expertise in the intelligence preparation of the battlefield process. 

Perception: Engineers seldom "think red." 

Discussion: Friendly engineers must be “experts" on 

enemy enginccrs. We must know the enemy engineer structure, how they are organized, their equipment, and how 

enemy engineers are employed in various siluations. Engineer planners and S2s use that knowledge to predict enemy 

engineer actions and the effort required for each identified 

course of action. We provide that information to commanders, intelligence staff officers, and subordinate engineers. To 

provide useful tips on probable enemy actions, we must evaluate how, when, and where the enemy uses crigineer reconnaissance teams, mobile obstacle detachments, movement 

support detachments, and bridge units. Ultimately we want to 

predict the enemy's main effort and deception cfforts. Prediction is the bottom line, not regurgitation of information. 

Perception: Continuously estimate enemy engineer capabilities based on the banle damage assessment. 

Discussion: Engineer planners should allocate resources 

based on actual and anticipated requirements derived from 

enemy capabilities. Many units initially assess enemy capabilities based on known strengths and time available. They 

often fail to track enemy losses or update their probable 

capabilities based on the passage of time and changes in 

strength. As a result, friendly units often find themselves facing more (or occasionally less) engineer effort than anticipated and templated. Many units allow the enemy to 

construct or improvc his defense. They tend to ignore enemy 

engineer targets in favor of enemy air defense, artillery, and 

command and control targets. Enemy engineers should be 

considered in the division and corps high-payoff target lists. 

Perceptiun: Template and disseminate enemy engineer 

effort based on their known capabilities. 

Discussion: Engineers should apply their knowledge of 

terrain and enemy engineers to template encmy engineer 

cfforts. This template, derived from known enemy engineer 

capabilities, should be revised and updated frequently to 

reflect new data gathered in a focused and integrated information-cullection effort. Units should devise a system to disseminate the template when it is revised. The All Source 

Analysis System (ASAS) is a great option for disseminating 

information. The engineer S2 can also use ASAS to scarch 

for reports of enemy engineer activities the G2 might not 

otherwise disseminate. Unfortunately, not all divisions 

resource their engineers with ASAS. 

Perception: Coordinate efforts of the engineer S2 and the 

G2 to take advantage of their individual strengths. 

Discussion: Units must delineate i~~telligence rsponsibilitics for products based on the skills each intelligence officer 

brings to thc c~~llective table. Many units duplicate efforts on 

enemy obstacle tracking. with both the G2 and the engineer 52 

following reports and tracking obstacles. ORen. neither of 

the111 uses confirmed obstacle reports or their knowledge of 

terrain, enemy capabilities, and enemy doctrine to template 

additional obstacles. Coordinating their efforts will focus datacollection activities and enhance the picture of the enemy 

defense. The engineer S2 oCSers the unit a tremendous capability when he maintains and updates the obstacle datahase for 

the entire unit because he can ensure that all subordinates have 
access to a common picture of the battlefield. With that database and his unique knowledge of terrain, defense construction techniques, and enemy engineer capabilities, the 

engincer S2 is the ideal person to assign obstacle templating 

responsibilities. Updated obstacle status and templates based 

on dynamic enemy engineer capabilities give commanders 

(including subordinate unit commanders) and their staffs 

valuable clues to identify the enerny defensive array. Division engineers should get an ASAS terminal for their S2 and 

exploit ASAS to assist in this function. 

Integrate obstacles to enhance other battlefield 

operating systems. 

Perception: Develop an obstacle plan that supports the 

scheme of maneuver. 

Discussion: Divisions often decentralize ohstaclc plans 

down to the brigade level but fail to synchronize brigade 

efforts to ensure a coherent division defense. As a result, one 

brigade may plan and construct a belt that turns the enemy 

into the flank of another brigade. Some plans lack a concept 

for obstacles. Units should ensure that ohstacle intents match 

the maneuver intent and concept of operation. One option to 

ensure compatibility is to use intent graphics at the division 

level. Another option is to review the obstacle plan and 

intents during each division backbrief and rehearsal. 

Perception: Refine obstacle-control measures to focus 

engineer effort and materials. 

Discussion: Divisions often do not want to restrict maneuver hrigade commanders, so they design zones that cover 

entire brigade sectors. As a result, each hrigade fights a separate fight not a division fight. Failing to focus obstaclecontrol measures to specific enemy avenucs makes it difficult to determine ohstacle resource requirements. 

Perception: Provide meaningful information on friendly 

and enemy obstacles. 

Discussion: Dissemination of obstacle information is 

extremely weak. Units lacking a staff engineer (field art& 

lery, air defense artillery, signal, and corps units) either do 

not ect obstacle information or fail to use it. Units, especially 

those with several types of communications systems, must 

develop a method that is easy to use and facilitates dissemination. Generally, the DNEN S2 cell is the ideal group to 

develop a single, common database and disseminate it over a 

tactical local area network or via TACFAX. The cell also 

must maintain an overlay that identifies cleared lanes and 

obstacle-control measures. Engineers must be involved with 

movement control, and maneuver units must enforce orocedures to ensure that a11 movement within their sector is coordinated with their engineer representatives. 

Perception: Address obstacles during rehearsals. 

Discussion: Discuss the intent for obstacles during 

rehearsals. This practice will reduce the chance of diverting 

August 1996 

engineers for lower priority missions and ensure that obstacle 

plans support the commander's intent and the unit scheme of 

maneuver. 

Perception: Plan obstacles that support offensive 

operations. 

Discussion: Obstacle-control measures are rarely discussed in plans for offensive operations. FM 90-7 describes 

techniques for obstacle planning in the offense. Obstacles are 

an engineer weapons system that, when properly employed 

and integrated with other operating systems, can wrest the 

initiative from the enemy. Many commanders hesitate to delegate emplacement authority for FASCAM during offensive 

operations hut rarely restrict the use of other obstacles. As a 

result, a unit is guaranteed not to face a "temporary" obstacle 

that will self-destruct in another hour or two but potentially 

runs the risk of dealing with such "semipermanent" obstacles 

as road craters or conventional minefields. When defining 

delegation authority, commanders must consider differences 

in sighting accuracy and marking methods between aerialand ground-delivered FASCAM as well as potential areas of 

employment. 

Perception: Synchronize FASCAM to maximize effects. 

Discussion: FASCAM capabilities are not understood by 

all, so they are rarely exploited during combat operations. 

Many commanders tend to consider field artillery (FA) delivered ADAM and RMM only. When FA-delivered FASCAM is used, it tends to be a "Call 911" approach. In that 

situation, nobody can maintain a clear picture of all of the 

FASCAM self-destruct times or safety zones. Once again, 

the planning requirement for FASCAM obstacles is the same 

as that for all obstacles; scatterable minefield delivery systems are just a more rapid method for emplacement. The bottom line is that obstacles must be emplaced for a specific 

effect and be targeted with direct and indirect weapons systems to take advantage of enemy delays at the obstacles. If 

the timing of an obstacle is critical to mission success, units 

must identify the NAIs, DPs, TAIs, and observation required 

to support the scatterable minefields. Y 

Lieutenant Colonel Greg Sranle), served as an engineer 

observer/controller with the BCTP fmm July 1993 to May 

1996. He currently serves as the executive ofplcerfor the Assistant Depuq Chief ofStaflTraining at Fort Lravenworrh. Previous assignment.^ include assistant division engineer for the 

6th Infantry Division (Light) und execrrtive officer of the 6th 

Engineer Battalion, Fort Wainwright, Alaska. 

Lieutenant Colonel David 3nodgras.r is the LlCTP engineer observer/controller Previous assignments include commander; Bravo Company, 17th Engineer Batralion; assistant 

division engineer in 2d Armored Division, Fort Hood, Texas; 

and lighr and armor ream engineer observer/controller at the 

National Training Cenrec Fort Irwin, Calgornia. 

Engineer 35 
A 

MliT?Y~lTPitlNlNG CENTER 

National Training Center (NTC) 

Engineer Platoon Critical in Defense 

Planning and Execution 

By Major Tonr Buning 

Engineer battalions and staffs are not using the time and 

resources available to them to suKiciently prepare detailed 

plans for countennobility and survivability efforts for their 

subordinate commanders. Poor adherence to the principle of 

parallel planning between the cngineer battalion staff and the 

brigade staff results in the issuance of incomplete and poorly 

staffed orders to engineer company commandcrs This problem often increases in magnitude as similarly incomplete 

orders are issued to platoon leaders. As a result, platoons are 

left with an overwhelming responsibility to complete obstacle plans, coordinate for and haul Class IV and Class V barrier material, and execute the plans. Since platoon leaders are 

trained and manned only to execute obstacle plans, platoon 

productivity takes a drastic nosedive. 

Philosophically, the engineer battalion and company 

headquarters staffs must realize that there are only six line 

platoons capable of emplacing barrier obstacle plans in the 

battalion. Commanders, staff officers, and noncommissioned 

officers must work together to maximize the platoons' outputs and to ensure the outputs are properly synchronized. All 

planning functions must be accomplished by the higher headquarters in direct proportion to the size of the staff available. 

The only acceptable end results are the issuance of an execution order to a platoon leader that requires obstacle siting as 

part of engagement area development (as outlined in FM 90-7) 

and disciplined compliance with executing squad and platoon obstacle-emplacement drills. 

Standard planning factors for platoon efforts, in terms of 

minefield frontage emplaced over time, are based on the 

understanding that an engineer platoon is responsible only 

for emplacing obstacles. It is no wonder that battalion staffs. 

as they trace the execution glide paths for the brigade and 

engineer battalion commanders, often see the platoons' performance fall behind more than 50 percent. Units must take 

several steps to fix this situation. They include but are not 

limited to the following: 

Brigade operation orders (OPORDs) must include 

directed obstacle and survivability efforts to he cxecuted 

before the battalion task force orders are issued. To start 

smart, task organi7.e engineers and issue detailed warning orders early. The brigade obstacle plan must include 

all directed obstacles (with sufficient details to execute) 

and brigade ohstacle belts, including intent graphics, priorities, and resources to be provided. The assistant brigade engineer must use these resource planning factors to 

determine the Class IV and Class V requirements to support the belt intens. 

Brigade orders must direct Class IVN point locations 

and amounts to be delivered from Corps. Details on Class 

IVIV point management responsibilities and augmentee 

manual labor must he directed in the main body of the 

brigade OPORD. Class IVIV point locations must have 

the following essentials: someone in charge with cngineer expertise, copies of the obstacle plan and orders, 

communications requirements, materiel handling equipment and labor. 

The brigade OPORD must direct the earliest possible 

time and place for maneuver commanders and supporting 

engineer leaders to link up and site battle and fighting 

positions, site-engagement areas, and target reference 

points. 

Units must consider a unit basic load of Class IVN materials to resource early emplacement efforts by engineer 

platoons as mission loads are brought forward. The engineer company and hattalion support platoon's hcavy 

cxpanded mobility tactical tmcks (HEMTTs) musl be 

ready to support the distribution of Class IVIV materials 

forward to the mine dumps. The key is to reduce the time 

engineer squads need to travel and load Class IVIV materials into their trailers. 

Staff discipline and practice orders drills, led by the executive officer in his role as the chief of staff, are critical to 

engineer success in owning the mobility and survivability battlefield operating systems for the brigade combat team. Brigades must take ownership of the fight and 

36 Engineer August 1996 
rid themselves of the notion that task forces and engineer 

companies should have the planning freedom to Yight 

their own fight." 

Engineer commanders must plan for the use of FASCAM 

both situationally and conventionally. The best planning 

considerations for VOLCANO are to complete conventional obstacles that were planned hut not executed prior 

to the defend time or to reinforce the conventional effort, 

as described in Chapter 7.FM 90-7. 

Platoons that do not emplace obstacles because they are 

coordinating unclear plans, running down materials, 

responding to faulty intelligence, or "Black on water are 

not adequately supported by their highcr level commanders 

and staffs. The platoon "lane" is to site and emplace obstacles. The battalion and company lane is to take care of all 

else so the platoons can do their work. 

The most important qualifier for successful engineer 

countermobility and sumivabilig operations is to properly 

synchronize obstacle effects where the brigade wants to kill 

the enemy and from what location. This task is critical! Failure to properly synchronize obstacle effects with maneuver 

and fire may not only render thousands of engineer countermohility man-hours useless but, more importantly, jeopardize the success of the mission. 

By addressing the above steps, units can maximize the use 

of their available time, forces, and materials to produce the 

most effective obstacles. 

Joint Readiness Training Center 

(JRTC) 

Engineer Command and Control 

at Brigade Level 

Ry Mrrjor Jim Brooks 

Recent improvements are noted in the integration of brigade engineers into the hrigade tactical operations center 

(TOC) and the brigade decision-making process. The brigade main engineer cell (BMEC) is typically manned 

by a brigade cngineer or assistant brigadc engineer (usually a 

first lieutenant who iormerly sewed as a platoon leader or a 

captain just out of the Engineer Officer Advanced Course), a 

borrowed vehicle with radios and a driver (not authorized on 

the modified table of organization and equipment [MTOE]), 

a few noncommissioned officers (operations, communications, or NBC), a digital nonsecure voice telephone (DNVT) 

for connectivity to the mobile subscriber equipment network, 

a tactical fax machine, and a notebook computer with a 

printer. Most brigade TOCs now allocate sufficient space for 

the brigade engineer to effectively set up appropriate map 

boards and ove~laysand to display current engineer battletracking charts. This personnel and equipment support is critical to sustained battle tracking, staff integration, and 24-

hour operations. 

Options. FM 5-7-30, Chapter 2, shows a sample organization for supporting engineer cells. When followed, this 

organization has proven to he more successful than others 

observed at the JRTC. Engineer companies on rotation here 

typically use one of two organizations for engineer command 

and control. Some units position a hrigade engineer in the 

brigade TOC, whilc the rest of the company headquarters 

section operates in a separate company command post (CP) 

within the brigade support area. Under this organization, the 

company CP tracks the current engineer situation and the brigade engineer plans future operations. Because challenges 

exist in communicating current and future operations 

between the BMEC and the company CP, the hrigade engineer is usually unable to keep the brigade commander and 

staff accurately informed on the current status of engineer 

operations. Also, task forcc engineers frequently are overtasked to report the same mission status to three nodes: the 

engineer company CP, the brigadc engineer cell, and the 

maneuver commander. 

Other, more successful, engineer companies divide the 

company headquarters to integrate engineers into both the 

BMEC in the brigade TOC and the brigade rear engineer cell 

(BREC) in the forward support battalion TOC. The company 

first sergeant establishes company trains in the brigade support area. The BMEC is manned and equipped with assets 

from the company CP and can track battles accurately and 

quickly. As a result, the brigade engineer can keep the hrigade commander and his staff informed on the current status 

of engineer operations, and he is available for better integration into the planning process and sustainment of 24-hour 

operations. This organization also reduces the reporting 

requirement nodes for battalion task force engineers. 

Boltom Line. Determine the command, control, and staJT 

integration requirements of the hrigade task force, then adjust 

the task organization of the available cngineer assets. For longterm solutions, submit MTOE changes for additional equipment and personnel in the brigade engineer cell. For the short 

term, given the current MTOE of light, airbornc, and air 

assault engineer companies, it is more efficient to Lake personnel and equipment fomcrly used to conduct current operations 

within the company CP and use them to strengthen the BMEC 

and the BREC in the brigade main and rear CPs. 
Shaping the Electronic Battlespace: 

The HEXJAM 

By Caprain Dale A. Kornuta and First Lieutenant Brian R. Dunmire 

ngineers fight obstacles! Webster defines 

obstacles as something, material or nonmaterial, that stands in the way of literal or 

figurative progress. For cngineers, obstacles are 

the task force defense-mines and wire. While 

not very exciting, they are very effective when 

properly integrated. Ttey were responsible for 

20 percent of tank losses in World War 11. 

Now engineers have discovered a new obstacle: the hand-emplaced expendable jammer 

(HEXJAM). It can jam the complete spectrum of 

frequency-modulated (FM) radios, both singlechannel and frequency-hopping! . . The HEXJAM is known in the militaq intel- , 

ligence (MI) community as a barrage jammer. 

Since the MI branch is no longer the proponent 

for hand-emplaced jammers, MI battalions may 

transfer these devices to engineer units. I 

History I 

FORSCOM fielded the HEXlAM as an 

electronic warfare communications device 

to divisional and corps MI units about 10 

years ago. As a one-time issue, Class IX expendable item, accountability for thc HEXJAM is 

maintained at the company level. This means 

that many MI S4s or property book officers may 

not know they exist. 

There are two problems concerning groundhased jammers: 

To overpower enemy radios, friendly jammers must create a huge radio signature that 

is easily detected by enemy direction-finding 

equipment. The large signature makes thcm 

artillery magnets, since no enemy commander will toleratc disruptions in his communications. 

To jam an enemy's communications, we 

must know his radio frequency. We must The hand-emplaced expendable jammer (HEXJAM) is a lunch-boxdetermine when to jam and then reacquire sized broad-band communications mine. 

38 Engineer August 1996 
HEXJAM Characteristics 

Can be set up in 3 minutes. 

Jams all former Soviet bloc radio frequencies; severely restricts radios used by U.S. and NATO forces. 

Operates when buried up to, but not over, the top of the system. 

Range (classified information). 

WARNING: A nonhazardous, nonreversible, self-disabling capability prevents unauthorized reuse. Use only the 

training setting; the operational setting activates the self-destruct feature. 

Activated by a timer, with up to 29.9 hours delay. 

Jams continuously for 2 hours with one SINCGARS battery or for 4 hours with an external adapter and two 

SINCGARS batteries. 

Can be command activated by shunting wires attached to mounting posts (does not require a blasting machine). 

Has a shelf life of more than 10 years without batteries installed. 

Operates in blackout condiions; has no visual or audio signature. 

Smaller and lighter than an M21 mine, it is made by Fairfield Westonlschlumberger, Model No. 4286-031. It uses a 

BA-5590 battery. 

No maintenance actions are authorized. A built-in test check, which includes battery installation, may be exercised 

at any level; however, it is performed primarily by deployment forces (engineers). 

Requires minimal training to operate (instructions are printed on the device). 

the target after jamming. This limits the number of nets 

that a unit can attack. 

Because the MI jamming mission is operational and strategic, a vacuum is created at the tactical level. The HEXJAM 

fills that vacuum, but the MI community does not have-and 

does not intend to have-personnel operating where tactical 

operations occur. Engineers do, and can fill that gap. 

Future 

We must train young engineers to attack the battlefield-notjust the ground-by making them aware 

of new technologies in our arsenal, such as the 

wide area mine (WAM), the hush flare, and the HEXJAM. 

The WAM destroys low-flying aircraft and helicopters. The 

hush flare (a directional ground flare) prevents the enemy 

from using thermal and passive night sights. The HEXJAM 

denies the enemy the FM portion of the electromagnetic 

spectrum. 

Obstacles in the electromagnetic spectrum (such as 

radios; microwaves; global positioning system receivers; 

and laser, visual, and thennal sights) must be part of the 

ground that we shape. We engineers must not restrict ourselves to destroying vehicles and personnel but concentrate 

on achieving the commander's intent. Disrupting the enemy's 

command and control slows or desynchronizes his maneuver, 

thereby supporting the killing systems of the task force. Disrupting the enemy's motorized rifle company or battalion 

while it conducts breaching operations can have a ripple 

effect reaching all the way up to regimental headquarters. 

Such disruptions may force him to commit follow-on forces 

early to make up for the forces destroyed in the breach. 

Jam Field 

Ajam field is any HEXJAM or group of HEXJAMs that 

deny the enemy effective communications on a particular piece of terrain. A jam field is difficult to 

detect. The enemy hears no static while his equipment is 

being jammed but clearly hears friendly vehicles nearby. 

Since jamming only affects reception, everyone outside the 

jam field can hear vehicles within the field. Therefore, 

enemy units do not realize they are being jammed even 

though they cannot communicate with elements of their force 

at the most critical juncture in their operation. 

If the enemy's direction-finding systems find the jammers, 

they can only report that fact, because the standard opposing 

force (OPFOR) tactic is to use heavy artillery or rocket 

launchers to destroy jammers. His problem now is that the 

jammers are "in the wire" with his forces. 

The HEXJAM's small size and dclayed activation make it 

a flexible munition. Its disrupting effect is truly nondiscriminatory, affecting engineer, artillery, and maneuver personnel. 

Engineers in the breach-or one tcmain feature short of the 

obstacle-lose their communications. Forward observers 

supporting the breach experience disruptions. The assault 

force awaiting the breach and the support-by-fire team that 

never gets the call to mass or shift fires are also affected. 
Figure 1. OPFOR Deliberate Breach Deployment 

O OPFOR Tank 

LEGEND 

When the enemy is in the defense, HEXJAMs pushed forward with the scouts isolate security forces, thereby dismpting the entire enemy security zone. 

Operations 

Alpha Company, 588th Engineer Battalion, Fort Hood, 

Texas, uscd the HEXJAM during recent training. The 

following examples typify the effects the HEXJAM 

produced on the battlefield. 

Action. Companylteam lanes were conducted in the 

I-kilometer-wide avenue of approach south of Bench Mark 

333 (Figure 1). The ground the maneuver commander chose 

for his defense was bound by a steep, wooded mesa on the 

north and forested, low ground on the south. The jam field 

was placed forward of the main defensive belt in the low 

ground and covered by the keyhole tank on the extreme north 

of the main defensive position. 

The OPFOR tank company maneuvered to conduct a 

deliberate breach. The support force deployed on the 

40 Engineer 

intervisibility line south of Bench Mark 333 and established 

a support-by-fire position. The jam field was activated using 

the time-delay function, which allowed the engineers to clear 

the battlefield hefore the direct-fire engagement. 

The support force skirted the low, vegetated ground in the 

south and the OPFOR commander moved with his breach 

force of four plow tanks into an attack position within the 

jam field. The attack stalled for 10minutes while the OPFOR 

commander attempted to regain communication with his platoons. In the absence of orders, the security force worked the 

low ground to the south, off the map and out of the battle. 

The blue force (BLUEFOR) keyhole tank then annihilated all 

the plow tanks in a short, one-sided fire fight (Figure 2). 

Eventually, based on the platoon leader's understanding of 

the commander's intent, thc security force conducted a 

desynchronized platoon attack (Figure 3, page 41). 

Effects. The OPFOR commander and plow tanks were 

effectively removed irom the fight, desynchronizing the 

attack. The commander never realized he was being jammed 

because he maintained constant communication with his 

wing tank even though he lost communication with all of his 

Augusr 1996 
BLUFORTank 

0 OPFORTanh 

a .,,.Id 

JAM Field 

Figure 3. OPFOR Desynchonized Assault 

LEGEND 

platoons. The security force passed through the jam field 

with little effect, because it was not assigned a critical mission at the location of the jam field. The jam field was covered with fires, allowing it to produce the maximum effect. 

Action. During Task Force Lane's offensive operations, 

scouts from the 3-67 Armored Battalion, Fort Hood, placed 

HEXJAMs near vacant enemy fighting positions before the 

positions were occupied. With less than 10 minutes of 

instruction, the scouts effectively employed the HEXJAMs. 

The devices were activated using the time-delay function 

based on line of departure plus movement time. 

Effects. Tank commanders were observed dismounting 

to develop hasty hand and arm signals, which became their 

only means of communication during the battle. Lacking 

radio communications, the tanks could not coordinate direct 

fires. Their higher headquarters could not effectively control 

them nor could they carry out the plan for indirect fires, since 

they could not hcar their fire support officer This led to 

destruction of the tanks and desynchronization of the 

OPFOR ddcnsive fight. 

Strengths 

The HEXJAM is an inexpensive, simple, and effective 

tool that has a tremendous effect during training exercises. Because thcre are no open frequencies to jump 

to. the broad-band jamming makes conventional antijam 

techniques ineffective. It can he set up in 3 minutes, requires 

minimal training, and is capable of continuous jamming 

operations for a period of 2 hours with one single-channel, 

ground-to-air radio system (SINCGARS) battely. The HEXJAM is nonhazardous and nonreversible and has a self-disabling capability which prevents unauthorized reuse by the 

enemy. It can be activated by a timer with up to 29.9 hours of 

delay (see chart on page 39). The command activation y stem is accomplished hy shunting ordinary wire. Many HEXJAMS can be "daisy chained" together. The effective area of 

the HEXJAM indicates the capabilities of the next generation 

of mines heing fielded. 

Limitations 

ike any minefield, the HEXJAM must he integrated 

into the scheme of maneuver. Most importantly, the 

jam field must be placed where the enemy needs tu 

communicate via FM radio. Integrating engineers into the 

S2's intelligence preparation of the battlefield (showing the 

enemy's decision pojnts) is critical to the successful emplacement of the HEXJAM. 

Co~n~nunicationsmineiields will require special rules of 

engagement or obstacle restrictions, such as in observer/controller locations. Its short operarional time requires excellent 

intelligence on the enemy time line or conirnand detonation. 

The batteries required for the HEXJAM must be requested 

through the task force several months before a training exercise. The new rechargeable SINCGARS batteries will mitigate this drawback somcwhat. 

The HEXJAM was designed to target potential enemy 

radios. As a possible friendly antijam TIT (tactic, technique, 

and procedure), single-channel antijam frequencies are available at the top of the FM radio spectrum. 
bi 

0 

D>, 

1 - a 

c. 

0 

- ~ ~- -, - ~-

. . ~~ - p~ i.".t5"*ipm.w . ~~L--~-p-~ . ~-p -

. . 1

The HEXJAM works by denying the enemy the FM portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. 

The HEXJAM is no longer in the supply system. It is 

available from the Delta Company (General Suppon) or the 

Long Range Surveillance Company of any military intelligence battalion that has had continuous service since 1985. 

This dcvicc is out of the system but not "out of snpply." The 

588th Engineer Battalion has obtained 22 HEXJAMs. Now 

each line company can deny the enetny significant portions 

of the engagement area. 

Thc hand-emplaced jammer is not a sensitive itan or u 

classified device, but its range and power output are classified "confidential." The exact specifications are published in 

Training Circular 34-98, Expendable Jammerr (U), 29 May 

1984 (a confidential document). This pamphlet, which offers 

excellent lTPs for engineers, is available at the same units 

where the HEXJAMs are obtained. 

Conclusion 

he effect of denying the enemy communications on a 

particular piece of ground is similar to blowing a track 

to disrupt his inmiation. The usefulness of this 

weapon is limited only by the imagination of the commander, 

the S2 who knows the location of the enemy's decision 

points, and thc cngineer or scout who emplaces tho device. 

The HEXJAM must he added to the task force engineer's 

equipment. Although current supplics of HEXJ.4Ms are adequate for training units in peacetime, they are not adequate 

for wartime needs. 

ne strengths and limitations of the HEXJAM must he 

developed through the normal training cycle so we can 

42 Engineer 

employ them to better defend ourselves from similar devices 

fielded by adversaries. In the Force XXI era, this simple, 

inex~ensive combat multi~lier will hel~ ensure that the Army 

achieves success on the modern battlefield. Y 

Endnote: 

'The memorandum authorizing engineers to ohtam HEXJAMS from MI units is on file at the Directorates of Battle 

Lab Support and Combat Developments, U.S. Army Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 

Captain Dale A. Kornuta is the Assistant S3 of the 588th 

Engineer Barrulion, Forr Hood, Trxas. Previous assignmerirs 

include brigade engineer and A Company commander: 588th 

Engineer Battalion: XO and detachmcnr conrmandes 55th 

Medium Girder Bridge Company, Fort Hood. He is a graduate of California State Universir). Fullerton. 

Firsr Lieurenanr Brian R Dunniir~ is the SZ, 1-10 Cavalry 

Squadron, 4th Infantry Division (M),Fort ilond. Texus. Previo~rs as.signmenrs inclicde XO of D/104th Military Intelligence Batralioi~; collecriori and jomming platoon leade~ D/ 

522d Military Intelligence Battalion; assistant S2, 1st Brigade, 2d Armored Division, all at Fort Hood. He is a gradilate of rhe Militnv Intelligence Officer Basic Course und rhe 

Airborne School and holds a degreefrom Pennsylvania State 

Universir): 

Send your ideas about shaping tactics and techniques of 

future engineers to CPT Bryan Green, the Battle Lab Integration Officer, (573) 563-7355 or DSN 676-7155. 

August 1996 
~ 

This article builds on the informarion contained in "Avoiding an Enfiineer's Nightmare: The Mine-Clearing Line Charge 

JMICLICJ," Engineer; December 1994, pages 18-24. 

Maintaining the MICLIC 


By Captain Joe Birchmeier; Sergeant First Class Terry Purdin, 

and Sergeant First Class Ted Roberts 

The Mine-Clearing Line Charge (MICLIC) is a critical 

mobility asset--even with its limitations. Engineers 

use it to clear a path through obstacles without having 

to dismount. 

The following information will help engineer units reduce 

or eliminate some common problems associated with the 

MICLIC. Units should follow these techniques and procedures in conjunction with those in Technical Manual (TM) 

9-1375-215-14&P when performing maintenance or training 

on the MICLIC system. 

Most of the MICLIC problems observed at the National 

Training Center (NTC) are attributed to- 

* Poor unit maintenance. 

A lack of system knowledge at both the soldier and the 

leader level. 

Poor readiness rates occur in units that do not maintain 

the complete system. Units have arrived at the NTC with 

launchers or trailers that were "up" to -10 standards; however, the system was "down" due to a faulty firing cable. A 

weakness of TM 9-1375-215-14&P is that it does not require 

a check of the complete system during the preventive maintenance checks and services (PMCS). 

Deficiencies in leaderlsoldier knowledge of the system 

result from insufficient training. Because most units do not 

fire the line charge often and lack a conlplete training aid, 

they arrive a[ the NTC improperly trained in MICLIC opera. 

tions. The end result is long MlCLlC preparation times and 

high misfire rates 

PMCS of Launcher 

Problem. TM 91375-2LS-I4&P does not provide enough 

delail about the U-bolts that attach the launct~er to the trailer 

or the arrnored vehicle-launched MICLIC (AVLM) mount. 

Marly ur~its arrive at the NTC to fire live line charges with 

U-bolts missing from the launcher. 

Solution. The launcher must he secured with four 

U-bolts. If any U-bolts arc missing or loose, consider the system nonmission capable. 

Problem. Some units conduct a PMCS of the MlCLlC 

system without checking the M34 blasting machine. Some 

units anive at the NTC with only one operational M34. 

Solution. Two M34 blasting machines should be available 

when the MICLIC is operated. Check the M34s with a 

August 1996 

Figure 1 

multimeter. To be used with the the M34s must 

P ~ ~ 222 ~ "its~ DC. ~ " ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 

Problem. Units do not check the firing cable and safety 

switch for continuitv when thev conduct a PMCS of the 

MICLIC without a line charge or rocket. 

Solution. Use the M5l test set and a 3-inch piece of communications wire with the ends stripped. Connect the firing 

cablc to the Jl plug (Figure I) on the safety switch. Attach the 

selector switch to the other end of the firing cable. Taking the 

?-inch piece of conimunications wire and the PI cable. jump 

the pin marked "A" and the pin marked "B" (Figure 1). This 

check replicates a line charge and will check both the firing 

cable and the safety switch. 

Note: If a lighr does nor come on when the launcher arm 

is in the raised position, test the safety switch. If the safetj 

switch is operational, thefiring cahle is defective. 

Problem. When checking the firing cable, a light appears 

when the launcher arm is in the lowered position; or therc is no 

light when the launcher ann is in the raised position. 

Engineer 43 
To ~klcmrswtW To contaherjunetion 

assembly. DWG. No. box assembly. DWG. 

82asO52A0800(P2) NO. 5854643 (P) 

n Mrlng diagram n 

Figure 2 

Solution. Using a multimeter, check the safety switch. 

Disconnect the firing cable from the Jl plug on the safety 

switch (Figure 1). Look at the pin inside the J1 plug and 

identify the A, B, C, and D pins. Do the same on the electrical plug (PI) that hangs from the safety switch. Set the multimeter for OHMS to check for continuity or a closed circuit. 

Insert the leads from the multimeter into the A pins at the J1 

and PI plugs. When the launcher rail is in the lowered position, there should be an open circuit. Repeat the procedure 

for pins B, C, and D. Only pin C should have continuity. 

With the launcher arm in the raised position, there should be 

continuity in pins A, B, and C. Pin D is not used (Figure 2). 

Note: ifthere is continuity in pins A and B in the lowered 

position, or if there is no rontinuiQ in pins A and B in the 

raised position, refer to TM 9-1375-215-14&P (pages 5-8) 9 ,. ... ,. .. . . ."., ? . .. , . . ana aa~nsr me rorler swrrcn rever IT me sarery -. swzrcn cnecKs 

orct after adjustment, recheck thejiring cable for continuity 

Problem. The line charge is not properly secured to the 

trailer or the AVLM. 

Solution. For the trailcr-mounted MICLIC, the line 

charge must he connected to the trailer with four lurnbuckles 

and locking nuts. Tighten the turnbuckles, but allow threads 

to show on the inside of each end. Then tighten the locking 

nuts to ensure that the turnbuckle will not unthread itself. 

Use two chains and binders for the AVLM. Pull the hook and 

chain through the rear line charge tie-down and attach the 

huok to the chain approximately 6 to 8 inches from the 

charge tie-down (Figure 3). Route the chain through the rear 

launcher tie-down to the front launcher tie-down, up through 

the front line charge tie-down, and attach the hook approximately 6 to 8 inches from the charge tie-down. Install the 

hinder under the center and ensure that the binder handle is 

facing rearward. After the binder is locked, secure the binder 

handle with tape. Repeat these steps for the other side of 

the charge. 

Setting Up the Line Charge and Rocket 

Problem. The MICLIC line charges sink due to settling, 

which may cause lhem to deploy erratically andlor misfire. 

Solution. Inspect the line charge as soon as it is opened. 

The line charge should be flush with the sides of the container. 

If it sinks more than 1 112 inches, do not use it. Return the line 

charge to the ammunition supply point for inspection. 

Figure 3 

August 1996 
Electrical wires Paper masking tape 

Figure 4 

Problem. TM 9-1375.215-14&P does not describe how complete MICLIC system is combat-ready. The checklists 

to ensure that the arming cable will not cut the firing wire at do not rcplace the PMCS in TM 9-1375-215-14&P. 

the base of the fuze 

Solution. As pan of each MICLIC preparation, pull back Ih. n.rl.\n *not-frllm thn ,,inn ,.-hln ..;Ap -6 .LO f,..n ?,.".^ PCCIPCI Checklist 

LVL. r.11611 LllC CICCYILLII WLlrD VII "1G a,"= UppYIIIC UIC ',1111111& 

wire and neatly tape them with paper masking tape (Figure 4). 

Return the nylon sock to its original position. 

Problem. The rocket bridle cable slips out of the cable 

sheath. 

Solution. The improved method of taping the rocket bridle cable to the launcher rail is to tape the bridle in two 

places-just to the iront and just to the rear of the cable 

sheath. Use electrical tape (Figure 5) to keep the bridle cable 

from moving back and forth. Ensure that the bridle forms an 

"S" shape when it is laid on top of the charge and connected. 

Problem. Some rockets come unlocked, due to excessive 

stress on the launcher rail, while traveling across rough terrain with the rocket attached to theMICLIC launcher. 

Solution. Ensure that the rocket locking mechanism locks 

the rocket in place. Always travel with the ball-lock pins in 

the LOCK position. To keep the rocket secure, put some 

packing material from the rocket shipping container under 

the head of the rocket. Use a ratchet strap to secure the 

launcher rail with the rocket to the launcher. 

Note: The strap must go over the top of the 

luuncher rail, not just over the rocket, to prevent 

undire stress on the rocket. 

Problem. Units travel at excessive speeds 

over rough terrain. Several line charge misfires at 

the NTC may have been caused when the charges 

shifted in the container before they were fired. 

Solution. For trailer-mounted MICLICs. 

maintain speeds of 15 mph or less on improved 

trails and 10 mph or less when traveling crosscountq; the top speed for the AVLM is 30 mph. 

Leaders must plan for the low speeds and coordinate with their supported maneuver units. 

Checking the System 

The following checklists for precornbat checks 

(PCCs) and precombat inspections (PCIs) were 

developed to help leaders ensure that the 

.C"" "1, A "'LO "A, ,,LC LUL,,"'CU pLIJUCILILI LLULIL, ,n, C, 

or the AVLM. 

Perform PMCS on the launcher. 

Notes: 

(1) On a trailer corlfigrrration, the lniincher is connected 

to the trailer wrrh four U-bolts. The line charge container is 

fnsrened with two 6-inch turnbuckles in front and nvo 12-

inch turnbirckles in the rear 

(2) On the AVLM configuration, the launcher is connected 

with two U-bolts bt the rear and fwo modified U-boltson the 

center 1-beam. Chain and binders are used to secure the line 

charge container. The binders must ,face rearward when 

closed; secure the binder to the chain with 100-mph rape. 

Start the inspection at the top of the line charge: 

Ensure that the rocket is tied down properly and locked 

into position. 

Note: The tie-down straps must be attached to all four 

hand blobs on the rocket rail guide. 

(Nme: Cable under 

Figure 5 

Augiist 1996 Engineer 45 
Give the ball-lock pin for the rocket motor to the crew or 

secure it to the rocket motor. 

Ensure that both bridle cables behind the sheath have an 

18-inch loop in place. 

Lay the bridle cables forward of the sheath on top of the 

line charge and configure them in an S-curve pattern. 

Place the bridle cables in the sheaths on both sides of the 

launcher and secure the cables with electrical tape. 

Pull back the nylon sock from the aresting cable fuze 

connector and inspect the connector. 

Note: The electrical firing wire must be secured to the 

nylon rope opposite the arming wire using ONLY paper 

mnsking tape. Do nor tape the arming wire. 

Move to the rear of the MICLIC launcher : 

Connect the safety switch cable to the tub of the line 

charge. 

Note: Before beginning the continuity check, shunt the 

rocker receptacle with either a shunt plug or a jump receptacle with a 3-inch piece of communications wire. 

* Verify that the hydraulic cylinder will hold from 3200 to 

3500 psi and that the control valve is set to the pressure 

accumulator. 

Engage the detents. 

Ensure that the two ball-lock pins are in place on the rail. 

Note: The ball-lock pins must be placed in the RAISE 

position; however; when traveling, the pins must be in the 

LOCK position. 

Mount and connect all cables. 

Move to the location where the control box will be fired. 

Verify the continuity check. 

Notes: 

(1) With the rocket in the down position, set the electrical 

control box selector switch to SAFIYTEST; hook up the MS1 

rest set and depress the handle; the system should show a 

light. The sy.stem shorrld not sirow a light when the selector 

switch is set on ROCKET or CHARGE. Va light is observed 

on the ROCKET or CHARGE srtting, stop and norib the unit 

maintenance section. 

(2) Raise the rocketfrom the cor~rrolbox andobserve ifir 

locks into position. Ensure that white marks on the inner 

launcher rail supports are visible birt have not risen high 

enough for the vertical white mark.! (T-srrips) to be seen 

above the outer lower launcher rail supports. Move the 

selector switch on the control box to ROCKET and depress 

the handle of the M51. You shoirld see a light on the test set. 

Move the selector switch to CHARGE and again you should 

see a light. 

Place the protective cover on the line charge. 

Rehearse the misfire and evacuation drills. 

Prepare for Movement 

Position the electrical control box so that it receives maximum protection yet affords quick access. 

Secure the cable for travel. This is especially important 

when using APCs with trailers. 

Note: The 60-foot cable frequently is damaged when it 

falls befween the APC and the trailer Run the cable so that it 

does not interfere with tmop reaction to enemy contact. For 

example, ensure that the cable will not be severed when 

troop hatches are closed during an indirect-fire attack. 

Place packing material from the rocket shipping container between the line charge and the rocket. Secure 

with a cargo strap. 

Note: The strap will extend from one side of the launcher 

over the rocket and guide rail. Secure the strap to the other 

side of the launcher 

Put the protective cover in place and check the line 

charge once more. 

Notes: 

(1)The bridle cable must be in the S-curve pattern: the 

protective cover must not interfpre with thefiring operation. 

(2) The bridle cables must be securedproperly. 

(3)The rocket ball-lockpin must be attached to the rocket 

or be in the hands of the crew. 

Insert the launcher rail hall-lock pins in the lock position. 

If towing the MICLIC, secure the trailer to the APC 

When towing the MICLIC, maintain speeds of 15 mph or 

less on improved trails and 10 mph or less when traveling 

cross-country. The speed for an AVLM should be no 

greater than 30 mph. 

Note: Excessive speed may require that the MICLIC 

spend more time at the assault position rather than moving 

quickly forward tofire. 

Prepare for Firing 

The MICLlC must be prepared for firing before it is 

moved fonvard for deployment. This preparation time will 

minimize soldiers' exposurc to enemy contact. 

Remove the ratchet strap and packing material. 

Remove the ball-lock pins from the LOCK position and 

insert them in the RAISE position slots. 

Pump the hydraulic cylinder until the pressure gauge 

indicates between 3200 and 3500 psi. Then set the control valve to thePRESSURE ACCUMULATOR position. 

Attach the rocket receptacle cable to the tub. 

Ensure that the deterlts are in the down position. 

Place the ball-lock pin in the rocket head. 

Move the sy stem fonvard to fire 
Table 1. Recommended BOM for MlCLlC Operations 

NSN .. Nomenclature 

6625-01-131-3586 D alla nu. Irllelcr lII~<el I 

7510-00-198-5831 ~a~e, masking (roil) ' 1 

5975-00-074-2072 Strap, tie-down 50 

5970-00686-9151 Tape, electrical (roll) 1 

4925-00-999-3454 Test set (blasting cap) M51 1 

1375-00-567-0223 Blasting machine. M34 2 

1670-00-725-1437 Tie-down, cargo 1 

(AVLM Only) 

Steel Pole Cheater pole (for binders) 1 

(Do not use an aluminumpole!) 

Tape, 100 mph (for bindem) (roll) 1 

NOTE: The AVLM is considered one system. 

References : TM 9-2320-205-14&P M200A1 Trailer 

TM 9-1375-215-148P wlchange #I MlCLlC 

TB 43-0001-36-5 Equipment lmprovemenf Report 

Table 2. Recommended PLL Stockage 

"NSN " Nomenclature Quantity 

5306-01-226-8720 Bolt, U- 4 

5310-00-491-5895 - Washer, flat 8 

5310-00-937-0453 - Washer, lock 8 

5310-00-764-6609 - Nut, hex 8 

6150-01-3484036 Cable assembly,power: W5 1 

6150-01-347-8428 Cable assembly, power: W3 60-fool 1 

4320-01-0724918 Pumping unit, hydraulic, hand 1 

1055-01-316-7764 - Handle, pump 2 

3040-01-218-6145 Accumulator, hydraulic 1 

5340-01-230-0093 Pin, quick release 2 

5930-01-2184673 Switch. safety, firing 1 

4730-01-342-0587 Cover. protective, racket launcher 1 

4730-01-3454083 - Shock cord 8 

5340-01-248-7962 Turnbuckle: 1.OO x 6 2' 

5340-01-249-0589 Turnbuckle: 1.00 x 12 2' 

5305-00-9474354 Bolt. hex (Grade 8) 4 " 

3990.00-171-9775 Load binder 4 " 

4010-00-171-4426 Chain, 14-foot 4 " 

5310-01-284-6395 Beveledwasher. 1-inch diameter 6 " 

5310-01-317-0480 Beveledwasher, 3/4 -inch diameler 8" 

5310-01-373-6951 Beveledwasher. 518-inch diameter 8 " 

5310-00499-3333 Nut, hex, self-locking 24 " 

NOTE: For trailer configurationonly. 

"For AVLM configuration only. 

Simultaneously give the authority to fire both the rocket 

and the line charge. 

Notes: 

(I)Valuable time is taken from, or added to, breach rime 

by units trying to makefiring the rocket andfiring the charge 

a two-part command. Recommend that commarlders give 

authoriry to fire both the rocket and the line charge when 

they order the emplacing engineer to moveforward from an 

as.caultposition. 

(2) A11 supporting units in the battlefield nust be preparedfor the safety standoff when the line charge detonates. 

Table 1 gives a suggested bill of materials (BOM) for 

MICLIC setup. Table 2 provides a suggested prescribed load 

list (PLL) for MICLIC operations. 

Commander's Challenge 

With the information in this article and the applicable technical manual, the commander can ensure that his MICLICs are 

always ready for employment ina combat environment. (Refer 

also to Enginee~December 1994. page 18.) Your challenge is 

to instill this knowledge in the leaders and soldiers responsible 

for this weapon system. Stay abreast of all current guidance 

involving the MICLIC and conduct appropriate inspections to 

ensure the maintenance status and mission capability of this 

valuable combined arms breaching asset. Y 

CPT Birchmeie~SFC Purdin, and SFC Roberis are 

assigned to Operations Group at the National Training 

Center; Fort Irwin, California They are members of the 

Sidewinder 12 Team, workins as company/platoon trainers. 

August 1996 Engineer 47 
~ 

ENGINEER UPDATE 


Commercial numbers are (573) 563-uxxx and Defense System Network (DSN) numbers are 676-xxxx unless othetwise noted. 

Department of Training and Doctrine (DOTD) 

Director Welcomed. We welcomed our new director, 

Lieutenant Colonel Robert Kirsch, in May 1996. He previously 

served as executive officer for the U.S. Army Engineer Center. LTC Kirsch may be reached at -4111. 

Professional Reading List Revised. The Engineer Center's recently revised Professional Reading List provides a 

short description of almost 100 books on leadership, the 

operational level of war, and combat operations at the tactical 

level. There is a separate listing of books on the history of 

Army engineers. To receive copies of these lists or to suggest 

changes to them, write to Dr. Larry Roberts. U.S. Army Engineer Center, ATN: ATZT-H, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 

65473. POC is Larry Roberts, -6109. 

and Basic Officer 

courses (BNCOCs) On l6July, TRADOC 

approved a plan to consolidate the Separate 128 and 12F 

BNCOCs. NCOs who previously were selected to attend the 

two courses now will attend a single 9-week course that integrates skills from both MOSs. ~ffective 1 October 1996, only 

promotable sergeants will be permitted to attend. Class starts 

for FY97 are: Class 1-97, 16 October 1996; Class 2-97, 6 

January 1997; Class 3-97, 17 March 1997; Class 501.97, 22 

May 1997; and Class 4-97, 1 August 1997. POC is SFC 

Lawrence B. Marks, -4125. 

Department of Tactics, Leadership, and 

Engineering 

Engineer Officer fEoAC). The EOAC 

curriculum and student handbook are available on the lnternet. Information also is available about the University of 

Missouri-Rolla master's degree program and the Engineer in 

Training and Professional Engineer examinations. The EOAC 

page is linked to Fort ~eonard Wood's Home Page. Direct 

links in these documents connect the user with an instructor 

at the Engineer School who can answer questions. POC is 

CPT Kurt Norem, -5764. 

Engineer Personnel Proponency Office (EPPO) 

Consolidation of MOSs 81C and 810 Approved. On 14 

May 1996, the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel approved consolidation of MOS 81C (Cartographer) and 

8lQ (Terrain Analyst) into MOS 81T (Topographic Analyst). 

Consolidated BNCOC training will begin in January 1997; 

consolidated advanced individual training (AiT) Will begin in 

July 1997. 

To facilitate reclassification, the Engineer School is finalizing a transition plan that identifies all tasks in which soldiers 

must demonstrate proficiency. The approved plan will be distributed by September 1996. Soldiers will have until August 

2000 to complete transition training through supervised onthe-job training or attendance at the consolidated AIT 

BNCOC, POC isSFC ~ h ~ ~-4087 ~ h ~~ , d

Directorate of Combat Developments (DCD) 

Polygonal-Based Terrain in the Corps Battle Sirnulator (CBS). The Jet Propulsion Lab is testing a new version of 

the CBS. The new CBS leaps from the hexagonal-based terrain grid to a more robust and flexible polygonal terrain grid. A 

major drawback to the hex-based terrain was that players 

could only emplace obstacles on the hex edge, and the 

obstacles had to extend the lenath - of the edae. The new ter- " 

rain model allows players to emplace obstacles at doctrinal 

lengths anywhere on the map. An operational test will be conducted at Fort Leavenworth in August. The first planned exercise usino the new technoloav is Prairie Warrior 97. ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

scheduledfor May 1997, POC isEPTeill id^^^, -4084, 

Engineer Branch Safety Office 

Demolitions Accidents. Serious demolitions accidents to 

soldiers during the period September 1991 through June 

1996 resulted in three fatalities and three permanent disabilities. All of these accidents resulted from a failure to follow 

procedures or a failure to maintain a minimum safe distance, 

as described in AR 385-63 and FM 5-250. Failure to follow 

procedures for steel-cutting charges (AR 385-63 and FM 5- 

250) contributed to two of the engineer accidents (one fatality 

and one permanent disability). A training packet called "Demolitions certification" is available from the ~~~i~~~~school, 

TO ~. receive ~. cooies. .7 .., call --~~ SFC - - Francisco

~ .~ .at .~.(573) ~~6.0071or \-. -, 

DSN 581-0071, POC is paul ~ ~ ~-4025, i ~ k ~ ,

News and Notes 

60-Kilowatt (kw) Generator Operation and Repair 

Video. A team effort between Headquarters, U.S. Army Combined Arms Support Command Training Directorate (Fort 

Lee, Virginia) and the Ordnance Center and School (Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland) has produced the video 

"Operation and Setup of the 60-kw Tactical Quiet Generator." 

The video is intended to help reduce damage to the generator 

sets. The video, TVT 9-312. PIN No. 710844DA, is available 

through local Training Support Centers (TSCs). POC is Ed 

Starnes, (410) 278-2415. 

48 Engineer Augusf 1996 
- :L BRIDGE THE GAP 


By Command Sergeant Major Julius 6.Nutter 

U.S.Army Engineer School 

Engineer Force Protection 

ur regiment has come a long way in its ability to successfully integrate risk management into training 

and battlefield operating systems. The number of 

accidents in fiscal year 1995, shown below, reflects our 

success. 

Engineer Accident Summary 

Cost 

Fiscal Yea No. Accichk No. FaElities @dk?ns) 

93 479 9 $9.7 

Despite the overall improvement, however, a review of 

recent training accidents shows a common factor: ineffective risk management. 

Risk management is a logic-based, common-sense 

approach to making calculated decisions regarding human, 

materiel, and environmental factors before, during, and 

after every training mission. It enables leaders to maximize 

their training and operational capabilities while minimizing 

the risks to soldiers. Risk management is a five-step process that requires all leaders to- 

.Identify hazards. 


.Assess the risk of each hazard 


Make decisions and develop controls. 

Implement controls. 

Supervise. 

A recent accident involving an M21 antitank mine seriously injured two engineer soldiers. The following information is provided to remind engineer leaders about the 

restrictions for live-mine training: 

. 	Training is allowed using M15, M16, MI9 and M21 

mines. 

No training is allowed with live MI4 mines. 

-	 All approved mines will be armedldisarrned no more 

than 25 iterations per mine. 

- No trip wires or booby traps will be used. 

. Use of tilt rods with live mines is prohibited. 

-	 Training with MI6 antipersonnel mines must be conducted 

with the positive safety pin remaining in the M605 fuze. 

.	No pre-1957 fuzes are allowed in training with the MI6 

antipersonnel mine. 

+ All arming and disarming will be conducted in the prone 

position. 

.	Live-mine training and simulator training will not take 

place concurrently at the same location to preclude a 

live mine from being mistaken for an inert mine. 

Restrictions for live-mine training are contained in the following messages and DA Pamphlet: HQDA, DAMO-TRI 

DACS-SF, 141237, Dec 90, subject: Live Mine Training; 

HQDA, DAMO-TRO, 1518352, Apr 96, subject: Ammunition Prohibited From Use During Training; and in DA PAM 

350-38, Standards in Weapons Training. FM 20-32, Mine/ 

Countermine Operations, provides additional guidance. A 

basic risk assessment for each of the abovemines is in 

Appendix E of FM 20-32. Units must adapt these risk 

assessments to account for local conditions. 

Human error is responsible for 80 percent of all accidents to Army personnel, including both ground and aviation operations. Accident-causing mistakes occur for a 

number of reasons. Sometimes the individual who makes 

the mistake is at fault, and sometimes it is the individual's 

unit or higher command that is at fault because they failed 

to provide adequate training, guidance, or supervision. 

The "Next Accident AssessmenY' is a good tool all leaders should use to promote accident prevention. It is 

included in two booklets available at your local safety office 

and at the U.S. Army Safety Center at Fort Leonard Wood 

(Risk Management Reference Guide & Coursebook, July 

1993; and Leader's Guide to Force Protection Through Risk 

Management, October 1995.) The risk assessment is 

based on the top five reasons for human-error accidents in 

both ground and aviation operations over the last 10 years. 

These reasons involve self-discipline, leadership, training. 

standards, and support. 

Safety begins with every soldier. Training safely does not 

mean unrealistic training. Units can execute realistic training to standards that is challenging and fun. But to train 

safely, leaders must be aware of the potential hazards and 

take sensible precaulions. 

Remember, no single tool or technique can completely 

protect the regiment. Additionally, tactics, techniques, and 

procedures applied without disciplined execution will not 

work. I challenge all noncommissioned officers to protect 

the force by using risk management in their daily operations 

and training. 

August 1996 	 Engineer 49 
I a*~..m~~:~~~g~*~~-w~? :&j 


l:r -=*, ~~ :~a*>:* :**~@@&&:*:& Th&g! @@@&A
 ,[,, 

The Future of A