formations and units
The Oxford Companion to World War II
|
2001
|
|
© The Oxford Companion to World War II 2001, originally published by Oxford University Press 2001. (Hide copyright information)
Copyright
formations and units In the armed services of all nations there are and always have been several levels of command so that forces can be effectively ordered and controlled. The global nature of the Second World War meant that hostilities took place in several geographical the atres and this added to the number of levels. Thus, at the very top, national leaders directed the war, operating through their uniformed chiefs of staff. Theatres of war had commanders-in-chief, who controlled the land, naval, and air forces operating in that theatre.
Eisenhower, as Supreme Allied Commander Europe, received his directives for the Normandy landings in June 1944 (see
OVERLORD) from the Anglo-American
Combined Chiefs of Staff and operated through his single service commanders—
Ramsay for the Allied navies involved,
Montgomery (land), and
Leigh-Mallory (air). Each service, however, had its own command level terminology.
1. Armies
The normal levels of command are shown in Chart 1. Starting at the top, an army group consisted of 2–5 armies, but was not used by all countries. The Soviet term for an army group was a
front. During the early part of the
German–Soviet war the Soviets operated an additional command level, the Theatre, or Main Command for Strategic Direction, which was interposed between
Stavka, the General Staff in Moscow, and the
fronts. Three of these existed, but the concept was abandoned by summer 1942. The Japanese also did not employ army groups as such, but defined this level of command in terms of general armies, most of them having a geographic title, which commanded two or more area armies, roughly the equivalent of a western army (see Japan, Chart 2). Thus, the Southern Army directed Twenty-Fifth Army in the overrunning of Malaya and Singapore, Fifteenth Army in its invasion of Burma, and Fourteenth Army's landings in the Philippines.
All nations employed armies and it was at this level that specialized roles began to be reflected in their titles. Both the Germans and the western Allies during the 1944–5 campaign in north-west Europe had airborne armies. In the Anglo-American case the First Airborne Army supervised the airborne operations during the Normandy landings,
MARKET-GARDEN, and the
Rhine crossings, but the German Third Parachute Army fought solely as infantry. The Germans also had the Twentieth Mountain Army, which fought in northern Finland and Norway. In addition, they had a number of panzer armies, which began to be created from the end of 1941 onwards to reflect formations made up largely of tanks and mechanized/motorized infantry. In 1945 the Germans also had two
SS armies, Sixth and Eleventh. The Red Army, too, formed Tank Armies, but also had Shock and Guards Armies. Shock Armies were strengthened formations employed in breakthrough operations, while Tank Armies were used to exploit them. The ‘Guards’ prefix was an honorific granted to armies which had distinguished themselves in action and were thereafter used as élite troops in especially difficult situations. The Japanese, on the other hand, only had conventional formations. Area Armies were responsible for a particular operational area and had overall charge of whatever formations were deployed in it. For example, the Burma Area Army both oversaw the operations conducted by several Japanese armies against the British and was responsible for the internal security of the country. A Japanese Army performed the same function as a British or American corps as it commanded a number of divisions. However, the Chinese armies which fought in the
Burma campaign only equated in size to an American or British division.
Except for the Japanese, the armies of all combatant nations comprised 2–5 corps, and what were called Army Troops, mainly additional artillery, engineers, and logistics units, which were directly controlled by the army. A corps was like an army in miniature, but varied greatly in size. A Red Army Tank Corps, shown in Chart 2, was on the small side, equating more to an American or British division. Indeed, it had no divisions in it, being built around brigades. In the conventional corps the number of divisions varied up to a general maximum of five. The most common type of division was the infantry division (known as a Rifle Division in the Red Army), and Table 1 shows the composition of a US infantry division in terms of numbers of men and weapons in July 1943 and January 1945. In action it would often have additional elements—tanks, anti-aircraft guns, tank destroyers—attached to it. In a Japanese division, commanded by a lt-general, the infantry elements were under an Infantry Group HQ commanded by a maj-general, who might have other elements assigned to him for specific missions.
The British and Dominion divisions were essentially made up of two or three brigades. In the divisions of other armies they were termed regiments. The exception to this was the US armoured division during the latter half of the war. This had three tank and three infantry battalions, which for operations were apportioned to three headquarters elements known as combat commands.
Brigades and regiments within divisions usually consisted of three battalions of the same type, with infantry regiments often also each having an anti-tank gun company and a light howitzer company. An exception to the ‘rule of three’ was that British and Dominion armoured brigades had three tank and one motorized infantry battalions. Those armies which did not have divisional brigades, did employ brigades elsewhere. The Red Army, as we have seen, had tank and mechanized brigades within its tank and mechanized corps. Early in the war it also deployed independent tank brigades. Other nations also had independent brigades which had their own artillery, engineers, and logistical units. The Japanese termed them Independent Mixed Brigades, while the British called them Brigade Groups.
The brigade was the lowest formation; those below it in the command structure—battalions, companies, platoons, etc.—were known as units and sub-units. This meant that while battalions might be moved between brigades, parts of battalions never were, except on occasion very temporarily for particular operations. Confusion, not least to Axis intelligence, was created by the fact that the British almost alone called their reconnaissance, tank (as did the Japanese), artillery, and engineer battalions ‘regiments’.
Chart 3 shows the organization of a typical infantry battalion. Changes during the war were primarily concerned with strengthening the heavy weapons element. Tank battalions varied in strength from nation to nation and during various phases of the war, as Table 2 shows. They were also made up of companies and platoons (British—squadrons and troops). Field artillery battalions generally comprised three batteries each of 6–8 guns, but medium and heavy artillery battalions had only 12–16 guns.
Formations, Table 1: Organic composition of US Infantry Division, 1943–5 (aggregate strengths; principal equipment)
Unit | 15 July 1943 | 24 January 1945 |
|---|
Source: Greenfield, K., Palmer, R., and Wiley, B., US Army in WWII: |
The organization of Ground Combat Troops ( 1947). |
Entire Division | 14,253 | 14,037 |
Division Headquarters | 158 | 166 |
Infantry | 9,354 | 9,204 |
Regiment (three) | 3,118 | 3,068 |
Hq. & Hq. Company | 108 | 104 |
Band | – | – |
Service Company | 114 | 111 |
Anti–tank Company | 165 | 159 |
Cannon Company | 118 | 114 |
Battalion (three) | 871 | 860 |
Hq. & Hq. Company | 126 | 121 |
Heavy Weapons Company | 166 | 160 |
Rifle Company (three) | 193 | 193 |
Field artillery | 2,160 | 2,111 |
Hq. & Hq. Battery, Division Artillery | 114 | 114 |
Band | – | – |
Light Artillery Battalion (three) | 509 | 497 |
Headquarters Battery | 132 | 126 |
Service Battery | 77 | 74 |
Firing Battery (three) | 100 | 99 |
Medium Artillery Battalion | 519 | 506 |
Headquarters Battery | 115 | 112 |
Service Battery | 77 | 76 |
Firing Battery (three) | 109 | 106 |
Anti–tank Battery | – | – |
Auxiliary units | 2,074 | 2,046 |
Reconnaissance Troop | 155 | 149 |
Engineer Battalion | 647 | 620 |
Medical Battalion | 465 | 443 |
Quartermaster Company | 193 | 186 |
Ordnance Company | 147 | 141 |
Signal Company | 226 | 239 |
Military Police Platoon | 73 | 106 |
Division Headquarters Company | 110 | 104 |
Band | 58 | 58 |
Miscellaneous | – | – |
Attached medical | 494 | 497 |
Infantry Regiment (three) | 135 | 136 |
Division Artillery | 57 | 57 |
Engineer Battalion | 17 | 17 |
Quartermaster | – | – |
Special Troops | 15 | 15 |
Attached chaplain | 13 | 13 |
Principal armament | |
Rifles, cal 30 | 6,518 | 6,349 |
Automatic rifles, cal 30 | 243 | 405 |
Machine–guns, cal 30 | 157 | 211 |
Machine–guns, cal 50 | 236 | 237 |
Mortars, 60–mm | 90 | 90 |
Mortars, 81–mm | 54 | 54 |
Anti–tank rocket launchers | 557 | 558 |
Anti–tank guns, 37–mm | – | – |
Anti–tank guns, 57–mm | 57 | 57 |
Guns, 75–mm. | – | – |
Howitzers, 75–mm | – | – |
Howitzers, 75–mm, self–propelled | – | – |
Howitzers, 105–mm | 54 | 54 |
Howitzers, 105–mm, self–propelled | – | – |
Howitzers, 155–mm | 12 | 12 |
Vehicles, all types (except boats and aircraft) | 2,012 | 2,114 |
Formations, Table 2: Strength of a tank battalion. Organizations were frequently changed as the war progressed.
Nationality | Year | No. of tanks | Remarks |
|---|
Source: Contributor. |
France | 1940 | 34 | Heavy tank battallion. |
Germany | 1944 | 90 | Actual strength was usually only 50% of this. |
Italy | 1942 | 52 | |
Japan | 1942 | 57 | |
UK | 1942 | 61 | |
USA | 1943 | 70 | |
USSR | 1941 | 36 | |
2. Navies
Naval organizations were much simpler than those of armies. At the highest level was the Fleet, which was responsible for a particular operational area, including all naval shore installations. In the Royal Navy and Dominion navies, fleets were broken down into squadrons and flotillas. The former were made up of larger warships by type—battle squadrons (battleships), aircraft carrier squadrons, cruiser and light cruiser squadrons—while the latter, also by type, represented smaller warships—destroyers, submarines, motor torpedo boats. A squadron would consist of 4–6 ships, while a flotilla had 6–12. Escort vessels (destroyers, frigates, corvettes) operated in escort groups of 4–8 ships.
The US Navy took a more flexible approach. Its fleets formed Task Forces, which were tailored for specific operations. They, in turn, would be made up of Task Groups, which equated to British squadrons, and further sub-divided into Task Units. Thus, when the British Pacific Fleet came under American command in the spring of 1945 its fighting portion was designated
Task Force 57 and the
Fleet Train Task Force 112. The German Navy followed the British system, although squadrons tended to be built round one major warship. The Japanese reflected US practice in forming
ad hoc forces and groups.
3. Air forces
Both the Soviets and the Japanese organized their air forces on army lines and they were part of either the army or the navy. They had air armies and the Soviets also used air corps. Both had air divisions and air regiments, with a regiment consisting of four squadrons (Japanese—companies), each of on average 12 aircraft. The German Luftwaffe had its
Luftflotten (air fleets), which also had corps and divisions, but thereafter had a singular organization (see
Germany, 6(d)). The British, too, had a unique system (see
UK, 7(d)). The Americans had a mixed organization. An army air force had under it a number of commands, reflecting its various roles. Thus for the Normandy landings the Ninth US Army Air Force had Ninth and Nineteenth Tactical Air Commands, Ninth Bomber Command, and Ninth Troop Carrier Command. The Eighth US Army Air Force, which was primarily a strategic bombing formation, subdivided its Eighth Bomber Command into bombardment divisions, but most Commands were divided into Groups each of which had a number of squadrons (see
USA, 5(c)).
Charles Messenger
Bibliography
Mollo, A. , The Armed Forces of World War II: Uniforms, Insignia and Organisation (London, 1981).
Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.
|
Relative insight into a great British victory; Blenheim: Battle for Europe by Charles Spencer (Weidenfeld, [pounds sterling]20).
Newspaper article from: The Evening Standard (London, England); 8/2/2004; 700+ words
; ...The Blenheim campaign and the battle itself prefigured Waterloo...the key role in shaping the battle. Not only were the Allies...conflict over the extended battle line was difficult. Marlborough...was to defeat them anew at Ramillies (1706), Oudenarde (1708...
|
|
The battle of Oudenarde: July 11th 1708.(Brief article)
Magazine article from: History Today; 7/1/2008; 601 words
; ...of Savoy in the War of the Spanish Succession (Blenheim, Ramillies, Oudenarde and Malplaquet) came after a succession of setbacks...officer who was present wrote that Marlborough 'shone in the battle, giving his orders with the greatest sangfroid and exposing...
|
|
Duke who made love -- and war.
Newspaper article from: The Daily Mail (London, England); 10/5/2001; ; 700+ words
; ...Marlborough, the occasion at the Battle of Ramillies when a French cannon ball missed...of every schoolboy -Blenheim, Ramillies, Oudenarde and Malplaquet. Yet...before he was due to meet James in battle. From the accession of Queen...
|
|
WAR FLEET'S FIRST FOR GLORY; COFFEEE BREAK:1.
Newspaper article from: The Daily Mail (London, England); 4/1/1997; 700+ words
; ...defensive line and leaving the battle in good order. Howe planned...Do You Know: Great Naval Battles, Maidstone, Kent. THE battle on June 1, 1794, the first...point after which to name the battle and celebrate the victory...Their first battle honour was Ramillies in 1706, followed by ...
|
|
Conversion of historic barn given go-ahead
Newspaper article from: Herald Express (Torquay UK); 5/29/2008; ; 641 words
; ...farming publican has won his planning battle to live in a barn built partly from the...timbers salvaged from the wreck of HMS Ramillies, a Royal Navy warship which went down...which it will'. The wreck of HMS Ramillies was declared a national disaster when...
|
|
Empires: ancient and modern.
Magazine article from: The Wilson Quarterly; 6/22/2004; ; 700+ words
; ...Of course, had the Battle of Blenheim been a fluke...about the once-famous battles fought at Ramillies, Ondenarde, Lille...in observing that "battles are the principal milestones...diplomacy." "Great battles," he insisted, whether...comparison with the Battle of Blenheim, the ...
|
|
Prince Harry will be first royal posted to front line in 25 years As defence chiefs confirm Prince Harry is being sent to Iraq, Morag Lindsay looks back at his forefathers' links to the military
Newspaper article from: Press and Journal, The Aberdeen (UK); 2/23/2007; 700+ words
; ...royal duty and lead us into battle. Through the centuries, royal...monarch to lead his forces into battle was George II, when he took...Ocean on the battleship HMS Ramillies in 1940, and in January 1941...Valiant was involved in the Battle of Matapan against the Italian...
|
|
ENGLAND'S SHADOW FLEET: WHITE ENSIGN IN THE PACIFIC
Magazine article from: Sea Classics; 5/1/2004; ; 700+ words
; ...point in the Atlantic convoy battle, the blockade of Europe and...Resolution, Reuenge, and Ramillies), relatively without armor...Dutch Kortenaer. The desperate battle was futile - Japanese invasion...carriers hung on grimly. In the Battle of the Coral Sea they met the...
|
|
Naval clashes in the Mediterranean.(BOOKS)
Newspaper article from: The Washington Times (Washington, DC); 7/12/2009; 700+ words
; ...in its complete coverage of the naval battles that occurred in the Mediterranean. Each battle is accompanied by a map and a graph...ones to support it. The battleship Ramillies had trouble getting up to 21 knots and...approached the epic proportions of the sea battles in the Pacific, but men died ...
|
|
Glory restrained.(wars in which King Louis XIV was involved)
Magazine article from: Calliope; 4/1/2002; ; 700+ words
; ...of Savoy routed French armies at the battles of Blenheim (1704), Ramillies (1706), and Oudenaarde (1708...personality and ability to fight back. At the Battle of Malplaquet (1709), Marshal Villars...the continent. Then, in 1712, at the battle of Denain, Villars broke the Dutch battalions...
|
|
battle of Ramillies
Book article from: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition
battle of Ramillies , fought May 23, 1706, near the village of Ramillies-Offus, Walloon Brabant prov., Belgium, 12 mi (19 km) S of Tienen, in the War of the Spanish Succession. Here, in one of his most brilliant victories, Marlborough...
|
|
Ramillies, Battle of
Book article from: The Oxford Dictionary of Phrase and Fable
Ramillies, Battle of a battle in the War of the Spanish Succession which took place in 1706 near the village of Ramillies, north of Namur, in Belgium, when the British army under Marlborough defeated the French.
|
|
Ramillies, battle of
Book article from: A Dictionary of British History
Ramillies, battle of, 1706. Marlborough's second major victory in the War of the Spanish...x2013;Dutch–Danish) under Marlborough, and routed in a battle dominated by tactical subtleties.
|
|
War of the Spanish Succession
Book article from: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition
...French under the count of Tallard (see Blenheim, battle of ), and the French lost Bavaria. Meanwhile...of N Italy, and by Marlborough's triumph at Ramillies (see Ramillies, battle of ), which compelled the French to retreat in...
|
|
Marlborough, John Churchill, 1st duke of
Book article from: The Oxford Companion to British History
...making William fight a Bosworth-style battle. As reward he became earl of Marlborough...fearing to risk everything on a major battle. But in 1704 French armies in Bavaria...1706 he won a second massive victory at Ramillies and overran most of the Spanish Netherlands...
|