Division slice

Last updated

The structure of a 1989 US armoured division 3rd US Armored Division 1989.png
The structure of a 1989 US armoured division
The structure of a Soviet armoured division from the same era Tank Division 1980s.png
The structure of a Soviet armoured division from the same era
A division slice also takes into account logistics troops, such as those operating supply trucks. Military trucks laden with ammunition convoy.jpg
A division slice also takes into account logistics troops, such as those operating supply trucks.

A division slice is a calculation of the number of service personnel required to keep an army division operational. This includes combat units, combat support, troops on the lines of communication and also those on the home front either as replacements or in training. It is a useful measure for general staffs to compare different operational units within their command. It is less useful when comparing between different armed forces due to structural differences in support arrangements. During the Cold War the division slice was used by some commentators to criticise the US Army for "extravagances" in resourcing compared to Soviet forces. However, once structural differences were factored, there was less difference between the two armies.

Contents

Description

A division slice includes the actual personnel of the combat division but also combat support units, lines of communication troops and, sometimes, troops in the zone of the interior (home front). [1] The slice, therefore, includes not just the men assigned or attached to the division but also its share of the supporting services such as logistics troops. [2] The number of zone-of-interior troops can fluctuate significantly as it includes personnel who are sick or wounded and those in training or travelling. [1] The slice is calculated by dividing the number of personnel in a given area by the number of combat divisions that are operating there. [3] The division slice can be calculated on a worldwide basis where the manpower of the entire army is divided by the number of combat divisions (in which case it includes troops stationed on the home front) or on a theatre level where the calculation is made only on manpower and divisions within a certain theatre of operations. [4]

The calculation is regarded as a useful rule of thumb for planning by an army's general staff and is good for making comparisons between different parts of the same army. [5] An estimate of number of divisions fielded by an army can be made when an overall manpower figure is known and an estimate of division slice can be made. This method was used by the US to correctly estimate the strength of the Soviet Army at the end of the Second World War at 175 divisions. [6] However, by 1960 the Soviet Army began increasing its overall manpower while maintaining the same division numbers, resulting in a larger division slice. Because American intelligence assumed that the division slice would not increase, the greater effectiveness of Soviet divisions was not detected. [7]

The division slice may not be a good measure for comparisons between different armed forces as different nations may allocate some army work, particularly logistics and transport, to non-military personnel. [1] During the Cold War division slice comparisons between the US armed forces and those of the Soviets, who generally had a smaller division slice value, were used to criticise perceived "extravagances" in the American force. [5] The differences were because of different strategies followed by the Americans and the Soviets. The Soviets, who anticipated that any confrontation with NATO would be a short and violent war, structured their divisions to have a proportionately larger combat element with minimal logistics support. [8] American divisions were structured with larger logistics and combat support elements, which it was felt contributed to a more effective fighting unit. [9]

American and European divisions were designed to be continually reinforced to replace losses and so were backed up with reserve troops and those still in training. In contrast, Soviet divisions that suffered heavy casualties would simply be withdrawn from the line and replaced with a fresh division. [10] Different training periods also had an effect on the division slice. Soviet troops had shorter training periods and longer terms of service and so did not spend as much time away from their division. American soldiers in 1950 spent one third of their typical 21-month term of service in training in the zone of the interior. The Soviet forces also generally maintained fewer medical units and, having shorter lines of communication to a potential conflict in Europe, lower logistics requirements. Soviet forces also made greater use of civilians to provide labour and to man anti-aircraft artillery, who were not counted in division slice calculations. When such factors, and the fact that Soviet combat divisions were generally smaller than American divisions, are taken into account, the disparity between the American and Soviet division slice is much less. [1]

Historical comparatives

A Soviet combat division at the start of Operation Barbarossa in June 1941 numbered around 8,000–9,000 men and a division slice was approximately twice that at 16,600. As the war progressed the combat divisions dropped in size to 10,500 by 1942 and perhaps 5,000 or fewer by the end of the war, the division slice likewise contracted to 13,400 and 12,300, respectively. [11]

During the Second World War the worldwide US division slice was around 90,200, but this included a contribution from the United States Army Air Corps or United States Army Air Forces. [4] A typical theatre division slice was around 35,500 in Europe and 34,300 in the Southwest Pacific Area; with combat divisions standing around 14,300 men. [2] [4] [12] The division slice for the Australian Army was 64,000; for those outside Australia, it was about 31,000. [13] The Canadian Army's division slice was 93,150, while that of the British Army was about 84,300. [14]

US Army division slices by theatre in World War II (on 30 June 1945) [12]
TheatreDivisionsClassification of troops
Combat arms Combat support Combat service support Service supportTotal
StrengthPer centStrengthPer centStrengthPer centStrengthPer centStrengthPer cent
European 6113,30137.496,69218.867,32320.648,16423.0135,480100
Mediterranean 713,61641.924,39513.537,84424.156,62620.4032,481100
Southwest Pacific Area 1513,55139.466,26718.255,46715.929,05526.3734,340100
Central Pacific 614,04526.4917,04632.1511,07120.8810,85820.4853,020100

In the immediate aftermath of the war division slices stood at around 13,000–15,000 for the Soviet forces (with combat divisions of 9,000–12,000 men) and around 40,000 for Western forces (with combat divisions of 16,000–18,000 men). [9] By 1950 the US division slice stood at around 35,000, though this increased significantly to around 50,000 men if a division were deployed 1,500 miles (2,400 km) from home (as for example US forces were in the Second World War). [15] Much of the increase in troop numbers was driven by a 33% increase in the number of combat troops in a division, only 25% of the slice was made up of troops from the zone of the interior. [1] By 1950 the worldwide division slice for US troops was around 80,000, and the Korean theatre division slice was 35,800; this compared to a Soviet division slice of 20,000 for 1960. [4] [7]

In 1974 the division slice for Soviet forces was approximately 16,000. The West German army stood at 26,300, British Army at 27,500 and US Army at 39,000. [10] By 1977 a Soviet mechanised combat division of 12,500 men had a division slice of 17,000, and US mechanised divisions of 16,000 men had a division slice of 48,000. [8] At the end of the Cold War in 1990 the Netherlands Army had the largest division slice size of any in NATO, standing at 68,000, with the figures being skewed by large numbers of reservists and replacements in that force. [16]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bulgarian Armed Forces</span> Military forces of Bulgaria

The Bulgarian Army is the military of Bulgaria. The commander-in-chief is the president of Bulgaria. The Ministry of Defense is responsible for political leadership, while overall military command is in the hands of the Defense Staff, headed by the Chief of the Defense. There are three main branches of the Bulgarian military, named literally the Land Forces, the Air Forces and the Naval Forces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Army of the Czech Republic</span> Combined military forces of the Czech Republic

The Army of the Czech Republic, also known as the Czech Army, is the military service responsible for the defence of the Czech Republic as part of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic alongside the Military Office of the President of the Republic and the Castle Guard. The Army consists of the General Staff, the Land Forces, the Air Force and support units.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">French Armed Forces</span> Military of France

The French Armed Forces is the military of France. It consists of four military branches: the Army, Navy, Air and Space Force, and the National Gendarmerie; and a reserve force: the National Guard. The President of France serves as commander-in-chief of the French Armed Forces. France has the eighth largest defence budget in the world and the second in the European Union (EU). It also has the largest military by size in the EU. According to Credit Suisse, the French Armed Forces are ranked as the world's sixth-most powerful military.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Defence Forces of Georgia</span> Combined military forces of Georgia

The Defence Forces of Georgia, or Georgian Defence Forces (GDF), are the combined military forces of Georgia, tasked with the defence of the nation's independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. They consist of the Land Force, Air Force, National Guard, and Special Operations Forces. The Defence Forces are under overall leadership of the Minister of Defence of Georgia and directly headed by the Chief of Defence Forces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hungarian Defence Forces</span> Combined military forces of Hungary

The Hungarian Defence Forces is the national defence force of Hungary. Since 2007, the Hungarian Armed Forces is under a unified command structure. The Ministry of Defence maintains the political and civil control over the army. A subordinate Joint Forces Command is coordinating and commanding the HDF corps. In 2020, the armed forces had 22,700 personnel on active duty. In 2019, military spending was $1.904 billion, about 1.22% of the country's GDP, well below the NATO target of 2%. In 2016, the government adopted a resolution in which it pledged to increase defence spending to 2.0% of GDP and the number of active personnel to 37,650 by 2026.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Latvian National Armed Forces</span> Combined military forces of Latvia

The Latvian National Armed Forces, or NBS, are the armed forces of Latvia. Latvia's defense concept is based on a mobile professional rapid response force and reserve segment that can be called upon relatively fast for mobilization should the need arise. The National Armed Forces consists of Land Forces, Naval Forces, Air Force and National Guard. Its main tasks are to protect the territory of the State; participate in international military operations; and to prevent threats to national security.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mongolian Armed Forces</span> Combined military forces of Mongolia

The Mongolian Armed Forces is the collective name for the Mongolian military and the joint forces that comprise it. It is tasked with protecting the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Mongolia. Defined as the peacetime configuration, its current structure consists of five branches: the Mongolian Ground Force, Mongolian Air Force, Construction and Engineering Forces, cyber security, and special forces. In case of a war situation, the Border Troops, Internal Troops and National Emergency Management Agency can be reorganized into the armed forces structure. The General Staff of the Mongolian Armed Forces is the main managing body and operates independently from the Ministry of Defence, its government controlled parent body.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slovenian Armed Forces</span> Combined military forces of Slovenia

The Slovenian Armed Forces or Slovenian Army are the armed forces of Slovenia. Since 2003, it is organized as a fully professional standing army. The Commander-in-Chief of the SAF is the President of the Republic of Slovenia, while operational command is in the domain of the Chief of the General Staff of the Slovenian Armed Forces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battalion</span> Military unit size designation

A battalion is a military unit, typically consisting of 300 to 1,000 soldiers commanded by a lieutenant colonel, and subdivided into a number of companies. The typical battalion is built from three operational companies, one weapons company and one HQ company. In some countries, battalions are exclusively infantry, while in others battalions are unit-level organisations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian Armed Forces</span> Combined military forces of Canada

The Canadian Armed Forces are the unified military forces of Canada, including sea, land, and air elements referred to as the Royal Canadian Navy, Canadian Army, and Royal Canadian Air Force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Afghan Army</span> Land service branch of the Afghan military

The Islamic National Army, also referred to as the Islamic Emirate Army and Afghan Army, is the land force branch of the Afghan Armed Forces. The roots of an army in Afghanistan can be traced back to the early 18th century when the Hotak dynasty was established in Kandahar followed by Ahmad Shah Durrani's rise to power. It was reorganized in 1880 during Emir Abdur Rahman Khan's reign. Afghanistan remained neutral during the First and Second World Wars. From the 1960s to the early 1990s, the Afghan Army was equipped by the Soviet Union.

<i>Bundeswehr</i> Combined military forces of Germany

The Bundeswehr is the armed forces of the Federal Republic of Germany. The Bundeswehr is divided into a military part and a civil part, the military part consisting of the German Army, the German Navy, the German Air Force, the Joint Support Service, the Joint Medical Service, and the Cyber and Information Domain Service.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">German Army</span> Land warfare branch of Germanys military since 1955

The German Army is the land component of the armed forces of Germany. The present-day German Army was founded in 1955 as part of the newly formed West German Bundeswehr together with the Marine and the Luftwaffe. As of January 2022, the German Army had a strength of 62,766 soldiers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Iraqi Ground Forces</span> Military unit

The Iraqi Ground Forces, or the Iraqi Army, is the ground force component of the Iraqi Armed Forces. It was known as the Royal Iraqi Army up until the coup of July 1958.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turkish Land Forces</span> Turkish land armed forces

The Turkish Land Forces, or Turkish Army, is the main branch of the Turkish Armed Forces responsible for land-based military operations. The army was formed on November 8, 1920, after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Significant campaigns since the foundation of the army include suppression of rebellions in Turkish Kurdistan from the 1920s to the present day, combat in the Korean War, the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus and the current Turkish involvement in the Syrian Civil War, as well as its NATO alliance against the USSR during the Cold War. The army holds the preeminent place within the armed forces. It is customary for the Chief of the General Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces to have been the Commander of the Turkish Land Forces prior to his appointment as Turkey's senior ranking officer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Soviet Armed Forces</span> Military forces of Soviet Russia and the Soviet Union (1918–1993)

The Soviet Armed Forces, also known as the Armed Forces of the Soviet Union, the Red Army (1918–1946) and the Soviet Army (1946–1991), were the armed forces of the Russian SFSR (1917–1922) and the Soviet Union (1922–1991) from their beginnings in the Russian Civil War of 1917–1923 to the collapse of the USSR in 1991. In May 1992, Russian President Boris Yeltsin issued decrees forming the Russian Armed Forces, which subsumed much of the Soviet Armed Forces. Multiple sections of the former Soviet Armed Forces in the other, smaller Soviet republics gradually came under those republics' control.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military organization</span> Structuring of armed forces of a state

Military organization or military organisation is the structuring of the armed forces of a state so as to offer such military capability as a national defense policy may require. In some countries paramilitary forces are included in a nation's armed forces, though not considered military. Armed forces that are not a part of military or paramilitary organizations, such as insurgent forces, often mimic military organizations, or use these structures, while formal military organization tends to use hierarchical forms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Romanian Armed Forces</span> Armed forces of Romania

The Land Forces, Air Force and Naval Forces of Romania are collectively known as the Romanian Armed Forces. The current Commander-in-chief is Lieutenant General Daniel Petrescu who is managed by the Minister of National Defence while the president is the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces during wartime.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Women in the military in Europe</span>

European countries have had varying policies that confine women and military service or the extent of their participation in the national armed services of their respective countries, especially combatant roles in armed conflicts or hostile environments. While most of the countries have always allowed women to participate in military activities involving no direct aggression with the enemy, most began seeing the value of servicewomen in the armed services during the First World War when they began losing unprecedented numbers of servicemen. In the modern era, many of the European countries allow women to voluntarily pursue a career path or profession in the national armed services of their country as well as permit conscription equality, with minimal or no restrictions at all.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polish Armed Forces</span> Combined military forces of Poland

The Armed Forces of the Republic of Poland are the national armed forces of the Republic of Poland. The name has been used since the early 19th century, but can also be applied to earlier periods.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Hearings Before Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on Sundry Legislation Affecting the Naval and Military Establishments, 1950: Eighty-first Congress, Second Session. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1951. p. 99.
  2. 1 2 Dunn, Walter Scott (1995). The Soviet Economy and the Red Army, 1930-1945. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 61. ISBN   978-0-275-94893-1.
  3. ↑ Services, United States Congress House Committee on Armed (1951). Hearings Before Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on Sundry Legislation Affecting the Naval and Military Establishments, 1950: Eighty-first Congress, Second Session. U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 98.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Hearings Before and Special Reports Made by Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on Subjects Affecting the Naval and Military Establishments. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1965. p. 356.
  5. 1 2 Taylor, Maxwell D. (1951). "Mobilizing American Power for Defense". Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science. 24 (3): 147. doi:10.2307/1173392. ISSN   0065-0684. JSTOR   1173392.
  6. ↑ Karber, Phillip A.; Combs, Jerald A. (1998). "The United States, NATO, and the Soviet Threat to Western Europe: Military Estimates and Policy Options, 1945–1963". Diplomatic History. 22 (3): 403. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00126. ISSN   0145-2096. JSTOR   24913704.
  7. 1 2 Karber, Phillip A.; Combs, Jerald A. (1998). "The United States, NATO, and the Soviet Threat to Western Europe: Military Estimates and Policy Options, 1945–1963". Diplomatic History. 22 (3): 412. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00126. ISSN   0145-2096. JSTOR   24913704.
  8. 1 2 Norton, Augustus R. (1977). "NATO and Metaphors: The Nuclear Threshold". Naval War College Review. 30 (2): 67. ISSN   0028-1484. JSTOR   44635465.
  9. 1 2 Evangelista, Matthew A. (1982). "Stalin's Postwar Army Reappraised". International Security. 7 (3): 117. doi:10.2307/2538554. ISSN   0162-2889. JSTOR   2538554.
  10. 1 2 Gray, Colin S. (1974). "Mini-Nukes and Strategy". International Journal. 29 (2): 221. doi:10.2307/40201193. ISSN   0020-7020. JSTOR   40201193.
  11. ↑ Dunn, Walter Scott (1994). Hitler's Nemesis: The Red Army, 1930-1945. Praeger. p. 78. ISBN   9780275948948.
  12. 1 2 Coakley, Robert W.; Leighton, Richard M. (1967). Global Logistics and Strategy 1943-1945 (PDF). Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army. p. 840.
  13. ↑ Long, Gavin (1963). The Final Campaigns. Canberra: Australian War Memorial. pp. 35–36, 581. Retrieved 25 March 2019.
  14. ↑ Burns, E. L. M (1956). Manpower in the Canadian Army. Toronto: Clarke, Orwin & Company. p. 14. OCLC   869411700.
  15. ↑ Services, United States Congress House Committee on Armed (1951). Hearings Before Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on Sundry Legislation Affecting the Naval and Military Establishments, 1950: Eighty-first Congress, Second Session. U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 100.
  16. ↑ Dunnigan, James F.; Nofi, Albert A. (1990). Dirty Little Secrets: Military Information You're Not Supposed to Know. Morrow. p. 77. ISBN   978-0-688-08948-1.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.