INTRODUCTION

This article is a product of research work that will differentiate the function of the Army Combat Engineer Brigade from the Navy Amphibious Construction Brigade of the SEABEES.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Army Combat Engineer

A sapper, in the sense first used by the French military, was one who dug trenches to allow besieging forces to advance towards the enemy defensive works and forts, over ground that is under the defenders’ musket or artillery fire. This digging was referred to as sapping the enemy fortifications. Saps were excavated by brigades of trained sappers or instructed troops. When an army was defending a fortress with cannons, they had an obvious height and therefore range advantage over the attacker’s guns. The attacking army’s artillery had to be brought forward, under fire, so as to facilitate effective counter-battery fire. This was established by the French Army in 1775.

Navy SEABEES

In 1943, the SEABEES were organized by Rear Admiral Morrel, USN composed of civilian engineers who built air fields called the Henderson Field in the Island of Guadalcanal primarily to provide civil engineering works for the US marines in the Island. It also provided support to amphibious landing force operations in island hopping, fighting the Japanese in the South Pacific. Later, it was organized as part of the US Navy.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARMY COMBAT ENGINEERS AND THE NAVY AMPHIBIOUS CONSTRUCTION BRIGADE

• A combat engineer pertains to air-land battle (also called pioneer or sapper) and is a type of soldier who performs military engineering tasks in support of land forces combat operations. Combat engineers perform a variety of military engineering, tunnel and mine warfare tasks, as well as construction and demolition duties in and out of combat zones. Combat engineers facilitate the mobility of friendly forces while impeding that of the enemy. They also work to assure the survivability of friendly forces, by building fighting positions, fortifications, and roads. They conduct demolition missions and clear minefields manually or through the use of specialized vehicles. Common combat engineer missions include construction and breaching of trenches, tank traps and other obstacles and fortifications; obstacle emplacement and bunker construction; route clearance and reconnaissance; bridge and road construction or destruction; emplacement and clearance of land mines; and combined arms breaching. Typically, combat engineers are also trained as riflemen and, when required, serve as provisional infantry.
• In contrast, the Navy Amphibious Construction Brigade is concerned with Civil Engineering of facilities in support of a marine landing force and is to support marine landing forces in the amphibious objective area by providing and installing landing pontoons and bridging between the ship to shore, providing causeway at the beach storage for logistics such as water, supply, fuel, etc. building runways, barracks for the troops, sanitary systems, underwater clearing and construction which ensures smooth flow of logistics, etc.

CREATION OF PHILIPPINE NAVY SEABEES

President Marcos, the President of the Philippines in 1967, organized the three-major service Engineering Units under the AFP Core of Engineers.

1. The Philippine Air Force Aviation Engineer specialized in air field and aviation facilities for the country.
2. The Philippine Army established three engineering brigades such as the 51^st, 52^nd, and 53^rd engineering unit and minor combat engineering mission.
3. The Philippine Navy established the Naval Construction Brigade in charge of dredging, port works, pier and wharves causeway deepening or harbor and port participation in order to participate in the socio-economic development program of the government.

In 2015, the Naval Amphibious Construction Brigade of the Philippine Navy was changed to Naval Combat Engineer Brigade. It is a puzzle as to why such a name change transpired, from Construction to Combat Engineer. The latter is quite a confusing title for a construction brigade to hold.

TYPICAL EQUIPMENT OF THE NAVY SEABEES AMPHIBIOUS CONSTRUCTION BRIGADE:

Pontoons, tugboats, warping tugs, floating crane, causeway matting, and bulldozers to provide egress in the amphibious objective in the beachhead: jack hammers, welding machines, concrete mixers, mobile shop, road rollers, chainsaws, riggings, mobile generators, etc.

TYPICAL EQUIPMENT OF THE ARMY COMBAT ENGINEER BRIGADE:

• Improvised Explosive Device (IED)
• Mine Breaching and Clearing Equipment
• Battlefield Mobility and Counter-Mobility
• Gap Crossing and Bridge Launching
• Route Proving and Clearance
• Route Processing and Clearance Multi-Tools
• Obstacle Marking System
• Other equipment; and
• Material Inventory:
• Concertina Wire
• Picket Post
• Anti-Personnel Mine
• Anti-Tank Mine
• Blasting Machine
• Detonating Cord
• C4 Explosive
• Sheet charge
• Booby Traps

THE QUESTIONS THAT I ASK MYSELF

Perhaps the following questions and opinions will help explain the apprehensions of my fellow taxpayers.

• By what authority such name change was promulgated and executed to the Naval Combat Engineer Brigade to that effect.
• Doesn’t the Navy Seabees doctrine state that it is not to be combat engineering but rather Engineering Construction which is the main essence of its original mission and creation in the AFP?
• Was the table of organization and equipment allocation and training changed from original Navy Seabees Rating to combat engineer rating?

I believe the unit is the Naval Combat Engineer is deviating from its original mandate and must be given clarity for the taxpayer to understand why.

Acquiring additional combat engineering equipment is too costly and exorbitant which will just be a waste of taxpayer’s money because later on such equipment will become a white elephant and will be of no use to its original mandate.

• If a mission in combat engineering are mine laying, mine breaching, and demolition, how sure can the construction engineer SEABEES perform the task and job of combat engineering?

THE PRESENT EQUIPMENT INVENTORY OF THE NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BRIGADE

The present equipment of the Naval Construction Brigade of the Philippine Navy in ports and harbor dredging equipment, tugboats, and barges are already becoming very difficult to maintain, have high life cycle cost, and practically are scrap value.

The following projects seem neglected by the SEABEES:

• Siltation due to shallowness and extreme shallow water at Cavite Naval Base in Cavite is no longer capable of docking larger vessels like Frigates and submarines which are envisioned to be acquired by the Navy. It therefore needs maintenance dredging to deepen the harbor on a gradual basis.
• Siltation due to shallow water in Manila Yacht Club where docking facilities at the Headquarters Philippine Navy, Roxas Boulevard is no longer capable to accommodate Frigates and logistical support vessels of the Navy, in spite of the fact that the Navy built a modern and very expensive pier that will only serve for landing of helicopters and small craft units.

I believe it’s not too late to correct such things that need to be corrected in order to use taxpayers’ money effectively.

OBSERVATIONS

If the Navy SEABEES is to adopt the mission of a Combat Engineer, it will be difficult for them to perform and accomplish the mission with mobility and counter-mobility as this is purely a function of the Army Combat Engineers instead. Assimilating the mission of the Army Combat Engineers makes the Navy SEABEES irrelevant to its original purpose and mission as the Amphibious Construction Brigade which is the Engineering Unit of the Navy supporting the marine landing force. As a result, the Navy SEABEES will always be subject to negative criticism.

I believe said changes in the name of the organization and the additional mission and equipment of the men including training has an effect on the budget allocation of the Navy which must be carefully scrutinized by the law makers of the Government budgeting authority.

RECOMMENDATION

Having laid out my opinions based on field observation, I respectfully hope this article will reach the Flag Officer in Command and I would like to recommend it for his perusal.

About the Author

CAPT BAINO is a registered naval architect and civil engineer in the Professional Regulation Commission in the Philippines.  He spent his early years in the PN SEABEES from 1972 to 1980 and was a recipient of the Engineer Basic Course and Combat Engineering at the Philippine Army Engineer School in Nueva Ecija and Engineer Officer Advance and Combat Engineering Course at the United States Army Engineer School in Fort Leonardwood, USA.  Likewise, he has undergone cross-training with the U.S. NAVY Amphibious Construction Battalion and Mine Warfare and Demolition with the United States Marines also in Subic Bay, Philippines and has participated as Platoon Leader of the Beach Party to the Naval Beach Group during Balikatan and Cooperation Afloat Readiness Training in three amphibious exercises with the United States Marines and PHILINDO Amphibious Exercise in Sta. Cruz and Paluan in Occidental Mindoro, and Nabas in Aklan, respectively.