Over a long period of history, units have merged and some even seperated years, even decades later. 5/7 RAR (Australian mechanised battalion) is a prime example having previously been two seperate battalions (5 & 7 obviously) but merging due to military cutbacks and personnel shortages. There are many more examples of similar mergings.
The military are very hesitant to simply throw away unit histories, and so merge instead of eliminate.
While it is stated in cannon that certain units had limited vehicles, etc (the 10 M1E2s of 3-70 armor for example), this state of affairs was at the end of an offensive that had kicked off some time before. It is conceivable that some weapon systems and vehicles had been lost in the precceeding weeks but not enough time for a reorganisation of remaining personnel and equipment (especcialy so in the last few days of the 5th).
Therefore we are not necessarily required to see the 5th as the template for US divisions in the latter stages of the war - the US 8th ID as described in the Eastern European Sourcebook might actually be a better unit to look at with all heavy armour concentrated into one company sized unit, infantry reorganised, artillery concentrated, etc.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.
Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"
Mors ante pudorem
|