RPG Forums

RPG Forums (https://forum.juhlin.com/index.php)
-   Twilight 2000 Forum (https://forum.juhlin.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   The Military Deployments of T2K (https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2729)

Rainbow Six 03-13-2011 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull (Post 32158)
Another thing I am sure the British would have sent more in the lines of Commonwealth Division in which HQ, support units, and one or more combat Brigade from the UK and the rest from whatever they could scrounge up from Commonwealth members.

I think the problem with sending additional British forces is simply where would these forces come from? It's not impossible, however the overwhelming majority of the British Army would already be committed elsewhere, so unless one advocates increasing the British Army's strength to more than it was in real life, any additional troops sent to the Gulf would have to mean less troops available for other roles (imho probably BAOR reinforcements or UK Home Defence).

Also, with regards to the Commonwealth, whilst it's possible that Commonwealth members would send troops to the Middle East (or Korea and Hong Kong for that matter), I think it's important to note that the Commonwealth now is completely different to what it was at the start of the Second World War when the UK declared War on Germany and various Commonwealth members duly followed suit in line with the Mother Country.

Commonwealth members now are all independent states (I think their only tie is that they retain the Queen as their Head of State), so would be under no obligation to enter WW3 as a belligerent on the Allied side (Canada is an obvious exception as it is also a member of NATO). I'm not saying that it wouldn't happen and the Commonwealth nations wouldn't answer the mother country's call, just it's not something that I would take for granted.

As ever, my comments based primarily on a V1 timeline, although whilst canon mentions various Commonwealth members fighting "local" Wars, e.g. India fighting Pakistan and (I think) Australia fighting Indonesia I don't believe there's anything in canon for either version to confirm one way or the other whether any of them - other than Canada - were active participants in the "Global" War?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32163)
Well, the GDW Iran had a moderate and pro-western sort of government. Some Iranians might take up arms against everyone, but I'd think the Soviet invaders would be seen as a bigger threat than the western support (especially since in the T2K timeline the Soviets were still "waging war against Islam" in Afghanistan, if I remember right).

The other thing to remember in the T2K timeline is that Israel and the Palestinians reached some sort of amicable settlement. I'd guess that at the peak of the conventional war, a larger IDF expeditionary than is shown in theater circa 2000 was on the scene, after they settled their slugging match with Syria.

To be honest, given the efforts made to keep the IDF out of the first Gulf War (which I realise came after the RDF sourcebook was published), the presence of an IDF contingent always struck me as one of the more "out there" parts of the sourcebook. The cynic in me always thought it was done purely as a mechanism to allow players to play IDF characters.

Granted, I am probably biased here - I much preferred the sort of scenario put forward in Harold Coyle's Sword Point to the one portrayed in the RDF Sourcebook.

dragoon500ly 03-13-2011 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six (Post 32170)
I think the problem with sending additional British forces is simply where would these forces come from? It's not impossible, however the overwhelming majority of the British Army would already be committed elsewhere, so unless one advocates increasing the British Army's strength to more than it was in real life, any additional troops sent to the Gulf would have to mean less troops available for other roles (imho probably BAOR reinforcements or UK Home Defence).

Also, with regards to the Commonwealth, whilst it's possible that Commonwealth members would send troops to the Middle East (or Korea and Hong Kong for that matter), I think it's important to note that the Commonwealth now is completely different to what it was at the start of the Second World War when the UK declared War on Germany and various Commonwealth members duly followed suit in line with the Mother Country.

Commonwealth members now are all independent states (I think their only tie is that they retain the Queen as their Head of State), so would be under no obligation to enter WW3 as a belligerent on the Allied side (Canada is an obvious exception as it is also a member of NATO). I'm not saying that it wouldn't happen and the Commonwealth nations wouldn't answer the mother country's call, just it's not something that I would take for granted.

As ever, my comments based primarily on a V1 timeline, although whilst canon mentions various Commonwealth members fighting "local" Wars, e.g. India fighting Pakistan and (I think) Australia fighting Indonesia I don't believe there's anything in canon for either version to confirm one way or the other whether any of them - other than Canada - were active participants in the "Global" War?

The most likely reinforcement for the MEFF might be a recon regiment with Scorpions/Scimitars, possibly a Australian battalion group and, at most, a company from New Zealand. Anything more than that is really stretching the force mix. I've also pulled the Paras out of the Middle East, with an entire Airborne Division available, there would be little need for more paratroopers, IMHO.

Quote:

To be honest, given the efforts made to keep the IDF out of the first Gulf War (which I realise came after the RDF sourcebook was published), the presence of an IDF contingent always struck me as one of the more "out there" parts of the sourcebook. The cynic in me always thought it was done purely as a mechanism to allow players to play IDF characters.

Granted, I am probably biased here - I much preferred the sort of scenario put forward in Harold Coyle's Sword Point to the one portrayed in the RDF Sourcebook.
Always had problems with the IDF/Jordanian mix itself, especially with the Israelis stationed in Iraqi, they would spend more times fighting the locals than the Soviet-backed locals.

Rainbow Six 03-13-2011 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly (Post 32171)
The most likely reinforcement for the MEFF might be a recon regiment with Scorpions/Scimitars, possibly a Australian battalion group and, at most, a company from New Zealand. Anything more than that is really stretching the force mix. I've also pulled the Paras out of the Middle East, with an entire Airborne Division available, there would be little need for more paratroopers, IMHO.

My MEFF has a recon Squadron drawn from 1st Mech Bde's recon Regiment, but that's as far as I've gone in terms of changes.

Mind you, you could perhaps stretch British deployments slightly if you didn't have two Battalions sitting in Canada...

dragoon500ly 03-13-2011 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six (Post 32172)
My MEFF has a recon Squadron drawn from 1st Mech Bde's recon Regiment, but that's as far as I've gone in terms of changes.

Mind you, you could perhaps stretch British deployments slightly if you didn't have two Battalions sitting in Canada...

I've always felt that with the example of the Sino-Soviet War, that NATO would have, at the very least, increased its readiness levels, reactivated some units, brought Reserve units up to a higher level of training. So I can see the two battalions maining the training area, but I can also see at least a handful of regiments being reactivated (no more than 4-7), that's where my extra forces come from.

Rainbow Six 03-13-2011 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly (Post 32174)
I've always felt that with the example of the Sino-Soviet War, that NATO would have, at the very least, increased its readiness levels, reactivated some units, brought Reserve units up to a higher level of training. So I can see the two battalions maining the training area, but I can also see at least a handful of regiments being reactivated (no more than 4-7), that's where my extra forces come from.

Yes, I think that's a relatively common theme...I've done it myself and I've seen several other British Orders of Battle that have a modest number of reactivated Battalions.

dragoon500ly 03-13-2011 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six (Post 32175)
Yes, I think that's a relatively common theme...I've done it myself and I've seen several other British Orders of Battle that have a modest number of reactivated Battalions.

The trick, of course, is to not go stark raving mad about it!

Legbreaker 03-13-2011 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly (Post 32171)
The most likely reinforcement for the MEFF might be a recon regiment with Scorpions/Scimitars, possibly a Australian battalion group and, at most, a company from New Zealand.

You can forget about Australian troops being involved in the Middle East with a war raging with Indonesian, and a potential UN involvement in Korea. Same for New Zealand - local needs come well before foreign deployment.

dragoon500ly 03-14-2011 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legbreaker (Post 32198)
You can forget about Australian troops being involved in the Middle East with a war raging with Indonesian, and a potential UN involvement in Korea. Same for New Zealand - local needs come well before foreign deployment.

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't Australia import a sizable percentage of oil from the Persian Gulf? With a local war threating/halting oil production from the Indonesian fields, would not the Australian government seriously consider commiting a battalion group, if only to acquire badly need oil?

The arguement can be made either way, it all boils down to how much crude oil is available, and how much refinery capacity survived any Soviet nukes. I'm just advancing a theory that the Australian government may see the need to secure both, a product that CENTCOM seems to have enough of.

Have to admit though, I neglected to consider any Australian commitment to Korea; but just how much would Australia send? I can see a battalion group, possibly two, but would a brigade be sent? Or would Australia decide a division would have to be committed?

LOL, this is where the lack of canon material on Korea inserts a monkey wrench!

Adm.Lee 03-14-2011 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly (Post 32139)
One of the reasons why the Italian Campaign of WWII was such a meatgrinder, all of the trained "mountain" divisions had been deployed elsewhere. It was only until the French and their Algerian troops were deployed that mountain-trained troops actually fought in the mountains....

Well, until the French/Africans showed up, there were hardly any Allied mountain troops. The US was still training the 10th division (1 regiment went to the Aleutians for a while), the Indian 4th division had had some mountain training, but had been fighting in the Desert for a while. Other than the aforementioned 52nd, that was about it.

HorseSoldier 03-14-2011 04:33 PM

Quote:

Have to admit though, I neglected to consider any Australian commitment to Korea; but just how much would Australia send? I can see a battalion group, possibly two, but would a brigade be sent? Or would Australia decide a division would have to be committed?
I doubt they'd send anyone. Probably helping back stop the UK division in Hong Kong, rather than sending troops to Korea. The ROK Army in 1996/7 isn't going to need international bailing out at anything remotely approximating the level seen in the 1950s.

Legbreaker 03-14-2011 04:55 PM

Australia can barely scrape together a single Division on anything less than about 12 months notice. Any more and reservists have to be called up and trained.
Australia also has it's own oil reserves. It may not be massively productive Fields like Texas or the North Sea, but there should be enough production post nuke to support the country's vital needs (especially if a couple of the cities got hit).
Regarding China vs Korea, Korea would get the troops without a doubt. Korea is essentially a UN operation (regardless of who's actually commanding), while China is basically a fight between two sovereign nations - the USSR (plus allies) and China (plus whoever was in the area and got caught up in it).
North Korea has long been seen as the BIG EVIL in the area, much more than the Soviets. North Korea also has no/less nukes (depending on how you want to look at it), which means less likelihood of Australians being irradiated.

Regardless of where the troops went, the moment hostilities broke out with Indonesia they would be recalled - Australia simply doesn't have the manpower to hold off such a huge military (even a poorly trained, led and equipped military as Indonesia at the time). Same thing happened in WWII when the Japanese were coming across Papua New Guinea - the Divisions in the middle east (mainly northern Africa) were recalled immediately and sent from the deserts to the mountainous jungles.

dragoon500ly 03-14-2011 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legbreaker (Post 32209)
Australia can barely scrape together a single Division on anything less than about 12 months notice. Any more and reservists have to be called up and trained.
Australia also has it's own oil reserves. It may not be massively productive Fields like Texas or the North Sea, but there should be enough production post nuke to support the country's vital needs (especially if a couple of the cities got hit).
Regarding China vs Korea, Korea would get the troops without a doubt. Korea is essentially a UN operation (regardless of who's actually commanding), while China is basically a fight between two sovereign nations - the USSR (plus allies) and China (plus whoever was in the area and got caught up in it).
North Korea has long been seen as the BIG EVIL in the area, much more than the Soviets. North Korea also has no/less nukes (depending on how you want to look at it), which means less likelihood of Australians being irradiated.

Regardless of where the troops went, the moment hostilities broke out with Indonesia they would be recalled - Australia simply doesn't have the manpower to hold off such a huge military (even a poorly trained, led and equipped military as Indonesia at the time). Same thing happened in WWII when the Japanese were coming across Papua New Guinea - the Divisions in the middle east (mainly northern Africa) were recalled immediately and sent from the deserts to the mountainous jungles.

Ouch! Another good idea meets up with cold reality! :p

Thanks for the info!

Abbott Shaull 03-15-2011 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly (Post 32211)
Ouch! Another good idea meets up with cold reality! :p

Thanks for the info!

The reality is for many nation this would be the case, due to the fact had all made deep cuts even before the end of the cold war.

dragoon500ly 03-15-2011 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull (Post 32249)
The reality is for many nation this would be the case, due to the fact had all made deep cuts even before the end of the cold war.

The issue remains just what kind of response would NATO have made, especially with the Sino-Soviet War starting to kick off, not to mention intelligence that something was brewing inbetween the Germanies.

At the very least we have more weapons rolling from the production lines, there should have been some call-up of selected Reserves. And if the intelligence people were really on the ball, there could have have been re-activation of units....even call up of the Individual Ready Reserve, its happened before with a lot less provocation, with a major shooting war in the Far East this could easily happen.

This is also the time period of Reagan-Bush and Maggie Thatcher...two Presidents and a Prime Minister that didn't have a lot of back-up when the Soviets were concerned. I can especially see Reagan pushing an even larger increase of the military...

So we can argue the point back and forth....my own view is that NATO would have done something to be a bit more prepared....

Legbreaker 03-15-2011 07:33 PM

Just going on memory, didn't the middle east flare up after Europe? Therefore it's no surprise that the middle east received what is essentially the dregs of the various nations militaries (in as far as they were the only units not already deployed).
In that case it doesn't matter what the best mix of units might be - the only mix is what little is available and hope to hell that it's able to do the job.

Abbott Shaull 03-15-2011 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legbreaker (Post 32258)
Just going on memory, didn't the middle east flare up after Europe? Therefore it's no surprise that the middle east received what is essentially the dregs of the various nations militaries (in as far as they were the only units not already deployed).
In that case it doesn't matter what the best mix of units might be - the only mix is what little is available and hope to hell that it's able to do the job.

By canon, yes. Ironically the entire chain of events goes with Soviet-Sino War. Then Soviets getting their arse handed to them on gold plate. Soviet pull units from Europe and activating their units in the Soviet Union. Then someone in Moscow gets the bright idea to request "Volunteers" to help out in China, from their Pact Allies. The Pact with mix feeling sent units to the East and started to call up and build up troops. The meat grinder was so bad there was second and third call for help.

Sometime after the second call, somewhere in the Military Leadership of the East German Armed Forces starts to have high level talks with their counter-parts in West Germany. They didn't mind losing people if they were fight the evil west, but they were balking at the loses that their units were taking in China. Somewhere the West German Army moves into East Germany and about couple months later you have WWIII.

Somewhere along the way the US and UK started their build up. Some 6 weeks to 3 months later they enter the war to help reinforce the German Army. Leaving NATO torn up and some countries out right siding with the Pact. While other members of the Pact effective breakaway to only get hammered themselves by the newest members of the Pact.

Some time too Korea takes off in effort to draw US Troops from reinforcing Europe.

Then Soviet get the bright idea to take Iran and to cut oil supplies to West Europe, China and Japan. US and UK decide to send units to the Middle East to prevent the Soviet from reaching the Persian Gulf Coast and closing the straits that the oil tankers have to travel through. For some strange reason Pakistan and India start shooting each other, especially when the Soviet move one Army from Afghanistan into Iran to help that Front out from that direction with the hopes of getting to the location to close the straits. In effect drawing weapons supplies that were coming into Afghanistan over land from Pakistan off.

Along the way several other localized wars start. In many cases, these are started at the urging of the Soviets to keep non-Soviet Allies from reinforcing any of the fronts that they were currently fighting and introduction of Nukes did take much longer.

So yeah to answer you question, yeah as per canon the Middle East was largely an afterthought for the US and UK and other allies. Another thing is the allies of Iraq and Syria seem to being a whole lot of nothing. They may have made token attacks towards Turkey, but they did nothing to help the Soviets on their conquest of Iran. Again the Syrian and Iraq had Jordan border and Syrian had the Isreal Border to keep troops at.

What is more interesting there really isn't much reason for the Saudi or the other City-States of the Persian Gulf to play host to the US Central Command and British forces there. As for sending more heavy units, the ones that have been suggested were from the east Coast. Maybe they were going to Korea to help reinforce the 8th US Army and UN commitment there, and got diverted. The 9th Motorized Division, 1st and 3rd Marine Divisions with their bases along the Pacific would be perfect example of unit being diverted to give the US Central Command more punch.

Also diverting the 40th Mechanized wouldn't be too bad, they were from California and probably would of been sent to Korea as reinforcement first off. The 24th Mechanized Division as it stands probably had it two active duty Brigade diverted to Europe at the start of the fighting to bring up III Corps units. The 24th Mechanized that was sent Iraq only when it new troops had been trained and were ready to ship out to Europe, but then sent to Iraq to reinforce Central Command.

With 1st Mechanized, 4th Mechanized, 5th Mechanized, 1st Cavalry, and 2nd Armor Divisions as well as the 3rd ARC, 194th Armor Brigade, and 197th Mechanized Brigade sending their troops that were on active duty still in the States over to take over Preposition equipment. Each of the Division had left their equipment at their state side bases, so 5 Divisional HQ, Support, 2 out three Combat, and Aviation Brigades could be reformed with 1 ACR, and 2 other Brigade to boot. I am sure one could organize an additional Armor and Mechanized Divisions for the Middle East at the cost of reinforcing Europe with fresh troops and slightly used equipment.

Canon says this equipment was being used to refit National Guard units, but in real life many of the units that were refitted already had been refitted with the equipment, so there was still equipment to spare. The only problem would have been getting new recruits trained and ready, then ship them off to a front they weren't quite expecting to fight in. Kinda like 1st Mechanized Division going to the Desert fighting in their Woodland Camos during the 1st PGW. Not to far of stretch if things are written up correctly.

Just some thoughts.

dragoon500ly 03-16-2011 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legbreaker (Post 32258)
Just going on memory, didn't the middle east flare up after Europe? Therefore it's no surprise that the middle east received what is essentially the dregs of the various nations militaries (in as far as they were the only units not already deployed).
In that case it doesn't matter what the best mix of units might be - the only mix is what little is available and hope to hell that it's able to do the job.

According to the RDF sourcebook, the Soviets invade Iran in 1995, CENTCOM is delayed by lack of shipping until 1996 and go right into Saudi Arabia with CENTCOM/Transcaucasus Front crossing barrels towards the end of 1996/97

dragoon500ly 03-16-2011 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull (Post 32272)
Then Soviet get the bright idea to take Iran and to cut oil supplies to West Europe, China and Japan. US and UK decide to send units to the Middle East to prevent the Soviet from reaching the Persian Gulf Coast and closing the straits that the oil tankers have to travel through. For some strange reason Pakistan and India start shooting each other, especially when the Soviet move one Army from Afghanistan into Iran to help that Front out from that direction with the hopes of getting to the location to close the straits. In effect drawing weapons supplies that were coming into Afghanistan over land from Pakistan off.

When you start talking India/Pakistan, only the intervention by the superpowers keeps things quiet....otherwise, India would dearly love to knock off Pakistan, once and for all.

[QUOTE]So yeah to answer you question, yeah as per canon the Middle East was largely an afterthought for the US and UK and other allies. Another thing is the allies of Iraq and Syria seem to being a whole lot of nothing. They may have made token attacks towards Turkey, but they did nothing to help the Soviets on their conquest of Iran. Again the Syrian and Iraq had Jordan border and Syrian had the Isreal Border to keep troops at.
What is more interesting there really isn't much reason for the Saudi or the other City-States of the Persian Gulf to play host to the US Central Command and British forces there. As for sending more heavy units, the ones that have been suggested were from the east Coast. Maybe they were going to Korea to help reinforce the 8th US Army and UN commitment there, and got diverted. The 9th Motorized Division, 1st and 3rd Marine Divisions with their bases along the Pacific would be perfect example of unit being diverted to give the US Central Command more punch.
Also diverting the 40th Mechanized wouldn't be too bad, they were from California and probably would of been sent to Korea as reinforcement first off. The 24th Mechanized Division as it stands probably had it two active duty Brigade diverted to Europe at the start of the fighting to bring up III Corps units. The 24th Mechanized that was sent Iraq only when it new troops had been trained and were ready to ship out to Europe, but then sent to Iraq to reinforce Central Command.[\QUOTE]

There was always a lot of doubt as to the 40th MID going to Korea, during the period covered by T2K, it was always Middle East/Korea/NATO...by the end of the '80s, early '90s, the talk was NATO reinforcement with a Middle East deployment possible. One of the reasons that I feel fry to post them into the Gulf.

Quote:

With 1st Mechanized, 4th Mechanized, 5th Mechanized, 1st Cavalry, and 2nd Armor Divisions as well as the 3rd ARC, 194th Armor Brigade, and 197th Mechanized Brigade sending their troops that were on active duty still in the States over to take over Preposition equipment. Each of the Division had left their equipment at their state side bases, so 5 Divisional HQ, Support, 2 out three Combat, and Aviation Brigades could be reformed with 1 ACR, and 2 other Brigade to boot. I am sure one could organize an additional Armor and Mechanized Divisions for the Middle East at the cost of reinforcing Europe with fresh troops and slightly used equipment.
There are two possible ways to reinforce CENTCOM, either slide 1-2 heavy divisions over as reinforcements or deploy 3-4 of the NG armored/mechanized brigades to reinforce...but that kills the idea of the 44th Armored.

HorseSoldier 03-16-2011 02:53 PM

Quote:

The 24th Mechanized Division as it stands probably had it two active duty Brigade diverted to Europe at the start of the fighting to bring up III Corps units. The 24th Mechanized that was sent Iraq only when it new troops had been trained and were ready to ship out to Europe, but then sent to Iraq to reinforce Central Command.
I'd doubt that. The situation in Europe isn't so critical that it would justify pulling the only heavy unit slated to help defend Middle Eastern oil supplies out of the mix. I'm actually not certain what level of badness would justify cutting 24th ID out of CENTCOM's force mix -- even if they're Dunkirking the remnants of USAREUR off the beaches, you've still got to hold the oil supply in the Middle East or face the possibility of defeat on a global, not theater, level. The thing I am skeptical about is that XVIII Airborne would collectively be held in reserve and out of theater until March of 97 -- more likely, I'd think, would be surging them into the region as soon as the shooting war starts in Europe.

Quote:

There are two possible ways to reinforce CENTCOM, either slide 1-2 heavy divisions over as reinforcements or deploy 3-4 of the NG armored/mechanized brigades to reinforce...but that kills the idea of the 44th Armored.
Realistically, XVIII Abn probably gets punched up with the addition of the 197th and 194th brigades (which is what GDW shows in the Middle East portion of their WW III wargame). An ACR would be nice to have also, but realistically the 9th Lt Mot guys in T2K are filling that role for XVIII and given the distances and low troop density of the theater are probably doing it better than a heavy cavalry regiment could.

In the T2K alternate universe by the time the war kicked off the National Guard had punched up their readiness to the point where the round out brigades worked -- not an entirely unreasonable idea given that the Sino-Soviet War would have potentially provided serious motivation to get the NG and USAR ready to go to war. So 24th ID going downrange with 48th Mech Bde in tow is probably reasonable.

Add in the 194th and 197th, with their strategic reserve role being taken over by two or all three brigades from 44th Armored (which I agree, is kind of a silly unit, insofar as that's not how the NG Separate Armored and Infantry Brigades were supposed to be employed -- though to be fair I think it and a couple other divisions like 43rd were depicted as an editorial decision to keep overall length of USAVG down).

Adjusting for the situation, it probably yields something like:

194th Arm'd Brigade -- XVIII Airborne
197th Arm'd Brigade -- XVIII Airborne

157th Mech Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- To III Corps in USAREUR
187th Inf Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- Iceland Defense Force
205th Inf Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- To 6th ID(L) (their actual round out unit)

30th SIB (from 44th AD) -- Strat Reserve @ Benning
31st SAB (from 44th AD) -- Strat Reserve @ Knox
218th SIB (from 44th AD) -- to III Corps in USAREUR

Or something like that. Putting 30th and 31st brigades at Knox and Benning allows them to pretty directly cover down on the 194th/197th storylines in the T2K timeline, though I suppose by the time XVIII punches out for the desert they could have just taken 30th/31st with them and left 194th/197th in place, though it seems like the combat power of the regular army units would be preferable in a low density theater.

Legbreaker 03-16-2011 04:28 PM

As far as I am aware, Iran and the west didn't have a lot of love for each other in the early to mid 90's. My guess is the late deployment to the area wasn't just due to lack of transportation, but also political manoeuvring - lots of background diplomacy/espionage/assassinations to ensure the government(s) of the day was friendly before putting boots on the ground.

dragoon500ly 03-16-2011 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32294)
In the T2K alternate universe by the time the war kicked off the National Guard had punched up their readiness to the point where the round out brigades worked -- not an entirely unreasonable idea given that the Sino-Soviet War would have potentially provided serious motivation to get the NG and USAR ready to go to war. So 24th ID going downrange with 48th Mech Bde in tow is probably reasonable.

Add in the 194th and 197th, with their strategic reserve role being taken over by two or all three brigades from 44th Armored (which I agree, is kind of a silly unit, insofar as that's not how the NG Separate Armored and Infantry Brigades were supposed to be employed -- though to be fair I think it and a couple other divisions like 43rd were depicted as an editorial decision to keep overall length of USAVG down).

Adjusting for the situation, it probably yields something like:

194th Arm'd Brigade -- XVIII Airborne
197th Mech Brigade -- XVIII Airborne

157th Mech Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- To III Corps in USAREUR
187th Inf Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- Iceland Defense Force
205th Inf Brigade (from 43rd Inf Div) -- To 6th ID(L) (their actual round out unit)

30th SIB (from 44th AD) -- Strat Reserve @ Benning
31st SAB (from 44th AD) -- Strat Reserve @ Knox
218th SIB (from 44th AD) -- to III Corps in USAREUR

Or something like that. Putting 30th and 31st brigades at Knox and Benning allows them to pretty directly cover down on the 194th/197th storylines in the T2K timeline, though I suppose by the time XVIII punches out for the desert they could have just taken 30th/31st with them and left 194th/197th in place, though it seems like the combat power of the regular army units would be preferable in a low density theater.

Now that I'm home and have the books!!!! The 2nd Edition Rulebook has PG1 pretty much as it was in 1991. The Sino-Soviet War kicks off in 1995, no mention of month, but the impression I get is Spring. June/July of 1996 is the time period of the initial German attack into Poland with November of that year seeing the first WP counterattacks, this is the period when the US/UK/Canadian forces join the Germans.

Switching to the RDF Sourcebook, the canon has 1988/90 opening with the death of Ayatollah Khomeyni's successor and the Iran Nowin movement gaining control of the country. This is the government that keys down the anti-US stance, ends the war with Iraq and starts to open back up to the West. 1st Edition rulebook had the Sino-Soviet War starting in 1993 with the Soviets invading Iran in 1995. 1996 has CENTCOM sending in a Special Forces Group as well as a ranger battalion. UK sends the MEFF and the French send in the GOLE (Foreign Legion).

1996 kicks off with Israel/Syria going into a stalemate after a bloody round of attack/counterattacks. The Iranian government splinters with the Tudeh/Pasdaran and Iran Nowin going for a short-lived civil war ending when the Soviets invade Iran in July. CENTCOM deploys headquarters to Saudi Arabia along with logistics elements in December. The first combat units enter SA at the start of January, 1997 with the 82nd ABN, another Special Forces Group and the Ranger Regiment (just how many battalions did the rangers raise in the twilight war?).

The US/Soviet forces first meet on the ground in May 1997.

With this timeline, even being adjusted for the offset in between 1st and 2nd Editions; the only possible logical reinforcements would be the 194th/197th brigades and possibly the 40th MID. The real argument then is if the US reactivates any divisions for service.

Damn, I hate giving up cherished plans!!!!!!

I still sat a ACR on the ground would be a hell of a lot more mobile than the 9th!!!!

HorseSoldier 03-16-2011 08:33 PM

Quote:

Now that I'm home and have the books!!!! The 2nd Edition Rulebook has PG1 pretty much as it was in 1991. The Sino-Soviet War kicks off in 1995, no mention of month, but the impression I get is Spring. June/July of 1996 is the time period of the initial German attack into Poland with November of that year seeing the first WP counterattacks, this is the period when the US/UK/Canadian forces join the Germans.
The 2nd edition timeline is nonsensical. 1st Ed is acceptably plausible from the perspective of 1985 or so, but 2nd edition just doesn't make any sense and was a mediocre attempt at updating the game without anyone having to make any real effort to think things through and provide the same level of internal consistency that made 1st edition such a strong product.

Quote:

With this timeline, even being adjusted for the offset in between 1st and 2nd Editions; the only possible logical reinforcements would be the 194th/197th brigades and possibly the 40th MID. The real argument then is if the US reactivates any divisions for service.
I can't see any additional divisions scratched together -- pre war there's the very significant task of trying to get the National Guard in a condition to actually fight a war. Once the war kicks off you've got less than a year before it goes nuclear, during which time there will be huge requirements for AFVs and personnel for battle casualty replacements. There's not going to be any significant slack in that mix to generate new divisions, judging by how close to zero combat power the late war USAR divisions are when formed.

Quote:

I still sat a ACR on the ground would be a hell of a lot more mobile than the 9th!!!!
An ACR probably has a bigger fuel footprint than all of 9th ID (Lt Mot) combined, and 9th ID's systems are probably more logistically forgiving of wear and tear from operational level manuevers in the Middle East. The whole division combined also lacks the compact buzzsaw elegance of an American ACR, but for screening and economy of force in a theater as big and empty as Iran the light motorized guys would be better than heavy cav (lots of space to trade for time, etc.).

Quote:

As far as I am aware, Iran and the west didn't have a lot of love for each other in the early to mid 90's. My guess is the late deployment to the area wasn't just due to lack of transportation, but also political manoeuvring - lots of background diplomacy/espionage/assassinations to ensure the government(s) of the day was friendly before putting boots on the ground.
Not so much Iran as Saudi -- the moment the war goes hot, I'd expect to see XVIII headed for Saudi Arabia post haste. The operations in Iran are more of an expeditionary effort after security of the Arabian peninsula is squared away.

Legbreaker 03-16-2011 09:01 PM

That's basically the way I see it as well - the oil fields of proven friendly (or at least not overtly hostile) need securing as soon as possible to allow the war effort elsewhere not to grind to a fueless halt. Once that's done those units in the area (whoever they may be) can be pushed forward towards the enemy in an effort to both increase the buffer zone and with luck acquire control over more fuel production areas (and deny them to the enemy).

Louied 03-16-2011 10:53 PM

Ok all this is what I have for IRL planned deployments circa 1988-1989 gleened from the following: (along with various websites)
1)Strategic Geography : NATO, the Warsaw Pact, and the Superpowers
http://www.amazon.com/Strategic-Geog...6&sr=8-3-spell
2)Inside the US Army
http://www.amazon.com/Inside-US-Army...0333472&sr=1-1
3)MANEUVER AND FIREPOWER: THE EVOLUTION OF DIVISIONS AND SEPARATE BRIGADES
http://www.history.army.mil/books/Lineage/M-F/index.htm

1 ID- VII Corps REFORGER
2 ID- Eighth Army ROK
3 ID- VII Corps
4 ID- V Corps REFORGER
5 ID- III Corps REFORGER
6 ID- TF Alaska, secondary to ROK
7 ID- to Eighth Army ROK
8 ID- V Corps
9 ID- coverting to Mech, SSR (L) POMCUS stocks in Cheshire UK, most likely deployment to Denmark/ Southern Norway
10 ID- AFNorth- Northern Norway
24 ID- XVIII Corps
25 ID- to Eighth Army ROK
82 Abn D- XVIII Corps
101 Abn D-XVIII Corps
1 Cav D- III Corps REFORGER
1 AD- VII Corps
2 AD- III Corps REFORGER
3 AD- V Corps
2 ACR- VII Corps
3 ACR- III Corps
11 ACR- V Corps
193 SIB- SOUTHCOM Panama
194 SAB- XVIII Corps
197 SIB- XVIII Corps
Berlin Bde- US Army, Europe
177 SAB- OPFOR Ft. Irwin

26 ID-I Corps/Strategic reserve
28 ID-I Corps/Strategic reserve
29 ID- Seventh Army
35 ID- VII Corps ?
38 ID- SOUTHCOM Reserve
40 ID- V Corps ?
42 ID- I Corps/Strategic reserve
47 ID- TF Alaska
49 AD- III Corps ?
50 AD-I Corps/Strategic reserve
107 ACR-I Corps/Strategic reserve
278 ACR- XVIII Corps
27 IB- RO 10 ID
29 SIB- to Eighth Army ROK (training association with 25 ID)
30 SIB- Seventh Army
30 SAB-Seventh Army
31 SAB-Seventh Army
32 SIB-TF Alaska
33 SIB- supports Infantry School
39 SIB- XVIII Corps
41 SIB- to Eighth Army ROK (training association with 7 ID)
45 SIB- III Corps (rear battle mission)
48 IB- RO 24 ID
53 SIB-SOUTHCOM Reserve
73 SIB-Seventh Army (rear battle mission)
81 IB- RO 9 ID
92 SIB-SOUTHCOM Reserve
116 CB- RO 4 ID
155 AB- RO 1 Cav D
163 SAB- ?
207 IG- TF Alaska
218 SIB-Seventh Army (training association with 1 ID)
256 IB- RO 5 ID

157 SIB- ?
187 SIB- Iceland Defence Force
205 IB- RO 6 ID

Hope someone can fill this out better or at least fill in what I have missing.

HorseSoldier 03-17-2011 01:06 AM

Part of the problem with the GDW Order of Battle is how casually they just miracled new Corps into existence, when any and all of the various support units and artillery and such just didn't exist anywhere in the US OOB for a lot of them.

95th Rifleman 03-17-2011 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32304)
The 2nd edition timeline is nonsensical. 1st Ed is acceptably plausible from the perspective of 1985 or so, but 2nd edition just doesn't make any sense and was a mediocre attempt at updating the game without anyone having to make any real effort to think things through and provide the same level of internal consistency that made 1st edition such a strong product.

That's pretty much how I view it. I run my games using the 1st ed timeline as it makes allot more sense.

Legbreaker 03-17-2011 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32313)
Part of the problem with the GDW Order of Battle is how casually they just miracled new Corps into existence, when any and all of the various support units and artillery and such just didn't exist anywhere in the US OOB for a lot of them.

They did however have roughly ten years from the moment of writing to when these units were supposed to be deployed. We really have no idea what happened in that period (and really don't need to). All we as players, GMs, etc need is to know they exist where and when they do.
The deployments and existence of certain units doesn't have to make a lot of sense in relation to the "real world" because it's just a game.

Abbott Shaull 03-17-2011 06:35 AM

For once I will go with Leg on this.

The next thing by time we start the game in t2k, many of the units that would of supported those Corps would have been absorbed by other units. Either the Corps or Army directly or spread out to the Divisions and Brigades as replacements.

So that doesn't really bother me much that the units and hardware needed to support all of the extra Corps and Armies didn't exist. Much can be said about the unified German Army and again the Soviet Union military forces to a lesser degree.. By the design of the game Corps, Armies, Army Groups, and Fronts have all lost their meaning in reality. I think this is one of the reason why many of the Divisions were down to such low numbers where they could barely exist as single combat Brigade on NATO side of things let alone as an actual Division.

Adm.Lee 03-17-2011 01:20 PM

To LouieD:thanks for the outline, there were some new things there for me.
- Notably that 9th motorized division had a POMCUS set in UK? That's the first I've heard of it. Do you know if that was for its LM organization, or standard infantry?

Regarding "new" corps HQs written up by GDW.
I was looking at another (massive) NATO OB file that I pulled from this list earlier. Some notes from that:
- IX Corps HQ (and presumably some support elements) are in Japan, I assume to run the ground fight in Korea once the 7th & 25th Divisions are flown in.
- I note that a "standard" corps has 1 brigade each of MP, air defense, and engineers, plus an armored cavalry regiment. In the National Guard & Reserve listings, there are 4 ACR, 3+ AD brigades and 8 MP brigades. Knowing that assumptions aren't worth much, let's work with the Army planned to set up 4 new Corps HQs when at full strength. Seeing as how all of the active Corps had odd numbers, I'd bet on them being II, IV, VI, and VIII Corps, all of which have "good" histories.
- For that matter, I see 21 Reserve and Guard field artillery brigades, when 1-3 are expected to support each corps. I also note 8 active brigades, so that comes close to a planning total of ten corps.

Aside: as I said elsewhere, I am in a PBEM game of GDW's Third World War boardgame. Now I want to try the Norway game with 10th & 9th US divisions.
Adding artillery would be fun, too, but I'd need to do a lot of Soviets, too.

HorseSoldier 03-17-2011 02:13 PM

I don't know. It's pretty clear in USAVG that a lot of the Corps involved weren't pre-planned, but thrown together once the war begins (i.e. X Corps in Alaska). I think this is an artifact of GDW thinking that there had to be a Corps HQ for any conglomeration of two or more divisions. In the case of Alaska, since there just aren't any other assets to the Corps, I'm of the opinion that CG 10th Mountain got handed a second hat as CG X Corps and told to have fun.

Quote:

For that matter, I see 21 Reserve and Guard field artillery brigades, when 1-3 are expected to support each corps. I also note 8 active brigades, so that comes close to a planning total of ten corps.
A portion of those were intended to provide flexibility to commanders above the Corps level to plus up firepower to units in the attack or defense that needed the extra hitting power.

In the Twilight War a lot of those extra divisions in theater that are tossed into made up Corps would likely have been theater reserves that were attached out to subordinate Corps to allow rotating other units out of the line to reconstitute, etc.

Louied 03-17-2011 03:17 PM

I didn't know about the POMCUS stock in the UK either until I read 'Strategic Geography' , which states only that there was POMCUS stocks for a 18,000 man division. I have also read that the Army could no longer justify the 9th as the HTTB div. as Congress kept cutting weapons systems they wanted.... So the late 80's plan was to convert it to Mech (deleting a active bde & adding the WA ARNG's 81 Bde, 2 Armd/2 mech as a RO) and assign it as SACEUR's Strategic Reserve (Land) based in the UK. The most likely deployments were to reinforce the FRG/Danish corps in Schleswig-Holstein or Southern Norway.

As per Maneuver and Firepower, the 116 ACR & 163 ACR were converted to Armd Bde.'s as there was no need for them in the Army's force structure based on five Corps (I - 107 ACR, IIII- 3 ACR, V- 11 ACR, VII- 2 ACR, XVIII- 278 ACR)

dragoon500ly 03-17-2011 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32345)
I don't know. It's pretty clear in USAVG that a lot of the Corps involved weren't pre-planned, but thrown together once the war begins (i.e. X Corps in Alaska). I think this is an artifact of GDW thinking that there had to be a Corps HQ for any conglomeration of two or more divisions. In the case of Alaska, since there just aren't any other assets to the Corps, I'm of the opinion that CG 10th Mountain got handed a second hat as CG X Corps and told to have fun.



A portion of those were intended to provide flexibility to commanders above the Corps level to plus up firepower to units in the attack or defense that needed the extra hitting power.

What a lot of people are not aware of is that the ACRs have extra staff to allow them to control a wide range of attachments. 2ACR in PG1, just to name one example, had an entire field artillery brigade attached to it for the opening breach of the Iraqi lines. It was quite normal in the various REFORGERs to attach a armd, mech or attack helicopter battalion. When 2ACR was pulling border guard duty in Germany, a MI battalion was attached. Doesn't seem much, I know, but a brigade normally was enough staff to control between a max of 4-5 battalions. An ACR has enough to control 8-12 battalions. Yet another reason why ACRs are just so damn useful to have around.

Panther Al 03-17-2011 05:50 PM

Yet another reason why getting rid of the ACR's by making them a cookie cutter battalion is rather insane.

Once again, flexibility is dropped in order to give it... um... "flexibility". Yeah. About that...

Adm.Lee 03-17-2011 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier (Post 32345)
I don't know. It's pretty clear in USAVG that a lot of the Corps involved weren't pre-planned, but thrown together once the war begins (i.e. X Corps in Alaska). I think this is an artifact of GDW thinking that there had to be a Corps HQ for any conglomeration of two or more divisions. In the case of Alaska, since there just aren't any other assets to the Corps, I'm of the opinion that CG 10th Mountain got handed a second hat as CG X Corps and told to have fun.

Well, it is a rule of military thumb that once you have at least two of something, you need a higher commander of some kind, to provide a clear chain of command.

In the case of the X Corps in Alaska, I agree that one was probably thrown together.

And I wonder if the separate brigades that were formed into the 44th division was some idea of USAREUR. When a 4-star general says, "I don't need three brigades, I want a division!"... he gets a division. With a slapped-together staff and supporting arms, of course.

Also, in my previous guesstimate, I overlooked that 1 of the ACRs was already spoken for, as the 107th is allocated to I Corps. FWIW, one of my wargaming pals was a battery commander in that regiment, he thought they were tasked for Korea.

Legbreaker 03-17-2011 08:00 PM

The best laid plans only last until contact with the enemy. From there on it's all about appropriate action and response to the unfolding situation.
Yes some units were slated to go to certain places, but that doesnt' mean that the situation at the time meant that's exactly what happened. An enemy offensive on one place may mean the unit loading up to go another place ends up retasked in transit.

raketenjagdpanzer 03-17-2011 08:56 PM

Does anyone know where the 377th Military Intelligence fits? Or what units are based in and around Orlando?

I ask because I'm working on a sort of "Orlando Sourcebook" for my hopefully upcoming campaign. I've got it that most of the fallout from Tampa/St. Pete went south of Orlando, and most of what Patrick got blew out to sea.

This leaves Orlando relatively intact, and a jewel for New America to try and seize.

The Orlando of 2000 has a population right around 22000, most concentrated in the downtown area, near the hospital district, and the rest at the Orlando NTC (and literally right next door is the 377th's headquarters).

Whatever I end up calling the unit - probably it'll wind up as a "Joint Task Force Operations Area" of a few hundred soldiers, here's a very rough TO&E:

375+ troops
1000+ dependents
2x M113A1 (see below)
2x LAV-100
2x LAV-150
2x HEMTT
1x UH1 Iroquois
?x HMMWV

Post strike, the skeleton crew and cadets at the NTC were quickly put on civil support duties as were the skeleton crew of the 377th, and un-deployed personnel stationed at various R&D and support posts near the University of Central Florida and several military contractors based around the city proper, as well as Army reservists and USMC reservists.

Through the looting and riots that followed, coupled with desertions of personnel trying to either reach more distant homes or escape the urban chaos, the provisional "Sunshine Brigade" settled at around 375 personnel plus dependents. The unit is stationed at the Orlando NTC and is a frequent target of harassment by various factions throughout Florida, not the least of which is New America (See Into the Howling Wilderness).

The Brigade is, curiously, "armor heavy": Florida State Troopers maintained a barracks in south Orlando and the motor pool included a crisis response unit consisting of two LAV-150s. Likewise, the Orlando Police Department maintained two LAV-100s. Both are now in possession of the Brigade, traded in exchange for the Brigade's assistance and overwatch in keeping the city safe. But even more curious than these four armored cars are the two M113s. Three weeks and four days after TDM, these two vehicles (at the time in NASA emergency vehicle livery of white and pale green) arrived at the NTC carrying personnel and dependents from the now ruined Patrick AFB. The drivers had risked serious radiation exposure to retrieve the two APCs and escape the devastation to reach Orlando.

While the Commando scout cars and HMMWVs operate regularly, the M113s are kept under wraps. Both have had pintle-mounted .50 caliber guns installed. While threatening radio propaganda from New America have directly mentioned the Commandos, they either choose to ignore or do not know about the M113s.

Finally the Sunshine Brigade is in possession of a true treasure: a working helicopter. A single UH1 is based on the NTC grounds. The UH1 came from the Lockheed-Martin facility in East Orlando. It is still flightworthy as on the day of the initial strikes, it was in a specially designed hangar undergoing EW testing on the airframe, and was thus insulated from the EMP. Many of the personnel who stayed on with the Brigade are Army Aviation and thus there is no shortage of qualified crew. The UH1 has a door-mounted M134 mini-gun on the portside, and a sling-mounted M60 starboard. There is plentiful avgas at Herndon Municipal Airport, although it has to be trucked a few miles through hostile territory. New America sorely wants the aircraft intact, as well as the avgas, and attempts take Orlando have been mounted before. The Sunshine Brigade's mobility and resources have thus far won out, however.

Be gentle, this is an alpha copy.

dragoon500ly 03-18-2011 05:24 AM

A lot of the units in the FL/GA area are assigned to Third Army/CENTCOM if they are Regulars or NATO reinforcement if they are Reserve/National Guard. Tampa, at one time, was CENTCOM headquarters. Hope this helps!

dragoon500ly 03-18-2011 08:25 AM

Part II
 
Now that we have pretty well hashed out the Middle East, let's take a look at
Korea.

According to the American Combat Vehicle Guide, the Eight U.S. Army consists of:

II Amphibious Corps
4th Marine Division (23rd Marines only) [400 mne, 7 M60A3]
5th Marine Division [2,000 men, 9 M-60A3]
6th Marine Division (16 Marines only) [600 men, 4 M-60A3]
II Corps
7th Light Infantry Division (1st Brigade only) [500 men]
26th Light Infantry Division [5,000 men, 13 LAV-75]
45th Infantry Division [2,000 men]
VI Corps
2nd Infantry Division [2,000 men, 4 M-1]
25th Light Infantry Division [600 men]
41st Infantry Division [2,000 men]
163rd Armored Cavalry Regiment [300 men, 4 LAV-75]

or a total of 3,000 Marines and 12,400 Soldiers in nine divisions and one ACR.

Anybody running any OOBs for the Korean Peninsula?

Abbott Shaull 03-18-2011 10:41 PM

Eighth US Army

II Amphibious Corps
3rd Marine Division [1,200 men, 5 M1]
5th Marine Division [2,000 men, 9 M60A3]
6th Marine Division [1,600 men, 8 M60A3]
II Corps
7th Light Infantry Division [1,500 men, 3 M60A3]
23rd Infantry Division [1,500 men, 5 M1]
45th Infantry Division [2,000 men, 2 M60A3]
4th Armor Cavalry Regiment[500 men, 2 M60A3]
VI Corps
2nd Infantry Division [2,000 men, 4 M1]
25th Light Infantry Division [1,200 men, 5 M60A3]
41st Infantry Division [2,000 men, 3 M60A3]
163rd Armored Cavalry Regiment [300 men, 4 M60A3]

I feel that the 3rd Marine Division would of been committed to Korea before sent to the Middle East.

Also replaced the 26th Light Infantry with the 23rd Infantry Division which would be formed in Japan before moving to Korea.

The 4th Armor Cavalry Regiment would be new formation that would be rushed to Korea to give both Army Corps their heavy formation.

Just some thoughts.

Legbreaker 03-19-2011 08:31 AM

For Korea, Australia might be able to send over one infantry Brigade which would likely be 9 Brigade. It's current IRL strength is only about 35% but given 12 months it should be ready for action. I picked 9 Bde because it contains the southernmost units in the country and most acclimatised. Most other units train in the tropics while at least 12/40 Bn and 16 Field Battery know all about mountainous terrain and sub zero temps being drawn from Tasmania.

The heaviest armour is the 9 M113A1 MRVs (M113s with Scorpion turrets) although I'm tempted to add a troop of Leopard 1s.

9 Brigade
HQ 9 Brigade (Army Reserve)
3/9 Light Horse (South Australian Mounted Rifles) (APC) (M113) (Army Reserve)
M113 Regimental HQ Troop (M577)
Sabre squadron, A (M113AS4 x14)
Sabre squadron, B (M113AS4 x14)
Combat Support Squadron (M113A1 MRV x9, M113AS4 x3)
6/13 Field Regiment (Army Reserve)
16 Field Battery (M2A2 105mm howitzer x6, Unimog 1700L LWB x6)
48 Field Battery (M2A2 105mm howitzer x6, Unimog 1700L LWB x6)
3 Field Squadron (Combat Engineers) (Army Reserve)

144 Signal Squadron (9 Command Support Regiment) (Army Reserve)

10/27 Battalion, The Royal South Australian Regiment (Army Reserve)

12/40 Battalion, The Royal Tasmanian Regiment (Army Reserve)
A Company
B Company
C (Training) Company
Support Company
Mortar platoon (F2 81mm Mortar x4)
Heavy Weapons platoon (M60 SFMG x 6, M2 Carl Gustav x6
Assault Pioneer Platoon (weapons as per rifle platoon plus specialist equipment)
9 Combat Service Support Battalion (Army Reserve)
Transport Company
Health Company
Supply Company
Maintenance Company
Logistic Support Company
Still working on the orbat, but enough to get an idea of capabilities I think.
The rest of the Australian forces (besides a handful of naval assets) would be fully engaged against Indonesia or occupied in civil duties.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.