The Three Block War ; Where do Combat Engineers fit in?

[E31]

Before we deployed on Roto 3 Op Athena the Snr NCO's and Officers attended a lecture on the Three Block War, given by a USMC Maj. To summarize it all today we can not ID our enemy as we could before. We are asking our tp's to be warriors, mediators and then policemen in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.  We have to think more of clearing city blocks contaminated with UXO's and small minefields and in some cases humanitarian DE-ming. I have been reading posts on this forum WRT Mech breaching with Tanks and Plows, AEV's and AVLB's. Crossing Gaps and massive Russian style minefields. All this is great reminiscing of days gone bye ( Germany etc). As Engrs we now have to focus more on defeating IED's as they have become more sophisticated than the average booby-trap taught on the QL3.  Our Sappers need more trg on route and area clearances. More defined SOP's have to be established by those who have deployed to places like Kabul or Kandahar. For those still holding onto the notion of living on their AVLB's, get out the moth balls boys.  And to answer a previous post, yes we do need dedicated EOD units within CER's. The biggest problems we faced prior to deployment was getting kit for our guys to trg with, qualified Tp's etc. Dedicated  IED / EOD teams are definitely part of the way ahead in the Three Block War concept.  :gunner:

 

[043]

Before we deployed on Roto 3 Op Athena the Snr NCO's and Officers attended a lecture on the Three Block War, given by a USMC Maj. To summarize it all today we can not ID our enemy as we could before. We are asking our tp's to be warriors, mediators and then policemen in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.   We have to think more of clearing city blocks contaminated with UXO's and small minefields and in some cases humanitarian DE-ming. I have been reading posts on this forum WRT Mech breaching with Tanks and Plows, AEV's and AVLB's. Crossing Gaps and massive Russian style minefields. All this is great reminiscing of days gone bye ( Germany etc). As Engrs we now have to focus more on defeating IED's as they have become more sophisticated than the average booby-trap taught on the QL3.   Our Sappers need more trg on route and area clearances. More defined SOP's have to be established by those who have deployed to places like Kabul or Kandahar. For those still holding onto the notion of living on their AVLB's, get out the moth balls boys.   And to answer a previous post, yes we do need dedicated EOD units within CER's. The biggest problems we faced prior to deployment was getting kit for our guys to trg with, qualified Tp's etc. Dedicated   IED / EOD teams are definitely part of the way ahead in the Three Block War concept.   :gunner:

Agreed!

What we are going to have in the future is task tailored Cbt Tm/Battle Gps.  A point to note though is that while fighting in built up areas is a reality, how do you get there? Do you just bypass the open areas?? I think there is still a requirement for Assault Bridging and by Assault Bridging I don't mean MGB's or Acrow like CFSME likes to call them.

While I agree that we require the EOD/IED Capability, I am not sure that they need there own entity. I would like to see more of an IED sub-unit instead of a EOD sub unit. EOD can be handled by the Fd Tps as part of the day to day routine.  Section Comd's should be HA/HB qualified but you and I know that that will never happen due to Op and Pers Tempo.

It is nice to day dream though!!!!!!!!!!! Leafs in 4!!!!!!! Damn, there I go again!

44, Out.

 

[Block 1]

I've had several briefings on the subject of the three block war in the past year, from US Engineers, Canadian Engineers, and UK Generals . We are now starting to add it into our training. This is so all the troops going through SQ and DP1 trg will have a taste of it. As for how we as engineers fit into the plan. Well whatever we do we must not forget our troops need the basics first then expand into other environments. You cant expect to teach a basic Infantryman the Defence in the urban environment first, no they need to see it in a conventional  open area first. This allows them to see the big picture, then move them into a three block war starting with block 1.

So as engineers we should be doing the basics at CFSME level, with a introduction into the three block war. Then at the unit level, they will know the concept and be able to employ their skills. And just what skills would that be ? Will the ones we have always done just modify by the terrain and then adapt.

    :gunner:

 

[Spr.Earl]

Yes and this is were EOD/IED comes into play.
Yes we teach C.M.D. but is this enough?
I have read a few reports from Iraq and the main thing was that C.M.D. is good for conventional War Fare but not for the present so called   Urban War Fare as what is happeing in Iraq.

Armies have had this problem in the past but not our technology and that is were we will lose if we don't keep up.

 

[Standards]

Good topic.  The Three Block War concept is the direction the Army is going, so hopefully some pers in CFSME (etc) are modifying the doctrine and courseware appropriately (anyone had any input?).

While we need to expand the EOD/IED capability due to the nature of the threat in an urban environment (the Three Block War is essentially an Urban Op), there are other skills/techniques that must also be developed and disseminated further.  For example, with the development of the PLQ (Inf) course, the Infantry have brought the Urban Ops training that used to be part of their DP3A (6A) down to the senior Cpl level.  Have we done anything similar to expand the knowledge base?

While each unit has conducted various types of pre-deployment training in order to give their Sappers the best training they can, this is all based on the knowledge and past experiences of the pers currently in that unit.  Therefore everyone is not conducting the same types or quality of training.

Overall, I think one of the biggest problems to overcome is mindset.  We have established procedures for conducting engr tasks, but at what point do the applicable hazards (not just ordnance and IEDs, but snipers etc) override our normal way of doing business.  For example, when conducting a clearance op, at some point do you stick two pers in the lane, one to clear and one to cover the others back?  I might be reaching on that example, but what I am trying to get it some of our tasks are generally practiced without a high active enemy threat level.  How do we merge those tasks that are not normally conducted on the front lines with a sense of tactical self-preservation?

Of course the other big problem is suitable area to train in.  A couple of beat up houses that everyone is familiar with is not the same as a propper FIBUA/MOUT site, but that's more of a bean counter issue.

Anyways, some more food for thought.

 

[PIPER DOOON]

Is C.M.D enough..?

It is enough to start, gives the Sapper the basic knowledge to know what to look for. It, along with the HA is the basic qual required to carry on with other training that will give the soldier the skills to deal with the "new threat" the one that we as a Corps pushed aside about 10 years ago.

Not everyone will get qualified, bottom line is out of a 100 soldiers deployed how many are dedicated to the EOD threat.
Other tasks have to get done and if push comes to Shove, someones primary role has to be to fight and support the infantry.

CHIMO...Brother Beavers

 

[Block 1]

Now I understand after several briefings the â Å“Tree Block Warâ ? is a â Å“concept of opsâ ? and not just in urban Ops its in complex terrain such as â Å“Jungles of Central Africaâ ? in the â Å“Mountains of Afghanistanâ ?, And in the City's of the world bâ ? Kabul , Kigali, Baghdadâ ?.

General Charles C Krulak, 31st Commandant, United States Marine Corps, â Å“UUUURRRRAAAAâ ?

â Å“In one moment in time , our service members will be feeding and clothing displaced refugees---providing humanitarian assistance . In the next moment, they will be holding two warring factions or tribes apartâ ”conducting peacekeeping operations. Finally, they will be fighting a highly lethal mid-intensity battle. All on the same day. So don't just think City think complex terrain including Jungle, Mountain, Urban.                         


:soldier:

 

[Sapper99]

The Full Spectrum Operations (aka the 3 Block War) training development concept was briefed to and endorsed by Army Council two weeks ago. 3 Block War terminology has recently become passe for a lot of good reasons. The gap analysis between what we teach in terms of capabilities (through both collective and indiv training) and what we must teach in order to operate in the Contemporary Operating Environment (COE) is being worked on now. This is done  in conjunction with doctrine developments, joint and combined developments as well as the move towards a common training scenario to sp the development of trg plans for gateway through to CMTC training in prep for assigned msns.

If you haven't read Gen Hillier's Maple Leaf article on 3BW - you should. The doctrine/trg/joint/simulation/indiv/collective trg pieces are moving ahead quickly to have specific direction on the street in the next couple of months. The Engr piece will fall out of that and show up in changes to TPs at the school, and assigned msns and tasks for Engr (sub) units as part of high readiness Task Forces.

 

[Spr.Earl]

Is C.M.D enough..?

It is enough to start, gives the Sapper the basic knowledge to know what to look for. It, along with the HA is the basic qual required to carry on with other training that will give the soldier the skills to deal with the "new threat" the one that we as a Corps pushed aside about 10 years ago.

Not everyone will get qualified, bottom line is out of a 100 soldiers deployed how many are dedicated to the EOD threat.
Other tasks have to get done and if push comes to Shove, someones primary role has to be to fight and support the infantry.

CHIMO...Brother Beavers

Yes CMD is a start,also is our Booby Trap training but what has come to light in Iraq were is the line drawn between a Booby Trap and a IED?
The reason Why I posted this question is many U.S. Eng. saw IED's which used Ordnance but were rigged with electronic firing systems and   not the usual firing devices we get in normal training as a result quite a few deaths.

I was on a Ex with the USAF EOD/IED they gave us a scenario,if you would have been one of our Combat Eng. with CMD you would have thought oh we can deal with this.
WRONG!!
It was a IED!

We have to start to draw the line as it will save lives.

Also the U.S . now has a anti IED Convoy Drill ,which is very informitive.
I had it but my F'n P.C starting giving me prob's ands I lost a lot of info.

I'll try and find it again on the net.

 

[Spr.Earl]

3 Block War

After some thought,is not this what the C.F. has being doing for the last 10yrs or more but with out the threat or ROE's as the U.S. has, yet we did have the same threat so to speak but not exercised against us.
Re. UNPROFOR,IFOR,SFOR,KFOR,etc. all peace keeping missions but with dif. ROE's.

We must all agree that the U.S. has not and never has had a Doctrine for Peace Keeping.
Case in point,when I was in Corolici the U.S. arrived ready for war,all pers wearing full battle order etc.,heres us Berets ,sleave's rolled up,weapons on the shoulder barrel down.
It took them over a week to get the message,we are here to make peace and keep it.
If need be we will show Force.

I have read that we and the Brits,Ozies,Kiwi's are the best in the so called "3 Block War " because of our attitude and training.

The major fault (my own opinion) is the U.S. did not have enough troops to sustain the peace,occupy or repair the infrascture and I have stated this before here on another thread ergo their 3 Block War.

 

[McG]

Don't become so fixated on EOD/IEDD skills as to forget everything else by the side.  The contemporary battlefield still requires we rounded engineers capable of providing a spectrum of support.  Lines of communication routes must still be kept open. 

The F ech will still require mobility support.  This may be an AEV breaching through barricades and rubble for vehicles to move in the streets, or it may be pairs of sappers blowing mouse holes for infantry sections advancing through the walls.  Conceivably, building demolitions could become a task we could expect.

Infrastructure will be a major element that we must contribute to.  The CTs will become the urban terrain experts.  Utilities will be shut off when our forces go into an area to conduct operations, and then those utilities turned back on once we are though.  This serves many purposes as it would deny an enemy the luxury of those utilities, it would limit the risks of exploding gas lines, it would cut-off telephone communication to outside enemy elements. 

There is also the question of the extent that we would become involved in reconstruction.  It seems the preference it to get the locals to do it themselves with international support.  This in turn ensures the skills for the locals to sustain the infrastructure after we leave.  However, for humanitarian purposes (part of the three-block paradigm) we should be able to contribute to an interim step of ensuring electricity and water to the hospitals and other key essential institutions.

There may be a role for hy eqpt in urban search and rescue.

Monitoring water sources for contamination (intentional or not).

Fortifying structures intended to be used as HQs, barracks, or for other purposes.