<arising from a prolonged lurk>
This discussion of engineering is quite interesting - J. Atkinson, could
you throw together that post on Engineering doctrine? If nobody else wants to
see it, private email would be fine. Also, pardon my ignorance, but what
national military doctrine POV are you speaking from? I don't know how much
they vary. Could someone (knowledgeable) put up an engineering doctrine from
the
Russian/Warsaw Pact POV? For comparison, as I tend to play 'eastern'
forces more often.
And to clarify things (& smooth hackles) could someone point out the technical
differences between these various groups of lunatics? (engineers/assault
pioneers/sappers - from a grunts perspective) What are they equipped
with, and what are they expected to do, reasonably. As a field commander, I am
sure that I will find PLENTY of unreasonable things for them to do..."You're a
motor-rifle regiment - of course you can clear mines. NOW."
> You wrote:
> This discussion of engineering is quite interesting - J. Atkinson,
It's on my list o' things to do...
national >military doctrine POV are you speaking from? I don't know
US Army.
> Could someone (knowledgeable) put up an engineering doctrine from the
I've got some stuff on it, I'll see what's worth posting.
> And to clarify things (& smooth hackles) could someone point out the
(engineers/assault >pioneers/sappers - from a grunts perspective) What
Sapper in US is term for Light Combat Engineer, in UK/Commonwealth is
what you call an enlisted Engineer (Her Majesty's Engineers/With the
Rank and pay of a Sapper! Good ol' Kipling!)
are they equipped with, and >what are they expected to do, reasonably.
ANYTHING.
Actually, a Combat Engineer unit has five main functions.
Mobility--enhance manuever units' ability to move by removing
obstacles, both manmade and natural
Countermobility--as above, but in reverse and to the other guy
Survivability--enhancing maneuver units' ability to fight and survive
by construction fighting positions and other emplacements
Terrain Visualization--enable the maneuver commander to understand the
effect of terrain on his mobility, through engineer-oriented
reconaissance.
Fight--Fight as infantry when necessary.
As a field commander, I am sure >that I will find PLENTY of
unreasonable things for them to do..."You're a >motor-rifle regiment -
of course you can clear mines. NOW."
Zhukov's theory on mineclearing was that if he ignored the mines and pressed
through anyway, he'd take less casualties than if he stopped to clear them.
> As a field commander, I am sure >that I will find PLENTY of
Especially as in WW2, minefields were often used to block areas that could not
be covered with direct fire.
> You wrote:
> Especially as in WW2, minefields were often used to block areas that
Which is exactally the opposite of the Way Things Ought To Be!
Obstacles can perform a few functions. They can channelize the enemy into a
kill zone, they can delay the enemy to keep him in a kill zone, and they can
disrupt his attack. If you expect it to stop him, you're out of your mind.
And an obstacle that's not defended isn't an obstacle. I can clear mines no
sweat if no one is shooting at me. Not a problem. You throw in 122mm artillery
and 7.62mm fire, and things get tricky. Obstacles must be covered by at least
observation and indirect fire, preferable also by direct fire.