The Engineer-Bradley Fighting Vehicle (E-BFV)
by MAJ Aniello L. Tortora, S-3, 4ID Engineer Brigade
To be a relevant force multiplier in the 21st Century Army, combat engineers need a mobile and survivable platform. Engineers are looking at the Eingineer-Bradley Fighting Vehicle as the answer.
Since the mid-1980s, combat engineers have struggled to keep pace with the modernized M1/2/3-equipped forces they support. Too often, CTC rotations demonstrate that engineer equipment is outdated and will not satisfy the demands of 1990's combat nor will it meet the needs of our 21st Century Army.
The M113 is a perfect example:
- It is slow.
- It has a high deadline rate.
- It provides little protection.
- It serves only as a troop and cargo carrier.
We are on the doorstep of the 21st Century, and it is now very clear:
The M113 has long outlived its usefulness as a combat engineer troop carrier.
The Army is transitioning from a mechanized to an armored warfare force. In mechanized warfare, soldiers move to an objective in a vehicle and dismount to conduct their mission. In armored warfare, soldiers move on the battlefield in a survivable, firepower-laden platform that allows them to conduct their mission, mounted and under armor. The implication for combat engineers is a need to progress from a sapper-based force to an equipment-based force. Moreover, our equipment must be capable of providing the functions needed to accomplish our mission.
The characteristics of the Force XXI battlefield will demand even more from combat engineers. Like the maneuver forces they support, combat engineers need platforms with speed, versatility, and survivability. Force XXI technologies will allow greater dispersion, enable distributed operations, and will increase the tempo of battle like never before. All these Force XXI enablers put demands on providing mobility to the force unlike any previous doctrinal change. Equipping combat engineers with the Engineer-Bradley Fighting Vehicle is a step in the right direction and essential to the future of combat engineer forces and to the success of maneuver forces.
What follows is a discussion of the initial results of an on-going Bradley Concept Evaluation Plan conducted by an engineer brigade and the United States Army Engineer School. The end-state for the evaluation is to determine if the Bradley is suitable for combat engineers and to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the Bradley as a combat engineer platoon vehicle. Throughout the training and evaluation, the focus of the engineer brigade is to provide the engineer community with feedback in three areas:
- What are the new engineer tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) for conducting combat engineer missions using Bradleys?
- How is the Bradley vehicle load planned so engineers can carry what they need to execute their combat engineer mission?
- What type of gunnery proficiency must be achieved by engineers, and how is engineer training balanced with gunnery training?
Bradley Concept Evaluation Plan
In February 1998, a combat engineer company made history when it fielded nine M2A0 Bradley Fighting Vehicles. The higher engineer battalion received the Bradleys on loan from a National Guard armored division.
The structure of the combat engineer company was minimally changed with the fielding of the Bradley.
- The number of personnel assigned to the combat engineer platoon was decreased to match the force structure authorizations from the Conservative Heavy Division Design MTOE (Engineer platoons go from three squads to two).
- Bradleys were substituted for the company's M113s. The company commander received a Bradley, and four Bradleys were assigned to each line platoon: one for the platoon leader, one for the platoon sergeant, and one each for two sapper squads.
Two points are worth noting regarding the structure of the Bradley engineer company.
1. The engineer Bradley is not referred to as a squad vehicle. Instead, the engineer Bradley is called the Engineer-Bradley Fighting Vehicle (E-BFV). This is in keeping with today's offensively oriented doctrine where the engineer platoon, not the squad, is employed as the basic breach/reduction unit. This is also true of countermobility operations which are more focused on emplacement of scatterable minefields. The engineer platoon sites and marks these obstacles.
2. The reduction of the engineer platoon from three to two squads was not precipitated by the transition to Bradleys. The reduction in squads is the result of a previously implemented MTOE change and is not linked to Bradley fielding.
The evaluation began in March 1998 with New Equipment Training (NET) and culminated in August 1998 with the unit's participation in a focused rotation at the National Training Center (NTC). The Bradley NET was conducted in two phases:
New Equipment Training
The first phase was conducted in 18 training days and included: driver training and licensing; maintenance training; turret operation and training; gunnery skills training with Unit Conduct of Fire Trainer (UCOFT); and MILES gunnery training.
The second phase of the NET was Bradley gunnery qualification. The company completed Bradley gunnery in eight days by first completing Bradley Gunnery Skills Testing (BGST) and UCOFT refresher training the first day, Table V the second day, and then two days each on Table VI, VII, and VIII. Engineers conducted their gunnery in accordance with FM 23-1, Bradley Fighting Vehicle Gunnery. The engineer company fired practice tables V, VI, and VII and then qualified on the Table VIII. These tables should not be modified for engineers because the tables include the same type of engagements engineers would encounter while conducting engineer missions.
The total NET for combat engineers lasted 26 days. No training was conducted on the TOW weapon system as this was not a weapon system engineers would be expected to use in accomplishing their mission. The NET proved to be fairly easy for combat engineer soldiers and leaders who quickly adapted to new equipment and skills. In addition to the dedicated NET team, the company borrowed other resources to accomplish the training.
A qualified Bradley master gunner was needed at both company and battalion levels to train gunnery skills and to plan, prepare, and help execute gunnery qualification.
The company also required a dedicated UCOFT to prepare for gunnery and maintain gunnery skills.
Between phase I and phase II of the NET, the combat engineer company conducted company/team lanes training with an armor task force to prepare for NTC. The company focused on validating load plans and on the TTPs for conducting missions in offensive and defensive operations. The company took this training a step further by conducting a one-week platoon lanes FTX to further refine the TTPs they would use when executing their mission at the NTC.
Findings
1. Combat engineer soldiers love the Bradley because it provides them speed, mobility, protection, and firepower not previously available in an M113.
2. Engineer leaders champion this vehicle because of its versatility and potential.
3. Maneuver forces support combat engineers in Bradleys because E-BFVs can maintain the pace and tempo of maneuver forces and provide enhanced mobility and countermobility support.
4. Row minefield placement was found to be easier and more productive in the Bradley than in the M113.
5. The turret and main gun of the Bradley have proven to be extremely valuable to combat engineers and have provided an increase in capability and versatility. Engineers in M113s rely on maneuver forces to protect them, which often drains the already stretched firepower of infantry and armor forces. Bradley Engineers can better protect themselves during movement and provide their own local protection while breaching and reducing obstacles. Thus, the Bradley Engineer Company and Battalion is better suited to perform as a breach force during battalion and brigade deliberate breaches.
6. The E-BFV increases our capability to conduct countermobility operations. While the E-BFV platoon is capable of conducting conventional mining operations, the focus of countermobility effort centers on the rapid emplacement of dynamic obstacles. Engineer platoon-, company-, and battalion-size countermobility organizations can be formed with the capability to operate independently on the battlefield. These organizations comprised of E-BFVs and scatterable minefield systems could protect themselves during movement and while emplacing and marking obstacles.
7. Sustainability is an area where E-BFVs are winners. During a two-week company/team lanes FTX, only one Bradley was deadlined. During the same period, an M113 company had six M113s deadlined at various times. Bradleys are more sustainable than M113s for two reasons:
- The M113 is an aging vehicle while the Bradley fleet is relatively new.
- As we adopt the Force XXI centralized logistics support concept and move from supply-based to distribution-based maintenance, an economy of scale is created through the use of common chassis. Although the Bradley is more expensive to maintain than the M113, when the increase in survivability, capability, and sustainability are weighed against cost, the additional cost is more than justified.
8. Another tremendous success story for the E-BFV and combat engineers was gunnery. Confident and motivated engineers conducted Bradley gunnery only six weeks after their introduction to the vehicle, producing astounding qualification scores. All crews qualified on their first attempt (Q1 rating) with one crew qualifying distinguished and two crews qualifying superior. This is a qualification record rarely achieved.
Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs)
The engineer company's higher battalion is developing detailed TTPs for the Bradley Engineer Platoon and Engineer Company. Converting from M113s to Bradleys has not generated dramatic changes in TTPs. Most of the TTPs used for operating in M113s translate satisfactorily for operations in Bradleys. In some areas, however, new TTPs are being developed as a result of the enhancements provided by the more survivable and versatile Bradley. For example, TTPs for lane marking and row minefield emplacement require minor modifications.
Mine Plows. The engineer battalion has been experimenting with the use of V-type surface mine plows with the E-BFV. V-type plows have the potential for maintaining mobility of the force enroute to an objective. The blades can clear rubble and skim scatterable mines from level, hard-packed surfaces. They plow well in soft soil where adequate spoil can be maintained before the blade. The blade would be even more useful if it floated along its horizontal axis so it could be employed along semi-level surfaces, such as combat trails. The blade currently does not perform well on uneven surfaces or in rocky soils.
Load Plans. Engineer soldiers have developed standard load plans for the E-BFV which facilitate the successful execution of combat engineer missions. Every piece of platoon equipment was examined to determine what was truly necessary for an engineer platoon in combat. TOW storage racks were removed from the M2A0 Bradley to increase interior space and the exterior was adapted to carry wire, pickets, and tools. Although Bradleys do not have as much interior space as the M113, the E-BFV can carry the necessary engineer equipment for combat. The E-BFV load plans were evaluated during the NTC rotation.
Interior/Exterior Modifications. Engineer soldiers developed plans for modifying the interior and exterior of the Bradley to increase space and utility. Through an agreement with the Bradley Project Manager and the Red River Army Depot, these plans were used to modify an M3A0 (Cavalry Fighting Vehicle). Bench seats with storage boxes were installed in place of the individual seats. Shelves and cabinet-type storage boxes were installed in place of excess TOW racks and ammunition boxes. On the exterior of the vehicle, posts were welded to carry pickets and lane-marking materials, and the trim vane was used to carry concertina wire. Additionally, a larger bustle rack was installed. These were simple and inexpensive modifications that could be completed internal to the battalion. M2 Bradleys can be similarly modified to increase space and function. M2 ODS Bradleys already have more interior space than earlier M2 models as a result of similar modifications.
Added Engineer Functions. The potential exists for adding additional engineer functions to the E-BFV:
- One possibility would be to replace the TOW launcher with a weapon system that employed a high explosive munition similar to the 165mm high explosive "bunker buster" round used by the Combat Engineer Vehicle. An E-BFV demolition gun could be used to reduce roadblocks and other obstacles.
- Another opportunity would be to design and mount a small Volcano panel on the E-BFV. Each Bradley engineer platoon would then have a rapid scatterable minefield capability.
Gunnery. The engineer battalion is developing a platoon live-fire table for combat engineers. Bradley Platoon Gunnery for Infantry consists of Table XI, Platoon Practice, and Table XII, Platoon Qualification. The qualification is based on the platoon's ability to execute collective tasks in a live-fire environment. Similarly, the Engineer Platoon Table XII will focus on offensive/breaching operations under live-fire conditions. A Bradley Engineer Table XII will serve as an excellent graduation exercise from platoon lane training. In addition, it will prepare the engineer company to participate in the maneuver task force Combined Arms Live Fire Exercise (CALFEX).
CONCLUSION
The E-BFV has made engineers a more valuable part of the combined arms team. It is the platform from which to launch the combat engineers into the Army After Next. Inexpensive and simple modifications to the Bradley have alleviated load plan fears. Plows and other attachments offer added advantages for the combined arms team and enable the engineer force to move from mechanized to armored warfare. The Bradley increases confidence in our leaders and is the only choice for the survivability of our soldiers. Finally, we have found gunnery not to be a distracter to training and believe it has the potential to improve engineer training by merging gunnery with engineer lane training.
Chapter
4: How the Engineer Company Can Support Defensive Missions for the Three-Company
Battalion
Chapter
6: Combat Engineer Equipment
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
