Rifle Squad Differences?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Here is a summary of a German infantry division TOE from 1939-41. Based on numbers of LMGs, can you derive ballpark estimates of the number of combat squads (rifle, heavy rifle, engineer, assault, etc.) in the division?

I don't think so. For one thing, a lot of those LMG's are in artillery units and such. They would come into play if the batteries were attacked directly, but otherwise would remain unused.

You will find more LMG's in direct combat units in direct combat units such as AT battalions. However, even these wouldn't become rifle squads joining an attack (or defense) under most circumstances. The troops would continue to serve their AT guns -- not abandon them to join in the attack or form additional rifle squads to bolster the firing line.

There are a number of positions that can be legitimately taken here. I strongly favor looking at who does what in a typical battle. That is, do the MG's with the signal battalion sit idle while the signallers signal, or do the signallers typically say 'screw communications' and join the battle?

I also strongly favor being consistent. It obviously won't do at all to decide Force A's artillerymen can fight as infantry at the same time as they serve their guns, but force B's can't.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

[P.S.  I'm guessing that some of the motorcycles in each of the combat units (infantry regiments, recon battalion, engineer battalion, antitank battalion) were combat-trained and used regularly in combat (I'm guessing usually as recon/spotting/intel gathering).]

I don't think so. Usually motorcycles that are intended for recon are in recon units -- be they regiments, battalions, companies, or platoons. Motorcycles elsewhere are probably intended primarily for communications.

Then too, you have consider the effect of adding motorcycles. They will speed up a leg infantry unit, and they will boost its recon rating (which has all kinds of effects).

So even if the TO&E for Infantry battalion X lists 30 motorcycles, I definitely wouldn't dump in three motorcycle squads unless I actually wanted the effects I mentioned.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

At 5km/hex, density penalties begin at 100 peices of equipment and above. So it makes a big difference.

Exactly. So, the problem isn't with the equipment, it's with the density calculations. At 50km per hex, how may pieces of equipment before density effects kick in? 5km has 21.65 sq. km area. 50km has 2165 sq km area. Thus, density effects at 50km should kick in at 10,000 pieces of equipment. I wonder if this happens...

I don't think so (three posts in a row I've started with this sentence!)

Density is based on active defenders, and active defenders are assumed to be in the firing line. That would lead to a linear scale: a 50 km hex would be able to absorb ten as many defenders as a 5 km hex, not one hundred times as many.

And if fact, if you think about how many divisions can be wedged into a given frontage, you will see that this would have to be the relationship as much as the relationship between the gross areas.

Else where in a 5 km scenario that allowed one regiment per hex without density penalties, only ten regiments could be fitted into a line 50 km long, but if we just went to 50 km hexes, we could fit 100 regiments into the same segment of front.

Naturally, there are reserve positions and such, and I think the actual formula is some compromise between the linear relationship and the area one.

[vahauser]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Here is a summary of a German infantry division TOE from 1939-41. Based on numbers of LMGs, can you derive ballpark estimates of the number of combat squads (rifle, heavy rifle, engineer, assault, etc.) in the division?

I don't think so. For one thing, a lot of those LMG's are in artillery units and such. They would come into play if the batteries were attacked directly, but otherwise would remain unused.

You will find more LMG's in direct combat units in direct combat units such as AT battalions. However, even these wouldn't become rifle squads joining an attack (or defense) under most circumstances. The troops would continue to serve their AT guns -- not abandon them to join in the attack or form additional rifle squads to bolster the firing line.

There are a number of positions that can be legitimately taken here. I strongly favor looking at who does what in a typical battle. That is, do the MG's with the signal battalion sit idle while the signallers signal, or do the signallers typically say 'screw communications' and join the battle?

I also strongly favor being consistent. It obviously won't do at all to decide Force A's artillerymen can fight as infantry at the same time as they serve their guns, but force B's can't.

But the fact of all those LMGs exists. So, if not through the use of rifle squads (or other combat squads), then how would you represent all that equipment?

[vahauser]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: vahauser

[P.S.  I'm guessing that some of the motorcycles in each of the combat units (infantry regiments, recon battalion, engineer battalion, antitank battalion) were combat-trained and used regularly in combat (I'm guessing usually as recon/spotting/intel gathering).]

I don't think so. Usually motorcycles that are intended for recon are in recon units -- be they regiments, battalions, companies, or platoons. Motorcycles elsewhere are probably intended primarily for communications.

Then too, you have consider the effect of adding motorcycles. They will speed up a leg infantry unit, and they will boost its recon rating (which has all kinds of effects).

So even if the TO&E for Infantry battalion X lists 30 motorcycles, I definitely wouldn't dump in three motorcycle squads unless I actually wanted the effects I mentioned.

So, to you, all those motorcycles should be treated like wagons and trucks (EDIT: for effect only)? No combat motorcycle squads at all?

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Golden_Delicious,

That summary I posted above is probably a generic amalgamation of the first 5 waves (and perhaps more), not just the first wave.  However, the real question is can any useful information regarding combat-squad totals (total number of squads) and strengths (light rifle, heavy rifle, etc.) be estimated just by looking at a divisional summary such as the one I provided above?

Yes. If there had been more like 250 LMGs per regiment, they would have been heavy rifle squads. But 123 LMGs does not mean 15 heavy rifle squads and 93 rifle squads.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

But the fact of all those LMGs exists. So, if not through the use of rifle squads (or other combat squads), then how would you represent all that equipment?

The same way you model the 942 "motor vehicles" in the TO&E you posted: not at all, if you want the unit to behave appropriately.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Here is a summary of a German infantry division TOE from 1939-41. Based on numbers of LMGs, can you derive ballpark estimates of the number of combat squads (rifle, heavy rifle, engineer, assault, etc.) in the division?

In a lot of cases, I wouldn't. That the inventory of Veterinary Company 658 happens to include 173 rifles and 19 pistols is nice -- but the fact of the matter is in most of the battles the parent formation engages in, these weapons won't be fired.

Now, if one has separate artillery units, and such, it's often a good idea to include at least some of this active defender firepower -- else the units can be overrun with unrealistic ease. At the same time, one wants to be careful about putting in too much -- else it starts to make more sense for the player to just shove his artillery into the front line along with everything else rather than keep it 5 km to the rear like in the history books.

Fact is, gunners can't fire their howitzers and man their machine guns at the same time in real life -- but in TOAW, they can. So you've got to consider what effect you want and strike a balance.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: vahauser

[P.S.  I'm guessing that some of the motorcycles in each of the combat units (infantry regiments, recon battalion, engineer battalion, antitank battalion) were combat-trained and used regularly in combat (I'm guessing usually as recon/spotting/intel gathering).]

I don't think so. Usually motorcycles that are intended for recon are in recon units -- be they regiments, battalions, companies, or platoons. Motorcycles elsewhere are probably intended primarily for communications.

Then too, you have consider the effect of adding motorcycles. They will speed up a leg infantry unit, and they will boost its recon rating (which has all kinds of effects).

So even if the TO&E for Infantry battalion X lists 30 motorcycles, I definitely wouldn't dump in three motorcycle squads unless I actually wanted the effects I mentioned.

So, to you, all those motorcycles should be treated like wagons and trucks (EDIT: for effect only)? No combat motorcycle squads at all?

Unless they're actually being used for recon or making it possible for the unit as a whole to move faster, I would tend to ignore them completely. I suppose the general level of mechanical assets might affect what proficiency level I assigned to the unit or its formation.

Really, these motorcycles are functionally similar to radios, or field telephone equipment. They obviously allow the unit to perform better -- but should be thought of in the same way as other communications equipment. That's what they are.

If say, each infantry company in a division has a motorcycle, that doesn't mean there should be three motorcycle squads out there punching up the division's recon. The company commanders aren't sending their motorcycle out ahead to scout; they're keeping it at hand so they can tell somebody to go back and make sure that ammunition column really is coming along behind like it was supposed to, etc. If the motorcycle is out ahead scouting, it's not available to perform its function.

As a rule, of course. But then, that seems to me what you should play for: what was generally the case. Else you wind up modeling something that was NOT generally the case.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Golden_Delicious,

That summary I posted above is probably a generic amalgamation of the first 5 waves (and perhaps more), not just the first wave.  However, the real question is can any useful information regarding combat-squad totals (total number of squads) and strengths (light rifle, heavy rifle, etc.) be estimated just by looking at a divisional summary such as the one I provided above?

Yes. If there had been more like 250 LMGs per regiment, they would have been heavy rifle squads. But 123 LMGs does not mean 15 heavy rifle squads and 93 rifle squads.

If one really gets into it, tracking down exactly where each weapon is in the TO&E that you're using can be a useful check. Like, you're wondering, 'did these battalions have the four-mortar sections or the six-mortar sections?'

Well, if the divisional total shows 36 mortars, you can figure the battalions are using four mortar sections. If it shows 47 mortars, I'd figure they were using six-mortar sections and some of the sections are short a mortar or two.

[vahauser]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Here is a summary of a German infantry division TOE from 1939-41. Based on numbers of LMGs, can you derive ballpark estimates of the number of combat squads (rifle, heavy rifle, engineer, assault, etc.) in the division?

Of interest to me, the number of motorcycles does not seem to correspond to combat personnel. My estimate is that the vast majority of those motorcycles are being used (unarmed) as messengers, communications. My guess is that of the 450+ motorcycles in the division, perhaps only 120 or so (~12 squads) are actually armed combat machines.

Curtis,

I'm curious about some of your numbers in your Soviet Union 1941 scenario. Below is your TOE for the German 215th Infantry Division in June, 1941. Comparing your numbers to the "official" TOE, things don't seem to match up:

1) I don't think that the 450 divisional motorcycles = 45 motorcycle squads
2) Your total number of LMGs seems to exceed 527 (385 rifle squads + 70 SMG squads + 45 motorcycle squads + 36 engineer squads + 9 bicycle squads + 9 cavalry squads accounts for 554 LMGs)
3) I'm not clear about where your total of 646 rifle squads is coming from (385 rifle + 261 light rifle = 646).

Just wondering. . .

[P.S. The "90 rifle-caliber Hvy MG" is an artifact of my own .eqp file where I replaced the old AT rifle line (the Hvy AT rifles are the ones I use for WW2). I realize that you might consider the 7.92mm PzB39 ATR to be equivalent to "old", but the reality is that the Germans converted many (all?) of their PzB39 ATRs to GrB39 ATR grenade launchers (firing HEAT grenades) early in the war. Certainly by 1941 the GbR39 was in widespread service. So, I call it a Hvy ATR. No biggie and not a serious point of contention. Consider it an error on my part because I know you intended those 90 rifle-caliber Hvy MGs to be ATRs.]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Curtis,

I'm curious about some of your numbers in your Soviet Union 1941 scenario. Below is your TOE for the German 215th Infantry Division in June, 1941. Comparing your numbers to the "official" TOE, things don't seem to match up:

It's been four years, so I don't fully remember. My notes are buried somewhere. But, for sure, I was using the same philosophy I used in "France 1944", where more than just the frontline elements needed to be modeled. Barbarossa was even messier than the Liberation of France.

1) I don't think that the 450 divisional motorcycles = 45 motorcycle squads

I don't know what the "official" functions of the motorcycles were. But I think it's safe to assume that their practical application included multiple functions. These were the same people that figured out that a AAA gun made a great tank killer. Here's a foot division and it's best recon equipment it its motorcycles. They'll have figured that out, for when they were manuvering. And if things got desperate, they would have a combat role, too.

Without the motorcycle squads the division would function the same as one that had none. That doesn't seem right - especially since I'm modeling rear-area elements. I preferred to include them. Note that (see below) since I had a target number of squads, if I hadn't included motorcycle squads, then there would just have been 45 more Light Rifle Squads.

2) Your total number of LMGs seems to exceed 527 (385 rifle squads + 70 SMG squads + 45 motorcycle squads + 36 engineer squads + 9 bicycle squads + 9 cavalry squads accounts for 554 LMGs)

I'd say it's 385 + 70 = 455.

3) I'm not clear about where your total of 646 rifle squads is coming from (385 rifle + 261 light rifle = 646).

I used the Handbook, but it just listed personnel - without giving their actual function. I had another source that said of the 17,700 odd personnel, 8,000 were infantry. So I had a target of 800 squads. Like I said above, how I got the split of that I don't recall at this time. You can get some idea by looking at the division component breakdown in "France 1944" for the 1944 division. But 385 + 261 + 70 + 45 + 36 + 9/2 = 801.5

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay



I don't know what the "official" functions of the motorcycles were. But I think it's safe to assume that their practical application included multiple functions. These were the same people that figured out that a AAA gun made a great tank killer. Here's a foot division and it's best recon equipment it its motorcycles. They'll have figured that out, for when they were manuvering. And if things got desperate, they would have a combat role, too.

I disagree. I think one has to look at what a man's usual function would be.

A motorcycle attached to an infantry company isn't usually going to be up with the lead elements of the division, adding to the recon rating: it's going to usually be with the infantry company slogging down the road five miles back, going off to see what became of the taco truck or whatever.

It's just like the MG's an artillery battalion has, etc. To portray these as usually functioning as front-line weapons is to move further from the truth than the alternative.

If there was a way where they could sometimes fight, that would be a different matter, but there isn't.

[macgregor]

I always figured that motorcycles in the German Army were used much like jeeps in the American(though perhaps more fuel efficient) in that they would largely be used to distribute supplies to the various rifle squads. I haven't researched that however.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

It's been four years, so I don't fully remember. My notes are buried somewhere. But, for sure, I was using the same philosophy I used in "France 1944", where more than just the frontline elements needed to be modeled. Barbarossa was even messier than the Liberation of France.

Don't you have these elements in separate units in this scenario?

I don't know what the "official" functions of the motorcycles were. But I think it's safe to assume that their practical application included multiple functions.

Not combat, I would think. Certainly not in the majority of situations.

These were the same people that figured out that a AAA gun made a great tank killer.

...when they had air dominance so the guns weren't needed in their primary role. In this situation, the division is going to be spread out all across the step. You're going to need motorcycle messengers.

[vahauser]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
I used the Handbook, but it just listed personnel - without giving their actual function. I had another source that said of the 17,700 odd personnel, 8,000 were infantry. So I had a target of 800 squads. Like I said above, how I got the split of that I don't recall at this time. You can get some idea by looking at the division component breakdown in "France 1944" for the 1944 division. But 385 + 261 + 70 + 45 + 36 + 9/2 = 801.5

I would love to look at a comparative table similar to what I've quoted here.
I'd love to see a table that has stuff like:
US Army 1944 Infantry Division, 15,000 men, 6,000 riflemen
German 1941 Infantry Division, 17,000 men, 8,000 riflemen
And so on...

Who has something like that?

[LAntorcha]

Hi,

Does anybody have an idea of the way of translating this Machine Gun Company, Type b (for example, or a simple rifle platoon) to the TOAW Editor?

I rather prefer sticking to the numbers than wandering myself if NCO Jerry counts as AP if impales Pvt Tom with his hornbugle, while rampaging with is bicycle over the trenches...

Has anybody done a basic chart (or anything like that) of conversion?

I always get different numbers when i examine the scenario Forces, depending upon whom has designed. And as the units are so big and complex, can´t guess what things has portrayed from a real unit. Does that pertain to the rear echelon or not? was that unit engaging in combat or wacking off after a bush?

Should it be that difficult to write an standard Orbat for a given country, starting with the lesser formations, and adding up the totals? maybe latter, (when we got the startint point) we could argue if that or what...

To be more ilustrative:
How should i put this into the Editor to use it as skeleton?



Does Squad equal to Section? How many MG squads do i put at the MG Section?
Thanks for your help.

[vahauser]

LAntorcha,
 
The machinegun company typeb =
6x 81mm mortar [plus possibly 1x light rifle squad, representing the platoon HQ/support personnel.  However, this is subjective and debatable.  I personally am inclined to not depict command/adminstrative/specialist/support personnel unless they are directly a part of a front-line combat unit.  And even then, I am hesitant to do so.  This mortar platoon is a front-line combat unit, so it's a subjective judgment call.  Curtis Lemay would add it, I probably would not.]
8x Medium MG [plus possibly 2x light rifle squads for the same reasons as above.  The German MG34 is not a TOAW heavy machinegun.  The TOAW heavy machinegun is for 12.7mm (0.50 caliber) machineguns.]
 
The infantry regiment is more complicated.  I don't have the time to do that right now.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

6x 81mm mortar [plus possibly 1x light rifle squad, representing the platoon HQ/support personnel.  However, this is subjective and debatable.  I personally am inclined to not depict command/adminstrative/specialist/support personnel unless they are directly a part of a front-line combat unit.  And even then, I am hesitant to do so.  This mortar platoon is a front-line combat unit, so it's a subjective judgment call.  Curtis Lemay would add it, I probably would not.]

If the company was a separate unit in the scenario then I'd add this stuff. It was part of a larger unit, I wouldn't.

[LAntorcha]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

LAntorcha,

The German MG34 is not a TOAW heavy machinegun.  The TOAW heavy machinegun is for 12.7mm (0.50 caliber) machineguns.]

So which is the Light MG from other Companies? The MG08 or MG13? and HMG are MG34 and MG42. ¿Is this correct?.

So --> HMG Section = 1 Medium MG from TOAW?
But the LMG? which is the equivalent?

Thanks for your time.