Replacing Pioneers and Assault Troops

[McG]

With the stand-down of Pioneer Platoons already started, will the Army be capable of providing sufficient Engineering support on operations?  

To create a perspective on the issue, consider that a Pnr Pl was structured the same as a Fd Engr Tp and employed the same equipment.  Each Bde had 3 x Pnr Pl; the equivalent of a Fd Engr Sqn.  Each CER has two under-strength Fd Engr Sqns.  That means there is an effective reduction by 1/3 of the Field Engineering capability within each Bde.  

I have heard arguments, based changes to the 20 CMBG model, that describe how this is feasible. (An Infantry Bn with a Fd Engr Sqn attached used to have 3 x Fd Engr Tp and 1 x Pnr Pl to support 4 x Rifle Coy.  It will now have 3 x Fd Engr Tp to support 3 x Rifle Coy).  However, 20 CMBG does not accurately reflect what we deploy on operations.

Do the Engineers need an increase in authorised establishment that corresponds to the number of eliminated Pioneers, or are there ways for us to absorb their tasks without negatively affecting those tasks which we have always been responsible for?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Without an increase in numbers of engineers who we all know are streched beyond their means everything else is of no consiquence.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

To add to this, pioneers specialized basically in mines and boobie traps and how to employ and defeat them (sure we did rope work and timber frames and such) where as engineers had many tasks including the above. With that said I found that on engineer camps pioneers always did a better job employing and defeating barricades, mines, boobie traps etc because we could focus on these tasks and not worry about Bailey bridges and the like.

 

[McG]

I would recommend the creation of a third field squadron in each regiment. This would bring us more inline with our doctrinal structure. It would also allow us just enough Engineering capacity to maintain two battle group deployments on an indefinite basis.

Real world field squadrons only have two troops, so adding a third squadron does not really replace three pioneer platoons. However, on a typical overseas deployment we send a composite squadron with only one field troop. A third squadron would allow us to send two field troops as part of a composite squadron when maintaining a single battle group deployment on an indefinite basis (i.e. Bosnia). The would be the troop we always would have sent and one troop for the pioneer platoon that used to deploy.

If we were asked to support two battle group deployments on an indefinite basis, then on BG could be established for two field troops and the other established for only one field troop. Augmentation from the primary reserve could bring this up to two field troops being available to both battle groups.

This would still leave us three troops short of what our doctrinal CER looks like, but it would give us sufficient strength to meet our peace time needs.

Note: I have used two battle group deployments maintained on an indefinite basis as my model because that is the capacity that exists in each brigade through its manoeuvre units. With one armoured regiment and three infantry battalions, each brigade can fill the four rotations that would be required to maintain a level of two deployed battle groups for a year. Meeting this goal fits with the current ATOF cycle used in the army.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

All the engineers I have talked to is how much they are short in personal and if thats the case I can‘t see where your going to find these people from to form another squadron.

 

[McG]

043 Combat Engineer is not one of the distressed trades. The personnel shortage stems from not being established to have enough personnel and is less a result of established positions being vacant. Growth on the scale I recommend would have to be phased in so that recruiting and promotions can build up to it.

Priority would be given to 1 CER and 5 RGC because 2 RCR can receive support through 4 ESR. Growth would be a troop one year and the second troop a year or two later. The SHQ could be established with the first troop or when the second troop is created.

 

[armybuck041]

Originally posted by McG:
[qb] 043 Combat Engineer is not one of the distressed trades.[/qb]

I‘m not so sure I agree with you there my friend. If this was true, DMCARM wouldn‘t keep closing us to OT out etc. We have been closed for 4 of the last 6 years. CFSME cannot keep pace with the holes we need filled, and units have been getting small waves of new guys, one unit at a time. So if you happen to be at one of those units that recently recieved a batch, things would appear to be OK.

2 CMBG Pioneers have been shut for well over a year now.

 

[McG]

The HR guys have some equation to determine what is a distressed trade and 043 does not make the cut.  It also seems the OT flood gates have been open for the past two years.

But, getting back to my point:  the soldiers to fill two new squadrons would have to come from the CFRC.  Give CFSME a few MMO MCpl and then kick them out to the regiments once enough courses have been machined through (this would temporarily give CFSME a little excess capacity to run courses and then provide the new section comds or 2ic's to the regiments).

The Army has now decided to cut the assault troops out of the armoured regiments.  When considered with the loss of pioneers, the army has eliminated 12 small engineering capability sub-sub-units without any increase in the number of engineers.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I may have to use your stats for my letter to the defence critic of the official oppostion party

 

[Infanteer]

Perhaps I could inject with a few questions here.  Although I've worked with Engineers lots, they always seemed to be driving front-end loaders and packers, so I am a little uneducated in their combat organization and employment.

McG, you say the Pioneer Platoons were organized along the same lines as a Field Engineer Troop; what is the organizational stucture for these sub-sub units, are they very similar to Rifle Platoons (is: three sections and a headquarters section; heavy weapons?).

As well, I'm looking at the 20CMBG model organizational chart, perhaps you could help me in filling in some gaps.  I see:
-  3 Field Engineer Squadrons consisting of three troops each.  I take it these are the working units of the CER?
-  An admin squadron, quite clear.
-  A fourth Squadron, consisting of four troops: 1 is Eqpt, 1 is Ress, and the other two are unmarked.  What is the role of these troops in this fourth squadron?  I take it they fulfill  specialty roles within the CER.

Finally, I understand that some time ago it was decided to make the 043 field out of two engineering trades; field and construction engineers.  Is this correct?  Was the rational behind this related to manpower issues?
I ask this because the distinction between engineers and pioneers given to me by my Pioneer-qualified Section Commander was that Pioneers were a "cheaper" version; as Engineers were too valuable to be plunked at the front line.  I understand the tongue-in-cheek nature of this answer, but is their some truth in it?  Do you feel that with the loss of the Pioneers and the Assault troops, a division of the engineering trade is in order; between Assault Pioneers (focusing on assault techniques, mines, etc) and Combat Engineers (Focusing on the mobility/counter-mobility aspect, as well as the necessary construction aspects).

Cheers,
Infanteer

 

[Spr.Earl]

I understand that some time ago it was decided to make the 043 field out of two engineering trades; field and construction engineers.   Is this correct?   Was the rational behind this related to manpower issues?

I ask this because the distinction between engineers and pioneers given to me by my Pioneer-qualified Section Commander was that Pioneers were a "cheaper" version; as Engineers were too valuable to be plunked at the front line.   I understand the tongue-in-cheek nature of this answer, but is their some truth in it?  

What has happened is we have come full circle but with a dif. number! :

It was Field Eng. and Heavy Equipment Op.'s which are F.E.'s also not to be mixed up with 935's (MSEOP)

In the old day's we were all 041 even if you operated equipment,then they created 042 which was any one who operated equipment and this created another trade with in our trade!! :
These are the two trades that combined.

Heres another one for you.

Before,all trades related to Engineers i.e C.E. were Army as at that time we were like the R.E.,as each Sapper in the R.E. has a secondary trade wheather he be plumber or a wood butcher but a Combat Engineer first.

We realised we had lost that capabilty and back in 95/96 we created the Construction Troops (4th Troop   ) by obsorbing the C.E. trade  too which peed off the Air Force
( Which is why the A.F. created Reserve Air Field Engineer Flights to retain the C.E Trades)
as many were Air Force and were choked at being posted to a Combat Engineer Regiment but still retain their trade designation with in 600 series but are not Combat Engineers but must still must be ready be deployed,so P.T.,weapon's etc. ;D

Your Sec.Commander is correct and it was not a tongue in cheek comment,Pionneers are cheaper as they deal or should I say dealt with only mines,booby trap's,hasty demolitions,breaching obstacles and at one time some bridging and only specialise in those task's and were damb good at it,where as a Engineer does Bridging,Water Purification,Roads and Air Fields,Hasty and deliberate demo,hast,mine war far and the list goes on.

Back in 76 when I first joined just to train a Militia Engineer to TQ3 was $15,000 vs $5,000 for a Infanteer and that's just Militia we are very exspensive to train and to mantain because of our kit and all that encompass' Engineering.

Hope this helps

 

[McG]

... the distinction between engineers and pioneers given to me by my Pioneer-qualified Section Commander was that Pioneers were a "cheaper" version; as Engineers were too valuable to be plunked at the front line.   I understand the tongue-in-cheek nature of this answer, but is their some truth in it?  

Field Engineer training allowed Sappers to do anything that Pioneers could do (and that has not changed with Combat Engineers).   The difference was that Engineer training also encompassed much larger tasks.   When contrasting the employment of Pioneers to Engineers, one could say that Engineers did Pioneer tasks on a more macroscopic scale (Eg: Pioneers did protective minefields while Engineers did tactical minefields) and they brought several additional capabilities to the table.

I do not think there is any need to split the Cbt Engr MOC, but there must be more all arms training if the Engineers are to be expected to fill the void of Pioneers & Assult Troops.   Training is already changing to increase the emphasis of mine warfare, IEDs, and demolitions.

 

[Gobsmacked]

The Army has now decided to cut the assault troops out of the armoured regiments.  When considered with the loss of pioneers, the army has eliminated 12 small engineering capability sub-sub-units without any increase in the number of engineers.

McG,

I was wondering what the overall PY impact of this is?
I've heard that the Asslt Tp had 47 PYs in 4 sections (incl. 60mm Mort), is this correct?
Also, exactly how many PY in Pioneer Plt (and how many sections)?

 

[McG]

Gobsmacked,

The Field Troops & Pioneer Platoons each consisted of four sections, a troop HQ (Tp Comd, Tp WO, Recce, & stores). Sections were armed the same as a rifle section (with the exception of Eryx) and troops were armed the same as platoons (with the exception of 60 mm mortar). Pioneer and Engineer section vehicles, small tools, and M&E loads were the same.

Pioneer & engineer sections were the same size as rifle platoon sections.

I have less experience with the organisation of real world assualt troops.  Maybe an someone with an armd background can fill that in.

 

[Slim]

hey all

During my short time in Assault Troop we had a variety of taskings:
-FIBUA and defile clearing seemed to be one of the most common.
-Some work with the engineers to flush out their numbers for different tasks.
-Lots of enemy force taskings
-Lots of mines and boobytrap stuff as well.

The constitution of the unit (as I remember it) was
44-Lynx with the troop leader, his observer (usually an Mcpl) and a driver
44A, 44B and 44C-M113 with one section of guys (usually understrength) and all the kit (including a SEV kit)

5/4 or MLVW with one or two support guys and, sometimes, the troop sgt (depending on what mood he was in!).

Slim

 

[McG]

... the pioneers are done now right?

Yes.  The pioneer platoons no longer exist.

 

[Slim]

Sad day to see them go...A whole area of expertise has just dissapeared.

Slim

 

[SprCForr]

What specific area of expertise has disappeared? I'm not aware of any unique skills possessed only by pioneers. ???

 

[Slim]

Sad day to see them go...A whole area of expertise has just dissapeared.

Slim

Sorry...I shouuld clarify. From the Infantry and the Armoured Corps.

 

[eod/combatdiver]

Seems like you have a good plan MCG.  However the 043 trade is short 70 pers and and we have been alloted to train 150 more troops to become engineers over the next 2 years.  As the career manager said from that 150 you can expect 1/2 to fail. So we are short 70 now and 75 pers to replace them over the next 2 years and with the amount of troops re mustering and getting out I don't think that we are in any position to stand up any additional SQN's.  I think things are working fine with One Sqn is dedicated to a Infrantry Regiment/ Amour Regiment from the CER's and they can handle all their needs. I do believe that we should have 1 Sqn dedicated to Light Ops with in the Regiment and that may come sooner than we think.

Mike