Posted on Sep 20, 2016
1
1
0
I have served has the Supply NCO for a National Guard Combat Engineer (mechanized (track vehicles)) that for some odd reason was placed under a Sustainment Brigade that consisted mostly of transport battalions (all wheels) and each time we submitted requests for support we had to explain to them that our track vehicles and time in the field (true field time) was different then staying in barracks.
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 10
I am in an infantry battalion as the engineer liaison Nco with the guard now. Our battalion had an attached engineer company this last time in the field. The unit had no desire to even try understanding what engineers bring to the battle space. I had company commanders tell me that when they want billets assembled they will ask for engineers, and that we have no place on recon movements, or breaching complex obstacles. Engineers with R2C2, an EOCA are completely discounted by many leaders who would rather wait hours/ days for EOD to show up to even confirm an IED.
(4)
(0)
SPC Kendall Moore
And those are reasons to why we CEngineers or Sappers are left in the black. I can guarntee that a squad CEngineer or Sappers of my pick will hands down walk through and infantry unit you put us against. We can out shoot, out manuver, out communicate, and out BREACH any unit on the field. If you cant do it" ESSAYONS" show us the direction away we will show you the way. We can be so much more benifial on an OP or patrol than on ECP or chow detail.
(0)
(0)
I've only had one good experience while attached as a Sapper company in support of a unit and that was my most recent.
Other than that I noticed they, for the most part, really just don't understand how to use us. They don't want to utilize the resources on something they don't fully know how to use.
Other than that I noticed they, for the most part, really just don't understand how to use us. They don't want to utilize the resources on something they don't fully know how to use.
(4)
(0)
As a former Engineer Battalion Commander I think I may shed some light on this question. In my experience supporting BN TF and BCTs I believe matter goes all the way down to Company level. Maneuver company 1SGs were not happy cats about having to feed, fuel, arm and water sappers with attached equipment, and there infantrymen do not like to string concertina for their obstacles. I have had one exception. It was during Purple Dragon 98' We supported the opposing forces. It particular there was a 1SG from 1/187 IN. He had to have Company sized "Battle Stars" completed with VFP for TOWs, CSW FPs, and Protective wire obstacles. He was great! he provided sketches of the positions, and a detail to assist with carrying wire and finishing the CSW positions. At the TF level very few staff officers grasp the value for the attached engineer company. It may be due to the dual role that the EN CO. CDR played (TF ENGER/EN CO CDR). Also, because of the volume of engineer specific information in the TF OPORD and the Transport required to more the ENGR CL IV/V. At the Brigade level I found that if the CDR consults and uses the EN BN staff then you as the BDE engineer have accomplished your mission. I also think that when the supporting Engineer Platoon, Co, or BN has success early on in the exercise or deployment then the maneuver folks will value them more, but if you show-up unprepared to work and fight, and not proficient they will treat you like a bad girlfriend! Such is the lot of a Combat Engineer! "Essayons"
(4)
(0)
Read This Next