NEW Query re Empire Land units

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

ORIGINAL: herwin
17th Indian Light Division
81st WA Infantry Division

17th Indian Division functioned as a training division from summer 1942 onwards (after the retreat from Burma) and the African Infantry divisions are a completely different affair: Less motor transport and lighter artillery (3.7in Mountain Howitzers and 4.2in Mortars upon arrival in the CBI, later replaced by 25pdrs [light version]), but otherwise standard.

The 82 WA was as you described. The 81 WA was binary and operated as a light division. The 17th ILD fought almost continuously through the Burma campaign and was never a training division.

herwin is correct with 17th Division and I was wrong (faulty memory). It was a Light Division between May 1942 and somewhen in 1944, but it seems that it was the only of its kind. It trained between May 1942 - Jan 1943 for this role without any artillery attached (strangely it kept its CRA the whole time) and had only two brigades until 1944 (when its brigades became motorised and it added 99th Bde as its third brigade). There are many oddities with this division.

81st WA Division was not binary. Its two remaining brigades fought as Brigade Groups until its missing brigade (3rd WA Bde) came back in 1945 (after being disbanded for some time). It was definetely no light division in the sense 17th Indian Division was.

[herwin]

Here's a question for the assembled multitude. What made a WWII infantry division a 'light division'? I suspect it was not the organisation, but rather the training and doctrine. A light division maintained a higher tempo of operations than a standard infantry division and was intended for more mobile operations.

The German light (Jaeger) divisions were binary divisions for operations in upland or forested terrain. They usually contained two Kampfgruppen, each built around an infantry regiment and had more motorised assets than a standard infantry division. The Kampfgruppen operated along separate axes, out of direct support range of each other, so they functioned like mini-divisions. The German mountain and motorised divisions were similar, but designed for operations in mountainous and open/rolling terrain, respectively. The 5th Light Afrika Division was built around a Panzer regiment and some motorised MG battalions and was formed specifically for operations in Africa. (The motorised MG battalions were trained in Beck's delaying defense--basically the same as the American Active Defense tactics of the 1980s-90s.) The 90th Light Afrika Division was formed specifically as the infantry element of the Afrikakorps. (The standard Panzerkorps had two Panzerdivisionen and one mot. ID.)

The 17th Indian Light Infantry Division was a binary division designed for operations in Burma. It contained two brigade groups, each of which usually operated on a separate axis, out of direct support range, and some separate battalions, retained for divisional HQ defense. It had less motorised assets than a normal division and more animal transport assets. Experience was that it was a bit 'light' for its responsibilities.

While the 81st West African Division may have been a normal division, it operated in the Kaladan valley (terrain as nasty as where the 17th IID operated) as a binary division with animal transport.

The 36th British Infantry Division was formed to concentrate the UK infantry battalions of the 14th Army in preparation for their evacuation after Indian and Burmese independence. It was not a light division.

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: herwin

The 17th Indian Light Infantry Division was a binary division designed for operations in Burma. It contained two brigade groups, each of which usually operated on a separate axis, out of direct support range, and some separate battalions, retained for divisional HQ defense. It had less motorised assets than a normal division and more animal transport assets. Experience was that it was a bit 'light' for its responsibilities.

Strangely the brigades of 17th Infantry Division were not organized into brigade groups (looked at this yesterday evening). After receiving two (Indian) mountain (artillery) regiments in Jan 1943, those regiments (as well as the LAA/AT regiment added later) were kept under division control (that is: under the CRA). Would have been logical to attach the mountain regiments (as well as the Field [engineer] coys) to the brigades to create brigade groups, but did not happen.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

ORIGINAL: herwin

The 17th Indian Light Infantry Division was a binary division designed for operations in Burma. It contained two brigade groups, each of which usually operated on a separate axis, out of direct support range, and some separate battalions, retained for divisional HQ defense. It had less motorised assets than a normal division and more animal transport assets. Experience was that it was a bit 'light' for its responsibilities.

Strangely the brigades of 17th Infantry Division were not organized into brigade groups (looked at this yesterday evening). After receiving two (Indian) mountain (artillery) regiments in Jan 1943, those regiments (as well as the LAA/AT regiment added later) were kept under division control (that is: under the CRA). Would have been logical to attach the mountain regiments (as well as the Field [engineer] coys) to the brigades to create brigade groups, but did not happen.

I'll check my references tonight on how the division was organised for combat in March 1944. I suspect the field companies were not attached to the brigades because they had *plenty* of work to do on the main supply route.

[el cid again]

Since WWII was very similar to our era in military language usage in English, the term probably meant EXACTLY what it means in our day: a 'light division' is one that does not weigh much to lift = move; it is one that does not have any really heavy equipment (large tanks, big artillery pieces); it is one intended to operate in places where such things are more of a liability than an asset. The British found light battalions (they called em regiments of course) very useful in the conditions in the Falklands - and they took almost no vehicles of any sort. Light units are very useful in rough mountains like Afghanistan - and in fact it is a problem that the enemy is better than we are at high altitudes (being conditioned for it). Ghurkas are always light infantry - but that does not mean they are not the best soldiers on the planet: they probably are. In short - what makes a unit "light" is a lack of heavy equipment -
and the advantage of such a unit is twofold:

1) It is always easier to move - especially to fly;

2) It is usually able to function more efficiently (in terms of bang per dollar or per man) in places heavy vehicles are impractical for any reason (rough mountains, very high mountains, jungle, tundra and bogs as in high arctic or Falklands, swamps, etc).

Note that in good terrain - particularly good terrain with a fine road/bridge infrastructure - a light unit cannot stand up very well to a heavy one. I don't mean to say they are the only kind of unit you want - or that heavy units are somehow not powerful.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

ORIGINAL: herwin

The 17th Indian Light Infantry Division was a binary division designed for operations in Burma. It contained two brigade groups, each of which usually operated on a separate axis, out of direct support range, and some separate battalions, retained for divisional HQ defense. It had less motorised assets than a normal division and more animal transport assets. Experience was that it was a bit 'light' for its responsibilities.

Strangely the brigades of 17th Infantry Division were not organized into brigade groups (looked at this yesterday evening). After receiving two (Indian) mountain (artillery) regiments in Jan 1943, those regiments (as well as the LAA/AT regiment added later) were kept under division control (that is: under the CRA). Would have been logical to attach the mountain regiments (as well as the Field [engineer] coys) to the brigades to create brigade groups, but did not happen.

I'll check my references tonight on how the division was organised for combat in March 1944. I suspect the field companies were not attached to the brigades because they had *plenty* of work to do on the main supply route.

OK, I checked it. The 17th basically operated around Tiddim, but it didn't really hold an organised position--just some strong points along the main supply route and lots of patrolling over a large area. I can see why the artillery was held by the CRA--with mostly mountainous terrain, it would have been rare that it would have an effect. (It takes a direct hit to take out a position on a crest, since a miss lands a few hundred meters down the slope.) I suspect it was probably used mostly as strong point garrisons and in platoons or as single guns for direct fire.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Since WWII was very similar to our era in military language usage in English, the term probably meant EXACTLY what it means in our day: a 'light division' is one that does not weigh much to lift = move; it is one that does not have any really heavy equipment (large tanks, big artillery pieces); it is one intended to operate in places where such things are more of a liability than an asset. The British found light battalions (they called em regiments of course) very useful in the conditions in the Falklands - and they took almost no vehicles of any sort. Light units are very useful in rough mountains like Afghanistan - and in fact it is a problem that the enemy is better than we are at high altitudes (being conditioned for it). Ghurkas are always light infantry - but that does not mean they are not the best soldiers on the planet: they probably are. In short - what makes a unit "light" is a lack of heavy equipment -
and the advantage of such a unit is twofold:

1) It is always easier to move - especially to fly;

2) It is usually able to function more efficiently (in terms of bang per dollar or per man) in places heavy vehicles are impractical for any reason (rough mountains, very high mountains, jungle, tundra and bogs as in high arctic or Falklands, swamps, etc).

Note that in good terrain - particularly good terrain with a fine road/bridge infrastructure - a light unit cannot stand up very well to a heavy one. I don't mean to say they are the only kind of unit you want - or that heavy units are somehow not powerful.

Well, historically, a light division was one that moved faster than a regular division, tactically and/or operationally. This was usually due to training, not necessarily lighter equipment. Jaeger in German, means 'hunter', so those were off-road mobile. Leichte, on the other hand, is literally 'light', but there's no evidence they were air-mobile in any sense. The 17th Indian Light Division was very similar to the German Jaegerdivisionen in its organisation for combat, so I suspect it was designed for off-road mobility.

Slim says the 81 WA was man-pack. It operated very well with the 82 WA in the jungle of the Kaladan valley.

[el cid again]

If you use airlift for a unit, it better be light. Only in our era can a heavy tank be airlifted. Even now it is a very demanding and slow process to airlift a heavy division. Only the USA really can do that - and it does not do that - but it would take about 18 days - if I remember my FM right.

But lift does not just mean - or mainly mean - airlift. It means mostly sealift for division size units. And it is still a lot easier to lift a light division.

However, note that pack is actually a lot harder to lift than light:

Japanese divisions came in three versions: semi-motorized, draft and pack - and their sheer manpower and weight went UP as you went down that list. The US First Cavalry Division was DISMOUNTED because the sheer shipping tied up by the horses was a big deal - and deemed more than it was worth. This AFTER it was in Africa. A pack unit would have the same problem: animals to move, vast amounts of fodder for them. [A truck does not eat when it is not moving - a mule eats no matter what - all the time]. The bulk of mules in a pack unit is much greater than a truck if you measure in terms of weight carried.

A light unit may be very large - and in fact both Japan and USA used MANPACK a lot in the PTO. These units would draft by various means local pack bearers - but IJA had actual manpack squads - I call them "ammo squads" because the bulk of supplies by weight is ammunition - and that goes double for the IJA system. The fewer vehicles a unit gets, the more manpack squads it gets, in the IJA system.

[JeffroK]

My sources say thet 17th Div fought as a Div, but at the time of Imphal/Kohima this meant being set up in Brigade sized defensive positions. While consisting of all arms they do not rate as Brigade Groups which implies a sepration from the Divisonal command.
 
I'm sure Slim explained the "Light Div" in Defeat into Victory, its lighter than the standard Div but not approaching the "Airmobile" standards.
 
Re Divisional MG Bns
While Indian Divs which fought in the Mid East, Italy, Persia & Iraq had a Divisional MG Bn, its a struggle to find the same Bn in those which fought in Burma & Malaya.  But these Divs also lacked the Div Recce Bn though a number of "Unbrigaded" Infantry Bns were in the Division as HQ protection etc so maybe they dropped the MG & Recce and replaced them with some extra Infantry.

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Re Divisional MG Bns
While Indian Divs which fought in the Mid East, Italy, Persia & Iraq had a Divisional MG Bn, its a struggle to find the same Bn in those which fought in Burma & Malaya. But these Divs also lacked the Div Recce Bn though a number of "Unbrigaded" Infantry Bns were in the Division as HQ protection etc so maybe they dropped the MG & Recce and replaced them with some extra Infantry.

Correct. Another aspect probably was that MG Bns were motorised units and thus not very useful in the terrain of Northern Burma and Assam.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Re Divisional MG Bns
While Indian Divs which fought in the Mid East, Italy, Persia & Iraq had a Divisional MG Bn, its a struggle to find the same Bn in those which fought in Burma & Malaya. But these Divs also lacked the Div Recce Bn though a number of "Unbrigaded" Infantry Bns were in the Division as HQ protection etc so maybe they dropped the MG & Recce and replaced them with some extra Infantry.

Correct. Another aspect probably was that MG Bns were motorised units and thus not very useful in the terrain of Northern Burma and Assam.

They were foot-mobile but lacked the tactical mobility of regular infantry because they were restricted to a walking pace by the weight of their weapons and ammo. The standard MMG battalion had enough automatic firepower to cover a typical division front using prepared fields of fire, but it lacked the supporting infantry needed to simultaneously protect and supply the MMGs and ensure that they were kept manned. This also meant that they could not cover much front using all-around defense. They were intended to provide the strongpoints that retreating infantry could fall back on to block an enemy advance.

By 'covering a front', I mean that the unit could kill or wound attacking infantry on that front as fast as they entered the field of fire--in other words, it had and could maintain continuous firepower superiority on that front and had to be suppressed by indirect or direct fire if infantry were to advance successfully on it. (This is what a tactical analyst means by 'firepower superiority'. There's a corresponding technical definition for 'armoured superiority' that reflects the process by which defending AT assets acquire and kill armoured vehicles. Been there; done that.)

MG battalions were used in Burma--the 14th Army OB I checked last night shows them in each division. The 9th Jats were the MG battalion for the 17th Indian Light Infantry Division, and Cowan used it to organise successive defensive strongpoints during the retreat from Tiddim.

[JeffroK]

Here's the difference, I have 9 Jats as IV Corps troops (and 17 Div was in IV Corps)
 
Were they Div troops or Corps troops??

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Here's the difference, I have 9 Jats as IV Corps troops (and 17 Div was in IV Corps)

Were they Div troops or Corps troops??

On 13 March 1944, they were on the 17th ILD OB.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: JeffK

.

I'm sure Slim explained the "Light Div" in Defeat into Victory, its lighter than the standard Div but not approaching the "Airmobile" standards.

Look - you can move a division by air without it being regarded as "airmobile." Do you understand that a LINE unit can fly - in the game too? It may not be able to air assault - but it can fly.

However - even for rail lift - a light unit is easier to move. It also is "light" on logistic requirements.
Light units are very common in the world - in spite of the near perfection of heavy units and their equipment.
Heavy units take a lot of cost and time to move - and they are unsuited to some sorts of terrain.

It is not really a matter of wether or not you fly them It is easier to move a light unit.

But on an open battlefield - a light unit is in trouble against a heavy one.

[JeffroK]

Sid, we are talking about 1944-45, not contemporary.
 
The Brits put together a Light Div, Australian Divs had a "Jungle TOE"
 
Yes, you can move some of a Division by air, but getting transport (above Jeep or Mule) or a 25pdr or 3.7" AA gun into a Dakota takes a bit of work.
 
So the Light/Jungle units moved more to Mule/Jeep transport at a lower scale, altered their 25pdrs with narrower axles and had a Mountain Gun Rgt replace one of the 25pdr Fd Rgts.
 
These changes would have made it less mobile in open/road movement, but far more mobile in Airborne/Jungle movement.
 
I wonder if the term was a bit more historical based on the British Light Divisions of Napoleonic, Crimean, Boer & WW1 eras. 5 of the 6 Bns in their OOB in 1944 were Gurkha Rifle Rgts.

[Kereguelen]

@ El Cid

Just to give you something to think about, quoting one of my earlier post about the Indian Army. If already reconsidered my thoughts about the LAA/AT Rgt.

K

ORIGINAL: kereguelen
Hi,

some thoughts about the Indian Army and proposals for a new Indian OOB:

The main problem with India in the game seems to be that only the units that fought in Burma and/or were stationed on Ceylon are included and do mostly arrive at the time they were send to the Burma theatre or when they arrived on Ceylon. This makes it quite easy for any Japanese player to actually invade India. While this still should be a possibility, actually this would have been much harder in history because there were many more units in India which are currently not included in the game. Currently it is even nearly impossible for the Allied player to send the units that historically went to Malaya (18th British Division, 44th and 45th Indian Brigades), to Singapore because this would leave India nearly undefended even against small Japanese raids.

Another problem with the Indian OOB is that the composition of the Indian Divisions changed alot during the course of the war because generally British and Indian brigades and divisions had no “organic” combat troops (battalions were not permanently attached to a certain brigade, brigades not to a certain division and so on) as most other nations. This leads to much confusion. I think the best solution would be to delete most of the Indian divisions we currently have in the game and instead make their brigades and artillery regiments available in the game (there were never enough Field Regiments available for all divisions that fought in Burma). By doing this we would have a more historic Indian OOB, give the Allied player some more choices at the start of the game and still have the possibilty of a Japanese attack on India in the game.

However, it would be neccessary to alter the OOB of the Indian brigades somewhat (by deleting the 12 18pdr howitzer batteries that historically did not exist in Indian and British brigades). A more correct OOB for Indian Brigades would be: 108 Indian Rifle Squads (3 Rifle Battalions), 9 Indian Eng. Squads, 9 Engineer Squads, 18 3inch Mortars, 18 2pdr ATG, 9 Eng. Squads 133(?) Supply Squads (Engineer companies were not organic to brigades, but there were plenty of Indian engineers available). The Indian divisions that should be kept should have 2 Field Regiments (with 48 18pdr/25pdr howitzers) and either 1 LAA/AT Regiment (with 24 2pdr/6pdr, 18 20mm and 18 40mm AA guns) or 1 AT Regiment (with 48 2pdr/6pdr) included in their structure). Division with LAA/AT would have: 324 Indian Rifle Squads, 27 Indian Engineer Squads, 27 Engineer Squads, 54 3inch Mortars, 78 2pdr ATG, 18 20mm AA, 18 40mm AA and lots of Supply Squads (I have not included the Divisional HQ Defense Bn. that was included in most Indian divisions but not existing in most British divisions and because 40mm Bofors AA guns were scarce in the Far East [that is, they were used in LAA Rgts], maybe the AA component of the division should have only 20mm AA instead of the 40mm).

There were 11 Frontier Brigades (each with at least 3 battalions) guarding the NW frontier, but these should not be included because in the game there is nothing for them to guard.


Indian Infantry Divisions:

Completely delete 3rd, 14th, 17th, 26th and 44th Indian Divisions from the OOB. Keep 5th, 7th, 19th, 20th and 25th Indian Divisions. Now we have:

5th Indian Division (arriving 15th June 1943) with 9th, 123rd and 161st Indian Brigades, 4th and 28th Field Regiments, 56th LAA/AT Rgt incorporated.

7th Indian Division (arriving 15th October 1942) with 33rd, 89th, 114th Indian Brigades, 136th and 139th Field Regiments RA, 24th LAA/AT Regiment incorporated.

19th Indian Division (arriving 15th March 1942) with 62nd, 64th and 98th Indian Brigades, 115th and 134th Field Regiments, 69th LAA/AT Regiment (amalgameted with 33rd LAA/AT Regiment) incorporated.

20th Indian Division (arriving 15th June 1942) with 32nd, 80th, 100th Indian Brigades, 9th and 114th Field Regiments, 55th LAA/AT Regiment (amalgameted with 111th AT Regiment) incorporated. Because 51st and 53rd Indian Brigades moved to 25th Indian Division this structure seems appropiate when 25th Division is included.

25th Indian Division (arriving 15th August 1942) with 51st, 53rd, 74th Indian Brigades, 8th and 27th Field Regiments, 7th Indian AT Regiment incorporated.

Indian Infantry Brigades:

7th December 1941:

In Malaya:

6th, 8th, 12th, 15th, 22nd, 28th Indian Brigades as in the game.

In Burma:

13th and 16th Indian Brigades as in the game.

In India:

36th and 37th Brigades at Chandpur (parts of deleted 14th Indian Division)
44th Brigade at Diamond Harbour
45th Brigade at Calcutta
46th Brigade at Dacca (part of deleted 17th Indian Division)
47th, 48th, 49th Brigades at Hyderabad (parts of deleted 19th Indian Division)
99th Brigade at Jhansi (?); moved to Trincomalee in January 1942

Reinforcements:

1st Indian Brigade 1st May 1942 (from frontier duty at Rawalpindi)
4th Indian Brigade 1st April 1942 (from frontier duty in Waziristan)
23rd Indian Brigade/111th Indian Brigade 15th March 1942 (23rd was later renamed 123rd Brigade and became part of 25th Division, 109th Brigade a short-lived formation with only two battalions that fought in Arakan for some time)
26th Indian Brigade 15th July 1944 (arrived from Iraq)
55th Indian Brigade 15th September 1942 (arrived after fighting vs. the Fakir of Ipi, formed earlier)
63rd Indian Brigade 15th January 1942 (at Delhi; formed December 1941)
71st Indian Brigade 1st March 1942 (formed from existing battalions at Calcutta)
77th Indian Chindit Brigade 1st January 1943 (actually formed in June 1942, but not ready before)
111th Indian Chindit Brigade 1st July 1943 (actually formed 30th March 1943, but not ready before)
268th Indian Brigade 1st October 1942 (formed under 43rd Indian Armoured Division)
50th Indian Para Brigade 1st February 1944 (actually formed much earlier but trained a long time and was used for internal security at Delhi)

Existing garrisons 7th December 1941 (not complety and not including frontier garrisons and battalions that were used to guard POW camps). Generally these locations retained garrisons during the war (even if the garrison battalions changed). 25th and 26th Battalions of the regiments were always “garrison” battalions.

Bombay: 2 Battalions (26th/4th Bombay Grenadiers and 25th/10th Baluch Regiment)
Karachi: 3 Battalions (15th/10th Baluch Regiment, 16th/14th Punjab Regiment, 4th/7th Gurkha Rifles)
Madras: 3 Battalions (18th/5th Mahratta Lt. Infantry, 25th/9th Jat Regiment, 25th/12th Frontier Force Rifles)
Dacca: 1 Battalion (25th/18th Royal Garwhal Rifles)
Bangalore: 1 Battalion (9th/9th Jat Regiment)

Field Regiments (Royal Artillery):

This are regiments that were (at some times) included in the deleted divisions. All remained in India until 1946.

On 7th December 1941 5th, 88th, 122nd 137th and 155th Field Regiments were in Malaya.

51st arrived February 1942 on Ceylon together with 16th British Brigade.
60th arrived March 1942 on Ceylon or at Karachi with the remainder of 70th British Division.
130th arrived May 1942 at Karachi (was included in deleted 14th Indian Division)
158th arrived May 1942 from frontier duty at Nowshera
160th arrived March 1942 from Quetta, may be made available 7th December 1941?
162nd formed April 1942 from existing batteries on Ceylon
18th arrived November 1942 at Karachi (with 43rd Indian Armoured Division)
9th arrived 15th January 1943 from Madagascar
123rd arrived August 1942 at Karachi (with 32nd Indian Armoured Division)
129th arrived August 1942 at Karachi (was included in deleted 14th Indian Division)
178th arrived June 1943 at Karachi, should be available from August 1943 as an Assault Field Regiment with SP-Artillery.

Medium Regiments (RA):

1st arrived July 1942 at Karachi
6th at Campbellpore 7th December 1941
8th arrived Karachi May 1943 from frontier duty

Anti-Tank Regiments (RA):

80th and 85th were in Malaya on 7th December 1941.

82nd arrived 1st January 1942 for 23rd Division
100th arrived March 1942 with 2nd British Division

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Here's the difference, I have 9 Jats as IV Corps troops (and 17 Div was in IV Corps)

Were they Div troops or Corps troops??

On 13 March 1944, they were on the 17th ILD OB.

I just checked Allen and he's reliable. You're probably right. The 9 Jats were corps troops that Scoones sent down to garrison the divisional supply base while the 17th ILD pulled back.

[el cid again]

This is really good stuff K - except I am told the AA is different - not mixed as you show - but homogenious - and I just changed it to that a few versions ago.

[JeffroK]

Sid,
 
The Regt serving with 2 British Div was an AA/AT Rgt, I have no idea of the TOE
 
Maybe the Indian Divs did have MG Bns but few sources show this.
7 Indian Div had 13 Frontier Force Rgt as its MG Bn for 2nd Akyab (Admin Box)
 
K,
You idea has merits, this portrays the use for most of the war, its a pity you cant merge 3 Bdes into a Div

[el cid again]

No need - many divisions are shown as components - see Philippine Division - and some Japanese divisions are shown with a detached unit called a brigade (a regiment with attachments) -
these are called "division" brigades in the game - as are binary Allied units.

I am going to adopt much of K's ideas I think