Breaching Operations & Equipment

[ender]

I don‘t think all the technology in the world is going to end the Sapper on his belly crawling through the minefield.

Plus, I heard that the Viper is now out of the system. The viper is an explosive way of clearing a breach through a minefield. And I don‘t think the CF has a lot of mine rollers in the service either. We arn‘t even using the technology that already exists.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

ender,
Rollers and ploughs are carried by each tank sqn, 1 each per troop (x 4 troops) last I heard, carried in the echelon. They can be attached to any leopard in 30 min to 1 hr. The roller goes first, with a max speed of 16 kph cross country and 30 kph on hard roads. Once a mine is encountered, the plough starts 100 mtrs back in the same track, passes the roller to the left and continues for 100 meters past. The roller then takes over again. The roller weight is about 9.5 ton and will det just about anything it rolls over. As well, SHQ has a dozer tank with it.

 

[ender]

thanks receeguy.
Do Engineers run the mine clearing tanks or do armoured? Just wondering how that works.

Anybody know why they took the Viper out the system?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

ender,
No, the whole crews are all armoured crewman. They still have to be able to fight the tank with the equipment mounted. It limits the gun movement somewhat but it can still fight. The rollers and ploughs can be mounted and used in a hasty attack, where the enemy is in a fortified position with minefields, so they‘re still fighting and attacking while clearing a lane (big order!). This also includes the dozer tank. The only thing crewed by engineers is the bridgelayer, when it‘s attached to the Sqn, as it has no main gun and is usually brought in for breeching obstacles well before the meeting engagement.

 

[McG]

The Engineers also operate the AEV. The AEV will often play a larger role in the breaching of obstacles than the AVLB. An armoured Engineer section consists of one AEV and one AVLB. During a minefield breach, the plow and roller will lead and the engineers will race up the cleared lane to breach AT ditches, berms, and other obstacles which the tanks cannot. The Armoured Engineer section may be dedicated to support a single breach attempt, or (more likely) split-up with each vehicle supporting a different attempt. These vehicles typicaly perform these tasks in contact with the enemy and insupport of both deliberate and hasty attacks (contrary to previous opinions). Nobody wastes the resources to lay an obstacle and not cover it with fire.

Chimo!

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Not to burst your bubble, but when we‘re in contact with the enemy, the eng vehs are normally a min of two tac bounds back with the ech, and only that close if we expect to use them. During a hasty attack, (exactly what it connotates) there is not time for the AEV to move forward, and normally no need as we have a Leopard dozer (with SHQ) and a lot of HESH rounds for demolition. The AVBL would only be used in extreme circumstanses where we could provide protection (for either, being as they‘re not armed) (and if you ever seen how long it takes the AVBL and how big it is during deployment). Both are nothing but sitting ducks, we have‘nt got time to protect. We‘ll use the experts if we have the opportunity, but it‘s not often. If it happens and your it, close your hatches and kiss your *** goodbye, cause we‘re movin, tootin, shootin and hootin with no time to protect static hard targets. Not trying to demean your role, just stating fact. Real world.

 

[meaf0rdm0]

Not to burst your bubble, but when we're in contact with the enemy, the eng vehs are normally a min of two tac bounds back with the ech, and only that close if we expect to use them. During a hasty attack, (exactly  what it connotates) there is not time for the AEV to move forward, and normally no need as we have a Leopard dozer (with SHQ) and a lot of HESH rounds for demolition. The AVBL would only be used in extreme circumstanses where we could provide protection (for either, being as they're not armed) (and if you ever seen how long it takes the AVBL and how big it is during deployment). Both are nothing but sitting ducks, we have'nt got time to protect. We'll use the experts if we have the opportunity, but it's not often. If it happens and your it, close your hatches and kiss your ***  goodbye, cause we're movin, tootin, shootin and hootin with no time to protect static hard targets. Not trying to demean your role, just stating fact. Real world.

What is the depth that the mine plows dig down to because i know the breaching tactics for the russians are or atleast used to be the first tank hits a mine and is pushed thru the rest follows. And the technology for mines now are far surpirior to warsaw pact mines of 40+ yrs ago  The Canadain tactic are the first tank hits a mine the remainder of the tanks pull back and take up a defensive position while the engineer section who is bounding with the tanks i know i have been there chasing our Loe's in GagetLeo'several times and i was not two bounds behind the lead tanks i spent most of two weeks eating dust from a Leo in my M113 dozer doing close support for the RCD from  Petawawa

 

[Kat Stevens]

Not to burst your bubble, but when we're in contact with the enemy, the eng vehs are normally a min of two tac bounds back with the ech, and only that close if we expect to use them. During a hasty attack, (exactly  what it connotates) there is not time for the AEV to move forward, and normally no need as we have a Leopard dozer (with SHQ) and a lot of HESH rounds for demolition. The AVBL would only be used in extreme circumstanses where we could provide protection (for either, being as they're not armed) (and if you ever seen how long it takes the AVBL and how big it is during deployment). Both are nothing but sitting ducks, we have'nt got time to protect. We'll use the experts if we have the opportunity, but it's not often. If it happens and your it, close your hatches and kiss your ***  goodbye, cause we're movin, tootin, shootin and hootin with no time to protect static hard targets. Not trying to demean your role, just stating fact. Real world.

errrr, not burst YOUR bubble, but your POS dozer tank would be far easier a target to hit than an AEV on a ditch breach.  Dozer tank is a barge to manoever in the muck, can't move nearly the material that a Badger can, and has no excavator arm for those pesky berms.  As for AVLB,  it was never meant for ditch crossing.  There's a reason the bridge is 22M long....

CHIMO,  Kat

 

[043]

errrr, not burst YOUR bubble, but your POS dozer tank would be far easier a target to hit than an AEV on a ditch breach.  Dozer tank is a barge to manoever in the muck, can't move nearly the material that a Badger can, and has no excavator arm for those pesky berms.  As for AVLB,  it was never meant for ditch crossing.  There's a reason the bridge is 22M long....

Hey Kat, you know, I did a stint in Armd Tp here in 2 CER and that was the biggest bone of contention that I had.  Everyone, including Engr Offr's, thought that the AVLB could be used for breaching AT ditches.  I agree it was another tool, but you and I know that the drive motors on the main jib weren't strong enough to push it into the berm, etc........

The AVLB was better to breach a AT ditch with the stab blade then launching the bridge. I saw 5 Ton Louis do that in about 6 minutes.

But, I guess some things will never change.

CHIMO!!!!

 

[McG]

I've always thought the Armd Engr Sect should have been two AEV and one AVLB.

Our doctrine calls for two breaches to be attempted for each lane required (thus two breaches are attempted at the Cbt Tm level).  The two AEV section would have been able to employ one AEV in each lane to support the cbt tm.  Not only is it the better vehicle for AT ditches, but it is also capable of breaching wire (other than by spooling it up on the rear drive sprocket).  The AVLB would still be available as a reserve breaching asset (though if things are going that poorly it is probably not a good place to send an AVLB).

The AVLB is an outstanding vehicle for what it was designed (European waterways) and there is nothing that can replace it for some obstacles.  I still would have seen one in each Armd Sect to Sp the Cbt Tm across point obstacles in defiles.  Any linear obstacle that could only be breached by an AVLB would be a major obstacle indeed and would have to be dealt with as a BG breach (with the each Armd Engr Sect responsible for one breach attempt with its AVLB).

 

[FEEOP042]

We need more then 9 AEV's. Norway has there version of the AEV on a Leo 1 chassis and they have 18. If we are getting rid of the AEV what are we getting to replace it. Some say a Cat D9 dozer like my avatar. Or we should look at the Deuce (Deployable Universal Combat Earthmover) for the lighter brigades.
And you are right CHIMO there seems that there was just a hand full of AEO operators that would stand up and tell the Officers that the AVLB was not designed to push in to a berm. I know I did my share of telling the unqualified pers.  The other mistake for breaching is using the AEV's arm to deploy the facine. It should be deployed like the British AVRE. That is the way to deploy the facine.

 

[Kat Stevens]

As a lowly Cpl in the AET I wrote a Pseudo-paper on re-inventing the Armoured Engineer Troops.  Well above my load station, I know, but 10 years in those machines taught me something.  I suggested that there be an AEV det that travelled with the pointy parts, and the AVLBs form another det a couple of bounds back, to be called up as and if required.  Anti-tank ditch crossing is a COLLOSAL misuse of an asset, IMHO.  Also, as much as I hate to admit it, AVLB just can't keep up and sneak-'n-peak with the big kids.....

CHIMO,  Kat

 

[George Wallace]

Kat

Those are good points.  In Germany the AVBL was usually right up there with the tanks, usually on bound back, sometimes right in the middle, depending on tactical situation.  The rest were either with the A Ech or Comd Tank.

I agree that the Dozer Tank was a POS, in the eyes of the Engrs, but it did give us some (Not too much) abilities.  I was in it once in Hohenfels and sent back to prep fire posns in a withdrawl.  I only had one jposn half done by the time the Sqn complete had passed me.  It was a bitch to drive, as it was so nose heavy.  Garry (who posts here from Cold Lake) was in the Dozer Tank much more than I and has lots of words to describe its performance.  ;D

The loss of these vehicles (Badgers, Bibers, AEVs) is a crime.

 

[Kat Stevens]

As a lowly Cpl in the AET I wrote a Pseudo-paper on re-inventing the Armoured Engineer Troops.  Well above my load station, I know, but 10 years in those machines taught me something.  I suggested that there be an AEV det that travelled with the pointy parts, and the AVLBs form another det a couple of bounds back, to be called up as and if required.  Anti-tank ditch crossing is a COLLOSAL misuse of an asset, IMHO.  Also, as much as I hate to admit it, AVLB just can't keep up and sneak-'n-peak with the big kids.....

CHIMO,  Kat

Sorry, I meant 2 AEV dets and 1 AVLB det to an AET....premature dischard before proofing...

CHIMO,  Kat

 

[McG]

Sorry, I meant 2 AEV dets and 1 AVLB det to an AET

That was my second option, but I thought more flexibility would be gained at the Cbt Tm level by spliting the AVLB section and putting one vehicle into each of the AEV sections.  Either way, we both have come to the same conclusion that the number of AEV should be double the number of AVLB.

 

[Larkvall]

Video on breaching.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/user/dregar1#play/uploads/10/ixT2kTk-F90

 

[Kat Stevens]

That's explosive breaching of buildings, really SFA to do with the ancient thread of minefield and obstacle breaching.  Apples and dump trucks.

 

[Larkvall]

Sorry

 

[bluecollared]

I was just about to respond to what recceguy had said about badgers being at the back in the ech, then I saw that he wrote that in 2001. How things have changed....

 

[X-mo-1979]

We had a excellent working relationship between the badger's and OUR troop.The badger was attached to our junior C/S and it worked like a charm.Higher allowed us the freedom of making our own movement,and we just communicated awesome.
We basically were basically our own patrol.

They didnt work well with the other troops,for good reasons.However the badger crew was like a part of our troop.

We carried either rollers,plow and sometimes both at all times.

We did all kinds of different things there.I also breached a 25 km lane with a mine plow....never did that in training.