DOCSLIB.ORG

Current and Future Roles and Capabilities of Engineer Robots in Modern Armies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current and Future Roles and Capabilities of Engineer Robots in Modern Armies CURRENT AND FUTURE ROLES AND CAPABILITIES OF ENGINEER ROBOTS IN MODERN ARMIES Michal Kopuletý Abstract: The paper deals with current and future roles of engineer robots in the world armies and especially within Czech Army Corps of Engineers. First chapter gives reader insight into problematics. Second chapter is dedicated to military robots, their definition, features, basic requirements and their taxonomy. Third chapter is focused on current and future roles and capabilities of engineer robots within world armies and also Czech army and gives some general recommendations regarding to future application of engineer robots into military practise. The last chapter summarizes the scientific outputs and briefly inform about possible future use of engineer robots and their importance. Knowledge obtained by studying of scientific and professional literature was assessed by methods of analysis and deduction. Additional information was gathered by interviews with experts. The paper can be used as brief introduction into current and future roles of unmanned/robotic systems within military engineering and as study material for engineer officers, students and other interested persons. Keywords: engineer robot, unmanned system, military engineering 1. Introduction Military engineering (MILENG) covers broad spectrum of activities – from combat to construction. Character and phase of the operation affect type of provided engineer support. Engineer tasks are usually very challenging and specialized. These types of tasks demand large quantity of time, forces, and assets and require special equipment [1]. Traditionally, MILENG tasks have been man power intensive, time-consuming, logistically demanding and dangerous [2]. What is more, military engineering and especially combat engineer tasks are frequently conducted in hostile environment with explosive hazard. But how to face this hazard when minimization of losses is always one of the main goals of deployed units in military campaigns? Heavy losses can affect deployed unit very negatively. Resistibility and force protection are extremely important in the sense of survivability and minimization of forces and means losses. One way of reducing risk to human life is to implement unmanned/robotic systems into military practise. Additionally, robots can reduce workload and save time. Robotic automation is inevitable process of human civilization development and modern armies react to this reality. Undoubtedly military robots and unmanned systems are becoming standard and common equipment of modern armies in recent 15 years. The process of robotic application interferes into all military areas and nor military engineering (MILENG) is exception. According to numerous studies, it is evident that application of unmanned technologies will have great impact on MILENG in the future, so we can predict that military robots will be integrated into Engineer corps as standard means of providing combat and general engineer support in military operations. 27 But a lot of questions is still unanswered. What are overall capabilities of these systems and what is their future? Do Engineers really need these systems? Will robotic systems push soldiers out of the battlefield in the future? This paper deals with these elementary questions and tries to find the answers. Main subject of this paper is to identify current state of implementation of robotic means into Czech engineer corps, to define their task and their capabilities. The paper compares current to required state and proposes possible solution of identified problems. 2. Military robots for military engineering, their features, taxonomy and basic requirements Modern armies implement the most modern and advanced military systems. These systems extend capabilities of the individual army branches and of the armies as a whole. Application of advanced unmanned systems will probably continue in haste. Their significance will grow quickly and by now we can predict rising numbers of unmanned systems across all domains – air, land and sea. These systems confirmed in the past military operations that can improve situational awareness, situational understanding, reduce manpower, increase performance of own forces, minimize risks for civilians and reduce overall costs in recent military operations. 2.1 Military robots features and basic requirements and characteristics The need of application of robotics into military engineering is stressed in US Unmanned Integrated Roadmap (UIR) and even in Concept of building ACR [4]. UIR considers combat engineering as area of activities suitable for robotics (unmanned systems) application. Additionally, the document states that unmanned systems can provide persistence, versatility, ability to survive and reduction of risk to human life. In many cases, robotics can be preferred alternative to perform 3D (dirty, dull and dangerous) tasks [5]. According to Concept of building ACR, essential engineer tasks to be conducted by advanced robotic system in the future (year 2025) [4]. So we can see clear demand for an application of (military) engineer robots that will be able to perform engineer 3D tasks including highly specialized task of combat and general engineer support. But why are these systems to be deployed in the future? Figure 1: Well suited tasks for unmanned (robotic) systems according to UIR Source: [5 – modified by author] Firstly, we have to understand fundamental features that defines contemporary robotic systems and basic requirements. Unmanned systems are preferred alternative within tasks called 3D – dirty, dull and dangerous. Specific features of these systems contribute to possible replacement of soldiers by robots in military operations and can be very usefully converted into military. Unmanned systems differ from classic manned (organic) systems in many ways. It makes them very special and very suitable for conducting military engineer tasks. Robots enable soldiers to concentrate on other tasks, they have ability to perform tasks persistently and they are immune to fatigue (constant effort and persistence). Robots have immunity to stress, fear and emotions. They are non-aggressive and safe. What is more, they are resistant to work in extreme conditions but also 28 expendable and replaceable. They are capable of advanced sensing of operational environment due to sensors and can be faster than human (in terms of mobility and decision-making). And finally, robots do not need individual training. The conditions of deployment of robots in land forces permit to determine the general requirements to be met [6]: Be able to progress and/or stay in a complex and hostile environment; Be able to analyze and understand the situation it is being used in and modify its behavior appropriately; Be able to realize an operational effect or conduct technical processes (e.g. the opening of an itinerary, intervention on an IED, survey and alert, etc.); Be able to fulfil its missions permanently; Appropriation of robotic systems by the soldier. Human Machine Interface should be intuitive and simply accessible to the soldier, whatever the conditions of employment and the characteristics of the environment; Be interoperable. Additionally, unmanned systems and other similar technological advancements can hugely affect military practice. The recent technological advancements and innovations have contributed to combat engineering in three main areas [2]: Automation to enable leaner manning of combat engineering equipment; Reduction of time spent on combat engineering tasks; Improvement of man-machine interfaces and ergonomics to make system safer and easier to use. Undoubtedly, these areas also represent one of the basic requirements of advanced engineer robots next to elementary requirement as ability to perform 3D (dirty, dull, and dangerous) or 3H (hot, heavy and hazardous) tasks. Ability to fulfil 3D tasks is the key and the most important requirement for military (engineer) robots. Dangerous tasks – robots must increase survivability of the troops in contact; Dirty tasks – ability to increase the soldiers capacities and finally the operational efficiency of the different units; Dull tasks – ability to permit the realization of repetitive and fastidious tasks. From the text above we can imagine the complexity and comprehensiveness of the problematics of unmanned and robotic systems. Thing are even getting more complicated whet it goes to technical issues, but it is beyond scope of this paper. 2.2 Military robots taxonomy Globally, robots can be divided according to various criteria – control taxonomy, operational medium taxonomy or for example functional taxonomy. Based on their features and intended use, robots can be defined as industrial or service. Service robots are able to perform non-manufacturing, handling and other operations [7]. Military robots are typical service robots that are usually designed to perform task in hostile or hazardous environment. Hazards may be present in the form of radiological or toxicity dangers to potential explosions [8]. In NATO countries, military robots are frequently defined as unmanned systems. These systems are divided into: UAS (Unmanned Aerial System); UGS (Unmanned Ground System; UMS (Unmanned Marine System). For the purpose of this paper, we can be also categorize these systems by their branch application – combat, reconnaissance, artillery, engineer, logistic, medical, chemical and others. 29 It is also necessary to define the term Engineer robot. This term is not commonly
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Corps Engineer Association History
    Photo from National Archives MARINEMARINE CORPSCORPS ENGINEER ENGINEER ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION HISTORYHISTORY --201 20177 Engineers Up! - 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS WORLD WAR ONE BY PHIL MARTIN, MSGT(RET) 33 GATE GUARDIAN FOR MARINE CORPS ENGINEER 1312 SCHOOL RETURN OF THE TD 18 BY ROBIN GENTRY, COL(RET) MARINE CORPS ENGINEERS IN VIETNAM BY PHIL 1414 MARTIN, MSGT(RET) AND ROBIN GENTRY, COL(RET) SSGT RECKLESS: KOREAN WAR HERO EXCERPT 22 FROM NANCY LEE WHITE HOFFMAN’S 1992 22 LEATHERNECK ARTICLE FIRST COMBAT ENGINEERS COMMAND 24 24 CHRONOLOGY SECOND COMBAT ENGINEERS COMMAND 31 CHRONOLOGY 31 THIRD COMBAT ENGINEERS COMMAND 37 CHRONOLOGY 37 2 - Engineers Up! 2 WORLD WAR ONE BY PHIL MARTIN, MSGT(RET) Photo from National Archives THE BEGINNINGS It is believed that early man discovered fire, when lightning hit a bog full of moss. This prehistoric man kept the fire going by piling up the moss for cooking and warmth. As man evolved, he invented hunting tools to kill animals, such as the Woolly Mammoth and other fur bearing animals for their skins to make clothes and their meat for food. Roving bands of people attempted to barter for the things they needed or sometimes took the materials they wanted by harming or killing the opposing party. Eventually, mankind learned to cultivate crops allowing him to settle in farms to provide food for his family. With these beginnings of civilization, leaders and councils were picked to organize communities and make decisions for the betterment of the citizenry. The leaders formed governments and declared certain regions for themselves; forming kingdoms, granting councils the ability to make laws, and enforce regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Mine Clearing Technology
    Introduction to Mine Clearing Technology ABSTRACT This paper presents the technologies and methods developed for mine clearing operations currently used by the military and humanitarian demining organisations. In any mine clearing operation, the operating environment and the type of threats are never the same. Thus, a single method or type of equipment rarely constitutes the most successful means of resolving the problem in terms of time, cost and effectiveness; a combination of tools is more commonly employed to ensure a successful mine clearing mission. This paper aims to give an introduction to and appreciation of the key mine clearing methods and equipment, and the key differences and considerations for military and humanitarian operations. The common methods of demining such as manual demining, explosive mine breaching and mechanical demining will be discussed. The design considerations for mine flails on mine clearing vehicles will also be presented. Tan Chun Gary Wong Hock Lye Bryan Soh Chee Weng Introduction to Mine Clearing 118 Technology Despite the initial development of mine INTRODUCTION clearing concepts as a form of countermeasure against mines during wartime, the real need History of Mines for mine clearing usually begins after the end of hostilities. This is attributed to the very Mines, derived from the Latin word ‘Mina’ nature of why mines were laid in the first place meaning ‘vein of ore’ was originally used to – to deter access to and use of land. Mines laid describe the digging of minerals from the during conflicts are rarely removed at the end earth. Over time, it has become a term used of the conflicts due to the lack of proper mine by military engineers to denote the explosives maps, markings, loss of such maps and markings they lay in the ground during battles.
    [Show full text]
  • Fm 3-34.170/Mcwp 3-17.4 (Fm 5-170)
    FM 3-34.170/MCWP 3-17.4 (FM 5-170) ENGINEER RECONNAISSANCE March 2008 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online <www.us.army.mil> and General Dennis J. Reimer Training and Doctrine Digital Library at <http://www.train.army.mil>. *FM 3-34.170/MCWP 3-17.4 (FM 5-170) Field Manual Headquarters No. 3-34.170/MCWP 3-17.4 (5-170) Department of the Army Washington, DC, 25 March 2008 Engineer Reconnaissance Contents Page PREFACE ............................................................................................................vii INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................ix Chapter 1 ENGINEER RECONNAISSANCE ..................................................................... 1-1 Engineer Functions............................................................................................. 1-1 Army Warfighting Functions ............................................................................... 1-3 Engineer Reconnaissance ................................................................................. 1-4 Engineer Reconnaissance Team Capabilities and Limitations.......................... 1-9 Chapter 2 INTEGRATING ENGINEER RECONNAISSANCE CAPABILITIES ................. 2-1 Enabling Information Superiority ........................................................................ 2-1 Integrating Assured Mobility
    [Show full text]
  • 9 » Combined Arms Breaching^Qperations
    ^°: 13 -1 ¿¡s 9 ^í? ô » J_. klS-1 Combined Arms Breaching^Qperations HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ¿?2&°n"ÍS S*** 00 ' X>3l0-t'£050 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. m FM 90-13-1 Cl CHANGE HEADQUARTERS NO. 1 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Washington, DC, 7 May 1993 COMBINED ARMS BREACHING OPERATIONS 1. Change FM 90-13-1, 28 February 1991, as follows: Remove old pages Insert new pages iii and iv iii and iv Appendices pages D-l through D-15 and E-l through E-16 Glossary-1 through Glossary-10 Glossary-1 through Glossary-12 Reference-1 Reference-1 and Reference-2 Index-1 through Index-4 Index-1 through Index-4 2. A star (★) marks new or changed material. 3. File this transmittal sheet in front of the publication. DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. By Order of the Secretary of the Army: GORDON R. SULLIVAN General, United States Army Chief of Staff Official: vLJfcr MILTON H. HAMILTON Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army 03652 Pentagon i.ihrer y (ANR-FL) ATTN: i/'üi'T imerits SsctiO® Room l/\hlo, rOntagon Washington. DC 20310-6050 DISTRIBUTION: Active Army, USAR, and ARNG: To be distributed in accordance with DA Form 12-11-E, requirements for FM 90-13-1, Combined Arms Breaching Operations (Qty rqr block no. 5012). I % Field Manual 90-13-1 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Washington, DC, 28 February 1991 Combined Arms Breaching Operations Contents PREFACE iv CHAPTER 1. CHALLENGE TO MANEUVER 1-1 CHAPTER 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream 1 Bridging & Gap Crossing
    Page 1 of 17 Defence Leaders© agenda subject to change depending on speaker availability 12th NOVEMBER 2019 CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION, DAY 1 MECHANISED ENGINEERING With the recent renewed peer threat to NATO and allied forces, a possibility of returning to urban terrain warfare has placed greater importance on movement and mobility. The emphasis on manoeuvrability for an active allied force ensures the war fighter can operate efficiently and with battlefield momentum. Maintaining the freedom of movement against a peer threat guarantees the forces fighting capability is not hindered by the terrain obstacles. This renewed threat has identified capability gaps which can be exploited by adversaries and needs to be addressed. While discussing the use of vehicles and autonomy, Combat Engineer 2019 will explore these capability gaps, giving the opportunity for nations to share their unique challenges with supporting the war fighter’s mobility. It will explore this theme with the view to understanding potential solutions that can aid in the future theatres of operation. 0800 - Registration and welcome coffee 0855 - Chairman’s opening remarks Major General (Retd) Mungo Melvin CB OBE, Former GOC UK Support Command and Former Colonel Commandant of the Royal Engineers, British Army SUPPORTING THE MANOEUVRABILITY OF THE WARFIGHTER Primary mission tasks need to be carried out efficiently and rapidly in order to gain a tactical advantage over adversaries. The engineers of any military must maintain the mobility of troops and support the tri-services in being able to move freely in areas of operations. This section will give context to the over-arching near pear threat that we face and how NATO and NATO friendly forces are reacting to protect our allies and to keep the war fighter moving.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming Combat Support Capabilities to Face the Complex 21St Century Operating Environment
    CONFERENCE DATES 23rd - 24th February 2016 LOCATION London, UK BRITISH ARMY REFORMING COMBAT SUPPORT CAPABILITIES TO FACE ENDORSED EVENT COVERING ALL KEY AREAS FOR FUTURE THE COMPLEX 21ST CENTURY OPERATING ENVIRONMENT ENGINEERING BENEFITS INCLUDE: DEVELOPMENT Shape discussions and Collaborate with customers Be the first to hear the Receive end-user influence requirements as and other stakeholders to latest UK combat support feedback from successful global combat support staff explore long-term trends in priorities and be on point to missions and use these to work to develop capability to military engineering and how to place your solutions at the contextualise your product’s face future challenges shape your business and target heart of the discussion role in the next operational markets for future success success story SPEAKER HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE: Brigadier General Major General Major General Mark W. Yenter, Brigadier Simon Humphrey Oshri Lugasi K. D. McQuillan Deputy Commanding General Director, Capability Commanding Officer, Corps Chief Military Engineer, Combat Engineering and Directorate of Engineers, Canadian Armed Forces International Operations, Combat Support, Israeli Defence Force United States Army Corps British Army of Engineers Lieutenant Colonel Colonel Jason Hones Colonel Jim Burke Lieutenant Colonel Jochen Gumprich Assistant Director Plans, Director of Engineers, Richard Burnet Head of Engineering Capability Directorate Irish Defence Forces Staff Officer- Engineer Branch- Army Development Combat Support, Operations
    [Show full text]
  • Mobility and Survivability
    FM 5-10 CHAPTER 3 Mobility and Survivability Mobility and survivability are the primary tasks of the engineer on the battle- field. The platoon leader requires a detailed understanding of this BOS to suc- ceed. This chapter provides the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) needed for the platoon to conduct mobility, countermobility, and survivability. MOBILITY Mobility enables the commander to maneuver tactical units into positions of advantage over the enemy. In the attack, engineers reduce enemy obstacles and fortifications that inhibit maneuver. Expanded engineer reconnaissance capability is needed to identify routes, existing obstacles, and minefields. Open areas that are level provide good sites for aircraft landing strips; however, in most cases, the soil must be stabilized. The application of the breaching fundamentals (suppress, obscure, secure, and reduce {SOSR}) and the organization of the force in terms of support, breach, and assault forces are standard. However, open areas may offer greater opportunity to bypass enemy obstacles because of the greater range of mobility afforded by the terrain. Exercise caution when choosing to bypass enemy obstacles, since the bypass may lead the force to the enemy's engagement area (EA). Additionally, expect the enemy to make extensive use of rapid mine-laying techniques that include SCATMINE delivery systems, as well as more conventional methods of mine emplacement. OBSTACLE BREACHING The platoon leader must decide where the best breach location is. Never breach where the avenue of approach crosses the obstacle. The enemy is sure to have pre- planned artillery there. Pick a location away from obvious breaching sites to reduce the threat of artillery.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineers As Infantry United States Army Engineeer Center and Fort Belvoir, Va
    IE $,-<*..I'ri . .p rvvvl .- - ,,.?,.." -x : .\ , 1,,. .~ , - - ngineer Z. 1 THE MAGAZINE RIR FMY ENG~NEERS FALL ... 'L:~ ENGINEERS AS INFANTRY UNITED STATES ARMY ENGINEEER CENTER AND FORT BELVOIR, VA - COMMANDER/COIKMANDANT MG James N. Ellis DEPUTY COMMANDANT COL Alvin G. Rowe CHIEF OF STAFFfDEPUTY INSTALLATION COMMANDER COL Paul J. Higgins COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR CSM Marvin L. Knowles DIRECTORATES DIRECTORATE OF ENGINEER FORCE MANAGEMENT LTC Arthur S Brown DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS COL Phillip R Hoge DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS COL Stanley R Johnson DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COL Ralph T Rundle On the cover: - -- - Engine= - The rxper~e71cesof t<r>oengr- UNITS neer battalions trailling as in- ENGINEER CENTER BRIGADE fantry is our courr story. COL Don W Barber Though a secorrdar.y combat ' ' enpineer mission, seruing as ENGINEER TRAINING BRIGADE infantcr is, as the nuihoi k . :' "', . \ ; notes, . .. a wartime mission COL Peter J Groh often assumed at a critical i::, lime and at a critical lace." PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER 1Iy' .. (photo by John ~10rencei MAJ James E. Kiley Jr. EDITOR John Florence ASSISTANT EDITOR SSG Bernard W. Tate Special thanks to Jim Wilson and to the artists ART DIRECTOR and proofreaders in the Engineer School's Train- John Florence ing Literature Division. VOLUME 12 F~LL1982 NUMBER 3 FEATURES 8 A Materially Different Bridge by Richard W. Helmke 11 Predicting Concrete Quality by Debbie J. Lawrence 12 Washington's Legacies to the Modern Army by David Curtis Skaggs, Ph.D. L, ..-,,,.,. ,',.u,-,r,.li,,. 20 16 U.S. vs. Soviet Engineer Training hy CPT Geor-ge D.
    [Show full text]
  • UN Military Engineer Unit and CET Search and Detect Manual
    United Nations Military Engineer Unit & CET Search and Detect Manual Second Edition January 2020 DEPARTMENT OF PEACE OPERATIONS UN Military Engineer Unit and Counter Explosive Threat (CET) Search and Detect Manual Produced by: Office of Military Affairs, Department of Peace Operations UN Secretariat One UN Plaza, New York, NY 10017 Tel. 917-367-2487 Approved by: Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations/Head of the Department of Peace Operations (DPO). January 2020. Contact: All enquires for this Manual and/or requests for amendments or comments should be submitted to the Policy and Doctrine Team, Office of Military Affairs, DPO. History: This Manual supersedes the UN Peacekeeping Mission Military Engineer Unit Manual dated 01 September 2015. Review date: January 2023 Reference number: 2020.03 Printed at the UN, New York 1 UN Military Engineer Unit and Counter Explosive Threat (CET) Search and Detect Manual Preface We are delighted to introduce the United Nations Military Engineer Unit and Counter Explosive Threat (CET) Search and Detect Manual, a guide for commanders and staff deployed in peace operations, and a reference for Member States and the staff at United Nations Headquarters. UN peace operations are rarely limited to one type of activity. As they work to implement their mandates provided by the United Nations Security Council in order to create conditions for a return to stability, peacekeeping missions may require military units to perform challenging tasks involving the judicious use of force, particularly in situations where the Host Nation is unable to provide security and maintain public order. To meet these complex peacekeeping challenges, military components often play a pivotal role in providing and maintaining a secure environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The MINEX Center
    Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction Volume 7 Issue 1 The Journal of Mine Action Article 17 April 2003 The MINEX Center Minex Minex MINEX Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons, Emergency and Disaster Management Commons, Other Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, and the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Minex, Minex (2003) "The MINEX Center," Journal of Mine Action : Vol. 7 : Iss. 1 , Article 17. Available at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol7/iss1/17 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for International Stabilization and Recovery at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction by an authorized editor of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Minex: The MINEX Center ocher munitions represent. Mine risk population's awareness. about neutralization procedures. This education is completed by concrete The training will be under the information can on ly be given ro The MIN EX Center assistance ro the victims of mines among responsibili ty of a French company accredited staff having all the technical chose populations, namely medical, accredited by the French Ministry of abilities to use it. ro engineer NCOs who have already surgical and orthopedic ca.re. Defen se. The School, as a service provider, This article highlights the efforts ofthe French Army Engineer School's MIN EX obrained the first two levels-MIN EX 2 Humanitarian demining remains rhe gives assistance in the form of offering Mine Risk Education program.
    [Show full text]
  • MARINE CORPS ENGINEER SCHOOL Organizations & Units
    Organizations & Units Serving Proudly COL NIEL NELSON SGTMAJ RODRIQUEZ MARINE CORPS ENGINEER SCHOOL The Marine Corps Engineer School was activated in May 1941 at Quantico, VA, and relocated to its present location at Courthouse Bay, Camp Lejeune, in 1942. The school prepares officer and enlisted personnel for duty with the Fleet Marine Force by providing formal instruction and practical application in the engineer, and utilities fields at the entry level, noncommissioned officer, and supervisory levels. The school was disbanded in 1947 and reactivated in 1949. In 1955 the school name was changed from Engineer School Battal- ion to Marine Corps Engineer School. Although the school has undergone many changes since its conception, it remains the center for educating engineers for the Marine Corps. Administration Division: Responsible for personnel and legal administration, postal, morale, pay and administrative functions for permanent personnel and student personnel of Marine Corps Engineer School (MCES). Page 44 2007 MCEA Newsletter Academic Division Responsible for academic operations to include: development of academic programs and the execution of approved courses of instruction; administrative, reproduction and audiovisual support functions associated with academics; administration of the apprentice- ship program; and conduct of Marine Corps required training. Support Division Responsible for supply/fiscal management, equipment maintenance, billeting, food service, area facilities and area support tasks. HEADQUARTERS AND SERVICE COMPANY Provide service and support to MCES in the functional areas of administration/ personnel administration, supply/fiscal, MCCS and motor transport. Provide engineer equipment maintenance support and consolidated maintenance management for all assigned equip- ment. Perform other functions as necessary for the discipline, morale, and welfare of military personnel assigned to MCES.
    [Show full text]
  • The Victory Engineers: Anglo-Canadian and American Engineering Operations in Northwest Europe 1944-1945
    “When another night came the columns, changed to purple streaks, filed across two pontoon bridges. A glaring fire wine-tinted the waters of the river. Its rays, shining upon the moving masses of troops, brought forth here and there sudden gleams of silver or gold.” -Stephen Crane The Victory Engineers: Anglo-Canadian and American Engineering Operations in Northwest Europe 1944-1945. By Eric Burton Greisinger M.A., History, Indiana University Of Pennsylvania, 2001 B.A., History, Saint Vincent College, 1999 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor Of Philosophy in the Graduate Academic Unit of History Supervisor: J. Marc Milner, PhD., History Examining Board: Trevor Hanson, PhD., Civil Engineering, Chair David Charters, PhD., History Lee Windsor, PhD., History External Examiner: Roger Sarty, PhD., History, Wilfrid Laurier University This dissertation is accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK June, 2015 ©Eric B. Greisinger, 2015 ABSTRACT Volumes of studies have investigated the strategy and tactics used in pursuit of Allied victory in Northwest Europe during World War II. These focus primarily on the actions of the combat arms – infantry, armor, and artillery – with vital supporting elements such as engineering given limited exposure. This is unfortunate, since the victory of mechanized Allied armies would have been impossible without effective combat engineer support. This study presents the operations of Anglo-Canadian and American engineering troops during the Northwest European campaign, highlighting the efforts of such troops as vibrant, necessary elements in the pursuit and final defeat of German forces in 1945. Drawing upon extant source material this study highlights Allied engineering equipment, doctrine and operations as the foundation for Allied operational and tactical mobility.
    [Show full text]