Discussion in 'RLC' started by Married_to_a_Brit, Aug 11, 2005.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Ah that age old question what is the difference between the two. Got to be some right bites come out of this, so to start the ball rolling Iâll just quote the old adage CMD not IED.
The British RE are very good at dems that constitute blowing holes in bridges there use of alternative techniques and large scale mine clearance thatâs your lot I give you no more quarter.
When it comes to large logistic disposal and IEDD there not in the same league as a trained AT/ATO. You canât carry out efficient dems on ammunition if you donât know or can not assess how that ammunition functions. Sure you can plaster it with explosives but it is the knowledge that the AT/ATO has gained or can call upon within his/her own trade that ensures a safer and more successful dem. IEDD was give to the AT/ATO trade because of that knowledge of how explosives works and WHY! Once we get who brings what to the party and leave it there we can play nice together. After all we are the best army at what we do (no Spam bash intended).
So to answer the originally question we are and must remain two separate entities both corps are highly trained and have specific skills to be called upon. Oil and water don't mix.
To put it at its most basic (therefore there are some exceptions)
RE - Battlefield munition clearance (particularly mines & associated ammunition), enemy air dropped weapon disposal and counter-mobility demolitions.
RLC (ATOs/ATs) - Logistic disposal (ie anything up to and including large scale dems), IEDD, plus all the other ammunition technical disciplines of storage, repair, accident investigation, ammunition performance failures etc etc.
Mostly it's limited to mines - although for large areas of UXO the RE will provide a high risk search function.
ATOs would normally take this on (unless there was some other expediency).
You've pretty much got this right except RAF responsibilities are centred around UK air munitions (the Royal Navy has primacy for ops below the high tide mark).
Northern Ireland is the preserve of ATOs and ATs.
Hope that helps
RAF EOD also covers IEDD, clearance of air drop weapon ranges (including below high water mark in some case) Rapid clearance techniques for airfields and EOC.
Does anyone have a definition of "Large scale dems"?
foot-tapper"Does anyone have a definition of "Large scale dems"?
Large scale dems=Logistic disposal. Disposing of ammunition in pallets rather than a UXO item or for you boys a 1000 ponder. AT/ATO's in the sandy place have disposed of blows at 8 to 10 tonnes NEQ.
Be very careful here boys... What's been quoted so far (because basically no one has bothered coming back with anything!) is normal Royal Engineer Battlefield Dems in time of War, of course during a rapid advance you will get kick outs when Sapper Units destroy ammunition pits, it's all quick dems to deny the enemy the said items, the Iraq conflict was a classic example as troops were advancing so fast they were finding enemy pockets in their rear. RE's will destroy abandoned equipment such as artillery pieces, tanks, ammunition piles etc. just the same as the American Engineers and that is part of their job, Royal Engineer EOD is a totally different ball game and you are outrightly accusing Sappers from 33 of carrying out demolitions with kick outs etc. they are a lot more professional than that! (I see you so happily mention mistakes made by Sappers etc. i.e Si and Luke being ambushed etc. but you have failed to mention the only person to be killed working on an item wasn't a Sapper but actually an ATO!) someone here mentions RE EOD clearing M42's with shovels?! I very much doubt that, in fact in one RMP thread it clearly states that due to a lack of EOD personnel certain RMP's started to move M42's from the route with shovels!!! you are totally giving the U.S. EOD Tech the wrong impression and I am very surprised this thread hasn't been inundated with RE EOD!!! you are trying to make them look like cnuts!!! Royal Engineers breach minefields during War/Operations as they did in both Gulf Wars, but they do it using the Giant Vipers then tanks with ploughs etc. to get through the breaches rapidly, although all Sappers are taught manual mine clearance they generally leave it to EOD (who clear any mines found on Operational tours especially during post operative) unless it is mission imperative that I believe elements of 59 Cdo RE had to do this time around. On the subject of large Dems to say it is solely an AT/ATO job is ludicrous and they know it!!! many EOD chaps from the RN, RAF and RE's will argue this point with you til they are blue in the face!!! When an American EOD Tech leaves the forces and works in Civvy street on BAC he is known as a UXO Tech, the lowest being Tech I then Tech II and Tech III is the Team Leader, they have a SUXOS above them as the Field Manager (Senior UXO Supervisor) the Royal Engineers EOD trade has been ruthlessly checked and compared with the American system recently due to Iraq, Afghanistan etc. and several former RE Section Commanders, senior NCO's and Officers (EOD) have been cleared and certified up to Tech III and SUXOS by the U.S. Corps of Engineers, if they looked deep into the AT/ATO Qualifications then yes they would of course be in line with the American EOD Tech but do AT and ATO's have any experience of Battle Area Clearance (not individual items littering the battlefield but full blown systematic clearance of a said area of ground to a said depth?! and this is what the Americans consider the bread and butter of UXO Techs; any AT's or ATO's on this site who have any doubts whatsoever of the EOD capabilities of the Royal Engineer Bomb Disposal Engineer should get in contact with DEODS and find out, I think you will have to take an embarassed step backwards for the stupid comments you have placed on here!
just asked because on Telic 3 and 4 JFEOD were doing dems of to 2 tonne NEQ to my knowledge (and possibly more)
Fair play and respect to you guys but there is one over riding similarity
You're all fcuking mad
Right no one else has gotten to it yet so I thought I'd correct you on a few points:
Yep, Maggie was the best mate, Big Balls for a woman! she was always well favoured by the British squaddie as she had the bollocks to use our Military against the aggressor! it is well known but not well publicised that she was actually quite dissapointed the SAS didn't waste all the idiots who held the Iranian Embassy siege. A great Gal...
Separate names with a comma.