• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

APPENDIX B

Engineer Estimate

---

THE PROCESS

The engineer estimate is an extension of the command-estimate process. It is a logical thought process that the engineer staff officer conducts concurrently with the supported maneuver-force tactical-planning process. The engineer-estimate process¯

• Generates early integration of the engineer plan into the combined-arms planning process.
• Drives the coordination between the staff engineer, the supported commander, and other staff officers.
• Drives the development of detailed engineer plans, orders, and annexes. Each step of the engineer-estimate process corresponds to a step of the command-estimate process. Both estimates are continuously refined. Table B-1 shows the relationship between these two estimates. The command-estimate process provides the framework for discussing the corresponding engineer-estimate actions. This appendix details each step of the engineer-estimate process.

RECEIVING THE MISSION

When he receives the mission, the staff engineer quickly focuses on several essential components of the basic order and engineer annex. These are the¯

• Enemy situation.
• Mission paragraph.
• Task organization.
• Logistics paragraph.
• Engineer annex.
• Type of operation (offensive or defensive).
• Current intelligence picture.
• Assets available.
• Time available (estimate).

CONDUCTING THE EBA

The maneuver commander relies on his staff to present him with facts and assumptions on which he can base his mission analysis, restated mission, and COA development. The staff engineer uses the EBA as the framework for developing facts and assumptions. Facts and assumptions pertain to the enemy as well as the friendly situation. Developing and refining them is an ongoing process. The EBA consists of three parts: terrain analysis, enemy mission and M/S capabilities, and friendly mission and M/S capabilities (see Table B-2).

TERRAIN ANALYSIS

Terrain analysis is a major component of the IPB and the first component of the EBA. The objective of the terrain analysis is to determine the impact that the terrain (including weather) will have on mission accomplishment. The staff engineer supports the S2 in this process. Using the OCOKA framework (see Table B-3), they determine what advantages or disadvantages the terrain and anticipated weather offers to the enemy and friendly forces. This process has a direct impact on planning engineer operations. See Table B-4 for examples of how the components of OCOKA could impact engineer support.

ENEMY MISSION AND M/S CAPABILITIES

Threat analysis and threat integration are also major components of the IPB. The enemy's mission and its engineer capabilities are subcomponents of the threat analysis and integration process and the second component in the EBA. The staff engineer supports the S2 during the threat evaluation by focusing on the enemy's mission as it relates to its engineer capabilities. When executing this component, the staff engineer must first understand the enemy's anticipated mission (attack or defend) and consider how, doctrinally, it will employ its engineers.

The staff engineer then develops an estimate of the enemy's engineer capabilities. To do this, he uses the G2/S2's order of battle and the knowledge of enemy engineer organizations and other assets, such as combat-vehicle self-entrenching capabilities, that may impact engineer operations. The staff engineer must also consider hard intelligence pertaining to recent enemy engineer activities.

The staff engineer uses the G2/S2's situation template and the enemy's capabilities estimate to plot the enemy's engineer effort and its location. He coordinates with the G2/S2 and recommends PIRs and the engineer force needed to augment the reconnaissance effort that will confirm or deny the situation template. Enemy engineer activities must be organic to the total combined-arms R&S plan. Table B-5 shows a summary on the enemy's mission and its engineer-capabilities analysis.

In the defense, the staff engineer plots the enemy's¯

• Mobility capabilities and location in its formation.
• Use of SCATMINEs.
• Engineers that support the reconnaissance effort.
• HVT (bridging assets, breaching assets, and SCATMINE delivery systems).
• Countermobility and survivability capabilities in a transition to a defense. In the offense, the staff engineer plots the enemy's tactical and protective obstacle effort, use of SCATMINEs, and survivability and fortification efforts.

FRIENDLY MISSION AND M/S CAPABILITIES

The third component of the EBA is estimating the friendly engineer capability and its impact on mission accomplishment. To do this, the staff engineer uses the information he developed in the first step (receive the mission). Since he knows the type of operation, he can quickly place the development of capability estimates in order. He considers the engineer forces task-organized to his supported unit as well as the assets that other members of the combined-arms team have (such as mine plows) to determine the assets that are available. The staff engineer should note the assets under the control of the higher engineer HQ and adjacent engineer units. He may need this information for future reference when he notes a lack of assets during a COA development.

Since the staff engineer has determined what assets are available and has estimated and refined the time available with the G3/S3, he uses standard planning factors or known unit work rates to determine the total engineer capabilities. For example, in the offense, the staff engineer would focus first on the total numbers of breaching equipment (armored vehicle-launched bridges [AVLBs], MICLICs, armored combat earthmovers, CEVs, and engineer platoons) and translate that into breach lanes. In the defense, the staff engineer would determine the number of minefields, hull- or turret-defilade positions, and tank ditches that he could construct with available resources. He would use the results of his capability estimates during the COA development. Table B-6 shows an outline of this analysis.

The staff engineer combines his analysis of the terrain, enemy capabilities, and friendly capabilities to form facts and assumptions about the¯

• Likely enemy engineer effort and the most probable enemy COA.
• Potential enemy vulnerabilities.
• Critical friendly requirements.
• Impact these factors have on the mission. Developing facts and assumptions is a detailed and sometimes lengthy process. The staff engineer must stay focused on the information the maneuver commander and his battle staff require to make decisions. The EBA is a continuous process that is refined as the situation becomes clearer. Each time new information is collected or the conditions change, the staff engineer must evaluate its impact on the mission and refine the facts and assumptions as necessary.

ANALYZING THE MISSION

The staff engineer participates in mission analysis by identifying engineer tasks that are mission-critical and have an impact on the overall mission. He identifies engineer tasks from the higher unit's entire OPORD, not just the engineer annex. He must examine the entire OPORD to fully understand the total scheme of maneuver, the commander's intent, and the instructions from the higher unit's staff engineer. The staff engineer should concentrate on the following portions of the OPORD as he receives and identifies the engineer mission:

• Paragraph 2, Mission.
• Paragraphs 1b and 3, Commander's Intent (two levels up).
• Paragraph 3, Scheme of Maneuver.
• Paragraph 3, Scheme of Engineer Operations.
• Paragraph 3, Subunit Instructions.
• Paragraph 3, Coordinating Instructions.
• Paragraph 4, Service Support.
• Paragraph 5, Command and Signal.
• Engineer Annex. Mission analysis has several components; the staff engineer should focus on engineer capabilities in each component.

SPECIFIED TASKS

These tasks are derived directly from the WO, OPORD, or commander's intent. Examples are obstacle zones, obstacle belts with intents, the required number of breach lanes, and the type of breach that the higher commander designates.

IMPLIED TASKS

The staff engineer develops implied tasks by analyzing the mission in conjunction with the facts and assumptions he developed earlier. Two examples of implied tasks are¯

• Coordinating obstacle handover during a relief-in-place mission.
• Identifying and planning a river-crossing operation. This task occurs to support an attack of seizing an objective if a river crossing is necessary to accomplish the mission but is not specified in the higher OPORD.

ASSETS AVAILABLE

The staff engineer identifies available engineer assets in the EBA. However, he should examine the total force structure of the combined-arms team to help him as he participates in the COA development. For example, determining the amount of available firepower may help him determine whether the force should conduct an in-stride or a deliberate breach or which float bridge a division has available to support a river-crossing operation.

LIMITATIONS (CONSTRAINTS AND RESTRICTIONS)

Constraints are those specified tasks that limit freedom of action. For example, designated reserve obstacles, obstacle zones (with intents), and obstacle restricted areas (ORAs) are constraints that the staff engineer must consider in his mission analysis. Restrictions are limitations placed on the commander that prohibit the command from doing something. Therefore, they impact greatly on the COA development. For example, obstacle zones and ORAs are restrictions because they limit the area in which tactical obstacles can be placed.

RISK

A commander might specify which risk he will accept to accomplish the mission. For example, he may employ the priority obstacle effort in a defense on the most likely enemy AA, but he may plan to use situational obstacles on the most dangerous AA as an economy-of-force measure. The staff engineer must understand how a risk that involves an engineer capability will specifically impact on combined-arms operations and advise the commander accordingly.

TIME ANALYSIS

The staff engineer must ensure that engineer operations are included in the combined-arms time analysis. A time analysis has several steps. First, the staff engineer determines the actual total time available. Second, he establishes a fact or assumption of the time available while preparing the friendly capabilities portion of the EBA. Third, he refines his time analysis. A good tool to use in this process is a basic time-line sketch. With the sketch, the staff engineer can accurately refine the estimate of the amount of time actually available and adjust the friendly engineer capability accordingly. Some items in the time-line sketch are the¯

• Supported unit's OPORD.
• Engineer unit's OPORD.
• Movement times.
• Line-of-departure or prepare-to-defend times.
• Rehearsals.
• Hours of darkness or limited visibility.

ESSENTIAL TASKS

Essential tasks are the specified and implied tasks that are critical to mission success. The staff engineer develops his plans, staff coordination, and allocation of resources on the essential tasks. He does consider the other specified and implied tasks, but his planning centers on the essential tasks.

RESTATED MISSION

The restated mission follows the same format as any mission statement. The who, what, where, and why of the restated mission are based on the mission analysis and then become the mission statement in paragraph 2 in the OPORD.

DEVELOPING A SCHEME OF ENGINEER OPERATIONS

The staff engineer must receive planning guidance to tailor the schemes of engineer operations that he will develop during COA development. How much guidance he needs depends on his and the maneuver commander's experience, their relationship, the time available, and the SOPs. The staff engineer might require guidance in¯

• Situational obstacle planning.
• The use of digging assets (survivability versus countermobility).
• The use of maneuver forces in the obstacle effort.
• Risk acceptance of M/S tasks.
• Interpreting the higher commander's intent pertaining to M/S. The next step of the command/engineer estimate is developing the maneuver COAs. COA development centers on employing maneuver forces. The staff engineer assists in the process by considering what impact the engineer operations will have on the maneuver. He develops a scheme of engineer operations for each maneuver COA. He develops a concept, not the complete plans, and he does this by using the same steps as the maneuver COA but without the detailed force allocation. If time permits, he can work on the details for each plan. Table B-7 shows the following process:

ANALYZING THE RELATIVE COMBAT POWER

The staff engineer compares the anticipated enemy engineer capability with the friendly engineer's capability needed to defeat it. For example, in the offense, the staff engineer considers the enemy's doctrinal norms, hard intelligence, recent activities, and the time the enemy has to prepare. He then determines if the friendly engineer's capability is sufficient to overcome the enemy's capability. In the defense, the staff engineer looks at an enemy's capability and where and when he expects that capability to be employed. He then determines what will defeat the enemy and what assets are available to ensure success.

IDENTIFYING THE ENGINEER MISSIONS AND ALLOCATING FORCES

Based on the maneuver COA, situation analysis, mission analysis, and commander's intent, the staff engineer assesses the engineer's requirements. This is the most important step in developing a scheme of engineer operations.

DEVELOPING A SCHEME OF ENGINEER OPERATIONS

The scheme of engineer operations focuses on how the engineer efforts integrate into and support the maneuver COA. Like the maneuver COA, the scheme of engineer operations is generic, without a specific engineer force allocation or unit designation. It must address all phases of the operation, especially where engineer priorities must change to support the maneuver.

BALANCING AVAILABLE ASSETS AGAINST SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

The staff engineer reviews his scheme of engineer operations in light of the assets he has available (using his EBA product). He uses hasty estimate tools, such as belt-planning factors, blade-hour estimates, and breach-lane requirements, to assess quickly whether adequate assets are available to support the plan. He notes all shortfalls and refines the scheme of engineer operations, if necessary. He refines the plan by shifting assets to the main effort, shifting priorities with the phases of the operation, recommending that the commander accept risk, or requesting additional assets.

INTEGRATING INTO THE MANEUVER COA

The staff engineer prepares a statement describing the scheme of engineer operations. He addresses how engineer efforts support the maneuver COA and integrates the necessary graphics (breach-control measures and obstacle graphics and intents) to show this tentative engineer plan.

WAR GAMING AND REFINING THE ENGINEER PLAN

War gaming is a systematic way to see the enemy's actions and reactions to each friendly COA. Its techniques are used to analyze the COA. Staff analysts identify the best COA and recommend it to the commander. (Table B-8 shows three techniques for war gaming.) The staff engineer participates in war gaming to¯

• Ensure that the scheme of engineer operations supports the maneuver plan and is integrated with the other staff elements.
• Identify weaknesses in his plan and make adjustments, if necessary.
• Ensure that the G2/S2 integrates enemy engineer assets and actions as he plays the enemy force. After analysis, each COA is war-gamed and the results compared. The goal of comparing COAs is to analyze their advantages and disadvantages relative to the other plans, using specific evaluation criteria. Either the staff or the commander, during his planning guidance, develops the evaluation criteria. The staff engineer compares COAs in terms of which scheme of engineer operations best supports mission accomplishment. His comparison is only part of the total comparison by the staff.

RECOMMENDING A COA

The objective of the comparison is to make a unified recommendation to the commander on which COA is best. The staff engineer may have to consider a COA that he can least support if, from the other staff perspectives, it is the best selection. He must be prepared to inform the maneuver commander¯

• Where he must accept risk or what additional assets he will need to avoid that risk.
• Where those assets may be obtained.
• What influence the maneuver may have to exert to get them. Based on the staff's recommendations, the commander decides which COA to adopt for final planning. He may select a specific COA, modify a COA, or combine parts of COAs. Regardless, the commander decides and issues additional guidance for developing the plan to the staff. This guidance concentrates on synchronizing the fight, focusing on bringing the combat multipliers together.

FINALIZING THE ENGINEER PLAN AND ISSUING THE ORDER

The staff engineer focuses his planning efforts on the scheme of engineer operations for the selected maneuver COA. He determines the C2 necessary to accomplish the engineer missions (see Chapter 2 for additional information). The scheme of engineer operations is fine-tuned based on the war-gaming process, commander's guidance, and situation updates. As the staff engineer fills in the details of his plan, he refers to his initial mission analysis to ensure that he accounts for all missions. He ensures that he assigns all engineer tasks to maneuver and engineer units as part of the subunit instructions. He coordinates with other staff members to ensure total integration and mutual support.

The staff engineer uses the basic OPORD (scheme of engineer operations, subunit instructions, coordinating instructions paragraphs) and the engineer annex (see Appendix C) to supply his input. As part of the combined-arms staff, he participates in the OPORD brief to the assembled command group. He briefs the command group on the scheme of engineer operations only once.

---