Should military use crushing attachments for excavators and backhoes?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:21:24 -0500

What are your thoughts on military equipment operators using crushing attachments on excavators versus crushing plants? (click here - http://bit.ly/mbmilitary)

The Army way to crush rock with a crushing plant:
https://youtu.be/Q55pjFr0uQ4

The Air Force way to crush rock with crushing plant:
https://youtu.be/HhzRqf2YwiY?t=8m17s

Occupations:

Air Force AFSC -
Pavements and Construction Equipment (3E2X1) https://youtu.be/TnEX3ct3MX0
REDHORSE http://airman.dodlive.mil/2013/04/paving-it-forward/

Army MOS -
Quarrying Specialist (12G) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAFAvte2ApU
Horizontal Construction Engineer (12N) https://youtu.be/3Y84_FBKb3k
Concrete and Asphalt Equipment Operator (12V) https://youtu.be/I4J1LgLruzE

Navy SEABEE Rating
Equipment operator (EO) http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/enlisted/community/seabees/Pages/EQUIPMENTOPERATOR.aspx

Marine Corps MOS -
Engineer Equipment Operator (1345) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt_xCQLO3wU

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 20 at 2015 7:07 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Nov 2015 19:07:09 -0500

The U. S. Military and Federal Government should utilize any & all civilian tools & equipment; means & methods where economically viable and meeting quality standards. As you know, crushed rock requires specific sizes & angles to perform as engineered, which may be difficult to control utilizing a mobile cruching attachment. In-short, depends on the project's required quality control standards & curshed rock application/use.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2015 11:24 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:24:42 -0500

Not sure I am understanding your question. Could we use it...of course...but should we? Should is the past tense of "shall" and if you put "shall" in a reg, well then you have to use it. We definitely have applications in which we can use it. One such application where it is very handy is during airfield pavement repairs. Once the slab is removed, the pieces can be broken down further to make transportation easier. Like LTC Private RallyPoint Member said, we should be open to any and all available tools to do the job as long as they are feasible (air transportable for example).

Response by SSG Phillip Sivell made Nov 24 at 2015 1:07 AM

SSG Phillip Sivell — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 01:07:56 -0500

Yes

Response by SSG Phillip Sivell made Nov 24 at 2015 1:18 AM

SSG Phillip Sivell — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 01:18:09 -0500

Yes. The problem is getting units to use it. I have only seen two active duty quarry's, the one at Ft. Wood and Schofield Barracs. Both see limited use. I was at ft Wood from 2000-04 we done blast and crushing operations every week. I went to Hawaii and their quarry was closed because of deployment. I returned to FLW in 2008 and the Quarry was all but closed. All rock needs were contracted out. This is a huge wast in equipment, money and expertise. All of the money spent could have been used to train the soldiers that do asphalt and quarry how to do their jobs.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2015 3:12 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:12:06 -0500

I agree that attachments are needed to implement, if not replace, the current systems. I also agree it is difficult to get the military to implement them into the current military crushing operations and even CE/Engineer heavy equipment units. Why is it difficult? The crushing plants are old, expensive, high maintenance technology that is costly to train and maintain and don't really fit most military units. An attachment would be great for training, they're low maintenance, highly versatile, and much more affordable. 1 HYEX/BHL/SKID. 1 Operator. Confined spaces operation. Crushes 9 tons in 8 minutes! Who are the strategic decision makers for military engineer equipment purchasing? Do they realize that they are bleeding out government money, spending it on contracting work when they could do it themselves at a fraction of the price and spend it better on soldier training like you said? I am interested to hear back from you all on this and please feel free to forward and share to get the word out in the military engineering community.

Response by SGT Joshua Newingham made Nov 28 at 2015 5:10 PM

SGT Joshua Newingham — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 17:10:23 -0500

Yes it would be great to have but the Army doesn't have enough quarrys to justify it. The only time I can remember where having one would have be benefical was while in Iraq in 2003 when we was cleaning up bombed buildings.

Response by SPC Rodger Bell made Jan 4 at 2016 11:43 AM

SPC Rodger Bell — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:43:54 -0500

yes if you only need a small amount of crushed stone but keep the big crusher to do larger projects

Response by SPC Rodger Bell made Oct 10 at 2016 6:29 PM

SPC Rodger Bell — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 18:29:21 -0400

only for the light engineers

Response by Fisher Nichols made Aug 16 at 2023 5:10 AM

Fisher Nichols — Wed, 16 Aug 2023 05:10:40 -0400

As far as I know, a POV Truck Tractor and lowboy trailer can be used to haul different types of vehicles, including tactical ones. I couldn't find any specific details in AR 58-1 or ATP 4-11, but maybe someone else here has more info on this? By the way, have you thought about looking into Compact Tractors ( https://www.machinerydealer.co.uk/compact-tractors-for-sale/ )? They could be another option worth considering.

Compact Tractors and Compact Tractors for Sale

Compact Tractors and Compact Tractors for Sale, Great Performance and Highly Affordable. We are a leading UK-based Supplier of Farmtrac Tractors.