Engineer white paper - into the objective force.

Engineers are a full-spectrum force for change. During the past year of so, we have all become familiar with the "trident" chart pictured below. It is Chief of Staff of the Army General Eric K. Shinseki's vision of how our Army must transform over the next 30 years. Engineers are fully involved in all three legs of the trident-the Legacy, Interim, and Objective Forces. Our involvement extends from the very tip of the spear all the way back to the sustaining base and includes elements of the soldiers and civilians working in the Active Component, Reserve Component, and Corps of Engineers. No other Regiment has that broad a band of responsibility. In past White Papers, our priority has been the Legacy and Interim legs of the trident. In this paper, our priority shifts to the third leg, the Objective Force.

The Objective Force

As a quick review, let us recall that the Objective Force is to have the deployability of the Interim Force with the lethality and survivability of today's Legacy Force. Beyond that, it will enable us to fight in a whole new way, using total situational overmatch and precision engagement. Built around the Future Combat System (FCS), the Objective Force will also include the Comanche helicopter and the Crusader field artillery cannon. Units will be structured as "units of action" (UA) and "units of employment" (UE). The Army is using these new designations to get us to think about unit organizations other than the platoons, companies, battalions, brigades, divisions, and corps with which we have all grown comfortable. UAs--roughly analogous to today's battalion and brigade combat teams--are tomorrow's maneuver units. UEs--roughly analogous to today's divisions and/or corps-are tomorrow's planners, synchronizers, and supporters.

The force made up of UAs and UEs will be lighter than today's force and easily deployed anywhere in the world within 96 hours. It will have superior firepower, networked together and capable of engaging any threat from beyond the threat's capability to engage us. Situational awareness and understanding of the entire battlefield is an integral part of its survivability and lethality. With this information, we stop reacting to obstacles as we encounter them and start making decisions based on the ability, capability, and intent of the enemy to emplace an obstacle. In this way, we are reacting to information, not just obstacles on the ground.

Envision a typical heavy armored division on today's battlefield, a division equivalent perhaps to one of our divisions in Operation Desert Storm. The commander of that division knows where all of his units are located and knows their capabilities. He wants to know where we are located as well. Now, think of us entering the battlefield in about the same strength as today's maneuver brigade. It doesn't seem a very fair fight, but in the Objective Force, we will not only know where all of our units are located, we will have a complete picture of where all of the Republican Guard units are located as well. And, with our precision strike and other capabilities, we will start blinding the threat before we land, taking down his command and control nodes so he loses touch with his own units. Our brigade-sized unit--the UA--will engage each of the threat's units in turn from standoff distances. Because the threat commander no longer has the ability to keep in touch with his own units--let alone target ours--our smal ler, lighter force will quickly roll up the much larger unit. The Republican Guard commander may not even know we have landed until we are knocking at the door to his headquarters. That, in a nutshell, is the theory of the Objective Force.

Where does this unparalleled situational understanding come from? It comes from sensors and databases, all networked together and available to the soldier on the ground or as he flies to the battlefield. The Global Information Grid (GIG), an element of the Objective Force, is an integrated, interoperable digital information infrastructure supporting the strategic, operational, and tactical information and intelligence needs for our warfighters. Whatever information we need will be available to us from the GIG. Future improved versions of our Digital Topographic Support System (DTSS) and the Maneuver Control System (MCS) will feed information into, and receive information from, the GIG. Data from the intelligence community, national intelligence assets, and other military and civilian information providers will also be fed into the GIG, fused at some point and fed back on demand. We may receive digital geospatial information and imagery in the middle of an Asian jungle from a French, Russian, or even a commer cial satellite.

Organizational structures are still being designed, but current UA designs have engineers embedded within the UA itself, as if today's tank battalion had its own organic engineer platoon. Many engineer "capabilities" will be performed by nonengineer personnel or organizations and may be built into equipment designs (for example, blast mitigating hulls on the FCS). There will be extensive use of robotic systems to perform the dangerous missions of countermine and reconnaissance, to name only two.

UE organizations are still being designed. It is our intent for engineer UE organizations to be modular offspring of today's echelon-above-division (EAD) and echelon-above-corps (EAC) battalion-sized organizations, existing within the UE to support the UA. Some of these modules will be specialized teams. These engineers will be supporting not only U.S. forces but also coalition forces and other governmental and nongovernmental organizations and will be needed to restore facilities to the local population and government. Special "urban infrastructure" organizations and technical or specialized augmentation support teams/cells are likely to be needed for such things as power generation and distribution, sanitary sewers, and water- and gas-distribution nets, in addition to execution of environmental baseline surveys and integration actions. Contractors will most likely provide a good deal of this support.

New Objective Force Tasks

Our work with the Objective Force has already introduced a new concept--assured mobility. Today, our forces avoid obstacles when possible and breach them when necessary, but tend to react to minefields and other obstacles as they approach them. Assured mobility is a combined-arms proactive approach to mobility in which we use information to maximize avoidance and prevent enemy actions that inhibit mobility. Computer algorithms are used along with intelligence, geospatial information, and weather data to identify numerous routes to the objective and to predict likely obstacles along each of those routes. The task force then maneuvers along multiple, dispersed, parallel routes to the objective. In this manner, minefields are no longer as prevalent, and we can handle them at standoff without changing our momentum. The slow, methodical breaching of minefields that we must practice today becomes the exception rather than the rule. This is how it works:

* See First--We develop the mobility common operating picture (COP) by integrating terrain, imagery, and intelligence to determine potential operating areas.

* Understand First--We select, establish, and maintain operating areas by identifying or predicting potential obstacles and booby traps, enemy staging areas, threat avenues of approach and egress, and emplacement methods using standoff detection means. We then "swarm" surveillance assets to cover suspected areas. Sensor nets allow us to detect enemy movements and actions, which cues validation sensors to suspected activity. The sensors then track the enemy and provide a detailed COP to our engagement systems.

* Act First--We swarm surveillance assets to attack the enemy's ability to influence our operating areas before he has a chance to place mines into or onto the ground, and we neutralize any overwatching observation and fires in order to deal with mines or booby traps out of contact.

* Finish Decisively--The cumulative effect of See First, Understand First, and Act First allows us to mass forces arriving on multiple routes to Finish Decisively Mobility actions such as breaching and bridging are included.

With this shift in emphasis, we have also changed our priority for materiel development. Three tailored lists have replaced the single "1-n" list you have seen in the past, one for each of the three forces.

Objective Force 1-n List

1. Mobility Information System

2. Standoff Mine Detection

3. Standoff Mine Neutralization 

4. Brilliant Sensor-Munition

5. FCS-Mobility Variant

6. Maneuver Support Bridging Suite

7. Rapidly Deployable Construction Equipment

8. Terrain Shaping Munition

9. Demolition Modernization

10. Infrastructure Construction Equipment

The Interim Force

We are more familiar with the Interim Force. Like the Objective Force, the CSA's intent is to put a combat capable brigade anywhere in the world within 96 hours, a full division in 120 hours, and five divisions on the ground within 30 days. The Interim Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) has a 118-man sapper company that supports 80 percent of the mobility tasks (1) required for the IBCT and has specialized engineer equipment, including an engineer variant of the Stryker interim armored vehicle, the Rapidly Emplaced Bridge System (REBS), the Volcano scatterable mine system, the small emplacement excavator (SEE), (which will be replaced by the high-mobility engineer excavator [HMEE]), a downsized version of the Mongoose explosive standoff minefield breacher, the deployable universal combat earthmover (DEUCE), and access to the Digital Topographic Support System (DTSS) which is located at the brigade headquarters. The Engineer Regiment in the Interim Division (IDIV) provides the maneuver commander with engineer command and control, mobility (to include assault bridging with the REBS), countermobility; survivability, general engineering (both vertical and horizontal construction), and embedded geospatial engineering support. EAD engineer support augments the capabilities of both the IBCT and IDIV engineer organizations.

We have developed a separate 1-n list specifically for this force. There are a number of differences between this list and the one for the Objective Force; these differences reflect the differences in the missions of the two forces and the time frame of their availability. The IBCT/IDIV engineer equipment and concepts must be proven out for use in the Objective Force.

Interim Force 1-n List

1. DTSS (five variants)

2. Engineer Squad Vehicle

3. Standoff Mine Detection

4. Mongoose

5. REBS

6. Countermine Robotics

7. Raptor/ Advanced Hornet

8. Demolitions Modernization

9. HMEE

10. Light Construction Suite

11. Bridging Suite

12. MCS-E

13. Volcano/APLA

The Legacy Force

The Legacy Force provides our near-term offensive capability. It contains a light "forced-entry" force that includes the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), 82d Airborne Division, 10th Mountain Division, 25th Light Infantry Division, and the National Guard's 29th Light Infantry Division. The Legacy Force includes an "early-entry" force (referred to as the containment force in some documents) composed of forward-deployed divisions (1st Infantry Division, 2d Infantry Division, and 1st Armored Division) and active and Army Reserve reinforcing combat units along with seven National Guard divisions and eight National Guard enhanced brigades. These forces will undergo only modest modernization efforts, sustainment, and recapitalized to maintain our offensive power until the Objective Force is fielded. They will be among the first units to move to the Objective Force. The "heavy-punch" component of the Legacy Force is the modernized III Corps, maximized for a counterattack role and composed of 1st Cavalry Divisio n, 4th Infantry Division, 3d Infantry Division, and 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment. The Counterattack Corps is the Army's highest priority for reorganization. With the Army's decision to not procure the Grizzly, our #1 priority system last year, the Legacy 1-n List is changed as follows:

Legacy Force 1-n List

1. Wolverine 

2. Standoff Mine Detection (HSTAMIDS, GSTAMIDS, and ASTAMIDS)

3. DTSS

4. MCS-E

5. Hornet/Raptor

6. Bradley Engineer Squad Vehicle

7. Mongoose

8. Bridging Suite (common bridge transporter [CBT], improved ribbon bridge [IRB], dry support bridge, and line-of-communication bridge [LOOB])

9. Countermine Robotics

10. Construction Equipment

Headquarters, Department of the Army has directed only modest modernization in this force, accepting risk here to enable development of the Interim and Objective Forces.

Near-Term Work Effort

EAD and EAC Engineer Battalions

Our quest for change does not ignore the EAD/EAC portion of our Regiment. A review of these organizations can streamline certain components into the more mobile and deployable units we need in the future. This portion of our force structure comprises 72 percent of our Regiment and is a major player in our plans for the Objective Force. What this force brings to the fight is the ability for long-term sustainment of operations. However, we must begin to upgrade our construction equipment fleet, for which we need approximately $150 million per year. We have been working with less than that requirement for years. We must take a hard look at the capabilities we need, eliminate redundancy, and develop alternatives to provide our construction needs. Key missions into the Objective Force will include airfield construction and improvement, lines-of-communication (LOC) development and maintenance, infrastructure development and sustainment, and mine-clearing operations and environmental-integration actions.

Restrictive/Complex Terrain

As the Russians learned in Chechnya, and as we learned in Mogadishu, military operations in urban terrain (MOUT) remain the great equalizer. We must prepare and equip our soldiers now for these highly likely future scenarios. We must give our platoon and company officers the tools, experience, and tactical acumen to fight and win the MOUT battle. The Infantry School has the lead in development of MOUT doctrine and training strategy, and we will be in "lockstep" with them as we identify the doctrine, training, leader development, organization, materiel, and soldier (DTLOMS) requirements for the combined-arms team at brigade level and below. We see our traditional engineer MOUT missions of rubble, mine, and booby trap clearing; demolitions; force protection--to include environmental considerations, survivability, and infrastructure repair--continuing into the Objective Force.

Beyond MOUT, engineers will continue to add great value to the force when it encounters difficult terrain. Our force-modernization plan is sharply focused on enabling high mobility of the transformed Army and on emplacing dynamic obstacles for countermobility operations. Geospatial engineering promises detailed terrain-feature information about roads, airfields, buildings, bridges, obstacles, subsurface infrastructure ( for example, storm sewers and utility conduits), and anything that has a symbol on the map. "Point-and-click" technology will bring up an information table (attributes) about each symbol and provide key information upon which tactical decisions will be based. Predictive terrain modeling for both threat analysis and friendly course-of-action development is required. Key programs in the works are--

* Rapid acquisition and application of fully attributed digital terrain data to support three-dimensional terrain visualization.

* Decision support tools that provide predictive modeling of building composition and strength of materials for precise and proportional weapons effects.

* New explosive and nonexplosive technologies for standoff! remote reduction of walls and other obstacles. We are the obstacle-reduction experts and must be fully knowledgeable of the latest in explosive and nonexplosive technologies. To this end, we are establishing a "master breacher" program similar to the armor and infantry "master gunner" programs.

* Modifications to our training methods that ensure we have the necessary skills to meet the challenges of fighting and winning in complex terrain.

* Employment of robotics to support the full spectrum of MOUT--from robotic followers used as "mules" that can transport equipment and casualties to robots used in reconnaissance and clearing/breaching operations to create lanes through obstacles.

* The need for urban rubble-clearing capabilities to maintain maneuver dominance in complex terrain.

* The need to reinforce, rebuild, or reestablish civilian infrastructure.

* The need for our sappers to move, shoot, communicate, and pave the way for the maneuver force they support. Sappers must have the tools, TTP, and training needed to accomplish their mission for the combined-arms team.

Geospatial Engineering. This is the development, dissemination, and analysis of terrain information that is accurately referenced to precise locations on the earth's surface. Although this is new terminology (replacing topography), the emphasis is still on engineers being the terrain experts for the maneuver commander. Our leaders must be "masters of terrain." Geospatial engineering is keeping pace with other Department of Defense organizations and services as they move from the old topographic line-map mentality into a new geospatial information age. The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) has developed the foundation-data concept, a revolutionary approach to provide geospatial information to warfighters. It relies on a readiness and responsiveness strategy that moves away from many standard products and toward an information-management environment. This strategy calls for the establishment of near-global coverage of foundation data, including medium-resolution geospatial information (for example, a joint-operations graphic at 1:250,000 scale). Regardless of location or mission, the foundation data will be available and maintained to provide a consistent, worldwide level of preparedness or readiness. Enhancements to the foundation data will generate mission-specific data sets to satisfy specific mission information needs. The mission-specific data sets are more detailed than foundation data and contain more time-sensitive geospatial content to meet intended uses. Engineer leaders must know how to exploit this information.

Countermine. Currently, at least 72 countries have mines already in the ground, impacting all CINC areas of responsibility. To most Third World countries, mines are a cheap, nasty, and effective means of conducting asymmetric warfare against a First World state and protecting national or tribal interests. Mines remain the "weapon of choice" for many rogue states. The article on page 21 describes how the Engineer School is tackling the countermine requirements for the current and the future force.

Dynamic-Obstacle Emplacement. The offensive and dynamic nature of future operations, coupled with the reduced number of sappers on the ground, forces us to shift from a reliance on conventional obstacles to emplacement of less-manpower-intensive dynamic obstacles with "turn-on/turn-off' and programmable self-destruct capability.

Fratricide from scatterable mines, time and resources required to put up fratricide fences, and implications of short-duration scatterable mines--coupled with problems associated with long-duration release authority--dictate that we look for a turn-on/turn-off capability. We must also look at "self-reporting," "self-marking," and Force XXI Battle Command-Brigade and Below (FBCB2) reporting capabilities to further enhance the task force's situational awareness. We are exploring, with other proponents, possible solutions to emplacing deep dynamic obstacles.

Munitions such as the Hornet, Advanced Hornet, Raptor Intelligent Combat Outpost, and mixed (antitank and antipersonnel) Antipersonnel Landmine Alternatives (APLAs) will provide us with new capabilities incorporating a high-tech ability to seek, identify, and destroy enemy ground vehicular systems. The Advanced Hornet will give us the first remote turn-on/turn-off capability and provide technological insights to add this capability to our current stock of scatterable mines. These intelligent dynamic-obstacle systems seamlessly integrate with our overarching engineer geospatial and command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) MCS.

Alternatives to current "dumb" antipersonnel land mines are being developed. Among these alternatives are an artillery-delivered mixed munition; a "self-healing" minefield consisting of antitank mines equipped with sensors, internal communication systems, and injectors that relocate and synchronize the minefield in near real-time; and non-self-destructing alternative (NSDA) munitions that add a soldier to the decision loop before munition activation.

C4ISR Systems. As we look at the Army's Transformation Campaign Plan--our path to the future--we see that knowledge-based battle command is the key to increased lethality and survivability. Comprehensive and reliable C4ISR systems are the cornerstone of the digitized Army. They give us the COP and superior situational awareness and understanding to facilitate precision maneuver and engagement.

One of our most important near-term goals is to define the critical information that must be digitized and how it is to be managed. It is critical that we work with our field commanders to correctly define this requirement. To maintain our relevance on the battlefield, we must develop and field a world-class engineer MCS. The MCS-E is an automated decision support and management element to be embedded in MCSs supporting the maneuver commander and providing the engineer commander rapid answers otherwise requiring time-consuming, manual calculations. The MCS-E is tied to the DTSS and the rest of the Army Battle Command System (ABCS) and is fully integrated throughout the battlespace. It links the commander to Tele-Engineering assets providing access to subject-matter experts from around the world.

Changes in engineer command and control structures in EAD are also being defined. Problems dealing with a mix of digitized and nondigitized units are prevalent. As LOCs become extended and the security of these LOCs decreases, command and control becomes more challenging. A near-term requirement will be defining the roles of engineer brigades and groups and their span of control in the battlespace.

Training, Leader Development, and Soldiers. The explosion of information technology, with its attendant operational and personnel implications, is helping to forge the Engineer Regiment of the 21st century. Even with changes to our structure, equipment, and technologies, our core functions of battlefield engineering and infrastructure support remain central to our mission. The Regiment must acquire the finest equipment and write the doctrine for using it effectively on the battlefield. The Regiment must also develop soldiers and leaders with the right skills, knowledge, and experience to meet unforeseen challenges of the 21st century. In the end, our most important mission and future success lies with the soldiers we train, equip, and deploy in support of the Army and the nation. Army training is in a period of significant transition. What we train, how we train, and the methods used to plan and execute training are all changing.

The article on page 24 describes how the legacy Officer Education System (OES) will transform to meet the Objective Force education needs. These changes are required due to the diversity of the Army's missions, the scarcity of resources, increased weapon lethality, and an anticipated decrease in available training time and space. The purpose of the next few paragraphs is to provide the direction regimental training will take in the near term.

Digitization is the near-term technology for storing and processing information. In the very near future, there will be fewer hard-copy field manuals, soldier training publications, mission training plans, and such. Access to these training and doctrinal materials comes through the Army Doctrine and Training Digital Library on the Internet or through the Standard Army Training System (SATS). Staffing of proposed revisions occurs electronically. Training development is also transitioning to electronic media. There will no longer be paper-based programs of instruction, lesson plans, andjob and task analyses. The training-development process will be accomplished in the Automated Systems Approach to Training (ASAT) database. Training developers input information into ASAT, the data are manipulated, and the output is training products that soldiers! units/activities obtain via an electronic medium (Internet, SATS, or data discs).

Classroom XXI takes the classroom to the battlefield and the battlefield to the classroom. It provides worldwide access to digital information, training, and simulation. We currently have 13 classrooms with this capability and will have 27 by 2009. These classrooms provide a multimedia environment with worldwide access to instruction/information. The digital format of training materials/products provides a faster, more economic means of delivery. In the near term, the Engineer School conducts small-group instruction using expert observer-controllers from the combat training centers, assesses student comprehension and performance, and delivers world-class source materials on demand--to include the capability to televise live classroom instruction to students worldwide.

Distance learning is a concept for delivering training to soldiers when and where it is needed without having to bring the soldiers to the schoolhouse. It is the engine making Classroom XXI achievable; it incorporates a number of emerging technologies to accomplish "distributed learning." CD-ROM and computer-based (Web-based) multimedia programs are two technologies used by the Engineer School. Some training-support packages and portions of some courses are available via these media. The Engineer Focused Battle Command/Staff Training (EFBCST) System is an Engineer School initiative consisting of three p progressive training tools for commanders and staffs: the Engineer Battle Staff Training System (EBSTS), Engineer Staff-Conduct-of-Fire Trainer (ES-COFT), and Engineer Collective Command and Staff Trainer (ECCST). The EBSTS is an Internet-based series of courses designed to train commanders and staffs on critical individual tasks. Eight individual position lessons have been developed or are under development. We are continuing to pursue funding for the remaining parts of this training system. Distance learning will be applied in many ways to achieve TRADOC's goal to have soldiers/students spend less time in resident instruction at the school; major portions of courses will be accomplished via distance learning.

Simulators and simulations (Sim2) are in great demand for accomplishing training. Increases in operating tempo and ammunition costs are coupled with a decline in maneuver areas and ranges. Currently, the Engineer School uses constructive simulations (Janus and Brigade/Battalion Battle Simulation [BBS]) to conduct training exercises for leader courses (officer and senior noncommissioned officer). In the next few years, Janus and BBS will be replaced with One-Semiautomated Forces (One-SAF), providing more realistic training possibilities. The training strategy for the Wolverine relies heavily on Sim2 for both institutional and collective/sustainment training. We are working hard to become an active player in the virtual training world. The Engineer School is working with TRADOC on the justification and requirements to include engineer equipment and systems in the close combat tactical trainer/virtual training arena. Our edition of this effort is called the Engineer Combined Arms Tactical Trainer (ENCATT). Pendi ng funding, we project having this capability for the engineer force by the 2005 time frame. Simulations continue to become increasingly realistic and eventually will include simulations of individual soldiers connected via fiber-optic/distributed interactive simulation lines all over the world.

Tactics, techniques, and procedures and new doctrine will be developed for engineer soldiers and leaders with new equipment and concepts to support the Interim and Objective Forces.

Conclusion

Development of new engineer capabilities is not solely the job of the schoolhouse. Good solutions require the help of the entire Engineer Regiment. I challenge the combat developments community, school, labs, and engineer commanders in the field to focus on the issues presented throughout this paper. By focusing our efforts on these top issues, we will be able to achieve our goal--to remain the best--trained, -prepared, and -equipped engineer force in the world.

Endnote:

(1.) The company's limited countermobility and survivability capabilities, and no general engineering capability, make it dependent on other engineer units for this support.

Major General Aadland is the Commandant of the US. Army Engineer School and Commander of the Maneuver Support Center. Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

Mr. Allen is the lead analyst and science advisor for the Concepts Branch, Engineer Division, MANSCEN DCD. He is retired from the U.S. Army Reserve with 34 years of active, reserve, and civilian military duty.