UNITED STATES ARMY 

ENGINEER CENTER 

AND FORT BELVOIR 

COMMANDEmCOMMANDANT 

MG James L. Kelly 

CHIEF OF STAFF/DEPUTY 

INSTALLATION COMMANDER 

COL Thomas M. McClelland 

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 

COL Robert M. Bunker 

COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR 

CSM Frederick I. Eisenbart, Jr. 

DIRECTORATES 

DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING 

COL Howard Steele, Jr. 

DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING 

DEVELOPMENTS 

LTC Edward L. Bishop 

DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT 

DEVELOPMENTS 

COL Philip R Hog e 

DIRECTORATE OF EVALUATION 

MAJ Terrance C. Ryan 

UNITS 

ENGINEER TRAINING BRIG ADE 

COL J ames H. King , Jr . 

ENGINEER CENTER BRIGADE 

COL Da vid a Coo ksey 

EDITOR 

Jerom e J Hili 

STAFF WRIT ER 

SP4 Jim Eady 

ILLUSTRATOR 

William Ru th 

PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER 

MAJ Sa ndor I. Ketz is 

THE COVER 

Featur e arti cl es il lustra te d on the 

cover include Corp s Engineers Far 

Forward (lowe r photo) s ta rti ng on 

page 8, Beyond the Call (upper right) 

starting on pag e 24 , and The 7th Engin eer Brig ade (upper left) starting 

on page 26 . 

l_

. ' ,1:': 

2 -'- ~-..:i_:~_j~_:;:~_~~_)::_
_._. J: t1 Z" ;\ FO RM. .~ r:! .ER

VO LUME 10 NUMBER 2
 

FEATURES 

8 CORPS ENGINEERS FAR FORWARD 

by LTC Fred C. Edwards and MAJ Stephen E. Drap er 

13 THE ITSCHNER AND STURGIS AWARDS 

by the ENG INEER Sta ff 

16 THE REALITIES OF RIVER CROSSINGS 

by MAJ Doug las J. George. RAE 

20 PLAY IT AGAIN 

by CPT Denis Gula kowski 

24 BEYOND THE CALL 

by the ENGINEER Staff 

26 THE 7TH ENGINEER BRIGADE 

by MAJ AI Born mann and SG M Larr y David 

~" 
 @ 

~_ ,.

I 

C!b 

Pag e 11 

7:
 .~ ..

\J:" "" ;II )f ( ...,..I;;.

·-' -;'.:2;' 

Page 24 

30 SPECIAL REPORT: THE ENLISTED PERSON NEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

by the EPM S Task Force , MI LPERCEN 

DEPARTMENTS 

2 NEWS & NOTES 38 RESERVE COMPONENTS 

6 FORUM 39 ENGINEER PROBLEM Pag e 29 

34 OFFICER CAREER INFO 40 THE SCHOOL SOLUTION 

37 ENLISTED CAREER INFO 

ENGINEER ' S an author.zoe publica tio n of the US Arm y Engrneer Cen le r and Fort Be lvou . VA Unl ess sp ecif ic ally stated . rnarerra l appea n ng 

he rrn does not nece ssant v rene ct ot tc ial po licy , th inking, or endorse ment by any ag ency 01th e US Army Al l pnot oq-a phs conta in ed herein are 

o fficial US Ar m y p ho tographs un le ss o therwise cr edited Use ot funds fo r print ing this pub lica tion was appro ved by Headquar te rs , De pa rt ment 

o f the Arm y on Fe bru ary 23 . 1979 Ma tena l herei n may be re prnte c If cr edit IS gi ve n to ENG INEER and the author . ENGINEER OB JECTIVE S are 10 pr ovide a for u m tor the ex change 01 ideas . 10 Info rm an d motiv ate. an d to promote the pr ofessional devel opment of al l rnern bcr s 

of the Army en gin ee r 1amlly • OIRE CT CORR ES PONDEN CE with ENG INEER IS autn c nzed and encou rag ed lnqurries . le iter s to the edito r. 

rnanus cn pts, phot ographs . an d gene ra l co rresp ondence sh ould be sent to Ed no r, EN GI NEER Maq azi ne . US Arm y Eng ineer Cente r, Fori 

Belvo lf . VA 22 060 Te lephone AUTO VO N 35 4 -500 1 or Commerc ia l 703-664 -3082,5 0 01 If a return ot ma nusc rip ts or ma te rial IS oesue c . a 

sell -ad dr ess ed stam ped en ve lope IS requuao • SU BSC RIPTI ONS to ENGINE ER ar e av ailable throu gh th e Su peri ntendent of Do cument s. US 

Government Pri nt ing Of fic e. wa stunc to n. D C 2 0402 A c hec k or money or der. pay abl e to Super mten dent of Docum en ts, must ac c ompany all 

subsc nouon reques ts Subscrrptron rates are $5 50 for c omesue ~c ud ong APO and FPO ) add re sse s and 56 90 for for eign addresses 

lndrvrdual copies a re availab le at 53 25 per copy for do me stic address es and S4 10 fo r tor erqn add re s ses . CONTROLLED CIRC ULA T ION 

pos tage paid at Wa shington, D.C 
__M News 8z Notes
 

SUCCESSFUL ARTEP 

Construc tion of the two -lane Bailey Bridge above wa s the Fo rt Bragg fir eb reak sy stem , constructio n of tim be r 

one of man y tasks accomplished by engi neers of Fort trestle bridge s an d cu lverts , and airstr ip run wayBr agg's 27th Engineer Batt ali on (C BT) (A BN) and Fort impro ve me nts. Other ART EP ta sks inclu ded demoliCampbe ll's 20 th Engi nee r Batt ali on (C BT) during a re ­ tio ns, ro ute reconnaissance , bridg e cl assifica tion, and 

ce nt seve n-day ART EP at Fort Bragg , N.C . Most ta sks target fo lders. Th e 548th Enginee r Ba tta lion (CBT) o f 

were co nstruc tion in na tu re , including the upgr adin g of Fo rt Bragg provided professional support through out the 

ARTEP. 

ARMY ENGINEERS SUPPORT OLY MPICS 

T he 535t h Engineer Det achment, headquartered at Fo rt secu tive hou rs foll ow ing the co mmerc ia l po wer fai lure . 

Mo nmo uth , N.1 ., pl ayed an active ro le in su pporting Ten additional ge nerators were ma nned by 535th perthe XIII Wi nte r O lympic Games at La ke Pl acid . N. Y. sonne l and co uld have bee n used , if necessary. The 17 

The 535th, a fie ld uni t of the Fac ilitie s Engineeri ng Army en gineers who participated in the back- up po wer 

Support Agency (FES A) , provided emerge ncy elec trical o pera tions inc lu ded " teams " from West Po int , Fort 

power fo r the Olympic Games on Februar y 19 whe n Bel voir, Fan E ustis, Fort Monmouth , and Fort Knox . 

commer ic al pow er went out on Mo unt Von Hovenbe rg Providi ng emerge ncy powe r is a key e le me nt of FESA 's 

and th rou gh out the Lake Pl acid communicatio ns center. missio n. The age ncy is one of the Arm y's first lines of 

b

Enlis

ine 

ted 

mobil

eng i

e g

neers 

e ne ra tors 

of th

a

e 

nd k

535t

ept 

h act 

them 

ivated 

in use for 

three gas 

14 c

tur

on-

­ defe

wor ldwide 

nse aga

. 

inst prolon ged power fa ilure in cr itical are as o

2 SUMMER 1980 
continued 

HERO HONORE D 

Serge anr First C lass (P) Marli n Mi ller, a construction superv isor statio ned 

at Fo rt Ric ha rd son, A K , rec entl y re ­

ce ive d the Army 's se co n d h i g h e sr 

peac etime service award for rescuing a 

d ro wni ng boy last year. Miller wa s p rese n ted th e So ldier's Meda l by Majo r 

Ge ne ra l T .G . Je ne s, Jr. , co m ma nder of 

the l 72 nd In fa ntry Brigad e in Feb ruary. 

H is hero ic deed occu rred in A pri l 1979 

durin g an ice -fis h ing trip a t Six Mi le 

Lak e on E lme nd o r f A ir Forc e Ba s e 

whc n a friends son fell thro ug h the ice . 

T he hoy' s father do ve in afte r him , but 

cou ld fin d ne ith er his so n no r th e on ly 

o pen ing in the ice afte r being dr agged 

by th e he av y c urre nt. Miller jumped into 

the wat er a nd pu shed both 10 safe ly . 

Wh e n h e no ticed the bo y ' s b rea thing 

had sto p pe d , Mill er po u nded th e boy's 

c he st and app lied first ai d . Th e bo y fi ­

nall y re su med breathi ng and wa s rus he d 

to (he ho spital , wh e re he was tr e ated fo r 

ex pos u re a nd rele ased . M iller , a 34 ­

year-o ld native of BUlle. MT , ha s been 

t h e NCO IC of t h e Dir e Cl o r a t e of 

Facilit ies Engi neen ng a t Fort Ri ch ar dso n for the p a st tw o years. He h a s 

worked as a c ra ne ope rato r , u ti Iiti es 

for ema n, a nd co n st ruc tio n fore man 

du rin g h is 17-year Arm y career. 

MOS 52E SHORTAGE 

T he Ar my is looking fo r so ld iers int erest ed in becomin g prime 

power ope rato rs . A o ne-year training co urse at Fort Bel voi r , VA , 

leads 10 MaS 52 E , Prime Power Produc tio n Spec ia lis t, w ith an addi tion al s kill ide ntifie r in ei ther mechan ical elec trica l , in stru me nt ation . or health ph ysics. Prime Power S pecialists opera te and maintai n Army non -t act ical d iese l and gas tu rb ine gen e rat o rs . The y may 

also be ca lled o n LO wo rk wit h he al ing . ve nt ilat ion , air co ndi tio n ing, 

bo iler o peratio n . and po wer d istribution . T he next class is sc he du led 

to start in Janu ar y 1981. If yo u ' re intere ste d. write to th e US Army 

Fac ilities Eng ineering Support Ag e ncy ATTN: Traini ng Di v isio n. 

FOri Bel voir. V A 22060 . O r ca ll Com me rc ia l 703-664-5235 o r A UTa VO N 345 -524 1. 

BATTLE REPORTS 

Terrai n reinforcement increa se s the advantages of the defende r. II 

may co ns is t o f e xt en si vel y e ng inee red o bs tacles or simp ly an infa ntrym an' S fig h t io g po si tion . Te rra in re inforceme nt co u n te rs a n 

e ncmys adva ntage of weapo nry . s upe rio r number s. o r mobilit y . T he 

late st in th e TR AD O C "Batt le Repo rt " se ries de scribe s o ne ty pe of 

terrain reinforceme nt -lhe tan k d itc h-and its use o n the baltic 

fie ld . Battle Reports a re used to d isse m inate le sson s le arn e d about 

ho w to fight o n the modern ba ttlefield . T hey provide interi m g uida nce until their co nte nt ca n be int egrat ed int o approp riat e ho w-to ­

fig h t. how-to-support, o r other doc tri na l public at ion s. Arm y Training an d Eva lu ation Programs (A R TEP) . Fi eld Man ua ls (F M). 

and Training Circul ars (TC) co nti nue to be the primary training referen ce s. TRA DOC Bull etin s. suc h as the Bailie Rep ort se ries, su ppl em e nt th em wit h an ex pla na tio n of why we are tr aining in a g iven 

mann er. TRADOC Bull etins are ca ta loged in DA Pa mphl et 310-3 . 

Th e se ries is numbered co nsec utive ly, a nd ea c h bulletin is d is tri buted b y the US Army AG Publi cati on s Cente r to a ll pinpo int accou nt 

holder s who indi c ate a desi re to rece ive th em . The Baili e Report o n 

Terrain Reinforcement/T a nk D itching is Numbe r 13 in the series and 

is d at ed 28 March 19i1 D. 

ENGINEER 3 
_ R ­ ews & Note s con tinued

r 

ME IVIO RIAL TO FO R1vIER C HIEF 

1',,1rS Ja ne Wat so n G ribble u nvc rls a mcrn or ral to he r a fte r <e rv ing the Army ' , 4J rd Chie f of Engi neers. 

de cea sed hu vha nd . Lt. Ge n William C G ri bble , Jr. . H" .' :i-y e M c a re e r was not able for a.,> Slg nJllenh o f exd uring rece nt ce re mo nies at Fo r: Bc lv o rr, VA . I he panded rc -po nsrbi luy in rhe sci en tific and e ng ineering 

mcmoriul " a new e ntrance ga te to the Kingma n Bui ld­ trclds . He wa -, grea tly re spc cted as a leader and man ­

tllg co m p lex . w h irh h ou se -, <ever al Corps of Eng ine ers ag er . an d is c red ited With de ve lop ing the techn ic al 

,ICt l \ itic «. G r ibb le. \\h o d ied lavt Jun e. retired 111 19 71l , pec if ica tion s 1'0 1' thc Arm y ', fir , 1 nucl ear po we r pla nt. 

FA I\1EC E T ERM INA TED 

lhc de velop ment pro g ram for th e Fa mily of IJlk ()f user ac cep tance a, a rc -ul t o j troo p o p ­

M rlnar y Eng i neer Co nstru ct io u Eq uip men t e ra u o na l te sting . (3) pro b lc m-, ""it h s afel y , 

( FAJvl EC E) w a-, te rn u u.n ed laSi O c to be r by hu m an faci orv. re liabi lity . ali t! m anu ainaln luy 

Oe pa runc nt o j the An ny FAM ECE wa s an lhc vc co usrr arnt x lu n itcd the nu mber o f vc ­

earthmov ing cqu ip meut syst e m dc xrg ncd to usc hie lex 10 be proc ured vur h lha l [hey could n Ol 

a sta ndard pow er .vcc tmn to do ze , sc rape , loa d , he IU'ilified a, cost-e ffec tive An e va lua tion of 

c a rry . p la ce a nd co m pac t e art h 11\ suppo rt of ih .rlte ru .u ive s to FA ME CE re su lte d in 

co mbat oper at ion s. I he systcm mc luded eight the dcc i vi o n thai Military Ad apt at io n of CO I11­

veh ic lex I hrcc rc asn nx were c ue d III the de ci ­ me rc ia l Il1 (MAC]) " the he '.! approa ch to 

<ro n 10 tc r rmn .uc t;AMECE: ( I ) a n o fli cl ,ll m ee t rc q u i rc mc m s 1'0 1 the nca r futur e (F Y 

ch" nge in ~y~ lc drstr ibuu on. lillli\l ng lIs u-,e X1- 8 b ) , g l\ cn th e co nvtra uu s o f pr o gra m 

III airho rne/a ll'lT1 nhile o rgunizan o n-, o n l)' : (2) f llnd ll lg " nd li me 1'0 1 acqu isitio n. 

4 SUMMER 1980
STRONGER BRIDGING 

Ihe Army is studying the possibility of using composite 

ma terials instead of pure aluminum in future bridging 

equipment. The material, graphi te fiber and epoxy 

re sin , isnt new, but its application to military bridge 

structures IS . The study 1<; being conducted by the Mobility Equipment Research and Development Command . 

If results of the study are favorable, bridging components of future systems could he significantly lighter 

and stronger than prototype bridges of the ., Bridgi ng 

fo r the 1980s" system currently being evaluated. 

60TH ANNIVERSARY 

The US Army Engineer Topographic Laboratories will 

celebrate its 60th anniversary in conjunction with its 

annual Engineer Day Open House on June 24. The 

event will feature demonstration, of the latest mapping 

and survey ing technology . Indoor and outdoor exhibits 

will trace histone achievements of ETL and its predece ssors the first of which was a SIDal! Engineer Detachmeru of the Army Air Service founded on April 5, 

1920. 

TO& E CHANGES 

Department of the Army Consolidated Change Table 

300-68 . 1 April 1980, implerncrus some long sought 

changes in Engineer Tables of Organization and Equipment. The most notable changes involve TO&E 5·-52 H , 

Headquarters and Headquarters Coup any, Eng ine e r 

Group; TO&E 5-58H , Combat ~~Ipport Eq u ipmen t 

Company: and TO&E 5-115H . Engineer Combat Battalion (Heavy). Change 8 to TO&E 5-52H returns the 

Me" and Ma intenance Sections to the Grou p He ad ­

quarters Company. There is also a slight inc rease in ve ­

hicles and radios. Change 9 to TO&E 5-58H move, 

certain equipment from the Equipment Platoon to the 

Quarry Section to make it independent. It also adds a 

5-ton wrecker to the DS Maintenance Platoo n a nd adds 

radios for the platoon leaders. Changes to TO& E 5­

115H will be published as Change 14!0 TO&E 5-116, 

Change 12 to TO&E 5-117, and Change 12 to TO&E 

5-118. The most important changes to these TO&Es include the following: 

• the addiuon of squad and platoon radios 

• the replacement of 20-ton dump trucks with 5-ton 

trucks in the line companies 

• the addition of a 20-ton Dump Truck Section to 

TO&E 5-117 

• the substitution of D- 7 dozers for D-8 dozers III 

the line companies. 

THE XMl TANK 

Staff Sergeant Steve Armstrong directs backing of XMI 

.. Abrams" Tank after demonstrating its vertical climbing ability at the Army's Lima, OH tank plant in late 

February, shortly after the first two production models 

had rolled off the assembly line. The XM I is the first 

totally new US tank in more than 30 years , The hull and 

turret are welded from cut and shaped pieces of armor 

plate. The M60 series tanks, un the other hand, have 

cast hulls and turrets. The XM I has a lower silhouette, 

better crew protection , greater speed, faster acceleration, and improved first round hit probability with its 

gyro-stabilized gun and fire control system. In addition 

to providing greater power, the 1500-horsepower turbine engine is much quieter, smokeless, and lighter in 

weight. The turbine engine starts easily in most weather 

conditions and is easier to maintain and repair than 

comparable diesel engines. The Army contracted for 

110 of the new tanks in FY 79 and current plans call for 

more than 7,000 to be built over the next eight years. 

ENGINEER 5 
FORUM
 

Strengthening the Backbone
 

MASTER SERGEANT ARCHER W. MILLER JR . 

EDITOR'S NOTE: Forum is a new secti on or " department" design ed to 

provide additional space f or the expression of pr of essional views by Army 

engineers worldwide. It is hoped that engineer office rs. enlisted personn el , 

and DA civilians employe d in Army eng inee r relat ed jobs will take advantage 

of the opportunity to express their views on doctrin e. organi zation. tactics, 

equipment , mana gement. training , leadership , or any other subject with 

potential inter est f or soldiers in general. or engineers in particular. What you 

have to say is the most important consideration, not how you say it or how 

much you say. ENGINEER Magazine was originally intended to provide a 

forum for fwo-way communication . but feedback/input from the field has all 

but ceased during the last few years. Thus. we enco urage your renewed 

participation in the communication process. If you have something worthwhile 

to share with others, we want to hear from you . The f ollowin g article. 

reprinted from INFA NTR Y Magazine. is an exce llent example of input from 

the field that we encourage . 

The Noncommissioned Officer Corps, the To focus on the standards. care , profesbackbone of our Army. is the life line be­ sionalism, and military courtesy of the enli sted 

tween those who command and those who soldiers. 

are commanded. Without the NCO, neither the To advise , assist, and support those appointed 

commander nor the commanded can be effective . over him . 

Our NCO corps is strong, but can be strength­ I believe that there are four ways in which we 

ened. And while much has been written about how can police and strengthen our time -honored rank s. 

we should lead , fight , command , and train . not First , we must quit bell yaching about the Volenough has been written about what our NCOs are unteer Army (VOLAR). about losing our authority 

supposed to do or how they can be improved . (if, in fact, we ar e losing or have lost it), and 

The NCO ' s job , whether he is a corporal or a about the Army's ills. We need to rechannel the 

command sergeant major is: energy we spe nd in tho se endeavors to make 

To conduct the daily business of the Army . VOLAR work, to reg ain whatever authority we 

To focus on the individual training of enlisted may have lost , and to work to correct the ills of 

soldiers. our Army . After all, we are professionals and volTo insure that hi s soldiers have the individual unteers. If we do not like what we see but do not 

equipment they are supposed to have and that it is attempt to do anything to correct the problems, 

in serviceable condi tion. then we should enter a new profession. When we 

To insure that the enlisted soldiers function as hear others bellyaching, we must ask them what 

effective team members . they are doing to correct the situation they speak 

6 $4 

SUMMER 1980 
of, and we should offer advice on how to make the 

needed corrections . This will take moral courage 

on our part. After all, it is easier to gripe and to 

pass the buck than it is to take an unpopular position . 

Next , we must rid our ranks of those nonproductive "stripe bearers" who make up a small 

but cancerous portion of our corps. 

Our non commissioned officers can be divided 

into three groups. Tho se in the first group immedi ately impress their superiors with their ability 

and desire to do the be st job they can. When they 

say that a job is completed, we can rest assured 

that it is, and that it is usually done well. Unfortunately , as a regard for their effort , initiative, and 

ability , the se NCOs are all too often given work 

because they earn the trust and confidence of their 

supe rio rs . 

Th e stripe bearers, on the other hand, impress 

their superiors, their peers, and their subordinates 

in just th e opposite manner and , thus , are not 

calle d on to perform diffi cult , time-consuming 

task s. Wh o wants to be embarrassed by a subordinate 's po or performance? Who can trust him? 

Unfortunately, however , they also receive good 

efficiency reports, lett er s , awards, promotions . In 

addition, they get soft jobs, work few er hours , and 

are pick ed f or cho ice TOY as signments and 

schooling because this is an eas y wa y to get rid of 

them . 

Those in the middl e group , whom I call the average maj ority , ob serv e these happen ings , and 

they wonder-why sho uld I exc el if all it will ge t 

me is more work '? Th e stripe be arers seem to get 

the same rewards. Is peac e of mind and se lfs atisfaction worth the effo rt? 

SOLUTION 

What is the so lutio n? We mu st devel op the 

moral courage 10 look the nonperforrn ers in the 

eye and tell them the y arc not mea suring up to the 

Arm y 's standards . Some of them ha ve never be en 

told this before and honestl y think their beh avior is 

ac ceptable . We must tell them wh at the acc eptable 

standards are , how they can reach those stand ards, 

and the action we will take if they do not , and give 

them a reasonable amount of time to demonstrate 

measurable improvement. 

I admit that th is is not an easy thing to do. It is 

much ea sier to look the othe r way , to let so me one 

else take care of it, or to wait until a set of PCS 

orders makes it some other NCO 's problem. When 

we do counsel, we must document our acti on s , or 

ad vice, and any and all changes in the so ldier's 

performance so that we can pr esent an hon e st apprai sal and recommendation to our superiors, who 

have the authority to rid our Arm y of these destructive members of our corps should our efforts 

prove fruitless. No matter what deci sion our 

superio rs make , we must support that decision . 

Th e third thing we can do to strengthen our 

NCO corps is to groom not only our young corpo rals and sergeants, but the soldiers who aspire to 

those ranks as well . They are not reall y different 

from the way we were 10, 15, or 20 ye ar s ago 

when we were first-termer s. We are still dealing 

with human beings, and the phy sical, safety , security, social, and self-fulfillment need s we had 

are the same ones our sub ordinate s ha ve today . 

We may live in a more permissiv e and educated 

soci ety, and this may cause our so ld iers to look at 

authority today in a different way. They understand that their superio rs have a legitimate authority and with it, the pow er of coe rc ion . Soldier s 

want their NCOs to communicate effectively with 

them, to have a certain expertise , and to gain their 

re spect thr ough the prop er use of their pow er. Did 

we want anything different ? 

Th e fourth thing that we, the senior NCO s of 

today, mu st do is to instill in the se nior NCO s of 

tomorrow an appre c iatio n for and a sense of value 

in the tim e-tested traits and principles of leadership . We mu st do this by demonstrating those 

traits and principles to our subordinates . We mu st 

set ch allenging but atta inabl e goa ls , insist on hard 

but fair and just di scipline , dem on strat e high 

standards of appearance, provide good training , 

and insure that we make productive use of their 

time . 

Our subordinates see the Army through ustheir immediate leaders. They do not realize or appreciate the size and complexity of our Army , or 

how it functions. The chain of command for our 

young soldiers for all practical purposes stops at 

the battalion level. 

I feel it is time to clean out our ranks. This will , 

in turn strengthen our corps. We must quit passing 

the bu ck. We must accept our resonsibiliti e s , 

analyze them, and demonstrate through our daily 

actions the proper traits and principles of leadership. We must treat our subordinate s as we want 

to be treated-with respect, sincere concern. and 

honest interest. Above all else , we mu st exerci se 

moral courage . 

Master Sergeant Archer W . Miller, Jr., is a recent.graduate of the Sergeants Major Academy. 

He is presently assigned as the First Sergeant, 

Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2d 

Brigade, lOlst Airborne Division (Air Assault). 

ENGINEER 7 
Early planning is required for the preparation of antitank ditches 

Corps 

E gineers The 78th Engineer Battalion and other Orange 

Forces engineers accomplished their mission during 

REFORGER 79, but it could have been done easier ar and much more efficiently 

orwar 

by LTC Fred C. Edwards & MAJ Stephen E. Draper 

8 SUMMER 1980 
x 

Exercise CERTAIN SENTINEL!REFORGER '79 

provided the 78th Engineer Battalion (Combat) 

the opportunity to function in direct support of 

an armored maneuver brigade. Different'? Weird? Many 

adjectives have been used to describe this organization 

for combat, but "unorthodox " is probably the most applicable. 

Several tactically sound reasons for placing a wheeled 

engineer battalion in this role are presented herei n but 

the real reason is that all available engineers are needed 

as far forward as possible on the European battlefield. 

The engineer mission is so critical that' "story book" 

concepts of organization and employment must yield to 

the lessons learned over and over again on operations 

such as REFORGER , even if doing the job right requires unorthodox, 'adhoc organizations. 

Due to the critical requirement for putting all avail ­

able engineers as far forward as possible, corps engineer 

battalions in Germany are routinely placed in direct 

support of divisions. The organization is not new . What 

ENGINEER 

1

I 

___ , 

:0
 MAB X I X X 

r ::: ----1---­ -----.

• 

>< GJ ><

>< 

X X 

[@J [@J
 

Typical deployment in USAREUR Divisional AD 

Divisional 9 

Corps 9 

Total 18 

Bde 

AD 

3 24 

3 0 

6 2 24 

Division Rear 

FIGURE 1 

IS new is that corps engineers are now being employed 

where the requirement is-up front in the maneuver 

brigade area of operations (AO) . Typically, one line 

company will be placed in direct support (OS) of each 

maneuver brigade and employed by the brigade engineers alongside the divisional engineer company. 

Exercise after exercise has shown that a two-company 

task force is the minimum essential to handle the heavy 

engineer load. And, since the Brigade Commander 

fights the battle. the engineers must be responsive to 

him through the brigade engineer. 

Exercise after exercise has demonstrated that a divisional engineer company cannot provide the Brigade 

Commander the needed responsiveness and also execute 

missions. This fact of life is recognized by engineers in 

Europe . Hence, majors are dispatched from both the divisional and corps battalions to form adhoc Brigade En ­

gineer sections. The end result is the organization 

shown in Figure I. The odd man out in the adhoc organization is the corps engineer battalion headquarters 

9 
and the one remaining combat company . During REFORGER '79, the Orange Force co mma nde r's co ncept 

of operations made good us e of the se asset s. 

The Or ange atta ck plan is sho wn in Figure 2 . The 

Main River was an obs tacl e in two respects. It slo wed 

the initial momentum o f the main a ttac k, and it complicat ed lateral communication s, The uncommitted line 

company fr om the 78th helped so lve the firs t pr oblem by 

being placed under ope ratio nal co ntro l o f the Crossi ng 

Area Control Group, The second probl em was so lved 

when the 78th Batt ali o n Headquarters was placed in diTh e purpose here is not to pr esent a " wa r story " 

about one ope ra tio n, but ins tead to pro vid e insight into 

diff iculties f acin g corps and di vision al engi nee rs when 

operating far for ward du e to present-day organizatio n 

and equipment. Granted, many of the probl em s wo uld 

not have arise n if CUrrent do ctrinal tenants of eng inee r 

emplo yment had been foll owed . Th e cou nterpo int to thi s 

argume nt and , inde ed , the reason s fo r this article, are 

that: in Europe , the en gin eer requirem ent is tremend ous 

and is gre ate st in the forw ard are a of op erations; to fulfill the requirement, all d ivisiona l and corps enginee rs 

Figure 2 

ORANGE Attack Plan 

) 

/ 

rec t support of the we stern-most brigade . The maneuver 

bri gade comma nder then had a batt ali on headquart ers to 

co ntrol his eng inee r effo rt. 

Pl acement o f the batt alion headquarters in the we stern 

sec tor a lso dovetailed with the Orange de cep tion pl an by 

helping to depict the main attack in the west. With the 

addition of a Ribbon Bridge company, Task Force 78 

starte d the " war" with one di vis ional co mbat comp any , 

one organic co rps co mba t co mpa ny , a nd one Ri bb on 

Brid ge compa ny, a fo rc e of over 500 e ng ineers (see 

Figure 3). Thi s is a lot of eng ineer horsepower for a 

maneu ver brigade , bu t as the battl e unfolded , even more 

co uld ha ve been used . Up Front , en g inee r requirem ent s 

ar e enormo us . 

must work side by side; without cha nge s in present organizatio n and equipme nt, the capability of the se e ngi neers will be less than optim al. 

Durin g REFORGER ' 79 , Or an ge Forces part icipated in de liberate and hasty river c ro ssings , 

a nd in offe nsive and d efen sive ope ra t io ns . 

Throu gh out the ex e rc ise th e HQ o f Task Fo rce 78 , 

co mma nde d b y a lieu ten ant co lo ne l, pro vided th e 

brigad e co mman de r superb enginee r plann ing suppo rt, 

and engi nee r co mma nd and co ntro l. All battle pl an s had 

e ng inee r input before exec utio n. The effort a nd reso urces expended by the Ta sk Force Headqu arters to 

10 SUMMER 1980 
keep pace with the maneu ver force during the attack , 

howev er, were a lmo st overwhelming. It required four 

en gineer tactical operati on s ce nters to keep pace with 

the maneuver brig ade. The Task Force tacti cal operations 

center was often 20-30 kilomet er s from the He adquarters support element s. 

During the attack , the corps co mbat co mpany could 

not keep pace with man eu ver units Hen ce , the divi ­

sional, tracked eng ineers provided direct support (DS ) 

to the maneu ver battalion s, while the corps company 

handl ed the flank s and c leared byp assed ob stacles. The 

defense are demolitions and mine s, bulk y and he avy 

stuff. Faced with a similar problem , the artillery rid itself of 5-ton dump truck s years ago . 

Communications were a constant hassle , espec iall y 

with nth Battalion co mpa nies DS to o the r bri gades. 

These companies need ed FM capability for three nets: 

the bri gade engineer net, their parent battal ion' s net, 

and the ir internal net . Presently , they can support only 

two nets . Similarl y, the TF n co mm ander required 

three net s: the divisi onal engineer net , the maneuver 

brigade net , and the internal net. Current capability proI'r:,(IRIBBON 

Ta sk Force : Attack Phase 

I) (IRIBBON 

Task Force : Defense Phase 

Figure 3 

attack moved fa st due to target turn-over problems of 

the Blue Force. Blu e Engineers had empl aced superb 

obs tacl es , but man y were never exe cuted . Had they heen 

execut ed , the Or an ge brigade attac k ma y have quickly 

bogged do wn because neither co rps nor div isi onal eng inee rs have ad equate obstacle breaching ca pability. 

The ribbon bri dg e was superb and made hasty river 

crossings a " piec e of cake " except for one lin gering 

probl em , bank preparation s. It is co mpletely assinine to 

del ay a river crossing while a D-7 dozer is wheeled into 

position and off-loaded to begin bank preparations. 

In pr eparing for the defen se , the corps engineer compan y is the best asse t due to haul capab ilit y, but it is 

foo lish to beli e ve that en gi neers can prepare a goo d 

hasty defense with the meager haul capability of the 

5·ton dump tru ck . Up front , the keys to an effective 

ENGINEER 

vides only two . Due to the dispersal of force s, FM radio 

range was als o a problem , The one retran smission unit 

authorize d the battal ion was not enough . 

Survi vabili ty obviously de creases as un its mo ve forward . However, units without antitank capability , or 

even the pa ssive protection o f armored vehicles and 

winter camoufl age are in for big troubl e. TF 78 was 

co nstantly in enemy artillery range and was hit on se ve ral oc ca sion s by enemy air strikes . 

Logistics worked with the ease of giv ing hirth to a 

square elephant and would have been worse except for 

co operation by the Division Support Command (DIS ­

COM). Th e n th Batt alion Headquarters was in the 

westernmost part of the Or an ge sector. Three line com ­

panies were spr ead eastward across the div ision area of 

operations. Since the 78th is a corps batt alion, use of 

11 
co rps supply point s was mandatory , as expre ssed in the 

ope ratio ns (OP) o rder. T ypicall y, corps supply a nd 

serv ice insta llations are located behind the divi sion . As 

the att ack progr essed , the supply line s for 78th Battalion 

units gr ew lon ge r a nd longer. Consequently, additional 

[§]
 

MAS 

m 

t---x----.---+x--~---x--__t

Proposed Engineer Deployment in Divisional AO 

Di visional 18 3 0 

Corps 0 9 24 

Total 18 12 2 24 

Bde 

AO Div ision Rear 

FIGURE 4 

co m munication problems were created by dis ta nce be ­

twe en the Battalion Headquarters a nd or g ani c compa nies . 

Th e situation became marginall y manage ab le in the 

sho rt run and totally unmanageable in the lon g ter m . At 

be st , it dri ves the batt al ion staff batt y. Simpl e proce ­

dures suc h as distribut ion of mail , issuing replacem ent 

equipme nt and movement of repl ace d personnel became 

astronomica l probl ems. 

Th e 78 th Engine er Battalion and othe r Oran ge e ngineers ac co mplishe d their mission du rin g REFORG ER 

' 79, but it could ha ve been done easie r an d mu ch mor e 

e ffic iently . The a utho rs recommend that the foll o wing 

actio ns be take n: 

•	 Recognize the requirement for a two-compan y for ce 

in the brigad e Are a of Operati on s an d the bri gade 

e ng ineers; reorgani ze the division eng ineers according ly. Th e organizatio n shown in Figu re 4 is 

recommend ed . 

•	 Mech ani ze co rp s en ginee rs wh o suppo rt mech an ­

ized units. 

•	 P ro vid e me c ha n i ze d e n g i ne e rs wi th a mo b ile 

e art h- moving ca pability (the UET wi ll work) . 

•	 Pro vid e a capab ility to rapidl y clear min e fie lds. 

•	 Pro vide more capab ility to haul mu nition s. 

•	 Beef up FM co mmunications . Provide a c apability 

to ope r ate on three net s at company le vel and provide one additi o nal ret ra nsm issio n unit to cor ps 

banal ions . 

•	 Deve lo p a logisti cs system which allows corp s un its 

to qui ckly tra nsit ion from co rp s support facilities to 

DIS COM . 

•	 Devel op a fir m do ctrine conce rn ing en gineer target 

turn -o ver a nd teac h th e do c trine at all branch 

sc ho o ls . 

Lieutenant Colonel Fred C. Edwards is Comma nder of 

the 78th Engineer Battalion, 7th Engineer Brigade . 

Majo r Stephen E. Draper is the Ex ecuti ve Off icer of 

the 78th Engineer Battalion. 

\ 

) 

/' 

12 SUMMER 1980 
The Sturgis Award
 

SFC Harold A . Lockwood is cited fo r exceptional 

achievement during 1979 

SFC LO CKWOOD 

The winner of the Stu rgis Award fo r 1979 is Serg eant First Cl ass H arold A . 

Lo ckw ood , Com pa ny C , 78th Eng inee r Co m bat Batt ali on . 7th E ngi ne er 

Brigade , VII Corps, US ARE UR. SFC Lo ckw o od 's c itation reads, in part, as 

fo llo ws : 

" Sergeant Firs t Cl as s H arold A . Lockwood . . . is cited fo r exceptio na lly 

meritori ou s ac hievement and se rvice from Ja nua ry 197 9 thro ug h Decembe r 

1979 . Durin g this period , S FC Lockwood ser ved as Seni or Dr ill Serge ant with 

the 3d BCT Brigade , Fo rt Le onard Wood, MO , and as actin g Pl at oon Leader 

and Plato on Sergeant with C Compan y , 78th Engi neer Battal ion . As a drill 

se rgea nt, SFC Lock wood 's sk ills were re adil y evi de nc ed by his se lectio n as 

Ho nor Graduate of the Fort Leonard W ood Drill Sergeant Ac ad emy . 

Maint aining this record of excell en ce , he wa s fo ur time s se lec te d Drill 

Serge ant of the Cycle . .. at th at training base . SFC Loc kwoo d 's attri butes as 

a Pl atoon Sergeant with Company C are refl ected in the accom pli shments of 

his pl ato on d uri ng the latter half o f 1979. During a five-month period of 

int ensive activ ity, his pl ato on successsfull y co m pleted th e foll owing proj ect s: 

• Construction of tw o under ground , reinforced conc rete oil collec tion 

vaults; 

• Renovation of a 70-foot permanentl y installed Bailey Bridge in the German 

community of Ettlingen; 

• Con struction projects fo r the Stuttgart Military Community , includin g a 

pressb o x for the Americ an hi gh sc ho o l football fie ld , a communications 

sec urity vault , a ph ysical training fac il it y . . . and two handball/racquetball 

courts. 

Th at these projects were com pleted ahe ad of sche du le while exceeding 

desi gn spec ificatio ns is . . . te stimon y to S FC Loc kw ood' s man agerial ability . 

That the se project s were accom p lished by a unit which had not been given a 

construction missi on in tw o ye ars is remar kabl e . O bvio us ly , SFC Lockwood 

provided the essentia l leadership to mold his pl atoon into a highl y effic ien t and 

effec tive org anization . 

SFC Lockwood exe m plifies the id eal engineer NCO . He is a tru e 

professi onal whose accomplishments have . . . been o uts ta nding." 

PREVIOUS STURGIS AWARD WINNERS
 

1974 

1975 

1976 

1977 

1978 

SFC Charles E. Oliver 

SGT Douglas R. Carron 

SSG James E. Skellion 

SSG Humberto A. Mclaren 

SFC lanny R. Hodges 

79th Engineer Battalion 

802d Engineer Battalion 

27th Engineer Battalion 

802d Engineer Battalion 

94th Engineer Battalion 

T he St urg is Meda l is na me d fo r 

Lieut enant General Samuel D. Sturgis , 

Jr. , for mer Chief o f Eng ineers. The 

medal is offered by the So c i e ty of 

American Military Eng ineers (SA ME) 

as an annual award to an active du ty enlisted member of the U.S . Army to recognize outs ta nd ing co ntr ibutions to 

military troop construction and/or base 

maintenance , by demonstrated technical 

and leadership ability . The awa rd is presented to an individual within one of the 

follow ing Army career fields: combat 

e ngineering , co nstruction and utilitie s, 

power production , heavy equ ipment and 

maint e nan ce, dra ft ing, surve ying , 

printing, special electrical de vices. instrument repairman , and reprodu ct ion 

repairm en . The award was made for the 

first time in 1975 to Sergeant First Class 

Charles E. Oliver of the 79th Eng ineer 

Battalion for his outs ta nding performance of dut ies durin g ca le ndar yea r 

1974. 

Other nominee s for the Sturg is Awa rd 

for 1979 included: 

USAREU R: SSG Richard F. Flory, 

Company B, 79 th En gin eer Co mba t 

Battali on (He avy) , 18th En g in e e r 

Brigade . 

FORSCOM: SSG Charle s R. Par ks, 

Co mpa ny C, 39 th Enginee r Combat 

Battalion . Fort Deven s, MA . 

FORSCOM: SSG Alfonso Carr asco, 

Company C , 14th En g in eer Combat 

Battalion (Corps), Por t Ord, CA. 

TRADOC: SFC(P) Will ie B. Jones. 

Comp any A, 2d Battali on , US Arm y 

Engineer Ce nter Brigade, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. 

WESTC OM: SG T G uy L. Hall . 

Headquarters Com pany , 65th Engi neer 

Combat Batt alion, Schofie ld Barracks, 

HI. 

EUSA: SFC Ri ch ard 1. Ec khard t, 

Company C. 44th Eng ineer Combat 

Blltl ali on ( Heavy) , 2 nd E ng i nee r 

Gro up. 

ENGINEER 13 
568th EI\lGII\lEER COMPANY 

The
 

Itschner
 

Award
 

The 568 th Eng i nee r Com pa ny (C ombat Support 

Eq uipme nt), 5S9th Engineer Batt ali on , 130th En gin eer 

Brigade , V Co rps . is the winne r of the Itschner Award 

for Acti ve Arm y units for calendar year ! 979 . T he 

awa rd citation , in part, re ad s as foll ows: 

" Th e ' 56 8th Eng ineer Compan y ... is cited for exce ptio na lly meritori ou s ach ieveme nts and service . .. 

Du ring 197 9 , the compa ny co ns iste ntly demon strated its 

outstanding construc tion and combat suppo rt capab ilities 

a nd excelled in every ar ea of operati on s , to include 

tr ain in g , maint en an ce, and adminis tra tio n . De spite a 

serio us sho rtage of equipment operato rs an d NCOs , the 

568th Engineer Compa ny succe ssfull y completed suc h 

diverse tasks as the con struction of scaled tank gunner y 

ran ge s, . . .. 15 kilomet er s of tan k tr ail, . . . tank 

ditch ing exerc ises in support of the 3d Armored Divisio n and other Central Ar my Group elements, and the 

co nstruction of hull defil ade fir ing posi tion s for a vari ­

et y of vehicl es. While carrying out constru ctio n and 

co mbat suppo rt missi on s, the unit did not lo se sig h t of 

its responsib ilit ies to the men and wome n of the co mpany. The esprit de corps and mor al e within the unit 

we re unequalled. This is readily refl ected in the 127 

percent ree nli stment rate during 197 9 and the fact th at a 

majority of those reenlist ing did so for their pre sent dut y 

assignme nt. Educ ation and se lf-impro vement we re emphas ize d and enc ourage d as an eff ective method to improve leadership , professi onalism , and skill . . . The 

successful int egrati on of wo me n int o the uni t , alo ng 

with their sig nificant contrib utions to mi ssion performance, wa s sin gularl y not eworthy . By its ac tio ns , the 

568th Enginee r Comp an y has mad e great stride s in enhan cing the rol e and image of Eng inee rs in the modern 

battl efi eld . . . . " 

PROVEN 

(COMBAT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT) 

T he 568th was co mmanded by Capt ain Cham pn ey A. 

McN air , Jr., through Febru ary 2 7 , 1979 , and by Ca ptain 

Sh eldon L. Jahn fro m Februar y 2R throu gh out the remainder of the year. 

The 568 th is ph ysic all y located in Pi oneer Kaserne , 

Han au , Federal Republi c of Ge rma ny. 

Th e Itschner Awards are silve r plaque s named for the 

forme r Chief of En gin eers, US Army , Li eutenant Ge neral Eme rso n C . Itschner. From 1960 , whe n it wa s first 

awarded, until 1973, it was o ffered annually by the Soc iet y of Ame ric an Military Engineers to o ne unit of th e 

Ar my Corps o f Engineers se lec ted as the mo st outstan ding un it during the pre vi ous cal en dar yea r. Since 

1974 , three awards h ave been offered annually to the 

mo st outstanding Active Army unit , Re serve un it , and 

Na tiona l Gu ar d unit of the Co rps of Engi neers . 

Othe r nominees for the Irschner Award for Ac ti ve 

Army units inclu ded: 

USAREUR: Company B, 79th En gin eer Comba t Battali on (Heavy ), 18th En gi nee r Brigad e . 

USA RE U R : Compa ny D , 16th Engi nee r Com ba t 

Battalion, 1st Armo red Divi si on . 

FORSCOM : Compan y C, 548th Eng inee r Combat 

Battalion (Heavy) , Fort Bragg , NC. 

FOR S CO M : 66 th Engi neer Company (A DM) , 62J 

Engineer Com bat Ba tta lio n (Heavy), Fo rt Hood , TX . 

TRA DOC: Compa ny A, 2nd Batt ali on , 2nd Traini ng 

Bri gade (OSUT) , Fort Leon ard Wo od , MO. 

WESTCO M : Compan y A , 65th En gi nee r Co mba t 

Batta lion , 25th Infantry Divisio n , Schofie ld Barrack s , 

HI. 

EUS A : Co mpa ny D, 44th Eng ine er Combat Battal ion 

(Heavy). 

14 SUMMER 1980 
PREVIOUS ITSCHNER AWARD WINNERS (Active Army) ARNG AWARD 

YEAR UNIT 

1960 100th Engineer Company 

(Float Bridge), Fort Belvoir, 

Virginia 

1961 562d Engineer Company 

(CBT) Alaska 

1962 Company B, 307th Engineer 

Bat1allon (ABN), Fort 

Bragg, NC 

1963 Company A. 8th Engineer 

Battalion (CBT), Korea 

1964 618th Engineer Company 

(Light Equip) 

307th Engineer Battalion 

(ABN) Fort Bragg, NC 

1965 Company A. 326th Engineer 

Battalion 

101 st Airborne Division, 

Vietnam 

1966 Company A, 39th Engineer 

Battalion (CBT) 

45th Engineer Group (Constr), 

Vietnam 

1967 173d Airborne Engineer 

Company, Vietnam 

1968 Company C, 39th Engineer 

Battalion (CBT), 

45th Engineer Group (Constr), 

Vietnam 

1969 87th Engineer Company, 

199th Infantry Brigade, 

Vietnam 

1970 Company C. 8th Engineer 

Bat1allon (Airmobile), 

Vietnam 

1971 Company A, 326th Engineer 

Battalion 

101st Airborne Division 

(Airmobile), Vietnam 

1972 518th Company (CBT), 193d 

Infantry Brigade, Fort 

Kobbe, Canal Zone 

1973 370th Engineer Company 

(Constr Sup), 

24th Engineer Group, 

USAREUR 

1974 Company D, 802d Engineer 

Battalion, 

2d Engineer Group, Eighth 

U.S. Army 

1975 Company B, 10th Engineer 

Bat1allon (CBT) 

3d Infantry Division 

1976 Company A, 293d Engineer 

Battalion (CBT) (HVY) 

24th Engineer Group, 

USAREUR 

1977 Company C, 547th Combat 

Engineer Battalion, 

130th Engineer Brigade, V 

Corps, USAREUR 

1978 Company A, 12th Engineer 

Battalion, 

8th Infantry Division, 

USAREUR 

COMMANDER(S) 

CPT Albert L. Schneider 

CPT Kermit Hoeft 

CPT Harry A. Hodges 

CPT J.H. Carnes, Jr. 

1LT Daniel R. Schroeder 

CPT George T. Kimbro 

CPT George P. Johnson 

CPT Glenn H. Lehrer & 

CPT Thomas E. Weber 

CPT Ph ilip H. Izard 

CPT Robert J. Walters & 

CPT Mark F. Moran 

CPT Donald J. Hejna 

CPT Charles B. Yonn III & 

CPT John T. Sevier 

CPT Phlflp C. Gee & 

CPT Garry V. Cooper 

CPT Robert Pot1er & 

CPT John W. Braden, Jr . 

CPT David E. Spaulding 

CPT Albert Kraus 

CPT Leon J. Lang 

CPT Richard A. Nance 

CPT Wayne F. Leadbetter, 

Jr. 

Th e 1979 Itschner Awar d for the 

Army Nat ional Gu ard goes to the 

269th Eng inee r Compa ny 

(C onstru ct io n Support) , Fl orida 

Army Nat ional Guard , Li ve O ak , 

FL. Th e award c itation, in part , 

re ad s as foll ows: 

" T he 269th En gineer Company 

maintained an av erage ac t ual 

stre ng th of 10 3 percent d uring 1979 . 

W ith a non e xistent draft , this 

remarkable . . .accomplishment wa s 

due in part to a total co llec tive effort 

by unit membe rs to se ll the Na tiona l 

G ua r d , and to a d edi cated , co nce rted 

eff ort in suppo rt of th e unit 

recru iting p ro gram . The sp irit of the 

unit trainin g program is ex em plified 

by its se lec tio n as a su pe rio r un it for 

Training Year 79 . T he co nduct of 

realist ic mea ning ful tr ai ni ng is .. 

an importa nt factor in the umts 

ou tsta nd ing success in rec rui ti ng , 

re te n tio n , morale , and 

espri t-de -corps. Unit performance is 

a direct re sult of stro ng le ad ersh ip , 

an e ffec tive c hain of command , an d 

an ac tive recru iting pro gram. " 

USAR AWARD 

The US Army Re serve unit 

se le cte d to rec eive th e Itschner 

A ward for calen dar yea r 197 9 is 

Company D , 467th En gineer 

Batt ali on , G reen ville , MS. The 

award citati on. in part , reads as 

fo llo ws: 

" Du ring 197 9 , Compan y D . 

4 67th En gineer Battali on , received 

the First US Ar my Ex cell ence in 

T ra ining Award , ach ie ve d a 

sati sfactory Annual General 

Insp ection rat ing , and was se lec ted 

as the mo st o utstandi ng 

co mpany-size unit in Army 

Readiness Regi on IV. Compan y D 

. .. ha s be en hi ghl y successful in 

the ar eas o f ma inten an ce , un it 

stre ngth, attendance , train in g , and 

readine ss . Dyn amic training ha s 

been a leading fac to r in sus ta ini ng 

o uts ta nd ing un it espri t-de-corps an d 

moral e . An acti ve com m uni ty 

suppo rt pr ogram ha s made Company 

D well known and accep te d by the 

lo cal c iv ilia n com m u n ity . " 

15 
Rive rs have never been a handi cap to the side fancy yo ur chanc es . That is , unl ess the odds are in yo ur 

with the upper hand in war. Reall y , it is rath er favo r. When you have to put yo ur troop s into the attac k 

amaz ing that after all the se cen turi es of dis­ ac ro ss a river , yo u are eve n less inclined to gamb le . 

proof, we still talk and thin k of them as obs tac les. Basicall y, when prehistori c man invented the boat, rivers 

ceased to be obstacles. O ne can argue that, intrinsically , 

the y became just the oppos ite. From the time that Al exande r mad e his classic crossing of the Hydaspe s Ri ver in 

Indi a in 326 Be until the might y Rhine was co nquered 

in 194 5, the great major ity of assault river crossings 

have been succe ssful. 

Sure , there have been failures, and the se have been 

ad equ ately documented . The failure a t the Rapido in 

1944 provides an exce lle nt ex ample of ho w not to do it! 

Why , therefore , have river crossing attacks been alm ost 

infall ibl y suc cessful? 

First , as a comman der , you never attack unless you 

Second , often a river c rossi ng att ack ca n be fore to ld 

and foreseen week s in advan ce so that planning , prepara tion , and even rehearsal can be do ne almost at leisure . 

Third , whe n an advanc ing fo rce reaches a river , it ca n 

pause to mount its attack (if a hasty c rossing is not 

feasibl e) because the enemy is unli kel y to thrust across a 

riv er from a de fensive posture . The attacker also ha s the 

advantage of knowing how long the pause will be . 

Lastly , the presen ce of a rive r see ms to ind uce a 

comma nder to plan and o rga nize his attack more ca refull y and in more det ail. He is also likel y to pay more 

heed to his eng inee r ad vi sor than he does o rd inari ly It 

is this subject that I wish to addre ss. 

The Realities of River Crossings
 

The lessons which come through from all successf ul 

assault river crossings is the attention to detail and 

the critical importance of engineers 

by MAJ Douglas J. George, RAE 

,,,~ ';.

• •

'. 

-.;.. -~

.' .,,,,,,

".' . . "3.' .,~

M577 Command Vehicle crosses ribbon bridge 

16 SUMMER 1980 
The recent publication of FM 90 - 13, River Crossing 

Ope ra tio ns , and the ex cell ent artic le " Cro ssing the 

Main River" by Lieutenant Colon el Dennis K . Culp 

(M ilitary Review , Febru ary 1980) suggest that it is time 

to review our doctrine . Th e qu ality of eng ineer ad vice is 

so cri tica l in a ri ver crossing ope ra tio n that we mu st 

fu lly co mprehe nd doctrine and its limitati on s. We might 

even try to improve it! 

PLA NNING-THE CRITICAL PART 

If a de li be ra te crossin g is e nvisaged , the division 

se lec ted to do it should be pull ed fro m the lin e to prepare for it. One could argue that this will not be possible 

in the next wa r, which is lik ely to be a fluid , mobil e , 

and lethal affair . I wo uld suggest that fo r any g uara ntee 

of success, the ass aulting di vision wi ll requ ire tim e to 

pr ep ar e , es pec ia lly if the se lec ted d iv isi on has been 

fighti ng defensive ly . As a bare minimum , it will requ ire 

some recon st itu tion. 

Most o f the asse ts required fo r the divi sion to deliberate ly c ross a river will be pro vi ded by Co rps . The only 

d ivis io na l engi nee r asset whi ch will be involved in the 

rafting and bridgi ng ph ase s will be the bri dg e co mpany 

of the div ision al engineer battal ion . 

Co rps Mil it ar y Police (MP) asse ts will un d ertake 

traffi c co ntro l tasks . If po ssible , Co rps e leme nts will 

provid e Air Defense Arti llery (A DA) pro tec tio n and 

gro und sec uri ty . Th e log ical dedu cti on fro m this is that 

planning for s upport in th e Crossin g Areas (CAs) sho uld 

be do ne by the headquarters whic h will co ntro l it. In 

esse nce , Corps elements do the pl an nin g for all aspects 

.;..=.~~

4llill" - .... 

..... - ...., - ::;.. 

.....:,.

...._­

of a river crossing except the assault ph ase. 

Wh at so rt of eng inee r ele me nts will be pr ovided for 

the division'? Optimis ts would lik e to see a gro up headquarters to co mm and all e ngi neer assets. If a group 

he adqu arte rs is not available , a batt ali on headquart er s is 

requ ired . Th e se lec ted battalion headqu ar ters should be 

well-practiced in the planning and conduc t of river 

crossing o pera tio ns . Headquarters a nd Headqu arters 

Det achment s (HHD s) such as those whi ch co mmand the 

559th and 565th Eng inee r Battalion s, are the most lo gic al ch o ice s because of their co ntinuo us inti ma te invol vem ent in river crossings . The only shortcom ing with 

this organ izati on is that an HHD ha s a restricted and 

limited ca pac ity for command and contro l. If the se detachments were tran sformed into co mp lete He adqu art er s 

and Headqu arters Compan ie s (H HCs), the cap aci ty to 

pl an , co mmand and co ntra ! ri ver crossi ngs fro m an en ­

gineer sta ndpoi nt will be readil y avail able . 

T he in co m in g e ng ineer headquarters, c a lled th e 

Crossing For ce Engi nee r (CFE) and st aff, would undertake all engin eer plan nin g fo r the division crossi ng . The 

CFE's po int of co ntac t ini tially will be the Assault Division Eng ineer (ADE) . Th e CFE will co nce ntra te on the 

c rossing area and the di vi sional engi nee r battali on will 

co nce ntrate on suppo rting the assault batt al ion s in the 

att ack . 

The primar y referen ce for the en gineer pl an nin g process is Appe ndix E of FM 90- 13. It d oe s have some 

shortcomi ngs, the primary ones being: 

- It take s no account of the maneu ver co mma nder's 

desire to cross his units orga nized for the battl e. 

-It provides an optimis tic " operations research " 

type approach to determining ho w long it will tak e to 

cross. 

-It suggests that amph ibians in Di vision Troop s , Division Artillery, and Di vision Support Co mma nd (D ISCOM) will swim, even wh en rafts and bridge s have 

been established . 

Apendix E to FM 90-13 should be revised to reflect 

live co nstraints. The pl ann ing methodology is fi ne bu t 

it's a bit like a co mp uter-you mu st feed in th e co rrec t 

input. 

THE ASSAULT 

Greater empha si s s ho uld be placed o n the inti al 

nece ssi ty to assau 1tin pneurnati c boats. A!though 

swi mm ing of amphibi ou s veh icles is a more desir abl e 

me tho d of assaulting , I s ugge st tha t it will rarel y be po ssib le . Th e Armo red Personnel Carrier's (A Pe's) ab ility 

to ex it fro m a river is, at be st , ve ry limited . Ex it bank 

preparati on wi ll be re q u ired an d will normall y be 

ac h ieved by tro ops crossing in pne umatic boats and 

worki ng with han d tool s. The first heavy veh icle crossed 

should be a b ulldo ze r or CE V to fur the r prepare the exit 

ban ks. 

Ano the r as pec t of the assault which sho uld recei ve 

ENGINEER 17 
greater emphasis is the seizure of the far bank using 

vertical env elopment. Riv er crossings require at least an 

air parity situ ation. Air sup eriority can be guaranteed for 

specific period s and thi s will be necess ar y for successful 

air assault. The time saved in securing the far bank will 

all ow raft s and brid ge s to be co ns tructed much e arlie r 

than normal . 

To raft or bridge is the qu estion? Do ctrine stresse s the 

classic appro ach to crossing rivers; namel y assaulting, 

then raft ing , and then bri dging . Howe ver, the ribbon 

bridge can be e rected ve ry qui ckly. A 1GO-meter gap can 

be brid ged in 30 minute s. In the foll owing 30 minut es, 

100 vehicles, all tanks if you wish, can be crossed . 

Compare this with rafting with a simil ar amo unt of 

equipment . Assuming that suff icient ramp sec tio ns are 

COMMAND AND CONTROL 

DIVISION COMMANDER 

lished in 30 mi nute s. Th e real issue at stake here is that 

doctrine must be written in concert with the equipment 

available . I' d go for a bridge an d forget about rafting. 

COMMAND AND CONTROL 

During the pl anning pha se , the Crossing Force Commander (C FC) will establish h is HQ, call ed the Cr ossing 

Force HQ (CFHQ) , near the Di vision Main Command 

Post (C P) . Pri or to the start of the operation , it will relocate c lose to the Division Tactical CP o Th e Tactical 

CP- not the Main CP, as suggested by do ctrine - is 

more appropriate because the Tactical CP controls the 

battle and brigades which will be c ross ing . 

--------¥~--~._------..j l~.... i:; __-­O.<:­J/..----_ CROSSING FORCE COMMANDER 

Plans and controls t be operation 

avail abl e , four rafts can be con structed in 15 minutes. 

Th e ne xt 45 minutes will allo w five round-trips per raft , 

enabling a tot al of 20 tanks to be moved ac ro ss . It becomes, therefore, a que st ion of whether the maneuver 

commander is prepared to wait an extra 15 minutes before c ro ssi ng any tanks. 

Th e buildup rate with a brid ge is so much grea ter that 

it is difficult to argue in favor of rafting. How e ver, th ere 

are some additional consid er ations. Rafting a t multiple 

sites offer s an attacking force dispersion ove r a wider 

front. Th is ma kes it difficul t for a defen der to co ncentrate and de fea t each small bridgehead . If yo u brid ge, 

you ha ve to co nce ntra te, but so can the defender. Th e 

wider the river, the lon ger it will take to brid ge , and the 

longer it will take to get heavy support weapon s across 

to defeat ene my counterattack s. 

It can a lso be argued that a brid ge is far more vulnerable to air attac k than a number of rafts. However, a 

bridge can be broken , moved 500 met er s and ree stab -

The CFHQ sho uld includ e the CFC , the CF E and his 

headquarters, ADA repre sentative s, MPs, the transportati on secti on fro m the Division G4 cell, and se curity 

ele ment repre sentatives. Cu rrent doctrine sug gests that 

the Traffic Headquarters (TfcHQ) is a separate entity 

and not a part of the CFHQ . The sa ving in lim e and 

redu ced amount of co nfus ion whic h would be gain ed by 

making the Tfc HQ part of the CF HQ would be subs tantial. Doctrine sho uld reflect thi s. 

Subordinate to the CFHQ will be the Cr ossing Area 

HQ, comma nd ed by the E xec u t iv e Offic er o f th e 

Crossing Bri gades and will norm all y consi st of representative s of ele me nts sim ilar to those in the CFHQ. For 

example , if a Corps MP Company has been ass igned to 

the division for the crossing, the Company HQ would be 

part of the CFHQ. Assuming that a platoon of the MP 

Co mpa ny supports a crossi ng a re a , the pl ato on HQ 

sho uld be pari of the CAHQ . 

From an eng ine er point of view, the co mma nd struc18 SUMMER 1980 
ture is simple (hopef ully , it is always! ). The CFE will 

command all engineer asset s employed in the CA . The 

engineer HQ , subordinate to the CFE and located at 

CAHQ , will probably be pr ovided by an Assault Float 

Bridge Co mpany or a company from a Corps Combat 

Battal ion . The mo st preferabl e so luti o n wo uld be to use 

the HQ of the As sault Fl oat Brid ge Compa ny. It is 

larger than that of a lin e co mpany and orga nically co mmands the platoons constructing the bridges and rafts. 

Communications with the crossing sites are also available if this struc ture is employed. 

Doctrine sugg es ts that the Assi stant Div ision Com ­

mande r (M aneuver) will be the Cro ssing Force Co m ­

mander. At some time during the battle , he will want to 

cross the river. Th e que stion is when ? And who will 

co ntrol the Cross ing Ar eas after the CFC cros ses the 

ri ver? 

Th e ADC(M) would logi call y c ross the river onc e all 

the artillery has crossed . Most of the division 's co mbat 

power would be ac ross and the AD C(M) would be 

primarily int erested in expansion o f the bridgeh e ad . Th e 

per son who sho uld co ntro l the CAs o nce the CFC moves 

is the Crossing Fo rce Eng inee r (C FE) . He will hav e an 

intim ate kno wledg e of th e CA becau se he and his staff 

will have don e th e detailed planning . 

An additio na l reason is that he commands all the engineer asse ts in the CA which re ve rt back to Corps control afte r the di vi sion crosses. He , therefore, provides 

the Corps Commander with th e ability to reg ain co ntrol 

of the are a . As a result , the tran sition from di vision to 

co rps control sho uld be smo oth. Doctrine should address 

the handover of the CA . 

It should be apparent that a lar ge number of communications nets are required . In the crossings o f the 

Main River by First Armored Di vision in Reforger 79 , 

se ve n radi o net s were empl oyed in the Crossing Area, 

all of which emanated from one CA Command Headqu art ers. Th e e lec tronic sig nature would be easily detect abl e . Th e pot ential use of tactical nuclear weapons 

o n the int egrat ed battle field, cu rre nt ly be ing emphasized, makes suc h HQ very vulnerable . 

The use of lin e , as sugge sted in current doctrine, 

therefore becom es a maj or contributing factor in the 

survival of the headquarters. The problem will not be a 

ca pac ity to lay lin e ; this ca n be don e when all routes in 

the CA are marked. Insurin g that sufficie nt lin e is available will be the prime considerati on . 

Traffic control is the backbon e of the organization for 

a river crossing ope ration . It is the tool used to ge t units 

through the CAs as qui ckl y as po ssibl e . It there fore deserves co ns ideratio n. 

Doctrine suggests th at CACs have opera tio na l contro l 

of all units with in or passin g through the CAs . Logically , a Traffic Control Post (T CP) will be established 

at the bou nd ary of the CA to give the CAC the requ ired 

co ntro l. However, the CAC will need to know more 

than ju st wh en a un it reach es th e bound ary . He will 

want to know when a unit is moving . 

There arc two wa ys of communicating thi s . A TCP 

can be e stablished at th e Staging Area outside the 

Cro ssing Area. The major disad vantage of this is that it 

further increases the size of the traffi c control net. 

An alternative method is for the c rossing unit to se nd 

a representative , probabl y the XO , to CAC HQ . Th is 

may neg ate the requirement for the c rossing unit to j oin 

the CA command net. It also allows the crossing unit 

commander to focu s his attention on his primary objectiv e , the far bank . 

The suggestion in curre nt doctrine that Engineer Regul atin g Points (ERPs), be co -located with TCPs, ha s the 

adv ant age of redu cing th e requirement for engineer 

communications. This sounds fine in theory . However, 

the traffi c co ntro l net is lik el y to be he avily loaded -a 

d ivision has some 4000 vehicles. Wh ile a TCP and an 

ERP ma y be co-located , it would be preferable if the 

squ ad manning the ERP had it 's own co mmunicatio ns . 

Routes also de serve further consideration. There will 

be return traffic , e .g., empty ammunitio n vehicles, ambul ances, etc . A se pa ra te route should be establis he d for 

return tr aff ic . Th is will prevent co ngestio n and co nfusion . 

A last word on ERPs. The requirement to techn icall y 

inspect vehicles prior to crossing to insure that the y 

match the crossi ng mean s ha s been some what neglect ed , 

prim ar ily because current bridging and rafting assets can 

car ry any vehicle in the division. But this requirement 

should not be fo rgo tte n, because heav ier vehi cl es than 

thos e within a divisi on will eventually cross. 

Is an ERP required at the cross ing site, as doctrine 

sug gests? The an swer must surely be no. The co m mand 

element of the eng ineer ogranization which co ns tructs 

the crossin g means will be at the crossing site . It will 

probably be a pl atoon headquarters. An ERP would be 

redundant. 

CONCLUSION 

My intent is not to criticize FM 90 -13, be caus e I believe it is a good manual. There are some aspects , however, that require further consideration . Military history 

can be a good tut or and the lesson which comes through 

fro m all suc cessful assault river crossi ngs is the atten ­

lion to detail required and the critical importance of the 

engineers. What I have attempted to do is emphasize 

som e areas wh ere more attention to detail is required. If 

you do no mo re than think about it, then I ha ve achieved 

my aim . 

Major Douglas J. George is the Royal Australian Engineer Ex change Officer at the US Army Engineer 

School. Fort Belvoir , VA. He is currently serving as 

Assistant Chief. Tactics and Operations Division , Department of Combined Arms, Directorate of Training, 

VSAES . 

ENGINEER 19 
Play It Again
 

Wargames simulations are tools to help the commander attain 

the unit efficiency needed to succeed on the next battlefield 

by CPT Denis Gu/akowski 

, .., ..j 

J ... . . 

.. .,. I • " / .... .:" , -, • • '\'" " . .1 , '~

\ 

\

, 

20 SUMMER 1980 
T


1 

I

" 

he map sheet indicates Germany . Hunfeld specifically . A US armor heavy team occupie s its 

battle position, waiting for lead elements of the 

approaching Soviet column to come within TOW range . 

The first vehicles pass the invisible line that mark s 

the beginning of the shooting gallery, but no defensive 

fires initiate. The PT 76s, the BMPs, and even the T-72s 

are ignored in anticipation of more lucrative targets . It is 

only when the BRDMs and roller-equipped tanks leave 

sanctuary that flashes erupt as TOW gunners acquire 

and engage . Artillery from both sides starts dropping as 

the contact heats up . The US combat ratio improves 

with the grass-hopping arrival of Sierra model TOW 

Cobras. Several vehicles are destroyed , many of them 

US .... 

The map sheet changes. The blue combat engineer 

battalion symbol is grease penciled in close to the Imjin 

River. A startling number of red grease pencil symbols 

adjoins it , all too closely. Inside the Tactical Operations 

Center (TOC) , the commander has assembled his principal staff, none of whom has slept in the last 16 hours . 

The Herman Nelson heater in the center of the TOC has 

long since died , another victim of the POL interruption, 

but the staff huddles around it from habit. 

The commander hands out five manila foldered packets, which describe the latest mission. He requests a 

recommendation within one hour. Each individual accepts the packet and begins leafing through it to determine, among other things, what is preempting the 

planned hour of sleep . 

Again the scene shifts, this time north to Alaska. A 

squad leader is planning a move to a job site which may 

very well be in hostile terrain and far from indirect fire 

support . The movement planning necessary includes 

troop tran sportation , relocation of materials , and route 

security. The task calls for a demonstration of critical 

leadership skills. 

The leader estimates the materials he needs , checks 

his vehicle status, breaks down the load, determines 

distance to the job site , computes travel time , lists work 

tasks, selects personnel .. . . 

Some might consider the aforementioned situations as 

fiction, events of the next conflict involving the US, or 

excerpts from Hackett's Third Word War, Augusr1985 . 

Others might recognize them as typical ex amples of 

training in which they hav e participated. 

The scenarios are realistic and fabricated deliberately 

to approximate the combat environment for which all 

soldiers ultimately train . They are presented in one of 

the fastest developing formats of army skill improvement programs. The scenes described are from three of 

the curr ent wargames simulations that are receiving 

much emphasis and much interest, and are representative of what participants face throughout the exercises. 

The first scenario represents routine action of a computer assisted engagement simulation known, surprisingly , as BATTLE (Battalion Analyzer and Tactical 

Training for Local Engag ements). The purpose of 

BA TTLE is to train soldiers in the combined arms concept and to integrate and represent all aspects of a 1980s 

battlefield. Inherent on such a battlefield are terrain use, 

weapons lethality and employment, task organization, 

tactics, logistics, and most importantly , coordinated intera ction of all types of forces-maneuver, support, and 

service support. Through the realism of the third dimension and the speed of electronics, many factors are 

coalesced into a unique system that accurately represents combat. 

ENGINEER 21 
BATTLE participants plot strategy 

A three-dimensiona l sc ale ter rain board becomes the 

battl cfi eld and 1/285 sca le min iatu re s serve as vehic les . 

Bo th US /NATO ami So viet War sa w Pac t Forces, ineluding tanks , armo red fighting ve hicle s. pe rso nnel ca rriel'S, anti ar mor guid ed 111 issi Ie sy stems , a ir defense 

sys tems , attack helico pters , a rtillery , supply ve hic les 

and, as pro mi sed , eng ine er vehicl es are portrayed . 

Th e exe rc ise is wh at is kn own in syste ms design ter ­

minol ogy as "open. " T hat is, it provides for free pl ay 

bet ween two think ing . react ing for ce s, w ith input from 

the exercise caus ing subseque nt beha vior. Contro lle rs 

me re ly se rve J S mon ito rs (p rovi ded the pi aye rs a re 

skilled) an d umpires to interpr et ru les or Judge ambi guo us c ircu rnsta nccs. 

Th e choice of sce na rio , too , rests with the par tic ipan ts or trainin g un it. and the area or the ater oJ operation is limi ted o nly hy the te rrain hoa rds ava ilab le. The 

de ta il and pre cisen e ss o f the simu latio n is s uc h lha l it 

a llows d irec t fire en gagem ent. For example, each irulivid ua l wea pon sy ste m that is found in units up to US 

Battali o n/Task Fo rce size a nd Sov ie t Regiment is provided . Su n ilarly, indirect fire of mortars and howitzers 

accuratel y portrayed. 

If the te rm " co mputer wa rfare" comes to mind . it 

may he d r-nu sscd . inasmu ch [he compute r doc ... no! 

fight [he ba ltic . hut mer el y doc s the hookk eepi ng for the 

exe rcise . W ith the appropriate input , the co mpute r (a 

Wang VP 2200 and a-,so rted pcn phcrals) reso lves di rect 

fire e ngageme nts . assesses indi rect fire rcxultv. slates 

the ou tco me s of air-gro und d ue ls , maint ai ns a runni ng 

status o n eve ry sy stem on the board , records ammunitio n ex pe nd iture , tal lie s pe rso nne l and ve hicular ca sual ­

ties. and ca lls up visual and/or prin ted insta nt replay . It 

e ve n allows parti c ipant s to look ahea d to see wh at will 

happen in a give n sit uation , All outco mes ar e d ete rmined hy performance tabl es, probabil ities o f hits and 

kills , sy stems cha rac teristics , and lethalit y tables stored 

in the computer , rath er than by the hot hand of a good 

cra ps shoo ter. 

Wi thin these ge neral systems is a specific sys tem of 

parti cul ar int erest to c ngineers-i-reali su c e ng inee r pl ay. 

Th e enginee r te net s of mobi lity , countcrm obi l ity, and 

su rvivahiluy ar c de picted in the engin eer rul es su pp leme nt deve lo ped by The En gi nee r Sch oo l. Obst ac lc 

employ ment, ob sta c le h rcachi ng , fighring po sition co nstr uc tio n , a nd most other c lements of combat e ng inee ring. can he useLI as they wou ld be on the hatt lcli c ld. 

Mini scule Combat En g inee r Ve hicle s (CE Vs ), Armored 

Vehi cul ar Launched Bridg es (A VLB s ), and D7s arc part 

of the for ce inventory , as arc comparable Sovie t asset », 

Th e accom pan y ing data of employ me nt times, clearing. 

limes, PH, Pf,. , ma teri al req uirements, and the like arc 

abo found in compute r mem or y . so that e nginee r effort 

is co rrec tly repres ented . After a ll, e ng ineers arc an inrcg.ra l pan of the combined arms ream . 

RA FTl. E, unf'or tu na rc ly , ca nnot he fo u nd a t th e 

do wntow n game s and hobb y store , or e ven the local 

co rn pu tc r hobby ce nter. In tact . anyo ne outs ide of Fort 

22 SUMMER 1980 
«
 

WANG VP 2200 computer does the bookkeeping 

Leave nw orth, Fort Be nning , Fort Kn ox , F ort Si ll, Whi te 

Sands. or Fort Belvo ir , wou ld be hard pressed to ev en 

find a BATTLE. let alone use it. T he reason is tha t on ly 

at the se loca tions does BA TT LE exist, and , with the 

exception o f Le aven worth and White Sands , on ly eval ua tion an d te sti ng is being conducted . Sh o uld te sts pro ve 

the util ity of the syste m , it ma y be expand ed to othe r 

installarions, in cl u ding OCONU S where it ca n be tailo re d for spec if ic loc al use. In any event . the possib iliti e s 

of suc h a sirnulatio n a re stagge ring . 

What abo ut the se co nd sc e na rio ') Al tho ug h it co uld be 

fro m a BA T T L E e x e rci se, it is no t . I n s t e ad, it 

drama tizes a uni t conduc ti ng a tact ical ta ining e xe rc is e 

bv usin g the inno vat ive Engineer Staff Exercise . o r 

ES EX. T h ree years ago USAES id en ti fied a nee d for a 

ve h icle to provide me aningfu l tr aini ng fo r e ng inee r bat ­

ta lion staffs. At the ti me, there was little info rmation 

a va ilable th at e stab lishe d the e leme nts of an e ffe c tive 

a nd su cce ssful staff. There we re volume s of wha t a good 

staff office r sh ou ld do , ho w he sho uld do it and wh y he 

shou ld do it, as we ll as g uide lines o n the te chn ic al ta sks 

o f va rious sta ff po si tions . 

But, mi litary literature exp la ining why any army unit 

staff. le t a lo ne a n eng ineer batta lion staff. was succe ssfu l. wa s virt ua lly non e xistent. There fore , prior 10 the 

deve lopme nt of tec h n ique s to tra in a staff to perform 

well, succ e ssfu l pe rforma nce had to be def ined . Fortunate ly. the research story h a s a happ y e nding . The re was 

su ffi c ie nt ma te ria l o f a com para b le na ture fr o m the 

civi lian se cto r and ot he r se rvic e s, co upled w ith inte nse 

res e arc h e ffo r t . c xpe ri me n ta ri on . a nd inform ati on 

gathe r ing , to yie ld a wo rkab le definition o f cri tical sta ff 

fu nc tio ns , and late r , the mean s to ob serve and measure 

these fu nct io ns . 

The e nd pr oduct . ES EX , sc hed u led fo r val idati on th is 

year, wi ll e na bl e an e ng ine er b<l_tl al ion com ma nd,er to 

co m po se a staff effectivene ss p ro fil e. comprised o j spe ­

c if ic stre ng ths an d we akne sse s, and to tr ain hi s staff to 

mee t perfo rm ance goa ls. The exerc ise is in three par ts, 

Ph ase s I, [I , a nd III. ide ntified as Ind ividual. Co llective 

a nd Combined. ESEX can be co nd uc ted in a ga rriso n o r 

fie ld e nv iro nme nt in as few a s three session." ra nging in 

du rat ion fro m two to four hou rs e ach . Based on th e ou tcom e of each pha se , the commander can co nsult the 

perform an ce improve ment tr ai n in g rec o m mend atio ns, 

add his ow n experie nc e and un it requireme nt s, and devise his own pro gram of staff traini ng . As w ith BA FTL E, ES E X is no t a vail ab le to the ge nera l c o nsume r . If 

the va lid at io n and evaluation i:-. a s favo ra ble as the p re ­

lim in ary respo nse to the Phase I and Pha se II pr ot o typ e 

c heck o ut , e ng ine e r ba tt ali on s wo r ldwide will hav e 

a nother trai nin g tool in the inve ntory by early ne xt ye ar . 

The third scenario shows ho w simu latio n can e nable 

lo wer ec helon leaders to improve sk ills used in d ay- tod ay u nit operat ion. The two des cribed sim ulatio ns do 

no t exe rc ise the sq uad le ader, platoon se rg eant. and 

pl atoon lead er o n rou tine ta sk s . and co nseq ue ntly lea ve 

somewha t of a tra ini ng vo id . 

The answe r fo r e nginee rs is the Combat En g in e er 

Game (CEG), a milita ry and engi neer mission kno wl ­

ed ge game re quirin g demo ns trati on o f ba sic pla nning 

a nd o rgan iz ing ab ilitie s. It is a " mo nopoly " ty pe game , 

in th at it us e s a no nt ac tical garne boa rd , a s o ppo sed to a 

terr ai n mo de l o r map , and game markers to designate 

u nits a nd typ e s o f tra nsp ortat io n . Fro m on e to five 

pl ayers may participat e ind epende nt ly or compe titivel y, 

and c an play the ga me virt ually anywhe re . PI aye rs draw 

ty pical e ng ine er mi ssi o ns, based o n SQT a nd ARTEP 

requ ireme nts, pla n alloc at ion of resou rce s , a nd mo ve to 

job site s by correctly answe ring qu e stion s . O nce a t the 

j ob si te , the pl ayer is q ueried vi a qu e sti o n. ~r o n 

rec nn ica l asp ects an d requirements of the rru ssion . He 

accumu la te s points for co rre c t answers. 

T he numerous missi o ns related to mobility , coun termobili ty . and su rvivab ilit y pro vid e a broad c ross-se c tio n 

o f ta sks abo ut wh ich e nginee rs sho u ld be knowledgable . 

T he ga me serves as a mea sure of knowledge as we ll as a 

me an s of skill-improveme nt. It also provi d e s a differe nt 

app ro ac h to te aching a nd tr aining fir st lin e pe rv iso

The good ne ws is that pro du c tion has be gu n a nd suffi ­

ci ent quantit ie s sho u ld be ava il ab le at th e lo c al T ASC by 

Octobe r. 

I ha ve bri efl y described three recent efforts in wa rg a me s and e ngageme n t sim u la tio ns th a t a rc be in g 

stud ied and/or im pleme nted to tr ain sold ie rs world w ide . 

A maj o r co nce rn is the co st and training effective ne ss of 

any sy stem be in g de ve lo ped . O hv iouxly mo re dollars are 

need ed to buy the speed an d so ph istic atio n of ele c tro n ic 

hard ware. But the abil iry to repro du ce th e bat tle fie ld 

and cha lle nge the people who work o n tha t batt lefi el d 

w it ho ut th e e x pense of tr a in in g am m u n ition , POL . 

sc hed ule juggling , tr ainin g area a nd range constr uc tio n . 

a nd tr avel requirements IS h ighly sought. 

S im ula tio ns suc h as BA TTLE , C EC, and ESEX are 

no t the so le an swer to bet ter. mo re cost-e ffec tive tr ain ­

ing. They a re mere ly tool s to help the co m ma nde r bring 

his uni t to (he le vel of eff ici en cy nece ssar y to succeed in 

the ne xt hatt lefie ld . 

Cap ta in Denis Gulako wski is an Infantry Officer 

cu rre ntly assi gn ed as t he Ch ief of th e A na lysis 

Branch , Co llec tive Trainin g A na lysis and Design Divisio n, Direct orate of T raining Developments, US 

A rmy Engineer S chool, Fo rt Bel voir, VA. 

ENGINEER 23 
lB)~Y(G)ffi\cdl

1rJh~ce©llil

I t was 

Fe b rua ry 27 , 194 5 . 

PFC Herman C. Walla

ce and 

seve ral o the r members o f the 

same unitCompan y S , 30 lst 

En gin eer 

Combat Ban al ion , 76th 

Infantry Division-were give n 

the task o f cle aring e nemy mines 

from a road near Prumzu rl ey , 

Germany . SUdde nly. Wall ace 

he ard a 

so u nd wh ic h he had learned 

to 

fear, the 

sound o f a mine bein g 

ac tivate d . He had stepped 

o n the 

mine himsel f. W all ace ' s fir

st inclinati o n was 

to di ve for co ve r, hu t he mu st 

have known 

that suc h a reacti on 

wou ld mean ce rt ain d eath f

or the 

two comrad es trailin g in hi s footste ps and pro ba b le injury 

to 

man y o ther 

co mrad es . 

Without a mom en t' s hesit ati on , 

Wallace placed his othe r foo t on 

top of the enemy mine to preve nt 

it fro m sp ring ing overhe ad to 

explode . Wall ace was the only 

cas ua lty . 

He died insta ntly . 

For ga llantry in battle , PFC 

Wall ace was po sthumu sl y 

award ed 

that high e st o f mi litar y 

hon ors, 

the Med al o f Hono r. He 

bec ame the tenth A rmy e ng ineer 

in our history to recei ve the 

nation' s mos t distingu ished awa rd . 

The first e ng ine er recipien t o f 

the Med al o f Hono r wa s Sergean t 

Major Fr ederic k W Gerbe r in 

11-\71 an d the most re ce nt 

recipi

e nt was Corpo ral Te rry T. 

Kawamura in 

196 9. Thirte e n 

o the r Cor

ps o f Engineers o ffice rs 

and so ldiers, incl ud ing Wall ace, 

were pr e sent ed the Med al of 

Honor 

be tween 1871 a nd 196 9. 

So me o f the 15 rec ipi ent

s, li ke 

PFC Wa llace , we re killed in 

ac tio n . A nd mo

s: o f them we re 

SGM Gerb er 

1LT Wilson 

1LT Gillespie 

1LT Benyaurd SGT Colyer 

24 SUMMER 1980 
hon ored for a singl e , spec it rc ac t inc luding the defense of the 

of va lor . But so me , lik e Gerber , Philippine Island s and the Baiaan 

we re hon ored for d is ti ng uis he d Pe nin sul a. 

and fa ithful se rvi ce ove r a period Ko rea n War Me dal recipie nt s 

of yearx . Gerber re cci vc d the incl ude d Sergeant George D . 

Med al as a c limax to 32 years o f Libby o f Compa ny C. 3d 

meritori ou s se rv ice to his Eng inee r Combat Batt al ion ; PFC 

coun try . Mel vin L. Brown o f Co m pa ny D, 

O n the heels of Gerber' s award 8 th E ng inee r Combat Batt ali on; 

came th e Civi l War, durin g whi ch PFC Jos eph C. Rodri gue z of 

three more U.S . Army eng ine ers Compan y F. 17th Infantry 

were pre sented the Medal o f Rcg irncnt: and Corpo ra l Dan D . 

HO!1or- Lieutenants John W. Sch oon over of Company A , 13th 

Wilso n , George L. G illesp ie, a nd En gin e er Combat Battali on . 

William H .H . Bcn yaurd . Wil son T he o nly e ngineer so ld ie r to 

and G ille spie e ac h later se rve d us rece ive the Med al of H on or si nce 

Chief o f Eng inee rs. the Kore an War was Co rp o ral 

Foll owing the Civil War , more Terry Kawamura o f the 173d 

th an hal f a century passed be fo re Enginee r Compan y, Ind 

the Medal wa s awa rde d [ 0 Airb orne Bri g ad e, dur ing the 

a no ther Army e nginee r. It W()S Viet nam Co nflict. Kawamur a ' s 

during Wo rld W ar I, on October hero ic deed occu rred on March 

9 , 191 8 w he n Sergeant Wilbur E. 20, 196 9 whe n an e ne my 

Colyer of Company A, ls: dem oliti on s team infiltrated the 

Engi nee rs , Ist Infantry Di vi sion unit headquarters a rea a t Cam p 

d ispl ayed courage and va lo r Radcl iff. Hi s award, pre sented 

beyond th e call of dut y near po sthu rnousl y , sla tes that he 

Verdun , France . d isrega rde d inten se e ne my fir e 

Col yer si ng le- hande d ly Wiped an d o pened fir e with his o wn 

ou t a g ro up of German machine automati c weapon s . Passing up a 

g un ne sts with grenades and the Cha ncc to escape , he th en threw 

enemy's own weapon s. He wa s himself on an enemy explosive to 

later killed in action. protect other members of his un it. 

W orld War II Medal recipi ents Gerbe r , Wilson , Gill espi e , 

inclu ded Pri vate Juni or Van Noy Ben yaurd, Col yer, MacArthur, 

o f Headquarters Com pa ny, Sh ore V<Jn Noy , Specker, Kimbro , 

Banali on , 5 32 nd En gine er Bo at W ill ace, Libby , Brown , 

a nd S ho re Regime nt ; Serge ant Rod riqu e z, Sc hoonover, and 

Joe C . S pecke r of the 48th Kawamura. 

Eng inee r Battalion ; Te chni ci an Names to remember. 

4th Class Truman Kimbro nf Some g ave their h ve s. o the rs 

Compa ny C . 2nd Eng inee r total d edi c ati on. bu t a ll 

Com ba t Bat tali on ; PFC Wall ace ; distinguishe d the ms el ve s 

and Ge ne ra l Dou gl as M acArthur. "conspicuo us ly by galla ntry a nd 

Mac Arthur . an e ngi nee r officer intrepi dit y at th e risk of life 

for 15 yea rs of his di stinguished a bove and be yond the ca ll duty 

milit ar y ca ree r. was c ited for his wh ile e ng aged in a n act io n 

conspic uo us leadership again st against an e ne my o f the U nited 

Japane se force s in (he Pa cifi c , St ate s. " 

PVT Van Noy 

SGT Sp ec ker 

T4G Kimbro 

PFC Walla ce 

GEN Mac Arthur 

ENGINEER
 

SGT Libby 

PFC Bro w n 

PF C Rodrigu ez 

CP L Sc hoonover 

CP L Kawamura 

25 




SPECIAL REPORT
 

. ; ". -. '-! ..

In 1974, the Army began overhauling the system used to train, 

test , classify , and promote enlisted soldiers. The project was called 

the new Enlisted Personnel Man agement System (EMPS). Many 

changes have taken place since then and more changes are 

forthcoming with the complete revision of AR 351- 1, Individual 

Military Education and Training. This article is excerpted from a 

status report on EPMS prepared by the EPMS Task Force Office , 

Enlisted Pers onnel Ma nagement Directorate , US Army Mili tary 

Personnel Center. 

Th e Enl i ste d Person ne l Manage ment System 

(E P MS) is a professio na l de ve lo pme nt cyc le 

whic h beg ins a nd e nds w ith trai ning. It include s 

an eva luation of w ha t so ldiers know a bo ut thei r Prim ary 

M ilitary Oc c upationa l Sp ecia lty (PMOS) and a de terrni ­

nati on o f how we ll the y perfo rm on the job. Th i s is recorded throu gh the submissio n of En lis ted Evaluation 

Repo rts (EERs) . Classification and promotion serve to 

recognize the ac tua l accomplishments a nd pot e ntial of 

tho se so ld iers identif ied as the Army ' s be st le aders, 

TRAINING 

Not muc h has be en writ ten about the det a ils o f the 

so ld ie r' s educat io n system . This is tra ining wh ich is 

nece ssa ry to trai n NCOs to pe rform thei r job s competentl y and to tra in th e m to train so ldiers o n the ir ind ividu al tas ks . Becau se mo st ind ivid ual traini ng ha s to be 

do ne in units , the ke y [ 0 fo rce re adine ss is to ha ve 

trai ned NCO traine rs. 

Im prov em en ts in the Noncommissio ne d Officer Education Syste m (NCOES) d ur ing the past fi ve ye ars were 

aimed at providing bet te r q ua lity tra ini ng to match job 

requ ire me nts fo r a ll NCOs. 

30 SUMMER 1980 
There are fo ur levels of traini ng within NCOES: primary , bas ic , ad van ced , and senior. Primary level 

train ing is skill level I traini ng (E I thro ugh E4) for sk ill 

level 2 (E5) duty positions. It includes the Prim ary NC O 

Course (PN C OC), th e Prim ar y Leaders hip Course 

(PLC), and the Prim ar y Technical Course (PTC). 

PNCOC is a combat arm s lead ership cou rse for 16 

MOS . PLC is also a leadership training course , but is 

design ed for 253 co mbat suppor t and comba t service 

support MOS. PTC is an MOS pro ficien cy tr ai nin g 

co urse designed fo r 23 add itional combat support and 

com bat service suppo rt MOS . 

For exampl e , Combat Eng ineers (M OS l 2B 10) wo uld 

atte nd PNCOC, wh erea s Heavy Tract or Oper ators (MOS 

62E I0) and Crane Operat ors (MOS 62F 10) are eli gibl e 

to attend PLC . 

NCO ES Basic courses are designed to tra in E5s at 

skill level 2 for skill level 3 (E6) dut y positions. Basic 

NC O Co urse (BNCOC) is a combat arms profi ciency 

co urse fo r 14 com ba t arms MOS , while the Basic Tech ­

nica l Co urs e (BTC) is tailored for 34 combat suppo rt 

and co mbat service support MOS . 

Advanced NC O Courses are designed to train E6s at 

ski ll level thr ee for skill level four dut y posit ion s at the 

E7 gr ade level . ANCOC is a combat arms proficien cy 

co urse for 14 MOS . wh ile ANCO C, CS/CSS is a proficiency co urse for 190 combat suppo rt/combat serv ice 

suppo rt MOS. 

Senior NCO Course s are designed to tr ain E7s at skill 

level fou r for ski ll level five dut y positi on s at the E8/E9 

grade level s. How ever, senior NCO courses are virtu ally 

non -existent at pr esent. Except for a fe w S NC OC s 

whic h cross man y MOS (o pe ra tio ns/intellige nce , firs t 

sergeant, etc .), it has been de termined throu gh ex perie nce that the technical skills required for most MO S do 

not differ mu ch between E7 and E8/E9 dut y positi on s. 

Th ere is no require me nt to de vel op an NCOES co urse 

for each skill level. Th at deci sion is left to the propon ­

ent ser vice scho ol. Tr ain ing requirements for each MOS 

are differ ent. Existin g tr aining pl an s re ve al that for 

most MOS, resident train ing will be avai labl e either at 

the primary or the ba sic level , but not both. It appears 

that most MOS will have a resident ANC OC. Also , that 

there will be few, if any, resident SNCOCs. 

In reality , mo st individual trainin g takes pl ace in 

units. Most of the train ing is provided by NCOs under 

the ma na ge me nt of the co mpany offi ce rs . Alt ho ug h 

tech nical and tactic al proficien cy is needed , it's not 

e nough. NCOES mu st produ ce mo re trained trainer s. To 

that e nd, se rv ice sc hools are puttin g the " trai n the 

trainer " tasks devel oped by the Army Traini ng Board 

into the NCOES co urses. 

EVALUATION 

Th e Enlisted Evaluat ion Sys te m (EES) provides info rma tion on how well soldie;s are do ing - indi vidua lly 

and co lle ctively . The system has two parts. The firs t is 

the Skill Qu alification Test (SQT) wh ich mea sure s Primary MOS kn o w-h ow . Th e second is th e Enlis ted 

Evalua tion Report (EER) , in wh ich du ty performanc e is 

evalu ated . Th us, the EES measure s ac tua l da y to day 

perform ance , as obse rve d by supe rvisors (EER/SEER), 

and through PMOS-c ritical task knowledge (SQT) . 

ENGINEER 

THE SQT 

Skill Qualification Tests (SQT s) are replacin g the old 

MOS te sts. In fact , MOS test ing was terminated in 

Janu ary 1977. SQTs are aim ed at tasks the soldier mu st 

do . Further , the y are ba sed on tasks listed in the Sol ­

dier' s Ma nua l for the grade the soldier holds. 

SQTs are perf orman ce- ori ented te st s desi gn e d to 

evaluate the soldier ' s ability to perform the critical tasks 

required of that MOS at the skill level of the curren t 

grade . However, that's not the whol e story . These test s 

are but one step in improvin g the overall read ine ss of 

the unit for combat. 

S QT is a tot a l co ncept of tr a in ing, te st in g a nd 

foll ow-up trainin g , which is the conti nuing aspec t of the 

pro gram. The retention aspect of trained tasks is also 

one of the key features. 

Most SQTs include three compone nts: A Skill Co mponent (SC), wh ich used to be known as the Written 

Co mpo nen t (WC); a Hands-on Component (HO C); and a 

Job-Site Co mpo nent (JSC), which used to be know n as 

the Pe rformance Certificati on Compo ne nt (PCC) . SC 

tasks are aimed at te sting the sold ier's ab ility to perform 

critical tasks that are almos t entirely mental. Different 

dev ices, such as T V tapes , will be used in addi tio n to 

writte n question s to test this porti on . HO C tas ks test the 

soldier's ability to per for m critical tasks on actua l jo b 

equipment or simulators. 

The JSC will allo w a supervisor to observe and sco re 

a soldier's performanc e on certain othe r task s during a 

pe riod prior to the ac tua l SQT date . Thi s as pect is par ­

ticul arly cri tica l because of the time an d resource constraints surrounding test (SQ T) day . SQ T s curre nt ly 

bein g devel oped will be shorte r, more easily administered , and will co ntain some questions in eac h of the 

components. 

Th e M anu al for Ad m i n is t ra t i o n o f the HOC 

(MA HOC), guide to setti ng up the HO C , is available for 

review and ca n provide ad ded assistance , in that commanders can set up "practice " HOC situ ati ons. 

In addition to prep ar in g sol diers ment all y to take the 

test, this procedure will also give them practice in performi ng critica l task s. Other val uable aids inclu de the 

Command er ' s Manual (CM) and the Sold ier 's Manual. 

Th e CM de scribes for the batt al ion and compa ny level 

commander his respon sibiliti es in the overall training 

plan for a parti cular MOS. It lists all crit ica l tasks for 

the MOS , study mat er ials an d referen ces to con duct 

traini ng , and inc ludes inform at ion abo ut where each 

task is taught (e. g . , in training ce nters or un its). 

Th e Soldier 's Manu al lists for the soldier those cr itical tasks need ed to per form sa tisfactorily at his prese nt 

skill le vel and, to some degree . at the next higher sk ill 

level within his MOS. Additio na lly, it tells him ea ct ly 

how to perform the ta sks, and prescribes the sta ndards 

which mu st be met. All tasks tested are lifted direc tly 

from the Sold ier' s Manual. 

For the first-line supe rvisor, a Job Book is provided 

to aid in keep ing track of the train ing and performance 

of his subord inates . The Job Book lists each critical task 

from the Soldier's Manual and pro vides colu mn s for 

ch ecking a GO or NO-GO. alo ng wi th the da te on 

wh ich the NCO last check ed the so ldier's co mpete nce in 

the task . 

Job Book s are ava ilable for inspect io n o r inventor y by 

31 
those who have a "need to know." It is important that 

supervisors insure they are kept up to date, for their 

contents can be used as verification for JSC tasks. The 

first-line supervisor can also use the Job Book to insure 

that work experiences (another form of training) are 

being distributed among all the soldiers . 

Prior to SQT day . unit commanders receive a roster 

for verification of individuals to be tested . He must insure that new arrivals are added to the roster and that 

departed soldiers are deleted. The commander also insures that all soldiers are interviewed to identify the appropriate track (if it is a tracked SQT) for which they 

must prepare . Track or career progression decisions 

should be made as early as possible for the benefit of the 

soldier. 

On SQT day, the commander should insure that all 

eligible soldiers are available for testing . Unit details 

should be assigned to ineligible soldiers. Emphasis on 

specific Soldier 's Manual tasks and insistance upon test 

attendance will have tremendous influence upon the test 

results and upon the ability of the unit's soldiers to perform in the "first battle" where MOS ability will be 

crucial. 

Soon after the SQT answer sheets are forwarded by 

ation . Once this was accomplished, the Army needed 

some way to capture this information. 

The device used to do that job-the glue which ties 

together training , evaluation, and promotion-is the 

Career Progression MOS (CPMOS). 

The CPMOS is a new feature of EPMS , and all soldiers , except sergeants major, will have one . By definition, the CPMOS is that MOS to which all soldiers will 

progress when promoted . The steps of normal progression for each primary MOS , including MOS 12810 , 

12ClO, and 12ElO, are pictured in the flow diagrams of 

AR 611-201. 

The fourth digit of the CPMOS is the important one . 

If soldiers are not yet qualified for the next higher skill 

level , the fourth digit (which denotes skill level) will be 

a zero (example: 12BO). For qualified soldiers, the 

fourth digit will show the next higher skill level. For 

example, an E5, with a PMOS of 12B20 who has completed on-the-j ob experience (OJE) or NCOES and 

scored at least 80 percent " GO" on his SQT, would 

have a CPMOS of 12830. 

On-the-job experience is defined as service in a primary MOS for a period of time . It is necessary to provide an alternate means for soldiers to qualify for the 

The single biggest factor affecting promotion is 

what the Army needs in the soldier's Career 

Progression MO S. 

the TCO , the commander will receive an Individual Soldier's Report (lSR) indicating not only the score received by the soldier, but also a listing of the tasks not 

passed. The ISR comes in two copies-one for the soldier and one for the commander. 

When the soldier is counseled on his SQT performance, he should be encouraged to pursue an individual 

training program to supplement the unit training program in areas of weakness. NCO supervisors can be a 

big help in aiding soldiers to improve in these areas. 

SQT is a continuous and total program. A continuous 

review of the training program insures that needed 

background is given to each soldier so that when the 

"move out" order is given, each member of the unit can 

do the job . When every soldier knows how to do the job 

and is properly led, the mission will get done . That's 

what the Army is all about. 

CLASSIFICATlON 

Thi s part doe s not deal with awarding or classifying 

soldiers in an MOS as a result of service school completion , physical profiles, or enlistment options . Instead , it 

examines how the MOS award will be used to identify 

the level of competence of the soldier in an EPMS environment. 

EPMS was designed to enable soldiers to demonstrate 

their potential for promotion through training and evaluawarding of a higher skill level in the CPMOS or for 

promotion , if the soldier cannot get to school or if the 

NCOES course has not yet been fielded for his MOS . 

In sequence, the Soldier's Manuals tell what soldiers 

must be able to do; NCOES/OJE provides them with 

training to learn the skills of the next higher level ; the 

SQT measures how well they know their PMOS; the 

EER measures how well they do their duties; and the 

Army recognizes the importance of trained soldiers to 

mission accomplishment by rewarding them for professionalism and potential through promotions. 

PROMOTION 

Soldiers who have successfully completed the training 

and evaluation process , and who hav e been awarded the 

CPMOS with the next higher skill level, are considered 

to have the skills and knowledge to perform at the next 

higher level. Provided they are otherwise qualified , the y 

are fully eligible for promotion. 

The single biggest factor affecting promotion is what 

the Army needs in the soldier's career progression MOS 

(CPMOS). The commander's recommendation , necessary time-in-grade , time -in-service , and edu cation are 

all necessary factors to be con sidered in the promotion 

process. However, by proving ability to perform by 

scoring high on the SQT, soldiers can enhance their 

probability of promotion . There are three different 

levels of pro motion: dece ntralized (E2- E4) ; se m i32 SUMMER 1980 
centralized (E5 & E6); and centralized (E7-E9). 

Promotions to grades E2 through E4 are controlled by 

local unit commanders. Certain waiver auth ority is au ­

thorized to that level , dep ending on the number of 

higher grade vacan cie s in the unit and on the number of 

soldiers assigned who could qualify, if a part of the 

time-in-service and time-in -grade requirem ents were 

waived. 

Promotions to grades E5 through E6 are rec ommended by the field commander, but controlled by a DA 

cut-off score system. Promotions are det ermined by the 

number of promoti on points in each MOS needed to 

meet or exceed the DA cutoff scores. Up to 300 promoti on points ca n result from a combination of MOS 

knowledge (SQT results) and demonstrated dut y performance. Soldiers in grade E4 can rece ive up to 150 

points from their commande rs, while E5 s acquire point s 

ba sed on EER scores . The higher the Enl isted Efficienc y 

Report Weighted Av erage , and the high er the SQT 

scores, the more promotion points will be awarde d . 

The new 1000-point worksheet pro vides more opportunity for the soldier of today to acqu ire points by doing 

bett er in those thin gs he can positively influ enc e , such 

as education, awards and decorations, and the evaluaThere is one part of the promotion syste m that is understood by too few commanders and soldiers. Authorization document (MTO E and TDA) vacanc ies are not 

fully covered by the budget that pays for prom oti ons. 

For example , the Arm y ha s approximately 1,800 E8 and 

10 ,000 E6 and E5 positi on s which cannot be fill ed by 

soldiers in the right grade because the dollars are not 

availabl e to pay for promotion s. 

Con sequentl y , th e more vac anc ies th at exist in a 

given grad e and MOS, the more prom oti on s th at skill 

will likely receive. Under the serni-centra ilized system, 

soldiers holding dife rent primary MOS do not compete 

for promoti on . The y onl y compete with others in the 

same MOS and grade. 

It makes little sense to promote soldiers in an MOS 

with no higher grade vacancies while other MOS have 

man y. Infl ation of the grade structure in auth ori zation 

documents sometimes work to the detriment of soldiers 

because " bottle necks " are often created which ca use 

prom ot ion s to go to ot he r MOS, wher e the total of 

Arm y-w ide authoriza tio ns is more feasibly struc tured . 

As a result of the authori zati on/bu dget probl em , the 

Army mu st insure tha t it promote s only the best qualified and mos t able soldi ers. Unde r EPMS , pro motion 

The final objective in promotions is to establish 

a realistic standard f or soldiers to compete 

against. 

tion proce ss. A recent change to the semi- centralized 

promotion system allows soldiers who score 60 points or 

high er on their SQTs to compete for promotion. However, comma nde rs ca n exercise one of their two wai vers 

to recommend soldiers who score 59 or lower. 

Promoti ons to grades E7 throu gh E9 are centralized 

by DA selec tion board and based on the " whole person " concept. Promotion boards are very interested in 

PMOS proficiency (SQT results) and in the ' 'comment s" contained in the Senior Enlisted Evaluation Report s (SEERs). Soldiers competing for promotion to 

these grades are considered onl y with others holding 

MOS in the same career mana gement field s. 

As ca n be see n, EPMS did not cha nge the authority 

level to promot e . However, it did esta blish an SQT 

standard as one of the eligi bility criteria for the semi ­

ce ntra lized promotion system. It also arrayed points derived from SQT resul ts in such a wa y as to give the 

soldier with a good score a better cha nce for promotion . 

At some future time, the SQT standard may be decl ared unw aiverable, for both the ce ntralized and se mice ntralized promotion systems. But this will not happen 

unt il tests for all MOS are available and valid, soldiers 

are trained , and the standard j udge d to be appropriate. 

Me anwhil e, commanders and soldiers should not become complacent. 

Th e final objective in promotion s is to establish a 

realistic standard for soldiers to compete against, instead of competing against othe r soldiers. 

ENGINEER 

potential is best demonstrated throu gh tr aining and testing (SQT) , as well as throu gh the othe r evaluation 

(SE ER/EER) and classification (hi ghe r ski ll level in 

CPMOS) ind icators. 

SUMMARY 

Soldiers must be trained to stay alive and to accom ­

plish mission s. Commanders must evaluate trainin g to 

insur e th at, from an ind iv idu al a nd c o l l ec t ive 

standpoi nt, the Army 's readin ess is maintained . Finally , 

there must be some form of management that will allow 

for the professional development of the soldie r. 

Th is article has described the continuin g program of 

individu al training , evaluation, classifi ca tion at the next 

higher skill level , and promotion . 

Both com ma nders and sold iers sha re the respon sib ility for mak ing these programs work . Soldiers must be 

aware of and seek the challenge and oppo rtunities available. Each so ldier hold s the key to his own future . 

Pr ofessional development is a co ntinui ng proce ss 

throu ghout the soldie r's caree r. Rem ember th e fo ur 

buildin g blocks of professional gro wth: 

• Training (NCOES, OJE) 

• Evaluation (EERISEER, SQT) 

• Classification (CPMOS with higher skill level) 

• Promoti on 

EPMS is a closed loo p sys tem that starts and end s 

with training . 

33 
__R Officer Career Info
 

OFFI CIAL MILITARY 

PERSONNEL FILE 

Re v ie w i ng and upd a t i ng the 

OMPF, especially the Perform ance 

fiche, is important for every officer. 

This responsibil ity becomes e ven 

more critical when an officer is in 

the zone of consid eration for either 

promotion or school selection . Thi s 

fil e contains most of the document s 

considered during the selection 

proc ess. Included in the OMPF are 

OERs, awards and decoration s, and 

the official photograph. 

Officers mu st ensure that a cur ­

rent photograph is included in their 

OMPF . The phot ograph provides the 

only means for the board to determine the officer 's military bearing , 

appearance , and ph ys ical stature. 

Th e se are important factors in consid ering the whole person. 

Keeping the OMPF updated is essential. The task of maintaining this 

file should not be left entirely in the 

hands of the MILPO or MILPERCEN . You are one of the key managers of your file . With the conversion of the OMPF to microfiche , the 

job of re viewing and updating the 

file has become simpler. Offi cers 

ma y, and in fact should , request a 

copy of their OMPF within a month 

or two of the scheduled convening 

date of any board which will be conside ring them for e ither promotion 

or sc hool sele ction . Officers may 

obt ain a copy of their entire microfiche by writing to Commander; 

MI L PERCEN ; ATTN: DAPCP S R-SR ; 200 Stovall Street ; 

Alexandria, VA 22332. 

REORGANIZATION OF 

OPMD-PHASE II 

Phase II of the reorgani zati on of 

the Officer Pers onnel Management 

Di rectorate (OPMD) at MILPERCEN was initiated in April. It is part 

of a four-ph ase plan intended to 

34 

provide officers with long term continu ity in career planning and personnel management. The new orga nization of OPMD is sho wn in 

Figure 1. The pIan doe s not include 

any ch anges in the stru cture of the 

Col onels Division or the Warrant 

Officer Division . 

Durin g Phase II, company grade 

di vi sion s will be re organi zed into 

three career man agement division s 

- (I) Combat Arms Division , (2) 

Combat Support Arms Division and 

(3 ) Combat Servic e Support Div ision . Each officer 's career will be 

managed by a si ngle career di vision 

from e ntry on active duty until 

sel ecti on for prom otion to colonel. 

For example, if an office r is assigned to Speci alty Code 21 , the 

Engineer Man agement Section will 

man age the indi vidu al's career in 

both of his specialty areas. 

Each new career man agement division is organized with a Personnel 

Support Branch , re sponsibl e for 

FIGURE 1 

maint aining ind ividual files and 

proce ssin g reque st s for orders ; a 

Personnel Act ion s Branch , respon sible for changes in caree r statu s and 

the correction of records; a Professional Development Branch, responsible for formal training/educati on 

programs and monitoring assignments; and an Assi gnments Br anch, 

re spo nsi bl e for assign ing officer s 

worldwide . 

The Assignments Branch will be 

further orga nized into management 

section s. For exampl e, the current 

Engineer Branch will become the 

Engineer Managem ent Section. Fi gure 2 provides a complete listing of 

new man agement section titles. 

The obje ctive of Pha se II is to establish smooth fun cti oning di vision s 

before int egratin g the Majors and 

Lieuten ant Colonels Divisions int o 

the new structure . Wh ile very few 

offic ers will be a ff ec te d durin g 

Phase II, a review will be conducted 

to e nsure that all compan y grade ofSUMMER 1980
 
contrnued 

ficers are managed by the appropriate divi sion and management section 

within that divi sion. 

Generally, officers can expect to 

be managed by the division and 

management section which corresponds to their basic branch . However, in some cases, neither specialty is related to a specific branch . 

The records of these officers will be 

reviewed to determine which divi ­

sion and management sec tion is 

most capable of managing the officer's career. Each of these officers 

will rece ive an official letter from 

OPMD explaining their assignment 

to a new management sect ion . It will 

not effect the officer's basic branch 

de signation . 

Another objective during Phase II 

will be the transition to a single 

manager for the non-accession spec ialty positions. Presentl y, assign ­

ments to non-accession specialty positions are made independently by 

six different assignment divi sions . 

When the new organization is fully 

implemented, one management section will coordinate all assignments 

of officers to positions coded with 

one of the non-accession specialities . 

Figure 2 shows how the 27 accession and 13 non-accession s pe ­

cialties have been assigned to the 

new manag ement sections. Sections 

responsible for non -accession specialties will have at lea st one officer 

assigned who holds the appropriate 

non- accession specialty . A major 

change resulting fr om the im ­

plementation of Pha se II is that 

every assignment in a given spe ­

cialty will be coordinated with the 

management section that has overall 

management responsibility for that 

specialty as shown in Figure 2. 

During Phase III of the plan, the 

existing Majors Division will be incorporated into the new care er management div isions. The existing 

Lieutenant Colon els Division will be 

incorporated into the new personnel 

management structure during Phase 

[V . The date s for Phases III and IV 

will be announced following successful implementation of Phase II. 

The dec ision to reorganize OPMD 

was made last August as a result of a 

routine organizational management 

stud y . Pha se I was initiated in 

January and con sisted of the reorganization of the three functional divisions. Under the new structure, 

functional operations are being performed by a Personnel and Training 

Division, an Officer Di stribution 

Division, a Plans , Program s and 

Analysi s Division , and an Administrative Support Office . 

The staff of OPMD is convinced 

that the reorganization will significantly enhance their ability to serve 

the officer corps . 

SPECIALITY ASSIGNMENT CONTROLLER RESPONSIBILITY 

COMBAT ARMS DIVISION 

INFANTRY MGT SEC: 

11-I nfantry 

"54-0PNS Force Dev 

ARMOR MGT SEC : 

12-Armor 

"28-Training Developments 

AVIATION MGT SEC: 

15-Aviation 

FIELD ARTILLERY MGT SEC: 

13-Field Artillery 

"48-Foreign Area Officer 

AIR DEFENSE MGT SEC: 

14-Air Defense 

"46- Public Affairs 

COMBAT SUPPORT ARMS DIVISION 

CHEMICAL MGT SEC : 

74-Chemical 

"52-Atomic Energy 

ENGINEER MGT SEC: 

21-Engineer 

"49-0RSA 

MIL INTEL MGT SEC: 

35-TACISTRAT Intel 

36-Counter Intel/ 

Humit 

37-Elec War1are 

LAW ENFORCEMENT MGT SEC : 

31-Law Enforcement 

COMM/ELECTRONICS MGT SEC: 

25-CBT Comm-Elec 

27-Com/Elec Engr 

"53-ADP 

72-CommlElec Mat Mgt 

"DENOTES NONACCESSION 

SPECIALITIES 

COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT DIVISION 

PERS & ADMIN MGT SEC: 

"41-Personnel Management 

42-Personnel Administration 

43-Club Management 

FINANCIAL MGT SEC: 

44-Finance 

"45-Comptroller 

MAINT & MATERIEL MGT SEC: 

"51-Research & Development 

73-Missile Mat Mgt 

75-Munitions Mat Mgt 

76-Arm Mat Mgt 

77-TKJGRD Mob Mat Mgt 

"91- Maintenance Mgt 

"97-Procurement 

SUPPLY MGT SEC : 

81-Petro Mgt 

B2-Food Mgt 

92-Supply Mgt 

TRANSPORTATION MGT SEC: 

71-Aviation Mat Mgt 

87-Marinefferm Opns 

B8-Highway/Rail Opns 

"95-Transportation Mgt 

FIGURE 2 

ENGINEER 35 
F1 Officer Career Info co",;""" 

OERS PROGRESS REPORT 

Early reports filed under the new 

Officer Evaluation Reporting (OER) 

System (DA Form 67-8) clearly indicate a conscious effort by rating 

officials to fulfill their evaluation 

responsibilities. One of the most encouraging improvements noted thus 

far is the writing of duty descriptions. Most reports contain a detailed summary of the rated officer's 

most important duties and responsibilities, emphasize specific functions required of the officer, and 

note conditions peculiar to the assignment. 

Considerable improvement is also 

noted in the rater's narrative evaluation of the rated officer's performance (Part Vc). In most cases, the 

rater's comments in the performance 

narrative have focused on specific 

aspects of the rated officer's performance, including results achieved 

and the manner and degree of 

achievement. Should this trend continue, the new system will go a long 

way toward providing the type of 

narrative that DA selection Boards 

have been requesting . 

A few reports have been returned 

for correction or improvement of the 

performance narratives. These reports fall into two categories: those 

which include comments on potential; and those whose narratives simply do not address the specifics of 

performance _ 

COMMAND TOURS EXTENDED 

Recent revisions in the Centralized Command Selection System 

(CCSS) have resulted in the extension of Command Tour lengths for 

lieutenant colonels and colonels in 

both CONUS and overseas long tour 

areas to 30 months. The ex.tensions 

are retroactive to 1 October 1979 . 

Major Army Command commanders 

have authority to extend or curtail 

the command tours for up to six 

months for cogent reasons, such as 

timing of training, inspection or 

tests, follow-on assignments, and 

similar reasons with advance notice 

to MILPERCEN . The command tour 

length in overseas short tour areas 

both unaccompanied and accompanied, remains unchanged. These 

changes to the CCSS are designed to 

build unit cohesion, improve readiness, and provide more stability for 

soldiers in field commands. 

PROMOTION BOARD 

GUIDANCE 

An objective of the Officer Personnel Management System (OPMS) 

is that all officers be afforded the 

opportunity for dual specialty development as they progress through 

the field grade ranks. Attainment of 

this goal is sometimes precluded by 

the necessity for an officer to serve 

repetiti ve assignments in one specialty because Army requirements 

for that speciality exceed available 

personnel assets. When this condition exists, a specialty is classified 

as underaligned . 

The basic goal of Officer Personnel Managers is to insure that 

adequate numbers of officers by 

grade and specialty are available to 

satisfy Army requirements. In recognition of this need, the 1980 

Lieutenant Colonel (AUS) Promotion Selection Board which convened in March was provided Specialty Gu id anc e which differed 

somewhat from guidance given in 

previous years . 

At the beginning of its del iberat ion s , the board was given the 

number of promotions needed, by 

speciality, to achieve an acceptable 

alignment condition . The purpose 

was to provide board members with 

an appreciation of the relative magnitude of underalignment by specialty . The data was 1I0t intended to 

be a selection quota. Board members 

were reminded that all eligible officers would be considered equally, 

regardless of OPMS specialty . 

Specialty guidance is indicative of 

the increased emphasis on insuring 

that promotion boards are sensitive 

to Army requirements. Such guidance is intended to foster a positive 

environment which enhances individual professional development and 

ultimately contributes to increased 

unit readiness. 

PROFESSIONAL 

REGISTRATION 

The Chief of Engineers has continually expressed his desire for all 

engineer officers to become professionally registered. He forwarded a 

letter on the subj ect of professional 

registration to all specialty code 21 

colonels and lieutenant colonels last 

September. In the letter, he established an objective that all District 

Engineers be registered by the summer of 1981 . His objective also includes registration or "training" for 

all Deputy District Engineers by 

summer 1981 . Approximately 50 

percent of all specialty 21 colonels 

and promotable lieutenant colonels 

are currently regi stered profession ­

ally. Approximately 65 percent of 

all District Engineers are registered 

as Professional Engineers, while 

about 45 percent of all Facility Engineers (06s) are registered as PEs. 

sse/esc SELECTION BOARDS 

Separate DA Senior Service College (SSe) and Command and Staff 

College (CSC) screening boards will 

convene on or about 8 July to consider officers (other than JAG , CH , 

and AMEDD) for nomination to the 

respective 1980 SSC and CSC selection boards, whi ch are scheduled 

to convene on or about 26 August. 

36 SUMMER 1980 
79 Enlisted Career Info 

_
 

TUITION ASSISTANCE 

The Army will pay up to 75 percent of the tu ition cost fo r formal 

educ ation courses leading to an asso ciate 's, b achel or ' s , or mast er's 

degree , under provision s of the Tu ition Assistan ce Progr am. Tuition assi stance ca nno t, how ever , be used 

for co urses beyond the master 's de ­

gree level or for courses leading to a 

second associate 's degree . In order 

to receive tuiti on assistance , enli sted 

personnel must have enough time in 

service remaining on their current 

enlistment to compl ete the course 

for which assistance is provided . 

Personnel who apply for and accept 

tuiti on assistance and then drop out 

for personal reason s, must reimburse 

the Army for the amount of the assistance. Personnel who drop out 

because of military rea sons or beca use o f illne ss, do not have to 

reimburs e the Army . Check AR 

62 1- 5 or co ntact your local education center for additional requirements and/or information . 

OMPF REVIEWS 

Soldiers may now revi ew the ir 

Offi ci al Military Personnel File s 

(OMPF) at their hom e stations instead of traveling to Fort Benjamin 

Harrison, IN. To obtain a copy of 

your OMPF, simply write to the 

Commander, USAEREC , ATTN : 

PCRE-RF-I, Fort Benj amin Harrison , IN 46249. Include your name, 

soc ial security number and signa ­

ture , and the address to which the 

record is to be mailed . Reque sto rs 

should receive their OMPF co py 

within 15 days. 

Soldiers who wish to review their 

records at Fort Harrison must make 

an app ointment at least five working 

days in advance by ca lling AUTO ­

VON 699-2657 or commercial 317/ 

542-2657. 

Individuals ma y update their 

OMPF by personally delivering autho rized fil e material or by mailing 

it to Comm and er , USAEREC, 

ATTN: PCRE-FR-S , Fort Harrison, 

IN 46249 . Only do cuments authorized by AR 640 -10 will be put 

on the OMPF microfi che reco rd . 

Documents rece ived by ma il that are 

not autho riz ed will be destroy ed . 

Soldiers sh ould , theref or e , chec k 

with the ir local Military Personnel 

Office to veri fy what material is 

authorized for filing in the OMPF. 

NEWEERREG 

AR 623-205 is the new consolidated regulation th at gov ern s the 

preparation and submission of enlisted evaluation reports (EER) . It 

became effective in Janu ary and replaces Chapter 8 of AR 600- 200 and 

DA Pamphlet 623-1 . It follows the 

same format as recently revised regulation s for the Officer Evaluation 

Repo rt ing Sys te m (A R 623-105 ) 

and Academi c Evaluation Reporting 

System (AR 623 - 1). The new EER 

regulat ion provides a single , easyto-rea d ref erenc e source for both individual soldiers and the manager s 

of the EER system. 

REENLISTMENT CHANGE 

Soldiers who fail their Skill Qualification Te st (SQT) may still be eligible to reenlist under a change to 

the Army Reenlistment Program. 

The interim change to AR 601-280, 

effective 15 January 1980 , allow s a 

so ldier's commander to certify that 

the indivi dual is " qualified for con ­

tinued Army Service " and el im inates a previou sly required waiver. 

SQT UPDATE 

Skill Qualif icat ion Tests (SQT) 

for all MOS will be revised in coming months. Major cha nges will incl ude more emphasis on hands-on 

tr arm ng and perform an ce test ing, 

single skill-level testing , and more 

timely feedback . 

The Written Component will be 

renamed the "Skill Compon ent " 

(SC) and will be much shorter than 

in the past. For combat arms E-l s 

through E-4s, it will be limited to 

one hour. For all others, it will be 

limited to two hours. The Hands-On 

co mpone nt (HOC) of the te st remain s basically the same . However, 

commanders will be able to split the 

HOC int o " bite-size " segments so it 

can be given more easi ly . An Alternate Hands-On Component in the 

form of a written test will be available for soldiers who ca nno t take the 

Hands-On Component because their 

unit does not hav e th e ne cessary 

equipment for their MOS . 

A new Job-Site Component (JSC), 

administ ered by first-line supervisor s, will be added to the SQT, 

repl acing the Performance Certifi ­

catio n Componen t. The fir st -l ine 

supervisor will prepare the soldier 

and administer the on-the-job evaluation. 

For co mba t arms sold ie rs, the 

larg est part of the new SQT will be 

hands-on and job site testing . Com ­

bat support so ldie rs will have compa rable hand s-on , job site, and skill 

component testin g . Combat servi ce 

support soldiers will have an SQ T 

made up of one-half skill component 

and one-half hand s-on and job site 

testing . 

Sin gle skill-level testing has also 

been approved. In the past , about 25 

percent of the SQT co nsisted of 

tasks fr om the next higher sk ill 

level. Now soldiers will be te sted 

only at their current skill level. 

The area of common tasks is also 

under study. Within the SQT , a 

numb er o f task s are common to 

every so ldier. The se tasks need to be 

standar dized throughout the Arm y. 

A more effi cient system is being developed to do this. 

ENGINEER 37 
Fl Reserve Components
 

NEW DISCHARGE POLICY 

Soldier s getting out of the Arm y 

before completing their first enli stment could be tran sferred to the Individual Read y Reserve ORR) instead of receiving a discharge , according to new Department of the 

Army policy . 

The new policy applies to Regular 

Army , Reserve, and National Guard 

soldiers separated for such rea sons 

as dependency, hardship, and inability to perform duties due to parenthood . Soldiers separating after 

completing basic training or at least 

eight weeks of unit training at one 

station may be transferred to the 

IRR to complete their six-year obligation . 

EOAC DATES 

Four phases of the USAR Engineer 

Officer Advanced Course will be conducted this summer at the US Army Engineer Center and Fort Belvoir, VA . 

Phases IA and IV will be conducted 

June 15-28 by the 3288 USAR School 

of Greenville, SC. Phases II and VI will 

bc conducted July 6-19 by the 1036 

USAR School of Farrell, PA. 

Prerequisites for attending either session include: 

• Membership in the US Army Reserve or Army National Guard 

• Grade of first lieutenant or above 

• Previous successful completion of 

the Engineer Officer Basic Course 

Applicants who have previously completed EOAC will not be considered for 

attendance at either se ssion of instruction. Applicants for Phase IA must have 

a Confidential Security Clearance , while 

appli c a nts for Ph ase IV must have a t 

least an Interim Secret Security Cle ara nce . 

Application s for Ac tive Dut y for 

T ra ining sho uld be processed throu gh 

normal c o m ma nd channels. Detailed 

informat ion re garding e nroll me nt and/or 

instruction should b e addressed to : 

Commandant, US Army Engine er Center, ATTN: ATZA-DTR , Fort Belvoir, 

VA 22060 . T e l e p ho ne commerci al 

703-664-4095 or AUTO VON 354-40 95 . 

CAPSTONE PROGRAM 

Th e Arm y Cap st one Program ha s 

evolved from two se parate but related 

programs: the Support Unit Improvement Program (SUIP) , and the Wartime 

Mission/Utilization Program (W AR MUP). It is de signed 10 link Reserve Com ­

ponent units with the Active Co m po nent 

units they will be expected to fun ction 

with during wartime . 

Cap ston e provides for dire ct interaction among geographicall y proximate 

AC and RC un its for the purpose of im ­

proved train ing and o verall readine ss . 

The training association is technical in 

nature and will not circumvent or violate 

e stablished command channels on matters of policy, command , control, pl an s , 

or funding . 

The planning association of AC units 

with RC units provides the necessary 

interaction to conduct missi on planning 

based on a wartime assignment to a specific gaining wartime command . Exchange of st anding operating procedures 

(SOPs) and direct command and staff 

communications are encouraged . 

The following group, or " packa ge," 

of AC and RC units is typical under the 

Capstone concept: 

420th Engineer Brigade, USAR, 

Bryan , TX 

Our apologies to current and former members of 

the 18th Egineer Brigade , USAREUR , for 

depicting the Brigade's shoulder sleeve insignia 

upside down in the Spring issue. We regret the 

error and appre ciate the concern and interest of 

the many readers worldwide who let us know of 

the mistake. 

35 3rd Eng inee r Group , USAR , Oklahoma City , OK 

299th Engineer Battalion , Fort S ill, 

OK 

120th Engi ne e r Batt ali on , ARN G , 

Oklahoma 

R7 5 th Eng inee r Batt al ion , AR NG , 

Ark an sa s 

The Capstone Program will ultimatel y 

define a basi s for mobil izati on , sta tionin g , and d e vel opment o f a pe ac et im e 

Re serve Component force tail ored fo r 

wartime e mp loy me nt. 

INADEQUATE DRILL 

ATTENDANCE 

The Appropriation s Committee s of 

both the House a nd the S enate have expressed stro ng se ntime nt for punitive 

ac tion against Re serve units which fa il 

to achie ve at least 70 per cent att endance 

at lOT . The punitive ac tio n will likely I. 

be a denial of pay . The exact language 

implementing the action is not availabl e 

at thi s time , but c o m m a nd e rs s ho uld 

strive LO achieve the highest pos sibl e 

attendance at monthl y tr ainin g sessions 

(R SU T A/RST) in the meantime . 

ROTC SCHOLARSHIPS 

The Army has awarded four-ye ar 

ROTC scholarsh ips to 867 more high 

sc ho o l graduates for academi c ye a r 

1980-81 . These scholarships are in addition to those offered last October. 

Overall , the Army expects more than 

1,000 scholarship recipients to enroll in 

Army ROTC this fall. The application 

period for academic ye ar 1981-82 has 

been in effect since Ap ril I and continues until November IS . Applications 

may be obtained by writing to : Army 

ROTC, P.O . Box 7 000, Larchmont, 

N.Y . 10538 . 

38 SUMMER 1980
 
Engineer Problem
 

Far Shore Near Shore I~

I 1 

14.0' 14.0' Unprepared :: 

Abutment 

.. 

.;'. 

Stiff Clay .. 

Toe of Slope 

As a result of recent inclement weather, a local community in the Hanau area has been denied the use of an 

important road link . The major problem was created by 

a flash flood which destroyed all but the pier foundations of the only Class 60 bridge spanning a small river 

on the outskirts of the community . 

The local crisis did not pass unnoticed by U. S. Army 

engineer personnel stationed within the Hanau area, who 

have maintained an excellent relation ship with the local 

German populace . At a recent cocktail party , the 

Brigade commander requested assistance from the commander of the 559th Engineer Battalion . The 559th 

commander , in turn , task s you, as the commander of the 

516th Engineer Company , to provide a solution to the 

crisis. He gives you the following information: 

• An initial reconnaissance of the de stroyed bridge 

site revealed the gap profile shown above. 

• A Class 60 facility is required . 

• An unlimited amount of Bailey Bridge is available 

from stock . 

Prepared
 

Abutment
 

Compact
 

Sand/Clay
 

• If a multi-span bridge is designed, the piers must be 

of Bailey Bridge components. 

• Conversion sets #3 are available, but there is no 

cable reinforcement. 

Your greatest concern is that your company has been 

equipped with the Medium Girder Bridge for five years , 

and there is very little expertise on Bailey Bridging 

within your unit. Nevertheless, your mission is to design a Bailey Bridge that will carry Class 60 wheeled 

traffic , and to provide at least one alternative design . 

You inform your platoon leaders that approximately 

one platoon (+) is available for site preparation and 

construction . Since you feel this is an opportunity for 

them to gain experience, you insist that they satisfactorily justify their selected design . Your only other instructions to them are that they have seven days to com ­

plete the task . 

See THE SCHOOL SOLUTION. page 40 

ENGINEER 39 
The School Solution
 ----------- - - - - - - -,-------- ------- - --- -------- - - - ----­

CONSIDERATIONS SOLUTION #1	 SOLUTION #2 

-------- - , - - - - - - - - - --------- -,-------- - - -- - -- - -- - - ­

DESIGN 

SPAN LENGTH 

TYPE 

CONSTRUCTION 

Design length 

Capacity
 

Truss type
 

GRILLAGE 

Near Shore 

Far Shore 

PIER REACTIONS 

PIER SELECTION 

ADVANTAGES 

DISADVANTAGES 

Simple Span 

Gap + roller clearance + Safety
 

Setbacks
 

107.75' + 2(2.5') + 3.5 ' + (14 x 1.5')
 

= 137.25'
 

Rounded to 140 feet 

Class 70/70
 

Double triple
 

3 Tons per square foot = Type 4,5,7 ,8 

= roller clearance = 3.5' 

1.5 Tons per square foot = Type 7,8 

= roller clearance = 3.5' 

N/A 

N/A 

No pier required 

I 

Triple storey construction involving 

difficult tech nique 

Required work force exceeds 

available work force 

MUlti-span continuous with Standard
 

Bailey Pier erected on far shore
 

existing pier
 

Span A=36.25' + 24' + 2.5' + 3.5' =
 

66.25'
 

Span B = 47.5' + 2.5' T (14 x 1.5') =
 

71'
 

Span A rounded to 70 feet, Span B
 

rounded to 80 feet
 

Class 80/80
 

Triple Single
 

3 Tons per square foot = Type 3* =
 

3.5' roller clearance
 

1.5 tons per square foot == Type 6,7,8 

=	 3.5' clearance
 

(Select Type 6)
 

70' - 80' = (172 * + 167)/2 = 169.5
 

(

tons
 

* Select worst case) - Reaction required = 169.5 tons
 

Lift required = 14'
 

(Select pier as at Figure 17-33, FM
 

5-277, with all trusses loaded and
 

crib up 7")
 

i Single story construction
 

Requires less numbers to construct
 

Requires construction of pier 

..
 

40 SUMMER 1980