As dawn broke on Wednesday, British, German, Polish and French military engineers swarmed the western bank, deploying their amphibious rigs in anticipation of the advancing vehicles.

The British Army say here that eight hours later, the eight ferries had successfully ferried more than 750 pieces of equipment and upwards of a thousand troops across the 300-metre-wide gap, in an impressive display of NATO capability.

“The wide wet gap crossing came mid-way through Exercise Dragon 24 (running February 28 to March 14), one of several elements making up the overarching Exercise Steadfast Defender.

Comprising circa 20,000 soldiers and 3,500 equipment platforms from nine NATO countries, Exercise Dragon aims to test the Land component of NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF(L)).

While the UK’s 7th Light Mechanised Brigade Combat Team (7LMBCT) led the VJTF(L) to the Vistula, it was over to the subject matter experts, the German-British Amphibious Engineer Battalion 130 to orchestrate the river crossing.

Recent heavy rain only made the crossing more complicated for the exercising forces, testing their ability to adapt to changing scenarios. Nonetheless, the wet gap crossing successfully demonstrated the capability.”

Watching the display from the bank of the eastern shore, Brigadier Guy Foden, Commander of 7LMBCT, the Desert Rats, commented:

“It’s the first time for many in the Brigade that they’ve done a really wide crossing of a major waterway, certainly a river of this width – one of the major waterways in Europe. What you’re seeing here is NATO’s ability to project a Brigade with relative ease across a major water obstacle. It shows the capability of both the British and German amphibious regiment, but also our French and our Polish allies.

We don’t do this very often, so there’s not an inherent understanding of it, but what I would say is using the doctrine, using the procedures that we’re all taught, works and the proof in the pudding, because a large proportion of the brigade has already crossed over, and the rest will follow. And we’re putting deliberately every element across. So, this is not just a thing for Infantry Battalions; 6 RLC (Royal Logistic Corps) will be coming across later, 4th Regiment Royal Artillery will be bringing their guns across, Brigade main headquarters is coming across – the whole thing is coming across. But the key thing is, if you use the doctrine, it works.”

Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

29 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
john
john
16 days ago

Did this in west Germany in the 70s but we did not need big flags.

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  john

Yep been there done that😀 hooray for the CRE👍

Tom
Tom
16 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

‘And worn the T shirt’ too don’t forget.🙂

David Barry
David Barry
16 days ago

Did the BCT command echelon function while moving and could this be done under fire and finally, given the scale of the Ukraine war, would a Bde make much difference?

I don’t know, but, I suspect this was all just a little bit too easy, except for on the eye.

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

Obviously you wouldn’t want to do it under small arms fire but any river crossing can be expected to attract enemy artillery and air attack👍

Joe16
Joe16
16 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

I know that there’s not a lot of information on it, and the force composition and purpose is probably quite different. But there’s a force of about 300 Ukrainian marines on the left bank (Russian side) of the Dnieper river and has been for quite some time. They’re basically there to force the Russians to keep forces in place to cover that front, thinning out the more active fronts further east (or at least, that’s what Twitter and bloggers tell me..!). They are well protected by long range artillery, drones, and EW, but they’re also pretty light role, and they’re… Read more »

DB
DB
16 days ago
Reply to  Joe16

Hi Joe

Now if only NATO would fund a Bde of M3 rigs for the Ukrainians and you do wonder what they could do with them.. Bde of A6 Leopards and Bradleys would rip the cr@p out of the RCZ of the Russian forces…

I’ll go back to thinking when I was young and about to change the world… ho hum.

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  DB

They have been training on M3s! Whether there are any to spare is a different matter.You could not use them for an opposed landing anyway!

DB
DB
16 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

No, you’re right. I was referring to a NATO common purchase of new kit.

As opposed to doctrine and what the UKEs can do… give ’em the equipment and hold their beer!

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  DB

No argument there,it’s just a numbers game with the rigs if there’s enough give them some👍

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
16 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

We only have one amph engr sqn, so not many M3 rigs. We had 37 rigs to 2019, but now have just 27.

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Answers that question then doesn’t it! Even back in the day with two Sqns (M2s) we didm’t have that many spare. There were half dozen or so bagged up in airtight bags for WMR in Binden barracks.

Last edited 16 days ago by Jacko
Graham Moore
Graham Moore
16 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Those 27 will be for: 23 Sqn, Attrition Reserve, Trg and posibly Repair Pool.
Not sure why we have lost 10 rigs since 2019!

Jacko
Jacko
16 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Are there any in the UK with 412 Amphibious Engr troop (reserves)?
Thinking about it probably not as there would be no support services for them🤔

Last edited 16 days ago by Jacko
Graham Moore
Graham Moore
15 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Whoops, forgot about them. I am sure they will have a small number of rigs. How could they train the guys otherwise?

Not sure how they would do REME support. Is the Tp part of a GS Sqn? if so, that should have a REME fitter section. But that would only be for minor Level 2 maintenance work.

Last edited 15 days ago by Graham Moore
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
15 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

I thought 412 were attached to 75 RE at Warrington for a time. They were a GS Reg I believe. Just looked and the Rny website now says they’re a bridging unit.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
15 days ago

*army

Jacko
Jacko
15 days ago

23 used to be part of 21 engr Regt for admin etc but as far as I can tell they now fully part of the German battalion. 412 troop are on Facebook still and would join 23 if it’s necessary I assume🤔 again it looks like they are under 75 for admin. Probably all change next week who can keep up😂
just noticed the 2ic of the battalion is British.

Last edited 15 days ago by Jacko
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
15 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Yes, 23 Sqn RE are in the Joint German Bn. I too had them with 21 admin wise at one time.
I do try to keep up mate! They never stop with their musical chairs changing of the ORBAT or the acronyms.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
15 days ago

Hi mate. I served with reg RE units twice. I never heard a unit (Reg or TA/AR) being described as a bridging unit – bridging is just one of the very many combat engineer tasks undertaken by a RE Regt. So that puzzles me.

Rny is ? typo for army?

412 used to be attached to 23 AES, and was the only TA unit based in Germany – their fb page says they were still there in 2016, celebrating 20 years. Not sure where they are now!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
15 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Hi mate. Yes, typo, on mobile.
I did have that info but even I cannot recall all of it without consulting the files!
Out at mo so when I’m shortly I’ll have a look at what I had.
From memory, they were linked to 75 RE and used the Warcop TA at a camp there. That might be utter cobblers so I’ll look shortly at what I have.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
15 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

OK, so I cannot find 412 either. And 75 are now the AR RE Reg for 4 LMBCT, so where that “bridging unit” ref I saw came from no idea.

Jacko
Jacko
15 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Just had a look at Wiki and they have Ukraine down as ‘future’ users so new or second hand?🤔

Graham M
Graham M
8 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

We have not enough M3 rigs to spare, so it would be up to Germany to gift some of theirs.

Jacko
Jacko
7 days ago
Reply to  Graham M

Not surprised,however Sweden has just ordered a new batch so they are still in production at least.

Joe16
Joe16
15 days ago
Reply to  DB

Haha, I know what you mean..! It is a little hard to understand why supply of Ukraine has been a drip-fed as it has been. I think there was a fear of nuclear escalation at first at least, and a belief that the Russians might give up and go away- or that they might be content with just the eastern sections of Ukraine. That has clearly shown itself not to be the case. But now, Europe at least is seeing more clearly what the situation is and is gearing up to look after itself. I’m guessing that the reason we… Read more »

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
15 days ago
Reply to  Joe16

The small number of CR3s reflect the continuous reduction in MBT numbers over time and whenever a new generation of tanks is fielded. We will only have two Type 56 armoured regiments (tank battalions in US-speak). Blame the politicians for defence cuts. The army has been cut once or twice a decade since 1953. I have no idea where this rumour comes from that the 148 number is predicated by an insufficient number of good CR2 donor tanks. Donor CR2 tanks do not have to be in incredible condition – they apparently get something akin to a mini-Base Overhaul then… Read more »

Joe16
Joe16
14 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

I’m always very happy to be put straight by those informed- and I’m glad that we haven’t let our tank force fall into such bad disrepair. Although it does raise eyebrows related to our continued low order for CH3 (yes, a political decision, and one I have great issue with) and our low provision to Ukraine (regardless of military funding, this one is baffling me). Incidentally, action reports out of Ukraine say that their tankers are finding the CH2 underpowered for working in muddy areas compared to the 1500 HP Leopards and Abrams- probably worth the Army reviewing their decision… Read more »

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
12 days ago
Reply to  Joe16

If our tank fleet was in bad disrepair then it would mean that both tank crews and REME tradesmen would have been doing a s*it job year in, year out.

I too think it rather pathetic that we only supplied 14 tanks to Ukraine.

I have never before heard that CR2s struggled badly in mud due to ‘only having a 1200bhp engine’. Interesting.