101st Airborne

[John_d]

I was just watching Band of Brothers today and I was wondering about how the organisation works. Apparently, the company in question is 'E' Company of the 2nd Battalion, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. The first bit is fine- I understand how the organisation works up to regimental level. But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops. This would be a HUGE number of troops and given that this kind of warfare was in its infancy back in the 40s, I seriously doubt that there would be this number of paratroopers in the American army. But maybe I'm wrong. Can anyone shed some light on the issue for me please?

[John_d]

I was just watching Band of Brothers today and I was wondering about how the organisation works. Apparently, the company in question is 'E' Company of the 2nd Battalion, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. The first bit is fine- I understand how the organisation works up to regimental level. But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops. This would be a HUGE number of troops and given that this kind of warfare was in its infancy back in the 40s, I seriously doubt that there would be this number of paratroopers in the American army. But maybe I'm wrong. Can anyone shed some light on the issue for me please?

[The_Enigma]

Originally posted by John_d:

I was just watching Band of Brothers today and I was wondering about how the organisation works. Apparently, the company in question is 'E' Company of the 2nd Battalion, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. The first bit is fine- I understand how the organisation works up to regimental level. But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops.

So your saying you dont know why they say there in the 506th of the 101st airborne?

But you understand why they say there in E Company 2nd battalion?

[The_Enigma]

Originally posted by John_d:

I was just watching Band of Brothers today and I was wondering about how the organisation works. Apparently, the company in question is 'E' Company of the 2nd Battalion, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. The first bit is fine- I understand how the organisation works up to regimental level. But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops.

So your saying you dont know why they say there in the 506th of the 101st airborne?

But you understand why they say there in E Company 2nd battalion?

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by John_d:

[snips]

But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops. This would be a HUGE number of troops and given that this kind of warfare was in its infancy back in the 40s, I seriously doubt that there would be this number of paratroopers in the American army. But maybe I'm wrong. Can anyone shed some light on the issue for me please?

For the US Army, I believe that:

Squads are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within companies

Companies are lettered within regiments

Battalions are numbered within regiments

Regiments are numbered within the entire US Army

Divisions are numbered within the entire US Army

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry and armored divisions (so airborne divisions are numbered along with the infantry).

Contrast this with British practice, where:

Sections are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within battalions

Companies are lettered within battalions

Battalions are numbered within regiments

Brigades are numbered within the entire British Army

Divisions are numbered within the entire British Army

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry, armoured, airborne and colonial divisions, but the numbering is not necessarily sequential.

For the Germans, I believe it's:

Sections are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within companies

Companies are numbered within regiments

Battalions are Roman-numbered within regiments

Regiments are numbered within the entire Wehrmacht

Divisions are numbered within the entire Wehrmacht

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry, armoured, airborne, Waffen-SS and Luftwaffe divisions.

Corrections welcome. If anyone can tell me what Russian practice was, I'd like to know.

All the best,

John.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by John_d:

[snips]

But presumeably there aren't at least 505 other regiments in the 101st, or another 100 divisions of airborne troops. This would be a HUGE number of troops and given that this kind of warfare was in its infancy back in the 40s, I seriously doubt that there would be this number of paratroopers in the American army. But maybe I'm wrong. Can anyone shed some light on the issue for me please?

For the US Army, I believe that:

Squads are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within companies

Companies are lettered within regiments

Battalions are numbered within regiments

Regiments are numbered within the entire US Army

Divisions are numbered within the entire US Army

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry and armored divisions (so airborne divisions are numbered along with the infantry).

Contrast this with British practice, where:

Sections are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within battalions

Companies are lettered within battalions

Battalions are numbered within regiments

Brigades are numbered within the entire British Army

Divisions are numbered within the entire British Army

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry, armoured, airborne and colonial divisions, but the numbering is not necessarily sequential.

For the Germans, I believe it's:

Sections are numbered within platoons

Platoons are numbered within companies

Companies are numbered within regiments

Battalions are Roman-numbered within regiments

Regiments are numbered within the entire Wehrmacht

Divisions are numbered within the entire Wehrmacht

Separate numbering sequences are used for infantry, cavalry, armoured, airborne, Waffen-SS and Luftwaffe divisions.

Corrections welcome. If anyone can tell me what Russian practice was, I'd like to know.

All the best,

John.

[John_d]

Thanks for that! So when they say that they are the 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne, the regimental number is not directly linked to the division (i.e. its not 506th regiment OF the 101st division, its the 506th regiment of the army) and the divisional number also just means that its the 101st division of the army? How many regiments were there in the 101st? Its only 506th that seem to get any media coverage

[John_d]

Thanks for that! So when they say that they are the 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne, the regimental number is not directly linked to the division (i.e. its not 506th regiment OF the 101st division, its the 506th regiment of the army) and the divisional number also just means that its the 101st division of the army? How many regiments were there in the 101st? Its only 506th that seem to get any media coverage

[Jim1954]

The 101st was composed of the 501st, 502nd, 506th PIR's (parachute infantry regiment) and the 327th Glider.

The 82nd was composed of the 504th, 505th, 507th, 508th PIR's and 325th Glider.

The 508th was formed up from the 502nd PIR and the 26th ID and was attached to the 82nd for Overlord since the 504th was depleted by action in Italy.

http://www.ww2-airborne.us/division/order_battle.html

http://www.ww2-airborne.us/18corps/101abn/101_overview.html

Hope this helps clear it up a bit.

[Jim1954]

The 101st was composed of the 501st, 502nd, 506th PIR's (parachute infantry regiment) and the 327th Glider.

The 82nd was composed of the 504th, 505th, 507th, 508th PIR's and 325th Glider.

The 508th was formed up from the 502nd PIR and the 26th ID and was attached to the 82nd for Overlord since the 504th was depleted by action in Italy.

http://www.ww2-airborne.us/division/order_battle.html

http://www.ww2-airborne.us/18corps/101abn/101_overview.html

Hope this helps clear it up a bit.

[John Kettler]

John_d,

This should help. Lots of info and knowledgeable members.

http://forums.wildbillguarnere.com/

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

John_d,

This should help. Lots of info and knowledgeable members.

http://forums.wildbillguarnere.com/

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

John D Salt,

For the Americans, shouldn't it read that companies are lettered within battalions, rather than as shown?

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

John D Salt,

For the Americans, shouldn't it read that companies are lettered within battalions, rather than as shown?

Regards,

John Kettler

[JasonC]

No he is right, within regiments. The companies of 1st battalion would be A, B, C, D, then the companies of 2nd battalion would be E, F, G, and H, not A B C D again.

[JasonC]

No he is right, within regiments. The companies of 1st battalion would be A, B, C, D, then the companies of 2nd battalion would be E, F, G, and H, not A B C D again.

[stoat]

Originally posted by John_d:

So when they say that they are the 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne, the regimental number is not directly linked to the division (i.e. its not 506th regiment OF the 101st division, its the 506th regiment of the army) and the divisional number also just means that its the 101st division of the army?

I'll just try to muddy the waters a bit more. The US used four sets of divisional numbers in WWII. One for Cavalry divisions, one for Armored divisions, one for Marine divisions, and one for Infantry divisions. The airborne divisions grew out of pre-existing infantry divisioins in between the world wars and kept the numerical designators of those divisions. Thus, they were mixed right in with infantry divisions when it comes to number. (100th Infantry Division, 101st Airborne Division, 102nd Infantry Division) It might be easier to think of it as the 101st Airborne Infantry Division to understand where it fits in with the rest of the army.

The Regiment also has a unique in the army number because regiments could operate without being attatched to a parent division, most commonly for the Americans as Regimental Combat Teams. Most regiments stayed with one division for the duration of the war, but those organizations were by no means set in stone. Later in the war when the Allies greatly needed manpower, Regiments were sent forward without their support formations as RCTs. The British used Regiment sized units more commonly as Brigade groups.

[stoat]

Originally posted by John_d:

So when they say that they are the 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne, the regimental number is not directly linked to the division (i.e. its not 506th regiment OF the 101st division, its the 506th regiment of the army) and the divisional number also just means that its the 101st division of the army?

I'll just try to muddy the waters a bit more. The US used four sets of divisional numbers in WWII. One for Cavalry divisions, one for Armored divisions, one for Marine divisions, and one for Infantry divisions. The airborne divisions grew out of pre-existing infantry divisioins in between the world wars and kept the numerical designators of those divisions. Thus, they were mixed right in with infantry divisions when it comes to number. (100th Infantry Division, 101st Airborne Division, 102nd Infantry Division) It might be easier to think of it as the 101st Airborne Infantry Division to understand where it fits in with the rest of the army.

The Regiment also has a unique in the army number because regiments could operate without being attatched to a parent division, most commonly for the Americans as Regimental Combat Teams. Most regiments stayed with one division for the duration of the war, but those organizations were by no means set in stone. Later in the war when the Allies greatly needed manpower, Regiments were sent forward without their support formations as RCTs. The British used Regiment sized units more commonly as Brigade groups.

[John Kettler]

JasonC,

While I understand what you're saying, if your and John D Salt's interpretation is correct, then why

give the battalion number at all if the lettering is tied to the regiment? If we take your model as being correct, then the battalion's identity is superfluous to lettering the companies and would read Easy Company, 506th PIR, 101st Airborne Division.

What we really have, though, IMO, is a definite statement of tactical subordination in the standard form, i.e., Easy Company of the 2nd Battalion, there being no other Easy Company anywhere else in the 2nd Battalion. Easy Company is part and parcel of 2nd Battalion, 506th PIR. Period.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ March 19, 2006, 05:07 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

[John Kettler]

JasonC,

While I understand what you're saying, if your and John D Salt's interpretation is correct, then why

give the battalion number at all if the lettering is tied to the regiment? If we take your model as being correct, then the battalion's identity is superfluous to lettering the companies and would read Easy Company, 506th PIR, 101st Airborne Division.

What we really have, though, IMO, is a definite statement of tactical subordination in the standard form, i.e., Easy Company of the 2nd Battalion, there being no other Easy Company anywhere else in the 2nd Battalion. Easy Company is part and parcel of 2nd Battalion, 506th PIR. Period.

Regards,

John Kettler

[ March 19, 2006, 05:07 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

[JasonC]

JK - not an "interpretation", a mere fact. Anybody who has read operational histories is well aware of it. Yes the battalion is redundant information if the company is given too. It isn't always - if the operational level is a bit higher the companies simply aren't mentioned and only the movement of the battalions is discussed.

Redundancy is a good thing. You wouldn't want to be the B company of 3rd battalion in a regiment with 3 B companies. It is confusing enough that there are 3 of them in a division. When you call for artillery fire, you don't want the gunners supporting you only a ninth of the time. Cuts such confusion considerably.

Confusion reduction through redundancy is everywhere. In language, the estimated redundancy is about 50%. The same is true in spelling. If you randomly blank out letters from English text, you can still read it down to about 40% blanked out. At 50% you are guessing. Error correcting codes use parity bits for the same reason. If someone says they are from B company of 2nd battalion, you can arrest the ignorant spy right there.

The Germans did the same thing, just with numbers instead of letters. Thus I battalion had 1, 2 and 3 line companies, 4 company was its weapons. The 13 and 14 companies didn't have a battalion parent but were regimental assets. There is no 1 company of II battalion, it is 5 company. So you can say II/5 or you can just say 5.

[JasonC]

JK - not an "interpretation", a mere fact. Anybody who has read operational histories is well aware of it. Yes the battalion is redundant information if the company is given too. It isn't always - if the operational level is a bit higher the companies simply aren't mentioned and only the movement of the battalions is discussed.

Redundancy is a good thing. You wouldn't want to be the B company of 3rd battalion in a regiment with 3 B companies. It is confusing enough that there are 3 of them in a division. When you call for artillery fire, you don't want the gunners supporting you only a ninth of the time. Cuts such confusion considerably.

Confusion reduction through redundancy is everywhere. In language, the estimated redundancy is about 50%. The same is true in spelling. If you randomly blank out letters from English text, you can still read it down to about 40% blanked out. At 50% you are guessing. Error correcting codes use parity bits for the same reason. If someone says they are from B company of 2nd battalion, you can arrest the ignorant spy right there.

The Germans did the same thing, just with numbers instead of letters. Thus I battalion had 1, 2 and 3 line companies, 4 company was its weapons. The 13 and 14 companies didn't have a battalion parent but were regimental assets. There is no 1 company of II battalion, it is 5 company. So you can say II/5 or you can just say 5.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by John Kettler:

[snips]

While I understand what you're saying, if your and John D Salt's interpretation is correct,

No "interpretation" is involved.

If US Army companies were lettered sequentially within the battalion, as you appear to be claiming, when would there ever be a sub-unit designated "Easy Company"? "Love Company"?

All the best,

John.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by John Kettler:

[snips]

While I understand what you're saying, if your and John D Salt's interpretation is correct,

No "interpretation" is involved.

If US Army companies were lettered sequentially within the battalion, as you appear to be claiming, when would there ever be a sub-unit designated "Easy Company"? "Love Company"?

All the best,

John.

[JonS]

In order to further muddy the waters AIUI the lettering sequence in PIRs was a little different to normal IRs. PIBs had support weapons, on broadly the same scale as leg bns, but they weren't grouped into a specific spt coy, they were directly attached to Bn HQ as pns (Mtr Pn, MG Pn).

Thus:

50# PIR

. 1st Bn 50# PIR

. . Bn HQ, A, B, C Coys

. 2nd Bn 50# PIR

. . Bn HQ, D, E, F Coys

. 3rd Bn 50# PIR

. . Bn HQ, G, H, I Coys

By-the-by, Joe Balkoski makes the point the bn designation (and the trailing 'Regiment') was often dropped when talking about companies. So just "G Coy, 22nd Infantry", since G Coy was always in 2nd Bn.

Regards

JonS

[ April 03, 2006, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]