• Military Menu                       

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

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Engineers Return to High Intensity Conflict

by CPT Daniel Dolwick, Grizzly 12

---

Did your unit just return from operations in Bosnia? Are you finding it hard to figure out what you need to focus on to prepare your company for a high intensity conflict (HIC) rotation at CMTC? Let me make it a little easier on you. Here are some of the observations and lessons learned from fellow engineer companies that have already been exposed to the agony of their first HIC rotation.

1. Task-Force/Squadron Integration. In Bosnia engineers conducted missions such as bridging, construction, and mine clearing independent of the maneuver. Because of this, engineers' proficiency to interact with the TF staff has diminished.

Techniques:

• Collocate company command posts (CPs) with the TF TOC.

• Integrate with the TF staff for all operations.

• Ref FM 5-71-2, pg 2-15.

2. Company SOP. Daily operations in Bosnia became so routine that there was no need for a company SOP.

Techniques:

• Make sure your unit has an SOP.

• Make sure it contains pertinent information that the soldiers in your company must have to function.

• Include at least the following:
  • PCI checklist
  • Reports
  • Battle Drills
  • Chain of Command

• Make sure the SOP is compatible with the TF you support or your parent battalion.

• Every soldier should know the SOP and have a copy.

3. Use of Volcano. Recent rotations indicate a lack of understanding of the Volcano system on the part of TF leadership/staff.

Techniques:

• Discuss Volcano capabilities and limitations with the TF at home station.

• Demonstrate how the system works to the TF during an OPD/NCOPD.
  • The need for security and hide positions
  • Reload time and locations
  • Route planning

• Conduct rehearsals prior to employment.

• Ref FM 20-32 w/change 1, pg 6-23.

4. Use of MOPMS. The TF leadership/staff do not know how to utilize MOPMS.

Techniques:

• Discuss MOPMS capabilities and limitations with the TF at home station.

• Demonstrate how the system works to the TF during an OPD/NCOPD.
  • Show its footprint
  • Remote Control Unit (RCU)
  • Reporting procedures

• Conduct rehearsals prior to employment.

• Ref FM 20-32 w/change 1, pg 6-31.

5. Company/Team Deliberate Breach. Currently units are not taking full advantage of the engineer combat function when rehearsing for a company/team deliberate breach. During their mission analysis, the S2 and the TF engineer have templated or targeted enemy obstacle locations based on intelligence reports. The CO/TMs are not using that information to construct an obstacle of similar composition to rehearse. Units have not been designating support, breach and assault forces. The breaching fundamentals of suppress, obscure, secure and reduce (SOSR) are not being achieved. The commander is not delegating responsibility to achieve these fundamentals to a specific force. No plan for redundancy in the breach force. Ref FM 90-13-1 w/change 1, chapter 3.

Techniques:

• Make realistic mockups of similar composition to use for rehearsals (i.e., 50m of wire and mines, BLUFOR, not OPFOR standards).

• Designate specific support, breach and assault forces.

• Emphasize the breaching fundamentals of suppress, obscure, secure and reduce (SOSR).

• Assign responsibility to achieve these fundamentals to a specific force.

• Plan for redundancy in the breach force.

• Ref FM 90-13-1 w/change 1, Chapter 3.

6. Soldiers' Field Craft. A tour in Bosnia accustomed some soldiers to a "base-camp" mentality. Recent observations show that field craft has slipped. Some examples are: noise and light discipline, use of camouflage and concealment, field hygiene, weapons cleanliness, not following load plans.

7. Survivability in the Defense. Blade assets are not being fully utilized due to the following:

• Failure to assign priorities.

• Lack of control over moving the blade assets between CO/TMs.

• Failure of CO/TMs to mark their positions prior to blades arriving.

• No plans for shifting blade assets to another CO/TM when the priority CO/TM is not ready to dig.

• Poor site selection (dead space, rocky soil, location silhouettes the vehicle).

• Failure of vehicle crews to assist blade operators in spreading spoil (pushing spoil in from the sides of the position).

• Failure to proof vehicle positions.

Techniques:

• Dig a standard two-tier turret position for a M1A1 and M2/3 during an OPD/NCOPD at home station.

• Ref FM 5-103.

8. Siting Tactical Obstacles. Engineer platoons are siting and emplacing obstacles without the company team commander's involvement. The emplaced obstacles are not covered by direct or indirect fire and often do not meet the desired intent (disrupt, turn, fix, block).

Techniques:

• Ensure the CO/TM commander participates to achieve synchronization between the obstacle effect and fires.

• Use the obstacle-coordination checklist in FM 90-7, p. 5-12, to assist coordination between the engineer and company team commander.

• Make sure that both the engineer and company team commander devote sufficient time to the siting effort.

• Reference: FM 90-7.

9. Know the Rules of Engagement (ROE). Units and soldiers not knowing the ROE. Just as Bosnia had ROE, so does CMTC.

Techniques:

• Learn and implement the ROE down to the individual soldier level.

• This training must be accomplished at home station.

Other engineer units have succeeded in overcoming the problems associated with the transition back to high intensity conflict. Learning from their experiences will put you on the right track.

---

Eight Keys to Support Battalion Success at the CMTC
Return to High Intensity: Observations Made of One Unit's Rotation at CMTC