ok - I am a little embarassed to ask this question...

[Yaba]

Call me stupid - call me dumb - call me a lazy ass for not resarching this more before I post but could someone please tell me the numbers involved in a: company / battalion / division / army?

I understand that this will differ greatly from one country to the next but there must be some consistency?

I undertand as well that a platoon is made up a a few squads and a company is made up of a few platoons. I even have a vague understanding that a battalion is made up of a few companies - but I am not tottaly sure of this. Is there a specific number of companies that need to be in place in order to qualify for a battalion? After that I get a little sketchy. Also, how does this work for armour, airforce, etc?

Cheers to anyone who can shed a little light for this dunderhead...

[Screeny]

I'm sure JasonC or one of the other groggs will come around with a full and very detailed description..per country and for each different stage in the war.

And yes it is quite complex in the detail (i.e. how it worked in practise) in theory however remember this list:

Squad

PLatoon

Company

Battalion

Regiment/Brigade (here is starts getting fuzzy..)

Division

Corps

Army

Army group

Squad is the smallest unit in the hiarchy (8 to 12 men)

3 squads = 1 platoon

3 platoon = 1 company

etc basicaly 3 of each forms the next level. As said this is the basic, a former UK officer explained me once that this is historically grown and is (probably among other factors..) due to the span of control of 3.

But as said this is more like a easy way to remember it. The groggs will probably elaborate soon...

[LGMB]

Soldiers,

I think the most perplexing section is the brigade/regiment factor which can be composed of basically anything and of any number (brigades are often or not, in battle, thrown together rather adhocly, giving you obscure numbers and sizes).

[Firefly]

The British confuse things, as usual, by not using the regiment as a fighting unit, a British/Commonwealth brigade would consist of three battallions, usually, but not always, from different regiments, plus support troops, whereas an American or German brigade would consist of three regiments plus support troops. The Soviet upper level organisation also differed.

[JonS]

VERY approximately:

Section/Squad: 10

Platoon: 50

Company: 200

Battalion: 1,000

Brigade/Regiment: 4,000

Division: 15,000

Corps: 60,000

Army: 250,000

Numbers will vary at the lower levels (up to brigade/regiment) based on exact TOE, nationality, casualties suffered.

Numbers will vary at the higher levels (from brigade/regiment on up) based on exact TOE, nationality, casualties suffered, as well as attachment of independent units (tank bns, artillery regiments, engineers, etc. These can swell the numbers very markedly), and the number of divisions in a Corps (usualy three) and corps in an army (again, usually three).

Regards

JonS

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Firefly:

The British confuse things, as usual, by not using the regiment as a fighting unit, a British/Commonwealth brigade would consist of three battallions, usually, but not always, from different regiments, plus support troops, whereas an American or German brigade would consist of three regiments plus support troops. The Soviet upper level organisation also differed.

I'm sorry ol' boy, but since we Brit/Commonwealth types had our Regiments before there was an America or a Germany, I do feel it is you who confused things, not us!

Toodle pip!

[Firefly]

Originally posted by Mike:

Where did I say that we didn't?

[Holman]

One confusing thing to remember, too, is that each higher level is usually composed of "3 or 4" rather than just 3 units of the immediately preceding level.

That is, a company usually has three rifle platoons *plus* a support platoon of some kind (maybe just a few machinegun teams). A battalion usually has three rifle companies *plus* a heavy weapons company (mortars, more machineguns). A Regiment usually has three battalions *plus* some attached artillery or AT guns or other assets of roughly battalion size. Etc.

I won't get into brigades vs. regiments because the issue confuses me the way British humor confuses my mother.

----

U.S. Armored Divisions in WW2 have three "Combat Commands," which are basically regimental-sized combine-arms task forces. A division's three units are named Combat Command "A", Combat Command "B", and Combat Command "Reserve."

I've always wondered about this. Was CCR always used in a reserve role, and was it therefore the cushy job to have? Were particular battalions rotated in and out of CCR? Or, if CCR was on the line just as much as CCA and CCB, why didn't they just call it CCC?

----

On a side note, when did the modern U.S. Army go from a regimental structure to a brigade structure (if indeed that is what they have done)? Does the Army still have numbered regiments at all? If so, how do they relate to the brigades? And how do the brigades relate to divisions now? And just what is going on with that Mr. Bean???

Jumping from reading WW2 history to reading about more modern U.S. operations feels like moving to a whole new country's force structure. It's like you've gone from Fort Benning to Salisbury Plain all of the sudden...

[Abbott]

Good Info. here.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Abbott:

Good Info. here.

Right. Especially this post:

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Note: the below applies to infantry formations. Armor and other arms may be organized along other lines.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Vader's Jester:

Company = 3 platoons

Plus a heavy weapons platoon.

Battalion = 3 companys

Plus a heavy weapons company.

What comes next, and what is it composed of? Is it Regiment?

Or, as Dorosh has posted, brigade.

With what? Three battalions?

Two or three rifle battalions depending on nationality and period of the war + one cannon company + one AT company. Regiments could also have additional arms and units attached to them that were not part of their organic TO&E, such as armor, artillery, medical, civil affairs, etc., etc.

I'd like to understand this network of organization all the way up to a full army.

So would we all.

Generally regiments (or brigades) were organized into divisions along with additional supporting arms such as engineers, artillery, AT, AA, signals, medical, ordnance, supply, transport etc. But sometimes regiments/brigades served outside of a divisional structure. This was more likely in the case of non-infantry units than infantry units.

Divisions were usually grouped into corps of two, three, or more divisions plus supporting arms.

Corps were grouped into armies. Armies usually contained two to four corps plus supporting arms.

The Soviet Red Army was somewhat unique in that due to a lack of qualified officers to man corps headquarters (largely because of the pre-war purge of the officer corps), they simply skipped that echelon of command and grouped divisions directly into armies. [but only from 1941 to 1943. Thanks, Andreas.]

Armies were grouped into army groups, or in the Soviet case, fronts.

Army groups were subordinate to the theater of operations, usually called the supreme headquarters. It was possible for a supreme HQ to have no army groups subordinate to it if there were only one or two armies in that theater.

A theater command was subordinate to the uniformed chiefs of the armed forces and they to their civilian chiefs.

This is a very generalized schematic. There were sometimes significant differences in structure depending on nationality and period. Minor allies (regardless of which side they were on) were usually subordinated to their major allies. But something like this was the case for all the warring parties.

Michael </font>

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Mbjvx:

Soldiers,

I think the most perplexing section is the brigade/regiment factor which can be composed of basically anything and of any number (brigades are often or not, in battle, thrown together rather adhocly, giving you obscure numbers and sizes).

No they were not. Brigades and Regiments were very well organised, and well documented, standard formations. At least on paper. They certainly were not composed of 'basically anything', and they were not just thrown together.

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Martyr:

U.S. Armored Divisions in WW2 have three "Combat Commands," which are basically regimental-sized combine-arms task forces. A division's three units are named Combat Command "A", Combat Command "B", and Combat Command "Reserve."

I've always wondered about this. Was CCR always used in a reserve role, and was it therefore the cushy job to have? Were particular battalions rotated in and out of CCR? Or, if CCR was on the line just as much as CCA and CCB, why didn't they just call it CCC?

----

On a side note, when did the modern U.S. Army go from a regimental structure to a brigade structure (if indeed that is what they have done)? Does the Army still have numbered regiments at all? If so, how do they relate to the brigades? And how do the brigades relate to divisions now? And just what is going on with that Mr. Bean???

Jumping from reading WW2 history to reading about more modern U.S. operations feels like moving to a whole new country's force structure. It's like you've gone from Fort Benning to Salisbury Plain all of the sudden...

CCR was commanded by extra corps headquarters people as the armored divisions had only command groups for CCA and CCB. Originally CCR was just what was left and was indeed the Division reserve. When many of the Corps independent assets began to be, more or less, permanently attached to the divisions the HQ units for these assets were left with nothing to command. These were formed into command groups for the CCRs.

CCRs were used in the line just as were CCA and CCB. In fact one of the first units to reinforce the Bastogne sector during the Bulge was CCR 9th Armored. I suspect the name stuck because there was no real need to change it.

Modern US divisions are organized into brigades. The battalions retain their Regimental affiliations for traditions and lineage. While there are a few for the most part there are no real regiments left in the U.S. Army. Even in places like the 101st or 82nd where a brigade might consist of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Battalions 502nd Infantry Regiment, they still fall under a brigade HQ rather than a regimental one.

I believe the switch was made during the mid to late 70s.

[LGMB]

Soldier,

Well, you shot me down in flames there!

What am I supposed to say now? Hunh? Punk?

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Mbjvx:

Soldier,

Well, you shot me down in flames there!

What am I supposed to say now? Hunh? Punk?

Say nothing, start reading?