| Hauptmann6 | 06 Nov 2009 7:32 p.m. PST |
How were the armored and infantry companies lettered in the light armored divisions(NOT the 2nd and 3rd division) Also, how were the battalions numbered? |
 aecurtis   | 06 Nov 2009 7:44 p.m. PST |
There wasn't a "numbering system" for battalions within a division. Numbered battalions (based on lineage) would be assigned to a division. You'd need to check the composition of the division you wish to model, such as 5th AD: link Within a tank or armored infantry battalion, the companies were lettered HQ, A, B, C, D (only in a tank battalion), and Service. Allen |
 John the OFM | 06 Nov 2009 7:46 p.m. PST |
"Light" armored divisions?
Enlighten the ignorant, please. |
| aecurtis | 06 Nov 2009 8:01 p.m. PST |
I'm as lazy as you are. I ain't typing, but you'll have to read, all the same: link Allen |
| Hauptmann6 | 06 Nov 2009 8:02 p.m. PST |
John, the difference is the number of Battalions of Armor vs Number of Infantry. In a Light Armor(all but the 2nd/3rd) Division there were 3 each of Armored Infantry and Armored battalions. In the 2nd and 3rd divisions there were 2 armored regiments with a total of 6 armored battalions and 1 Armored infantry regiment with a total of 3 Battalions. |
| Hauptmann6 | 06 Nov 2009 8:09 p.m. PST |
Thanks Allen, that's what I was thinking, but with my luck. lol |
| John the OFM | 06 Nov 2009 8:14 p.m. PST |
Ah, thank you.
I am now enlightened. |
| Hauptmann6 | 06 Nov 2009 8:16 p.m. PST |
And knowing is half the battle. |
| Marc33594 | 07 Nov 2009 4:46 a.m. PST |
The differences in the two types goes a bit beyond merely counting battlions. From a quick glance it would appear that the heavy divisions had twice as many tanks as the lights, not so. As Allen's link points out total for the two was 390 for heavy and 260 for light. A heavy division had 2 regiments each made up of 2 Medium and 1 light battlion. This meant 4 medium and 2 light battalions for the division and 12 medium companies and 6 light. The light division indeed had 3 battalions but each battlion had 3 medium and 1 light company making for 9 medium and 3 light companies. So while a heavy had twice as many light tanks (of dubious value) only 1/3 more mediums. There were also differences with the organization of the armored infantry with the light division's armored infantry battalions having as part of the permanent organization recce elements and self propelled artillery/assault gun support (M8 Scotts) while in the heavy division such assets had to be assigned from divisional assets. I believe as assets were made available both the 2nd and 3rd Division permanently augmented their infantry formations. |
| donlowry | 07 Nov 2009 11:24 a.m. PST |
I've always wondered about the 1st AD (which fought in Italy). Did it follow the heavy organization, or the light? |
| aecurtis | 07 Nov 2009 12:26 p.m. PST |
Scroll down one page, to page 11, on the Google Books link I posted. And watch your mailbox! Allen |
| Hauptmann6 | 07 Nov 2009 2:25 p.m. PST |
Don, all but the 2nd and 3rd were light divisions. The first started as a heavy but reorganized in 44. |
| majed4385 | 07 Nov 2009 6:54 p.m. PST |
Here is the list of all the US armored divisions that were organized. The web page is from the US Center for Military History. link The 2nd and 3rd have their regiments listed, all the others show their TO&E after re-organization to battalions and Combat Commands. In the "lettering" of the companies each separate battalion had A, B, C, D, HQ, etc. Ed |
| McWong73 | 08 Nov 2009 3:19 p.m. PST |
I'm not sure the US used the term "Light" to desribe their armoured divisions, rather that the 2nd and 3rd were called "Heavy". |
| Hauptmann6 | 08 Nov 2009 10:31 p.m. PST |
It was an easy identifier… I've seen it done both ways. |
