Engineer presents professional information designed to keep U.S. military and civilian engineers informed of current and emerging developments within their areas of expertise for the purpose of enhancing their professional development.
Issue link: https://engineer.epubxp.com/i/284727
36 Engineer January–April 2014 ■ Failure to show graphics of decision points associated with the breach on a decision support template. Better attention to these planning deliverables will greatly help units synchronize the support, breach, and assault forces and implement the breaching fundamentals. The fnal trend observed during the planning process involved rehearsals; specifcally, the lack of participation by engineer leaders as briefers on terrain models. Engineer leaders or task force operations offcers often do not brief necessary details of the breaching tenets during the combined arms rehearsal. Engineer-specifc icons often were not developed or placed on the terrain model. If they were, the icons themselves were not referenced or used during the combined arms rehearsal. During the execution of the combined arms breach, maneuver task forces struggled to synchronize the support, breach, and assault forces. This contributed to an inability to execute SOSRA. The following are observations obtained from numerous executions of combined arms breaches during several decisive action training environment rotations— ■ The breach force moved toward the POB before the support force suppressed the objective. ■ The support force fred obscuration smoke too early or too late. ■ The breach force began reduction without adequate obscuration. ■ The breach and assault forces failed to secure the breach site. ■ The breach force began obstacle reduction before the breach site was secured. ■ The breach and assault forces struggled to mass at the POB. ■ The assault force failed to understand the marking technique used. ■ The assault force moved through the breach lane before the lane was marked ■ The assault force stalled at the breach. Planning Tools S everal tools help leaders incorporate the breaching tenets during planning to ensure that the maneuver task force employs them during execution. The ESM records war game results and helps the staff synchronize a course of action across time and space. 3 Here, the engineer leader or planner ensures that the support, breach, and assault forces—each with its associated task and purpose in relation to time and space—are captured on the ESM. Populating the ESM during the military decisionmaking process begins synchronization. The ESM allows the staff to visualize the breach organization, task, and purpose. Most importantly, it shows how the support, breach, and assault forces relate to each other in time and space. The proper use of the ESM also confrms the results of reverse breach planning, develops instructions to subordi- nate units, and helps determine effective mission command node composition and locations. The ESM describes any decision points determined by the staff that lead to the development of the second and third tools—the decision support matrix and decision support template. The matrix and template facilitate the synchronization of the combined arms breach. The template depicts decision points, timelines associated with the movement of forces, The assault force moves through the point of breach. EN Law.1.indd 39 3/12/2014 1:27:06 PM