For Official Use Only


D O T M L P F Recommendation



Download 180.27 Kb.
Page7/11
Date20.10.2016
Size180.27 Kb.
#6436
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11

D O T M L P F

Recommendation:




Issue D-5: The combined employment of Facility Engineer Support Teams (FEST) and the Facility Engineer Teams (FET) led to success in reception and staging of troops.
Discussion: Field Force Engineering is an emerging U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) term and concept to give structure to ad hoc engineering structures, engineering command and control, and facility engineering support in a wide array of contingency operations and is articulated in FM 3-34, Engineer Operations.

The FETs and Facility Engineer Detachments (FED) have provided a wide variety of services in a Directorate of Public Works (DPW) capacity to include: Project management, construction management, quality assurance, contract management (COR), design services, facility master planning, maintenance and repair, utilities, environmental services, work order and service order management, housing management, real property management, force protection, mine & unexploded ordnance (UXO) clearance operations, training mission support, and contingency planning.

In August and September 2002, the Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC) leadership identified two tasks necessary for the build up of contingency forces in theater. The first was develop an Army Airfield complex at Camp Udairi for bed-down of rotary wing aviation and other national assets. The second was the expansion the bed-down capacity for Camps Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey and Virginia in addition to sustaining DPW services to the rotational 3rd ID brigade combat teams.

The FET, serving as the DPW, provided the master planning, initial design and project management for Camp Udari. A FEST from the Corps of Engineers Transatlantic Program Center (CETAC) was brought into theater on 11 September 2002 to work with the FET to complete the design and specifications for the design-build solicitation package. Then the FEST conducted a solicitation through the Corps’ Installation Support Office and completed a technical review of the bidders for availability of award by 30 September 2002. Three solicitations with a value of more than $20 million were completed and ready to award within 19 days.

Integration of FEST into DPW or FET organizations made the project a success. The USACE Project Management Business Process states that every project should have one project manager and one project delivery team. The work is inherently process oriented and customer focused. A DPW on the ground gives the commander responsive facility engineer support and effective liaison with other technical staffs that compose the Field Force Engineer.

The FEST and FET continue to provide facility engineer support to base camps and lodgment areas and provide engineering and environmental services to the war effort and the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) as they conduct stability operations in Iraq.




D O T M L P F

Recommendation:


E: C4 ISR
Issue E-1: Echelons Above Division (EAD) attached engineer units were challenged to conduct Reception, Staging and Onward Integration (RSOI).
Discussion: Several limitations made integration a challenge. The physical separation of EAD units and engineer brigades tremendously complicated the planning and RSOI process. Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) was the primary communication means in the pre-deployment stages, but it proved incapable of passing large briefing files used in planning operations. Uncertainty over units’ arrival dates in theater further complicated planning and the RSOI process.

Many EAD units were not attached to the divisions until very late in the planning phase. Units assigned to conduct RSOI for these EAD engineers were often short of resources such as combat equipment and materiel required to outfit the arriving units.

Engineer staffs also lacked experience working with the Field Engineering Support Team (FEST), Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) and prime power. Due to the late integration, units often did not discover the capabilities and support needs of these specialized teams until they actually went out on missions and recons with them.

D O T M L P F

Recommendation:




Issue E-2: Divisional engineer brigades lacked the command and control (C2) capability required to effectively communicate with subordinates and higher echelons.
Discussion: Contrary to doctrine, divisional engineer brigades fought almost the entire campaign as a separate entity from the Division Main Command Post (DMAIN). The Engineer Brigade Main Command Posts (EMAIN) controlled numerous forward passage of lines (FPOL) and stability operations that required long-range communication capabilities. By modified table of organization and equipment (MTOE), engineer brigade units have limited long-range communication capabilities. The following systems were used during the campaign:

1. Single-Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) radios were used extensively for battalion and below communications, but very rarely could the engineer brigade talk to all of its subordinate units via Frequency Modulation (FM). FM relay extended the range of the FM net but only in one general direction. Retransmission (RETRANS) was not a viable option because they could not be secured in a non-contiguous, nonlinear battlefield.

2. The Mobile Subscriber Equipment (MSE) network worked well when units were stationary, but operation tempo (OPTEMPO) precluded MSE for major portions of the operation.

3. The engineer brigade had a single Tactical Satellite(TACSAT) radio that enabled the brigade to listen to the division command net. The division engineer could talk to the Commanding General (CG), but could not always accurately portray the engineer picture and make recommendations because he could not routinely receive reports from and talk to his subordinate commanders.

4. Force XXI Battlefield Command-Brigade and Below (FBCB2) was another long-range communication system that provided leaders with excellent situational awareness. Unfortunately, there was only one system fielded to the engineer brigade, and most engineers had to rely on borrowing time on their supported maneuver units’ systems.



Download 180.27 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page