US National Guard books (1985-1989) recommendations?

[dude_uk]

Hey guys.

Just writing to as if anyone has any good book reccomendations regarding the US National Guard of the late 80's (Our relevant time period).

I'm interested in two kinds of books. The first, any sort of overall 'idiots-guide'. Notes on organisation, training and day-to-day running. That sort of thing.

The second, more detail on NG Armoured units. I'd like to know more about how a part time tank unit operates. Not so much on the equipment. (Which would be mid-90s stuff anyway) But as above, training etc.

Thanks!

[James Langham]

Something I found useful when I was working on National Guard write ups was Harold Coyle's "They Are Soldiers(? - not got it to hand). NG unit deploys to Israeli/Palestinian border to try and keep the peace. Wrong era (2000s) but good for the mentality.

Bear in mind by 2000 however all units will be basically heavily made up of draftees (although the initial make up may affect how they operate to a degree).

[cavtroop]

I was in a NG Armored Cavalry unit from 93-96ish (when they reflagged to arty, I told them to F off ).

I was a track commander on an M901 ITV. The tankers had M60A3's and us scouts had M113's and M901's. We also had a mortar platoon along with the HQ guys. It's a little later than the timeframe you want, but the equipment and training were the same, shoot some questions and I'll see what I can remember

[dragoon500ly]

I was stationed at Fort Knox as a Gunnery Instructor during this time and had the chance to observe several NG companies rotating through the gunnery program.

On the technical side, the NG crews had a quite decent level of skill, they suffer less from crew rotation than the RA, on average the NG kept crews together for 5-6 years compared to 2-3. Crew drills were at least as good and some cases superior to the RA.

In the field, the RA had a greater advantage due to being able to get "down and dirty" far more often than the NG. Depending on the unit, many companies were restricted (budgets and lack of maneuver areas) to sand-table exercises or even reduced to walking the crews through a nearby park or field. Platoon level maneuvers were adequate, company and higher was at a noticeably lower level than the RA

The general view during this time was that the NG would need at least 45-60 days of intenstive training to bring them up to RA standards.

With the NG it really depended on the state, SC/NC/TX/MS/LA units tended to be at a much higher capability than the NY/NJ/PA units for example. But then these guard units had round-out and NATO missions and were able to get more funding and time for training and equipment.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

I was stationed at Fort Knox as a Gunnery Instructor during this time and had the chance to observe several NG companies rotating through the gunnery program.

On the technical side, the NG crews had a quite decent level of skill, they suffer less from crew rotation than the RA, on average the NG kept crews together for 5-6 years compared to 2-3. Crew drills were at least as good and some cases superior to the RA.

In the field, the RA had a greater advantage due to being able to get "down and dirty" far more often than the NG. Depending on the unit, many companies were restricted (budgets and lack of maneuver areas) to sand-table exercises or even reduced to walking the crews through a nearby park or field. Platoon level maneuvers were adequate, company and higher was at a noticeably lower level than the RA

The general view during this time was that the NG would need at least 45-60 days of intenstive training to bring them up to RA standards.

With the NG it really depended on the state, SC/NC/TX/MS/LA units tended to be at a much higher capability than the NY/NJ/PA units for example. But then these guard units had round-out and NATO missions and were able to get more funding and time for training and equipment.

I'd agree with everything here, it mirrors my view from the inside as well. We as a unit did as well as we could with the extremely limited budgets and time restraints we had. During a typical drill weekend, we wouldn't get to the Cape training area until noon time or so. Then, a couple of hours to draw vehicles etc, we'd finally hit the maneuver area around 3pm in the afternoon. We'd do our thing until late in the evening, usually have some night maneuver of some kind (mounted or dismounted). In the am, it was two hours at the birdbath, another hour or so doing vehicle maintenance/turning in the vehicles, then the long bus ride back to the armory.

During the two week stint in the summer we got about 8 days 'in the box' or so. For the tankers, a large part of that was spent on the gunnery range. Us scouts spent alot of time running STX type lanes, though it was all self-run and evaluated, we got no support from anyone. Also, in the entire 5+ years I spent in the NG, not once did we do weapons qualifications. We did some familiarization fire with the MGs, and even once did a TOW live fire (mine malfunctioned, I was SO PISSED), but no weapons qual at all.

So in short, we knew our stuff, we were just incredibly rusty. Towards the end of my time with the Cav unit, we had zero budget for anything (literally). We'd spend the drill weekends in the armory running sand tables, but mostly fixing up the armory and other bullsh*t like that. MA then decided they didn't have the money to upgrade us to M1's and Bradleys, so they disbanded us. Most of the tankers went up to the VTARNG (they had M1s). Most of the scouts retrained to 13 series MOS (arty) that our unit reflagged as. I wanted nothing to do with that (and was getting fat and out of shape, but that's another thread ) so I just got out.

TL;DR - NG guys are highly motivated and fairly skilled. The skills just don't get used much, so are typically very rusty and will take some time (45-60 days is probably a good guess, as dragon said) to get 'up to speed'.

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

With the NG it really depended on the state, SC/NC/TX/MS/LA units tended to be at a much higher capability than the NY/NJ/PA units for example. But then these guard units had round-out and NATO missions and were able to get more funding and time for training and equipment.

This was the time of the NG brigades in RA REFORGER units too I believe. They learned the lesson in ODS when the 'best' brigades were not ready, nor in some cases with individuals willing to get ready for deployment in the allotted time. Recalling the 'mutiny' of the Mississippi or was it Lousyana tank unit that resulted in the court martial of at least one of the mutineers.

I was in ND NG in the late 70s. As the only MP company in the state, and full of Nam vets, most of them combat vets to boot. Went on the ARTEP for summer training. They stopped out training after three days of scheduled five days as we had exceeded all tasks by that time and the state did not want us to be upgraded in readiness.??? Yep it depends on the state, or at least use to.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

This was the time of the NG brigades in RA REFORGER units too I believe. They learned the lesson in ODS when the 'best' brigades were not ready, nor in some cases with individuals willing to get ready for deployment in the allotted time. Recalling the 'mutiny' of the Mississippi or was it Lousyana tank unit that resulted in the court martial of at least one of the mutineers.

I think you're talking about the 256th in Louisiana: http://articles.latimes.com/1991-02-...national-guard

I was active duty at the time, and this made BIG news in military circles.

[dude_uk]

[

]Something I found useful when I was working on National Guard write ups was Harold Coyle's "They Are Soldiers(? - not got it to hand). NG unit deploys to Israeli/Palestinian border to try and keep the peace. Wrong era (2000s) but good for the mentality.[

He actually has a better reference book Sword Point . Features a NG unit fighting the Soviets in Iran. Its where I wanted to find out more!



Thanks for the information guys! The first hand accounts are great. Nice to know the Brits aren't the only ones starved of funds

But taking up on your offer for questions:

1) Once "Joe average" (Male, early 20's, 9 to 5 Blue collar job) Decides he wants to play with tanks. How long did it take for him to go from man off the street to National Guardsman deploying on REFORGER? How many courses?

2) Were all National Guard Armoured units earmarked for West Germany?

3) Once 100% trained, what is the training he must attend to continue being a member?

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by dude_uk

[
Thanks for the information guys! The first hand accounts are great. Nice to know the Brits aren't the only ones starved of funds

But taking up on your offer for questions:

1) Once "Joe average" (Male, early 20's, 9 to 5 Blue collar job) Decides he wants to play with tanks. How long did it take for him to go from man off the street to National Guardsman deploying on REFORGER? How many courses?

2) Were all National Guard Armoured units earmarked for West Germany?

3) Once 100% trained, what is the training he must attend to continue being a member?

Happy to answer!

1) 17 weeks or so. My 19D training (Cav Scout, not tanker) was 17 weeks start to finish, I know the tankers at the time had a very similar timeframe (they were in the barrack right down the street from us at Ft. Knox). Coming out OSUT (One Station Unit Training), you were still green and raw, but you were at your unit then and fully deployable.

2) Don't know the answer to this. Some of the NG Armored units - mostly in the south and west - were called 'round out units'. I believe they'd form one brigade of an Active Duty Army Unit, I don't know the specifics though. My Cav unit was the division Cavalry Squadron for a National Guard Infantry Division, we weren't 'affiliated' in any way with a regular army unit.

3) One weekend a month, two weeks a year until the end of your commitment. Sometimes a guy would take an extra two weeks during the year to attend leadership training for promotion or some other military school, but that was rare. Usually any leadership training/schooling was taken in lieu of your normal 2 week annual commitment.

[Adm.Lee]

I'll take a shot at 2), using stuff I've culled from web sources. Short answer, only the 2 NG mech brigades that were to fill out the 4th and 5th MDs would have gone through REFORGER.

The Guard had 2 Armored Divisions (49th & 50th), it's hard to see where else they would have gone, other than Europe. In T2k, the 49th stayed around Chicago until it returned to Texas in '98.

Three mech divisions were allocated to Europe, and were deployed in T2k's timeline.

Two armored brigades-- ditto, in T2k, part of the made-up 44th AD.

Two brigades all had roundout positions in divisions that REFORGER-ed. 48th Mech Brigade was to roundout the 24th Mech division, the heavy element of CentCom.

There's also two (or four) ACRs, at least one was allotted to Europe, and in T2k, three of them went.

Also, each of the 9 "leg" infantry divisions of the Guard should have their own tank battalion.

[dragoon500ly]

The listing below reflects the NG units and their real-life intended missions:

26th Infantry Division, MA-NG
28th Infantry Division, PA-NG
38th Infantry Division, IN/MI-NG
42nd Infantry Division, NY-NG
47th Infantry Division, MN/IA-NG
These were pure infantry outfits with 1 tk, 1 mech and 7 inf battalions. Generally had Korean/Vietnam-era equipment and were considered to be low-readiness divisions. Not intended for service in NATO, not even intended for overseas duties! There were reports that these were intended for Home Defense only.

29th Infantry Division (Light) VA/MD-NG
Forming during this period and in search of a mission. Was supposed to be the NG "roundout" for the RDF, Norway reinforcement, Korean reinforcement, you get the idea.

35th Infantry Division (Mechanized) NE/KS/KY-NG
40th Infantry Division (Mechanized) CA-NG
The 35th MID had a NATO role (60-90d). The 40th MID, depending on who was in office, was either NATO or Persian Gulf.

49th Armored Division TX-NG
50th Armored Division NY/NJ-NG
The 49th had a NATO role (60-90d) and the 50th was also slatted for NATO (90-120d).

The Separate Infantry Brigades:
29th IB HI-NG was augmentation for the 25th LID
33rd IB IL-NG was another stay-at-home unit
39th IB AR-NG was affiliated with the 101st AAD and was considered to be a future RDF unit.
41st IB OR-NG was augmentation for the 7th LID
45th IB OK-NG was a possible NATO unit
53rd IB FL-NG was a stay-at-home unit
73rd IB OH-NG was a stay-at-home unit
92nd IB PR-NG was a stay-at-home unit
207th IB (Scout) AK-NG was a stay-at-home unit

The Mechanized Infantry Brigades
30th MIB NC-NG was a NATO unit (45-60d)
32nd MIB WI-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d), possible Norway
48th MIB GA-NG was augmentation for the 24th MID
81st MIB WA-NG was augmentation for the 9th ID(M)
218th IB SC-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
256th IB LA-NG was augmentation for the 5th MID

The Armored Brigades
30th AB TN-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
31st AB AL-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
155th AB MS-NG was augmentation for the 1st CD

The Armored Cavalry Regiments
107th ACR OH-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
116th ACR ID-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
163rd ACR MT-NG was "slotted" for Korea, but would have been most likely committed to NATO
278th ACR TN-NG yet another NATO unit (60-90d)

The "at-home" units were intended to be shifted to cover the border with Mexico and to cover FL and PR from any attempt by Cuba to liberate those areas. There are a couple of articles that the 26th and 47th IDs may have been shipped to Alaska. Considering that these two divisions had little or no aviation support and only 2.5 & 5-ton trucks for transport, they would have been almost immobile in the Alaskan countryside. I would have to stamp that article as a very low probability...

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

Happy to answer!

1) 17 weeks or so. My 19D training (Cav Scout, not tanker) was 17 weeks start to finish, I know the tankers at the time had a very similar timeframe (they were in the barrack right down the street from us at Ft. Knox). Coming out OSUT (One Station Unit Training), you were still green and raw, but you were at your unit then and fully deployable.

2) Don't know the answer to this. Some of the NG Armored units - mostly in the south and west - were called 'round out units'. I believe they'd form one brigade of an Active Duty Army Unit, I don't know the specifics though. My Cav unit was the division Cavalry Squadron for a National Guard Infantry Division, we weren't 'affiliated' in any way with a regular army unit.

3) One weekend a month, two weeks a year until the end of your commitment. Sometimes a guy would take an extra two weeks during the year to attend leadership training for promotion or some other military school, but that was rare. Usually any leadership training/schooling was taken in lieu of your normal 2 week annual commitment.

Tankers would have the 17 week OSUT course. When I went through OSUT, roughly half the platoon was NG, One intresting fact was that the Training Company had 16 M-60A1s for the RAs and a single M-48A5 for the NG to train on (mostly to show the differences between the two). Training was roughly the same, although the NG (in 1977 at least) also had two days of riot-control training.

The augmentation or round-outs tended to have younger personnel assigned and were able to get training funds from DOD to help increase their readiness. The 155th Armd Bde (MS-NG) was the only I ever worked with for any length of time and they would do 3-4 days a month and 3 weeks a year, including a stint at the Fort Irwin NTC, one of the very few Guard units to rotate through during the 1980s. It was organzied with 2 tk, 1 mech and 1 FA Bn with an attached troop of cavalry and a engineer company (the later were "augmentation" for the 1st Cavs engr/cav units, but both of those were at full strength. There was a lot of arguement going into Desert Storm that the roundouts could not perform their mission, this was the reason that the 197th MIB replaced the 48th MIB GA-NG in the 24th ID as well as the 1st Cav leaving the 155th at home. Both units argued that they were mission capable, but I would have to go with the DOD decision, neither unit had as much field time as the RA units.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

The listing below reflects the NG units and their real-life intended missions:

26th Infantry Division, MA-NG
28th Infantry Division, PA-NG
38th Infantry Division, IN/MI-NG
42nd Infantry Division, NY-NG
47th Infantry Division, MN/IA-NG
These were pure infantry outfits with 1 tk, 1 mech and 7 inf battalions. Generally had Korean/Vietnam-era equipment and were considered to be low-readiness divisions. Not intended for service in NATO, not even intended for overseas duties! There were reports that these were intended for Home Defense only.

<snip> There are a couple of articles that the 26th and 47th IDs may have been shipped to Alaska. Considering that these two divisions had little or no aviation support and only 2.5 & 5-ton trucks for transport, they would have been almost immobile in the Alaskan countryside. I would have to stamp that article as a very low probability...

I was in the 26th ID (again, mid 90s). We had about zero cold weather gear, and I never heard about Alaska at all. Cant speak for the rest of the division (never had any contact with anyone outside the Squadron), but we were fully mechanized Cavalry. We were FOR SURE a low-readiness unit - in the mid 90s we still had M113's, M60 tanks and M16A1's for goodness sake. Overall my experience there was a bit of a joke, compared to my active duty experience - I always thought that if we got called up for anything other than disaster relief we'd be in a world of hurt just from an equipment standpoint, let alone training.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by cavtroop

I was in the 26th ID (again, mid 90s). We had about zero cold weather gear, and I never heard about Alaska at all. Cant speak for the rest of the division (never had any contact with anyone outside the Squadron), but we were fully mechanized Cavalry. We were FOR SURE a low-readiness unit - in the mid 90s we still had M113's, M60 tanks and M16A1's for goodness sake. Overall my experience there was a bit of a joke, compared to my active duty experience - I always thought that if we got called up for anything other than disaster relief we'd be in a world of hurt just from an equipment standpoint, let alone training.

LOL! And here I was thinking that the Infantry Journal would have decent info!! Thanks for confirming my own thoughts on it, now, can any one confirm the readiness of the 47th ID during this time period?

[schnickelfritz]

All-
Is there anything out there that would show US Army Reserve Mechanized Infantry and Armored formations...if they even existed...in the 80's-90's?

I was at Ft Custer in Michigan a number of times from 99-03 and remember seeing some stuff posted there for an Armored unit.

Thanks!
Dave

[Webstral]

I had rather the same experience as Cavtroop in the California National Guard. Upwards of 90% of my light infantry unit had active duty time. About 75% of the unit had been infantry in the Regular Army. (I was an exception. My RA time was in combat engineering and MI.) The reason we performed at all was due to the experience base. Certainly, the Title 32 training* was hopelessly inadequate. Our Title 10 training# was not that much better. The most valuable stuff we learned during our train-up happened off the Big Army’s clock, when the guys with the right knowledge base taught us what they had learned in their previous lives. Very sad.

(*) Title 32 refers to a National Guard unit under the control of its parent state
# Title 10 refers to a National Guard unit mobilized for federal service

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

The listing below reflects the NG units and their real-life intended missions:

47th Infantry Division, MN/IA-NG
These were pure infantry outfits with 1 tk, 1 mech and 7 inf battalions. Generally had Korean/Vietnam-era equipment and were considered to be low-readiness divisions. Not intended for service in NATO, not even intended for overseas duties! There were reports that these were intended for Home Defense only.

There are a couple of articles that the 26th and 47th IDs may have been shipped to Alaska. Considering that these two divisions had little or no aviation support and only 2.5 & 5-ton trucks for transport, they would have been almost immobile in the Alaskan countryside. I would have to stamp that article as a very low probability...

Not sure when the 47th reverted to 34th ID, but I do know that there was at least a brigade that was training for possible deployment to Norway as early as the mid-late 70s. They even had some troops training in Norwegian language and had some folks that spoke it brokenly. We ARE talking Minnesota after all.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by schnickelfritz

All-
Is there anything out there that would show US Army Reserve Mechanized Infantry and Armored formations...if they even existed...in the 80's-90's?

I was at Ft Custer in Michigan a number of times from 99-03 and remember seeing some stuff posted there for an Armored unit.

Thanks!
Dave

Best source would be "Armies of NATO's Central Front"

26th ID: 1-110 ARM, 2-181 INF(M), 1-26 CAV

28th ID: 1-103 ARM,1-109 INF(M), 1-104 CAV (Trp A carries the lineage of the Troop of Philadelphia City Cavalry, the oldest US unit in continuous service)

35th MID:
NE-NG: 1-195 ARM, 1-134 INF(M), 2-134 INF(M), E-167 CAV
KS-NG: 1-635 ARM, 1-137 INF(M), 2-137 INF(M), E-114 CAV
KY-NG: 1-123 ARM, 2-123 ARM, 1-149 INF, A-240 CAV

38th ID: 1-246 ARM, 2-152 INF(M), 1-238 CAV

40th MID: 1-185 ARM, 2-185 ARM, 3-185 ARM, 1-149 ARM, 2-159 INF(M), 1-160 INF(M), 2-160 INF(M), 3-160 INF(M), 4-160 INF(M), 1-184 INF(M), 1-18 CAV

42nd ID: 1-127 ARM, 1-108 INF(M), 1-101 CAV

47th ID: 1-94 ARM, 2-133 INF(M),1-101 CAV

49th AD: 1-112 ARM, 2-112 ARM, 3-112 ARM, 4-112 ARM, 5-112 ARM, 6-112 ARM, 1-141 INF(M), 2-141 INF(M), 2-142 INF(M), 3-144 INF(M), 1-124 CAV

50th AD: 1-102 ARM, 2-102 ARM, 3-102 ARM, 5-102 ARM, 1-172 ARM, 2-172 ARM, 1-113 INF(M), 2-113 INF(M), 3-113 INF(M), 1-114 INF(M), 2-114 INF(M), 5-117 CAV

30th MIB: 1-252 ARM; 1-179 INF(M), 1-180 INF(M), E-145 CAV

32nd MIB: 1-632 ARM,2-127 INF(M), 1-128 INF(M), E-105 CAV

48th MIB: 1-108 ARM, 1-121 INF(M), 2-121 INF(M), E-348 CAV

81st MIB: 1-303 ARM, 1-161 INF(M), 3-161 INF(M), E-303 CAV

218th MIB: 2-263 ARM, 1-118 INF(M), 4-118 INF(M), B-713 CAV

256th MIB: 1-156 ARM, 2-156 INF(M), 3-156 INF(M), E-256 CAV

30th AB: 3-109 ARM, 4-109 ARM, 4-117 INF(M), B-230 CAV

31 AB: 1-131 ARM, 2-152 ARM, 1-167 INF(M), E-31 CAV

155th AB: 1-198 ARM, 2-198 ARM, 1-155 INF(M), A-98 CAV

107th ACR: 2-107 CAV, 3-107 CAV, 1-150 CAV (WV-NG)

116th ACR: 1-116 CAV, 2-116 CAV, 3-116 CAV (OR-NG)

163rd ACR: 1-163 CAV, 2-163 CAV, 3-163 CAV (TX-NG)

278th ACR; 1-278 CAV, 2-278 CAV, 3-278 CAV

The Guard also has several independent battalions:
2-120 INF(M) NC-NG; 2-136 INF(M) MN-NG; 2-117 INF(M) TN-NG; 3-141 INF(M) TX-NG

1-152 ARM AL-NG; 1-210 ARM NY-NG; 1-221 ARM NV-NG; 2-252 ARM NC-NG; 1-263 ARM SC-NG; 1-803 ARM WA-NG; 1-108 CAV MS-NG

Finally, no list is complete with mentioning the TLAT battalions, these are "infantry" battalions equipped with 48-72 jeep-mounted TOWs, needless to say, trying to nail down their TO&E is HARD!!!! (subtle hint for any assistance in nailing it down)

2-128 INF(TLAT) WI-NG; 1-249 INF(TLAT) OR-NG; 2-180 INF(TLAT) OK-NG, 1-122 INF(TLAT) GA-NG

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Best source would be "Armies of NATO's Central Front"


107th ACR: 2-107 CAV, 3-107 CAV, 1-150 CAV (WV-NG)

Odd, I'm pretty sure the 107th elements are Ohio NG, it's the 150th that's in WV.

[Louied]

Dragoon,

I have an article on the TLAT Bns (I forget if it gives an exact TO & E)
I'll post it when I get home. Also the info in Isby's book are a little dated. by 1989 42 ID fielded 3 Armd Bns. I have a list of all Armd/Cav units I will post also.

Louie

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

Odd, I'm pretty sure the 107th elements are Ohio NG, it's the 150th that's in WV.

You are correct sir, of the 4 NG ACRs at the time, only the 278th was "purely" TN, 107th was OH/WV; 116 was ID/OR; and 163 was MT/TX/UT. All three used the older ROAD TO&E with 3 armd cav sqns, two troops of avn and a engineer company.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Louied

Dragoon,

I have an article on the TLAT Bns (I forget if it gives an exact TO & E)
I'll post it when I get home. Also the info in Isby's book are a little dated. by 1989 42 ID fielded 3 Armd Bns. I have a list of all Armd/Cav units I will post also.

Louie

The TLATs were supposed to be organzied with a HQ and 5 line companies with equipment ranging from 60-72 jeep/TOWs, later replaced by Hummer/TOWs. There are also articles claiming that they had as few as two and as many as six line companies. I've also found articles that give a different TO&E for each of the 4 battalions! Of intrest is that two of the battalions were slotted to go to the 82nd/101st, one to the 9th ID and one to the 7th LID. It's an intresting little tidbit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the two extra tank battalions come about when the decision was made to de-activate the 50th AD?

[Louied]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

The TLATs were supposed to be organzied with a HQ and 5 line companies with equipment ranging from 60-72 jeep/TOWs, later replaced by Hummer/TOWs. There are also articles claiming that they had as few as two and as many as six line companies. I've also found articles that give a different TO&E for each of the 4 battalions! Of intrest is that two of the battalions were slotted to go to the 82nd/101st, one to the 9th ID and one to the 7th LID. It's an intresting little

IIRC, that's basically what the article I have touches on.

[Louied]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the two extra tank battalions come about when the decision was made to de-activate the 50th AD?

AFAIK the answer is no. I have the a lineage book of ARNG Armd/Cav Regts and the two extra Armd Bns seem to have been stood up in the late 1980's. I believe this was due to the attempt to reconfigure the ARNG Inf Divs to a "Medium" TO&E as described in Romjue's history of the 1980's Army that I posted on an earlier thread. As for the 50 Armd Div, I did read somewhere (of course I can't find it again !!) that one DOA plan was for it to fold in the 42 Inf Div which would alleviate that Div's recruiting problems (they were having a hard time forming a third Bde to replace the 27 Inf Bde which had become a RO Bde). So by the mid 90's (pre-fall of the Wall plans) 42 Inf Div would be Mech in NY/NJ/DE, 26 Inf Div would be Medium in MA/CT/VT and a new Armd Div would be formed somewhere in the South (I would guess utilizing TX's 36 Bde)

[Louied]

The TLAT Bns

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by schnickelfritz

All-
Is there anything out there that would show US Army Reserve Mechanized Infantry and Armored formations...if they even existed...in the 80's-90's?

I was at Ft Custer in Michigan a number of times from 99-03 and remember seeing some stuff posted there for an Armored unit.

Thanks!
Dave

I know there *were* Reserve armored/cav units, but only because when the local reserve armored cavalry unit disbanded (around '94 if my memory serves), about 30 of the guys came over to our NG armored cav unit. For the life of me, I can't remember what unit designation they had before they got disbanded though...

[The Rifleman]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

The listing below reflects the NG units and their real-life intended missions:

26th Infantry Division, MA-NG
28th Infantry Division, PA-NG
38th Infantry Division, IN/MI-NG
42nd Infantry Division, NY-NG
47th Infantry Division, MN/IA-NG
These were pure infantry outfits with 1 tk, 1 mech and 7 inf battalions. Generally had Korean/Vietnam-era equipment and were considered to be low-readiness divisions. Not intended for service in NATO, not even intended for overseas duties! There were reports that these were intended for Home Defense only.

29th Infantry Division (Light) VA/MD-NG
Forming during this period and in search of a mission. Was supposed to be the NG "roundout" for the RDF, Norway reinforcement, Korean reinforcement, you get the idea.

35th Infantry Division (Mechanized) NE/KS/KY-NG
40th Infantry Division (Mechanized) CA-NG
The 35th MID had a NATO role (60-90d). The 40th MID, depending on who was in office, was either NATO or Persian Gulf.

49th Armored Division TX-NG
50th Armored Division NY/NJ-NG
The 49th had a NATO role (60-90d) and the 50th was also slatted for NATO (90-120d).

The Separate Infantry Brigades:
29th IB HI-NG was augmentation for the 25th LID
33rd IB IL-NG was another stay-at-home unit
39th IB AR-NG was affiliated with the 101st AAD and was considered to be a future RDF unit.
41st IB OR-NG was augmentation for the 7th LID
45th IB OK-NG was a possible NATO unit
53rd IB FL-NG was a stay-at-home unit
73rd IB OH-NG was a stay-at-home unit
92nd IB PR-NG was a stay-at-home unit
207th IB (Scout) AK-NG was a stay-at-home unit

The Mechanized Infantry Brigades
30th MIB NC-NG was a NATO unit (45-60d)
32nd MIB WI-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d), possible Norway
48th MIB GA-NG was augmentation for the 24th MID
81st MIB WA-NG was augmentation for the 9th ID(M)
218th IB SC-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
256th IB LA-NG was augmentation for the 5th MID

The Armored Brigades
30th AB TN-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
31st AB AL-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
155th AB MS-NG was augmentation for the 1st CD

The Armored Cavalry Regiments
107th ACR OH-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
116th ACR ID-NG was a NATO unit (60-90d)
163rd ACR MT-NG was "slotted" for Korea, but would have been most likely committed to NATO
278th ACR TN-NG yet another NATO unit (60-90d)

The "at-home" units were intended to be shifted to cover the border with Mexico and to cover FL and PR from any attempt by Cuba to liberate those areas. There are a couple of articles that the 26th and 47th IDs may have been shipped to Alaska. Considering that these two divisions had little or no aviation support and only 2.5 & 5-ton trucks for transport, they would have been almost immobile in the Alaskan countryside. I would have to stamp that article as a very low probability...

It all gets rather confusing, especially after 1993 when the NG downsized, reflagged and reorganized most of these formations. You were pretty much spot on with everything except....

you left out the 86th Armored Brigade, Vermont National Guard. During the early 80s it was with the 50th Armored Division, thus that formation should read NJ/VT NG. Sometime in the late 80s, the 50th was moved to the 26th ID thus splitting up the neat TOE by giving an infantry division 2 armored battalions and a mec infantry battalion from the 86th Brigade. Then, in 1993 the 26th ID and 50th AD closed. The 86th Brigade went to the 42nd ID, along with the remainder of the the NJ assets of the 50th Armored Division. The 42nd was an infantry division in name only, but in reality had the composition of and armored division. Meanwhile, the remaining units of the 26th merged with the 29th ID.

The problem with any discussion of organization is that the army is constantly opening and closing units or in the case of battalions, renaming them. Its an effort to give all the "flags" a chance to be alive for a while.

[dragoon500ly]

And let's not forget, that if you don't like your unit designation....just wait a year, the U.S. Army will change!!!!

Next up, I Troop, 3rd Squadron, 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment has just been reflagged as the 9356201st Underwater Mess Kit Repair Team (Stryker)!

[The Rifleman]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

And let's not forget, that if you don't like your unit designation....just wait a year, the U.S. Army will change!!!!

Next up, I Troop, 3rd Squadron, 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment has just been reflagged as the 9356201st Underwater Mess Kit Repair Team (Stryker)!

LOL, yea. Too many general officers with good ideas... you look at the UK, they can trace their lineage right to who's great grandfather formed what regimement and where it went....