Good point, Web. I hadn't thought about the dramatic downsizing of unit staffs. That would free up more officers for line duty.
Web, I agree about not adding too may captured enemy to NATO TOEs. I figure, though, that one or two wouldn't be pusing it too much. On the other hand, for some of the German units, captured Soviet-made MBTs are listed in the sourcebooks. So, there's a bit of a quandry there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13
I spent literally months trying to reconcile the size and equipment of the 8th Mechanized. Given the equipment that unit should be at least 3 times larger IMO. To me it was like they took the equipment of a prewar division and divided it by around 14 (more for helicopters less for IFVs). An interesting thought except when you consider that a prewar division had around 18,000 men and the 8th currently has 1000. That means that it has more firepower man for man than a prewar division.
That fact makes me reluctant to consider the 8th to be the cornerstone of any thoughts on reorganization and I am not sure the author thought things fully through.
|
The 8th ID does seem like an anomaly, even for 2000. Looking through the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide though, there are a couple more units with similarly anemic listed strengths. For example...
4th ID (Mech.): 1000 men; 8 M1s & 10M1A1s
I don't know if this is helpful, but some of the listed Brigade strengths may give some clues as to unit TOEs below division level.
1st Brigade, 40th ID (Mech): 400 men; 4 M60A4 & 2 M1
2nd Brigade, 2nd Armored: 300 men; 1 M1, 3 M1A1, 1 M1A1
vs.
2nd Armored Regiment: 100 men; 2 M1A2 & 6 LAV-75
It's pretty much all over the place so I guess anything goes. Maybe the designers wanted it that way since it gives the GM a lot of flexibility.