You are not logged in.

Iberian Army?

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

1

Monday, January 19th 2009, 2:26am

Iberian Army?

Anyone else think that the organization is odd? Like the 24 tank battalion?

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

2

Monday, January 19th 2009, 2:30am

Define what you mean by "odd". The tanks support the infantry, the infantry support the tanks. I don't find that odd.

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

3

Monday, January 19th 2009, 2:40am

Well most tank company ToE i have seen are 12-16 tanks so a 24 tank battalion seems odd, and the mixing of infantry (leg?, no trucks or other transports assigned) at section level is hardly regular either

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

4

Monday, January 19th 2009, 2:47am

I did it with the Bulgarian Army, and no one commented about it. Everything I've read emphasizes the need for tank/infantry teamwork, so why wouldn't you assign a tank like that?

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

5

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:08am

Because tanks are usually used at least in groups of 3 or four so that they can cooperate more efficiently, not to mention the interesting situation where the section commander (in or outside the tank?) is trying to command both the tank and infantry at the same time during combat.

Let us assume that this formation is attacked by a traditional tank platoon of 4 or 5 tanks, what do you think would happen?

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

6

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:17am

Just looked at the Bulgarian armored squadron, your squadron commander is going to have an interesting time when committed to battle...

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

7

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:22am

So do you have any better suggestions for how a tank division should be organized?

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Brockpaine" (Jan 19th 2009, 3:24am)

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

8

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:30am

Current:

Squadron: Three troops (4 tanks, 60 crew and infantry), a sharpshooter squad (10 men), and a heavy weapons lance with 3 50mm mortars, or 3 heavy MGs, or one M35 47mm AT gun + 3 Solothurn AT rifles. Total strength: 12 tanks, 260 men)

My suggestion if you want to keep infantry and tanks mixed at this level.

1 x Tk platoon, 4 Tks
1 x Inf platoon, 40 men, 4 ATR

Mtr and AT guns on battalion level in a Hvy weapons company

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

9

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:44am

It seems reasonable... on the other hand I usually operate by "the rule of three", putting three units into a larger. For instance, three regiments in a division, three battalions in a regiment, etc. (Though sometimes I break the rule... it's more like a "guideline".)

And I see that when I wrote the Chilean TO&E, I went and did something completely different.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Brockpaine" (Jan 19th 2009, 3:48am)

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

10

Monday, January 19th 2009, 3:56am

You could always have two tank and one infantry platoon

Vukovlad

Me too !!!

Posts: 4,137

  • Send private message

11

Monday, January 19th 2009, 4:45am

And when I look at it a second time it should of course be
1 x Tk Coy and 1 x Inf coy since you have 12 and not 4 tks in the squadron like i wrote

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

12

Monday, January 19th 2009, 4:49am

Well, that can be fixed too.

Hrolf Hakonson

Scooby-Doo

Posts: 6,178

  • Send private message

13

Monday, January 19th 2009, 5:18pm

The Iberian tank units have a fairly unusual structure, but we have to keep in mind that we're looking at the period when there wasn't any real idea of how to make these things work best. I doubt, long term, that the Iberian tank formation structure (with it's tank-infantry pairing all the way down) will work out well, but it's an interesting experiment (rather reminds me of some armored cavalry organizations from the 1960s/70s).


By the mid-30s, lots of armies are using a triangular (3 line units plus support units make up a higher level unit) structure, replacing the older square (4 line units plus support units) structure that was a standard before the Great War. WW Germany, as is historical, is using the triangular structure, while the US, not having been involved in the Great War, is still basically a square structure country.

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

  • Send private message

14

Monday, January 19th 2009, 5:27pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
By the mid-30s, lots of armies are using a triangular (3 line units plus support units make up a higher level unit) structure, replacing the older square (4 line units plus support units) structure that was a standard before the Great War. WW Germany, as is historical, is using the triangular structure, while the US, not having been involved in the Great War, is still basically a square structure country.

I was noticing that difference when I was browsing the various armies.

Hrolf Hakonson

Scooby-Doo

Posts: 6,178

  • Send private message

15

Monday, January 19th 2009, 5:33pm

Heh, well, I didn't want the US Army to be a carbon copy of the German army, and the WW US Army didn't have to Great War experience of the OTL US Army, so..... I came up with that as a major differentiator. Now, that said, the US Army will head in the direction of the triangular structure, but it's not there yet.

perdedor99

Sage

Posts: 4,026

  • Send private message

16

Tuesday, January 20th 2009, 4:16pm

My concern would be the small number of soldiers assigned to the divisions. They seemed similar to OTL Italian "divisions" in the number of troopers assigned; with the exception of the cavalry unit. IMO they will be easier to control but will lack any staying power if facing a comparable enemy.