Re: Scouts.....

>Which ain't gonna change the fact that your maps will
>still be perfectly good.

.unless someone hacked into your mapping agency's computers and changed
things
before they went to press. And it's unlikely your printed copy has kept
up with
the new roads built in the last 2 (or even 12) months. Or the new
buildings.

John, you're an Engineer. Your activities give map-makers fits. You make
new
bridges, and take down old ones. You alter the terrain in small but
important
ways. And sometimes not-so-small ones.

<Sarcasm>Of course, you *always* instantly update all maps of the area
in the
US Army's inventory every time you lay a hasty minefield, don't you?. Or
if
not, *everybody* always gets the word, don't they? There's always
perfect and
seamless co-operation between the US Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines
too.

And of course, your UAV is good enough to judge the carrying capacity of
that
bridge, whether 20 tonnes or 100 tonnes. Could make quite a difference
to your
MBTs. (It's marked on your map as "estimated 50 tonnes", but that was by
some
expert back in the CONUS, and anyway some idiot drove a 170 tonne load
over
it last week and it's now marked on enemy maps as "unstable, 5 tonne
limit"**).

The UAV also carries sensors that show that the bottom nearby is
suitable for
fording due to clay below the mud, but that the banks nearby will
require beaucoup
PSP to stabilise them due to hollows caused by local wildlife, right? 

You always have access to the most timely Intel too, it only takes
seconds to
relay it from the theatre to Langley, get it all analysed, and get it
reticulated
to everyone who needs it.

**Apart from the enemy map you captured last week, which was deliberate
disinformation.***

*** Or just hadn't been updated. The enemy makes mistakes too.
</Sarcasm>

I've had great fun as a referee in the past with such things.
New short roads that make T-junctions into crossroads. New multistorey
buildings
that become unmistakeable landmarks. Bridges that exist where none are
marked,
or that are unsuitable for vehicular traffic where they are. 

This was pre-GPS, so the opportunities for people to get lost were
greater.
But SNAFUs will still occur. The only reason why the defender doesn't
get the
same problems is because they've taken the time to recon their own
terrain before
the battle starts. But they have their own problems: keeping enough of a
screen
to detect enemy incursion and frustrate recon, enough mobile units to
slow down
the main thrust and maintain contact, and a large enough reserve to deal
with
any attack. Lots of opportunities for an attacker to create a false
picture
- say of a full scale attack where it's just a feint to cover a
withdrawal.