[Post Reply] [*]  Page 11 of 15  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page « 19 10 11 12 1315 »
Author Message
darthpanda
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 12th, 2016, 8:03 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2177
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 2:14 pm
Location: HOLLAND!!!!!!!
Contact: Website
Caddaric79 wrote:
Very nice DP :-)
Perhaps put the vehicles designations ?
Is updated
[ img ]

_________________
Worklist:
FD-Scale:
- ROCAF
- RHKAAF / HKGFS
Never build:
- Lockheed Boeing AFX-653


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
signal
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 12th, 2016, 9:09 pm
Offline
Posts: 227
Joined: August 6th, 2010, 5:44 pm
I could be wrong about light tanks, but I know that a medium
tank company had three platoons of five tanks each, plus two
at company HQ - for a total of 17 tanks in the company. Is this
table of organization correct - only four tanks per platoon?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
mortarigus
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 12th, 2016, 10:26 pm
Offline
Posts: 23
Joined: June 29th, 2016, 9:20 pm
As far as I know this is correct and reflects the way they move and fight. A medium tank platoon (or troop) moves in bounds of 2 with one pair in over-watch and one pair moving, with the troop commanders vehicle observing and instructing the 'pairs', usually moving at the same time as the second pair.
Generally the US army conducted 'reconnaissance by fire' (though the Greyhound armored car was very quiet) as against the British system of 'Reconnaissance by stealth', hence the greater use of armored cars by the Brits.
Tracked vehicles in WW2 were very noisy and the example above utilized the speed of the of the M5 Stuart and a 4 tank platoon (or troop) moved in bounds that crossed country more quickly to keep itself out of trouble, quickly guiding heavier metal into the situation if and when needed.
A four tank unit was simply just that more simple and agile, very important attributes if your have one less command link to worry about and the initiative remains with the vehicle in 'the red zone';


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
deankal55
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 13th, 2016, 9:44 pm
Offline
Posts: 100
Joined: December 11th, 2011, 9:11 pm
Up until the M1 Abrams was introduced, the standard U.S. tank platoon was 5 tanks, with 2 in the company headquarters.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
signal
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 2:11 am
Offline
Posts: 227
Joined: August 6th, 2010, 5:44 pm
deankal55 wrote:
Up until the M1 Abrams was introduced, the standard U.S. tank platoon was 5 tanks, with 2 in the company headquarters.
Exactly my point. One of the advantages the U.S. Army had over the
German Army was that our tank battalions had 54 tanks (3x Companies
of 17 tanks each, plus 3 tanks at Bn HQ), while the Germans made do
with a battalion having about ten fewer tanks. They had better tanks,
but the U.S. had more, so eventually, the U.S. ground down the panzers.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Calis
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 3:30 am
Offline
Posts: 84
Joined: March 29th, 2013, 6:10 pm
Okay Gentlemen this might help, I don't normally get into these conversations

http://www.niehorster.org/013_usa/44_or ... co-lt.html


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
darthpanda
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 11:25 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2177
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 2:14 pm
Location: HOLLAND!!!!!!!
Contact: Website
Calis wrote:
Okay Gentlemen this might help, I don't normally get into these conversations

http://www.niehorster.org/013_usa/44_or ... co-lt.html
It's 5 tank, I will update it together with a new version of M5

_________________
Worklist:
FD-Scale:
- ROCAF
- RHKAAF / HKGFS
Never build:
- Lockheed Boeing AFX-653


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
mortarigus
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 12:13 pm
Offline
Posts: 23
Joined: June 29th, 2016, 9:20 pm
Just to make things clear to everybody TO&Es in all armies in WW2 varied from year to year, sometimes even with a year, due to the constraints or demands of topography, tactical circumstances, casualties, logistics, change of doctrine or any number of circumstances.
It is a fact that some US TO&Es show a four tank platoon others a five, the fact is both can be right and we shouldn't be treating one as right and another as wrong.I have seen creditable scales that show both.
Calis' observation about US troop size is important. The figures show that for every German tank destroyed in Western Europe, five Allied tanks were destroyed, that sort of reality made good sense of a 5 unit medium tank platoon.
A US authored book titled 'Fighting Power' (I have it in my library and will find it if any-one is interested). It is the most meticulously researched book; it does an exhaustive comparative study on the German and US armies in WW2 and shows the Germans as superior in almost every area except material. Because the comparison was only with the US Army I cannot say any more than that, except that US Tankers really did fight hard.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
signal
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 2:49 pm
Offline
Posts: 227
Joined: August 6th, 2010, 5:44 pm
Most, if not all, of the recent books about tank warfare in Europe during
1943 - 1945 emphasize that the U.S. fared badly in one on one tank combat.
Only the superior numbers of U.S. tanks and tank destroyers, combined
with better radios, more artillery support, more infantry, and a larger
replacement pool made victory possible. Many U.S. tank battalions suffered
100% losses of equipment, and more than 25% losses of personnel in just
8 - 11 months of combat after D-Day.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
mortarigus
Post subject: Re: US ARMY OrganizationPosted: July 14th, 2016, 4:15 pm
Offline
Posts: 23
Joined: June 29th, 2016, 9:20 pm
I need to correct a point I made above, Western European Allied tank losses were in fact 3 for every 1 German. The five to one tank ratio was on the Russian Front, also where 1 Stug was knocked out for every 3 Russian tanks.
The points made in 'Fighting Power' consider things like leadership, officer quality and training, morale, ratio of combatants to rear support, combat fatigue, ability to react to the unexpected etc. greatly favored the Germans.
Just shows how terribly traumatic it must have been on both sides, but like thew North and South material wins out in the end.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 11 of 15  [ 142 posts ]  Return to “FD Scale Drawings” | Go to page « 19 10 11 12 1315 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


Contact us | The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited