[US Army] Infantry Battalion Structure & Attack Tactics World War 2 (1944)
2016 ж. 18 Ақп.
244 088 Рет қаралды
Patreon: / mhv
This video gives an overview on the structure and organization of an US Army Infantry Battalion in 1944. The number of men and equipment for each company. Furthermore, it shows how an attack against an organized position is performed. This video various visualizations and visualized content, it has purely educational purpose.
Sources
Stephen Bull: World War II Infantry Tactics: Company and Battalion
Field Manual 7-20 Infantry Battalion 1944
Authorized Organization - 1944 Infantry Division - Infantry Battalion
www.niehorster.org/013_usa/44_...
The medical detachment sounds badass with the heavy weaponry they were given
Aaaaand the medical Company had bandages xD
I felt the same 😂😂😂
Hey, if the battalion is led by a shitty officer, bandages might be more useful than guns.
Matt M. I'm certain that they also had sharp scalpels and scissors.
Hey, don't discount those deadly assault bandages!
Matt Yeah feeling The same a few years later
Small nitpick, "Baker" not "Bravo", since you bothered to use their contemporary "Able" over current "Alpha"
...and the medical detachment had bandages XD
lol
+Jeff Grimes I laughed at this too
+Jeff Grimes They had lots and lots of delicious morphine too.
i fuckin lost it.
They sneak up to germans and stuffed bandages down their throats to choke on.
0:46 the medics also had surgical scissors to throw at germans
If Band Of Brothers is anything to go by, they barely even had scissors
They suffered from budget cuts.
tver not even their bandages could cover those cuts
...and morphine syrettes!
@@jkdm7653 Running With Scissors would be proud.
Its amazing how well the US incorporated mortars into their infantry.
Hellfire _ it was very highly experimental how the US Army employed that tactic in WW2 because they began adopting the concept of combined arms were it relied on immense coordination between air, sea and land support with one another. On the Battalion level combined arms meant that meant having mortars and machine guns directly assigned under you including medical and some cases combat engineer units directly assigned under the Battalion. This concept has become the staple of US Military combat strategy today with our military constantly redeveloping weapons equipment and units to better suit this concept.
yeah i mean it makes sense to have all 3 Rifle Company mortars in a single Squad consisting of 3x 5 men teams together as part of the Weapons Platoon since each mortar can co-operate with each other more effectively, sharing Firing solutions and better concentrate fire on a particular target. This mortar squad's HQ also had an SCR 536 Handie Talkie along with the rifleman platoon HQ's allowing for instant communication between them rather than sending a messenger so the Response time wasn't any worse than if they were in the Rifle Platoon's closer to the frontline. Compare that to the Germans who had just 1x mortar 3 man team per each of the 3 rifleman platoons where the 3 Mortars in the Company were more separated not being able to co-operate, concentrate fire and share firing solutions with the each other as effectively. But even if they did take up the US layout, they didn't have any Handie Talkies so the response time would be slower.
If the enemy had the MG 42 the 60 mm mortar would get rid of it.
Definably the best video yet, amazing graphics, clear description of what was going on and extremely well researched. Great work. Maybe another video on how the Germans defended against this attack?
+Nick Long Agreed. I really like the content, format and presentation of these.
+Nick Long thank you! The Germans have to wait a bit for now (well, kinda...), because I have covered loads of German stuff, but UK, Russia, Poland, Canada and many others haven't gotten anything yet :(
+Military History If you need any help covering Polish subjects let me know, I'd be happy to help. :-)
+Firefly I would love to have a *complete* table of organization and equipment for Polish Divisions in 1939. Something that outlines how many men for each regiment/battalion and also equipment. So that I can do something like the German Tank Division, alternatively a smaller unit like Regiment or Battalion is also fine, like I did with this video. The main point it, it should be complete as possible. For some armies you get tables quite easily (US), but for others like Germany it is usually a patchwork of fragmented information.
+Military History I am incredibly busy at the moment but I'd love to help also, especially if you need any help about French Units or German units around the fall of France :)
"And finally, the medical detachment were equipped with bandages." loved that 😂😂
Thank you for your excellent reports.
For all those who are wondering how an US Infantry Division’s Artillery is organized here it is (the basic layout, won’t get too in depth) 3 Infantry Regiments (each regiment has an Anti-Tank Company of 9 57mm AT guns (3 platoons with 3 AT guns each), and a Regimental Cannon Company with 6 towed short-barreled 105mm Howitzers (3 Platoons with 2 Howitzers each). So the Regiment level has a total of 27 Anti-Tank guns, and 18 105mm Howitzers. The Infantry Regiment has 3 Infantry Battalions (each battalion has an AT platoon with 3 57mm AT guns). Since there is 9 Infantry Battalions in the division 9x3 AT guns= 27 in total in the battalion level. The division’s artillery consisted 3 Artillery battalions with 36 105mm Howitzers, and 1 Artillery battalion with 12 155mm Howitzers (12 per battalion). There’s a whole lot of other units I did not cover. I’m guessing the remaining AT platoon is attached to some sort of Headquarters or Recon unit, not sure. The total Artillery strength for the division is 54x 105mm Howitzers, 12x 155mm Howitzers, and 57x 57mm Anti-Tank guns.
Your videos are simply amazing good sir! Thank you for all your work and Subbed!!!
Great video man! Love the new graphics!
+ziros22 thank you!
And the medics had bandages.... Good old Geneva convention
great video! subbed
i like your videos precise and straight to the point.
Fantastic historical videos! Very insightful details and I apreciate the apparently well researched facts. Just one thing, when you talk about the number (like 192 men, it would be much easier to follow if you could also write the number in your animation :) Thanks, and thanks for the great vids :)
'The medical detachment had bandages' Like I know they're medics and all, but that made me laugh way more than it should have. Also Fuedamore. Sorry I absolutely love the german accent but the Fuedamore gets me every time as an american who speaks german. Again Ich leibe Deutsch, aber hell its just silly to me. Seriously dont stop saying Fuedamore, it makes my day
That's a nice video mark
Around 3:00 in there's a problem. Because the secondary attack was focused only on the central fortification, the right-side fortification was left open to deploy troops to attack bravo company's right flank and roll them up. While being overrun and displaced Bravo company will be caught in the cross fire of the counter-attackers from the right and the defenders from the center and will most likely take heavy casualties. By the time Charlie has scrambled their way to a position from which they can respond to the counter-attack without being exposed to fire from the center, Bravo will likely have to fall back to either Able's position or Charlie's position (costing more men). By that point the central defenders will have either started to take the pressure off of the left-side's attack by Able and potential Bravo remnants, or reoriented and/or deployed to assist in the flanking action against Charlie and potential Bravo remnants. If Charlie is pushed back by the counter attack, every Company except for the Medical Company will be flanked and caught in crossfire. If the main attack is repelled, then every Company except for the Medical Company will be flanked and caught in crossfire, but with a clear escape route being held open by Charlie. This could have been avoided. Any student of history should remember that ancient and medieval generals liked to create an obvious weakpoint on one of their wings like the German defenses shown here specifically to allow the stronger wing to fold over and envelope the flank of the attacking force. Therefore fore this plan to have been successful, Bravo should have been tasked with engaging both the central and right-side fortifications to make it difficult for the Germans to launch a counter attack on the right.
If Charlie was unable to push forward to support before the defenders could push out, then they were badly placed and too far away from Bravo. The ideia is that Bravo should be able to fall back towards Charlie while charlie provides support by fire, ideally from an elevated, concealed position. Thus any defenders trying to move in on Bravo's flank would find themselves under fire from Charlie company's mortars/MGs - and unable to make good progress against Bravo's flank. Organizing an effective counter attack from a defensive position was not as easy as it was in set piece ancient and medieval battles - infantrymen in world war two moved in smaller, more individual groups than the large blocks of men in battles of old, and often spread across much larger distances - and thus being able to get the message across to advance for counterattack was much harder (especially in an organized non-human-wave fashion). On top of that, in modern military doctrine dictates that you never attack with less than a 2:1 advantage in numbers, ideally 3:1. Failing that, you should be able to overwhelm and suppress the enemy with fire support (be it artillery, CAS or another unit's fire). Now, that may not always have been the case in the Second World War, but in a textbook engagement like the one described, you would not attack with less than a 3:1 advantage, and any attempt to counterattack by defenders would find themselves outnumbered, outside (or in the way of) their own fire support and outside of their defensive positions: suicidally disadvantaged.
***** That's what I'm saying.
The secondary attack is more of a diversion. It was to draw attention from the main attack and keep troops from being moved from where the secondary attack was coming from to the primary attack [ "feint attack" ]. The defenders would assume the main and secondary attacks were targeting everything, rather than the "main attack" overwhelming it's objective. Once the main objective was achieved (as you saw in the video), the main force and reinforcing force would begin pressing the flank. The secondary attack wasn't vulnerable to being flanked themselves as their primary objective was diversion, so didn't typically attack as if it was trying to capture it. If it was easily able to, then yes, it would capture the objective and create a pincer move.
Look, we got motherfucking Hannibal Barca over here I am sure nobody has thought of that. Modern battles work exactly like ancient battles, with entrenched troops routinely abandoning their positions mid-enemy attack while being shelled to counterattack and defeat the attackers in hand to hand combat out in the open.
@@migkillerphantom lol
this line alone gets my thumbs up: "Finally, the medical detachment had bandages." love your vids! in the scenario presented, unless the enemy center is weak, looks like Bravo eats shit.
very, very well done mate
+YOLO just an idea, everytime you make one of these "setup" videos, maybe make a similar one of the other major armies of WW2 and make it into a series?
+YOLO thank you
+YOLO yeah, I got loads of stuff planned.I will do comparison videos in the future. Getting the data for those videos is sometimes quite annoying for the German Tank Division I had to use 3 different sources. For this video it was just one table for the setup and two for the tactics. Right now, I am trying to do one video about one format, e.g., one division, one battalion, intended vs. historical setup, tactics, etc. I haven't done a battle yet, nor any navy stuff, etc.
very interesting and well made - i hope to see more like thhis for other forces.
+Daniel Hall thank you. Yeah, I have some planned and also some necessary sources, although time is the major bottleneck.
i searched for a channel like this for almost 5 years now!!
I noticed that 5 years ago, but it took me 4,5 years to get it started ;)
Military History Visualized humour too huh? Seems like I have another fav youtuber xD
Loved it! Informative, short, and to the point! I especially like the bit where the medical teams had...."bandages..."..though I am sure they had more than that! as much as I am sure you have did not intend in any way to undermine their contribution to the combat group as a whole..
Short and sweet.
'And finally, the Medical company had Bandages.' This did me a giggle
I need more MORE!
"And finally the medical detatchment had bandages" Brilliant.
Fantastic video as always! I would be so happy if you could do somethin on Charles XII's Karoliner from the great northern war or something like that!
+Jo0niz in the (far) future very likely, right now, I will stick closely to World War 2, because I have the most knowledge here and since I am still in a learning phase I will be way more efficient when approaching topics that I am quite unfamiliar with.
+Military History Sounds Great! Keep up the good work!
Love your videos man, are you planning on making videos on the soviet or japanese army or smaller nations in ww2? It would be also very interesting to see comparisments between allies or enemies in the war concerning structure and tactics. Anyway keep up the good work!
+Andor R thank you, glad you love em. Yeah, a Soviet Army video is planned for a long while, but my last three videos all took way longer than I had planned, but Soviet Army will be coming soon also I got some basic stuff for the Japanese Army. Huge backlog. Comparison will probably take a while, because I want to get the basics beforehand, but well, you never know :)
+Andor R thank you, glad you love em. Yeah, a Soviet Army video is planned for a long while, but my last three videos all took way longer than I had planned, but Soviet Army will be coming soon also I got some basic stuff for the Japanese Army. Huge backlog. Comparison will probably take a while, because I want to get the basics beforehand, but well, you never know :)
You should do a video on AirLand battle doctrine
Lol, the medical portion used bandages. You made it sound more epic than it is XD
God I'm in heaven. This is what I've been searching for: the numbers of men and weapons in WW2. I discovered this though the German tank production.
+Alex Greinke thx, be sure to check the description for sources and also niehorster.org. For the American side there are quite some manuals (FM) freely available on the internet also - in case you don't know yet - one key term is TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment). Also still setting up the homepage: militaryhistoryvisualized.com I probably will put up some infographics there and sources etc. oh and welcome to my channel!
I quickly understood this one.
Could u tell us about ur resources, as u have thorough info! Excellent
Awesome ..
+Grasyl thx!
You forgot to mention the Handie Talkie! which each platoon had atleast 1, this is something the Germans didn't have and gave the US a MASSIVE advantage in communication on the front line giving us much better organization and co-operation while fighting.
You have to some about Combat Engineers, Pioneers and StrumPioneers tactics
0:42 the medical detachment had bandages-haha that was hilarious
General Marshal was the driving force behind the Three Company Battalion (as opposed to four companies everyone else used) if you ever wonder why so many Army battalion badges have a triangle motif. General Macarthur was in the capitol serving as Chief of Staff while this reorganization went on and was not one to pay attention to the changes Marshal made. So Macarthur insisted on the old four company battalions, much to the consternation of the infantry coming into theater, as he would tear companies from their parent 'triangles' in order to form his 'squares', dubbing them task forces - if you ever wondered why everything in the Pacific was a task force. These victimized battalions would have to prepare two sets of paperwork, one for the battalion and one for Macarthur.
Excellent, do you have the German version that is within this same scope? I always see the german one focusing on only one squad.
And the medical detachment has bandages ... This just sums up my Hell let loose experience with the second loadout of the medic class :D
What happens to Bravo company after Abel breaks the lines?
Actually, the tactic (from Platoon up to Divisional was 1: Holding attack. 2: Flanking attack 3: Third element in reserve waiting to exploit breakthrough or, used as reserve. It is a minor but VITAL point and difference.
Making a 1 to 2hour order.to a section.line 1to 5. Transit from 1to 3.shield on eagle to points.
Very interesting that the B CO didn't inform A or B CO Commanders of which attack they were performing. My memory of USMC at tacking orders was that we were in theory told who was "the focus of main effort." One wonders if the B CO Commander could infer that given that A Co had all the heavy weapons support that he wasn't the "Main attack?"
How do you make the graphics if you don’t mind me asking?
Perhaps the biggest reason why Americans were so successful in their NW European campaign 1944-45 was - artillery. They had excellent mobility supply logistics and ability to concentrate fire power to certain points in massive way. In retrospect the biggest surprise of WW2 was likely that Germans were in artillery warfare much behind Americans, British and surprisingly even Finnish artillery. Finnish FQ method was really genius although their artillery guns were mostly and dependent on horses. But it was revolutionary compared to German system.
Hello Military History Visualized! Can you make a video about modern infantry combat, considering situations like Iraq and Syria and Curdistan? How those fighters learn tatics? What they do in combat?
0:28 "Each rifle company has 4 bazookas..." adds up 5 bazookas :) Great video by the way.
Hmmm. Company Commanders are not informed with is the "main attack" and which is the "secondary attack". Hmmm. "Hey why is Fred getting the Weapons Company Support? Is there something you're not telling me?"
I'm going to use these tactics in CoH3
In theory it will work. Actual application it all boils down to the men in making drastic adjustments in the strategy. In the heat of the battle all plans are trash.
Holy crap! they were well equipped!
Eh, the rifle companies were a bit too light - needed more m1919s (six would be appropriate) to compensate for the lack of a role-fulfilling LMG... Or just get a real LMG, rather than a leftover from a failed WW1 experiment :P Otherwise, yes, and any shortcomings were overcome with strong artillery and tank support.
if theres one thing I know for sure its that only The American Military enjoys having heavy weapons at their disposal
0:56 So under-appreciated.
Just a question here, the .30 cals you mention are Light or medium machine guns? I know that both use the same rifle caliber but I thought that each section/squad had a Light machine gun group. Great video BTW!!!
each squad had a BAR as far as I know. .30 cals are medium as far as I know, but this rather "relative" in the German Army a MG34/42 with a bipod was a light MG with a tripod it was a heavy MG.
+Military History Visualized Thx!
GI 1: I got a bazooka GI 2: I got a mortar GI 3: I got some band-aids.
I feel like these tactics are playing to America's primary strength, and that's its industrial output. While they may burn through a lot of ammunition, they're able to replenish their supply quickly in time for their next encounter with the enemy.
Now I know why a US Battalion today has four combat companies with integrated weapons platoons. Splitting your company in half to allow a passage of lines while the two halves are attacking in opposite directions would tend to degrade the company commanders C2. Rather I would attack with two companies and then have them pivot while exploiting with the fourth company. Mortar support is directed from the battalion HHC/HHT and other support platoons are integrated within the HHC/HHT
Why did trenches look like that, with the circles foward and squares in the rear?
And finally the medical detachment had bandages My mind: Medic charging the enemy position throwing bandages left and right as if they were grenades screaming "Heal you fools, Heal!"
The way he uttered bandages with an emphasis. And the medical company had BANDAGES ! It"s funny and kinda reminds me of Desmond Doss
can you do a similar video about german infantrie companies in ww2 and maybe compare them? I would also be interrested in which german units received the g43s and stg44s as monst units kept the k98 till the end of the war
Are you sure the weapons platoon of a rifle company had light 30 cal and not water-cooled? Also, how did airborne units differ in their organization. If you've covered that in another video I apologize.
"From a Russian document: "One of the serious problems in planning again American Doctrine is that the Americans do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine." From a German General: "The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis." From an Anonymous American: "If we don't know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can't anticipate our future actions!" :)
From a current PL in a US Army Rifle Platoon: this is absolutely our most valuable weapon against the enemy, the sheer unpredictability of American tactics.
If you get heavy weapon support, you know you are doing the main attack.
I know that this video was published a long time ago, but perhaps someone will find this question one day and answer it... What was the role of the HQ company? In your example the fire support was provided solely by the weapons company. It contained half of the divisions' manpower and there must have been a reason for that. As they had a lot of firepower i'm assuming these were not non-combat personnel - so what was their purpose and when would they see combat, if only the A,B,C and weapons company were used in assaults. Was their role purely defensive?
Good question and I came to the same question as well. Originally I assume HQ company is for HQ security but if you notice the anti-tank gun and a large no. of heavy weapons, so logically I would also assume they might be attached to some of the Fire Company for fire support if necessary, instead of pure bodyguards.
Company HQ needed to be defended 24x7, so you need infantry and anti-tank gunners for that. Also, a battalion HQ is going to need, among other officers, intelligence officers, at least one signal officer, staff officers, cooks, maintenance crews, etc. Supporting a battalion of 900 men required a great deal of human resources. www.trailblazersww2.org/orgcharts/Inf_battalion.jpg
quick clarification quetion, in the video you say each rifle company had 4 bazookas but in the graphic you show 5 bazookas. Which is it 4 or 5?
nevermind I checked the source you provided
Do not underestimate the bandages. They can heal you fast if you walk within a 3 meter radius of the bandage dropped on the ground
Yes 😎
Great video! Why was it called Abel company, shouldn't it be Alfa, according to the international standard?
thank you. Not sure I guess "Able Company" was the WW2 standard, after all those alphabets change all the time, e.g., in German K - Konrad now, back then K - Kurfürst, but since there is a company line called "Conrad" a lot people got my name wrong when I say "K like Konrad" :D I would have sworn it is "Alpha" btw. damn "Alfa" just looks wrong... SO WRONG.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet#Prior_Alphabets
a bit of an error here. the US Support Heavy weapons company only had 6x 81mm Mortars and not 8x. www.niehorster.org/013_usa/44_org/div-inf/div-inf_inf-heavy.html it's got 1x 81mm Mortar Platoon which consists of 3x 81mm Mortar Squads each consisting of 2x 81mm Mortar teams. 1*3*2 = 6
Can you do a video on U.S infrantry platoon organization ?
+Pilot Hatfield at one point yes, I guess I will cover almost any size. Squad, Platoon, Company, Battalion, Regiment, Brigade, Division. But also depends on the sources. Squad is for sure.
how is company attack and spread from platoon to squad
So wait, those are some fairly large infantry companies. How many platoons do they have?
and the medical detachment had... bandages.
Usually with good recon on any enemy postion.Intelligence reports can only be an indication of the enemy intent.With an attack order given prior to the attack.A good if possible recon of your route to the attack can be estimated along with your platoon command to include squad leaders to see and understand where they must move,engage,and your other assets within the platoon,company,or other organic fires to be placed for your attack.Irwin Rommel did this as a young leader during WWI.Doing personal recon on enemy positions gave him great success as a platoon leader,company commander,battalion commander,and later as a division commander in early WWII.After WWI he wrote Infantry Attacks during the 1930s.The rest of the world ignored and never took this man seriously.I bet Patton the old crusty bastard of a fighting man read his book may have read it and got into his mind or by circumstance they understood each other.The book Infantry Attacks is a good reading for junior NCOs and Commanders up the chain.Rommel is indeed and Infantry Officer beyond his breed,intelligence,and luck.He is by far a very good teacher to future Infantry NCOs because he has inspired men in battle.No bullshit book and fantastic reading...
"And finally, the medical detachment had bandages." Lmao you left out the metric fuck-ton of morphine. Even with it, though, really shows where the R&D development was focused; on taking people apart, not so much putting them back together.
One point of note, a major strategy employed by US forces during WW2 would be the concept of fire and maneuver. If both companies were attacking a single objective, they would alternate between suppressive fire and movement. While this seems like a pretty straightforward idea, it is amazing how it wasn't a standard doctrine with all militaries at the time.
With that in mind, it would be interesting to know how many BARs a rifle company fielded.
+MakeMeThinkAgain www.trailblazersww2.org/history_infantrystructure.htm - one per squad, three squads to platoon, three platoons to the company. They also had .30 cal machine guns and light mortars at their disposal. There were also Thompsons issued to the headquarter units, and a smattering of M1 carbines in the ranks. Hopefully that answered your question.
+MakeMeThinkAgain Also, the three platoon BAR Gunners would often group together and essentially chain fire to allow sustainable cover fire in the absence of the .30 Cal's. Wherein, once the first BAR ran dry, the second would continue burst firing. The third would then take over. Once the third ran dry, the first will have reloaded and continued the firing. This could also be a part of the fire and maneuver.
HQ company was equipped with a bunch of weapons Each rifle company also was equipped with a bunch of weapons The Weapons company had a shitload of weapons And finally, the Medical detachment had bandages
Fascinating. Would this have had any luck in WWI?
We should not tell the units whether they are the main or secondary attack. Won't they deduct it from the fact, that one has a reserve and an artillery support, while the other has a big fat nothing?
It is interesting comparing this to the firepower available in a 1944 British battalion. The number of mortars is comparable (although the British ones are generally a bit lighter, there are considerably more overall), and the number of hand-held anti-tank weapons is similar (but a bit higher in the US battalion). The British battalion has twice the anti-tank guns (exactly the same weapon, the 57mm was a British design, known as a 6pdr in British use). However, it get interesting on the machine gun front. The US battalion has far FAR greater numbers of medium and heavy machine guns, which are entirely absent in a typical British infantry battlion. In fact, a British division only seems to have 36 medium machine guns in total, and has at least twice that number of medium artillery tubes! On the other hand, British battalions have far more LMGs (if you can even count the BAR as an LMG), which suggests a far greater emphasis on mobility and aggressive use of machine guns compared to the HMGs and MMG throughout the US battalion. A grand total of 63 LMGs throughout a British battalion (10 per company, with 19 LMGs in the fully motorised support company), vs 20 MMGs and 6 HMGs for the US battalion above. This suggests to me that US battalions would be superior in defence, with a greater capacity to lay down sustained firepower, but less mobile in the assault.
Having looked a bit closer, there is also much less motorisation and mechanisation of the 1944 US battalion, which further limits their mobility. Very interesting comparison. This actually surprises me a lot- I would've thought the US army as a whole would be far more mechanised than the British army in 1944. I think I may have underestimated the utility of the little universal carrier in the British army.
I think your infograph is a bit misleading on the m1919's. Infantry battalion normally used m1919a4 that were mounted on tripod, but your info show them as m1919a6. m1919a6 were normally issue to paratrooper or ranger, not regular infantry.
but otherwise I like your channel a lot.
thx, I usually try to get the correct guns, but to be honest I didn't know that they were quite so different. Also for some models there are proper blueprints for others there are not, e.g., the Polish Version of the BAR was quite a bitch and is probably still not really "correct".
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized I think your doing a great job, I still enjoy these videos today and I learn from them and the comment section as well
So.. what programms do you use for your animations?
+ACElicious just one PowerPoint 2013
But i guess you draw your shemes on your own? All the tanks etc you use in your powerpoint are certainly no templaits :P Also how do you record the sound or how do you record your PPP ?
+ACElicious yeah, I draw everything in PowerPoint. Sometimes I combine basic shapes, but often I use the free shape tool for complex shapes. Thus, I can scale them the way I like. No, no templates. I record with Open Broadcaster Software (free), it captures the screen and also the stuff from the mic. For the first videos until the USMC video I used Moviemaker for cutting, but since it has a "video" destroying bug, I bought filmora, which is pretty simple and also lets me move audio tracks relatively easily, which made recording and editing way less painful.
Well, you'd certainly know as a company commander that you were not conducting the main attack when you saw the weapons company heading to the other company's position!
The medical company had bandages...😂😂🤔😭😭
"The Battalion Commander doesn't tell his subordinates who is making the main attack and who the secondary attack." ... But this video shows the main attack getting all the support from the weapons company, which is something of a giveaway...
I think it's more down to semantics, the officer doesn't tell the company commanders that one is really only a diversion. Basically they are all attacking equally, but one has more support for a better chance at a breakthrough. If you tell one commander he is only doing a supporting attack he might not put enough pressure on the enemy, so you just tell everyone they are attacking equally.
0:32 You mention four but show five bazookas, which is it, sir?
oh, five if I am not mistaken: www.niehorster.org/013_usa/44_org/div-inf/div-inf_inf-rifle.html
I know, funf! xD
"Medical detachment had bandages" - hilarious!
I didn't know that the infantry co's had their own mortars. I thought the Heavy Weapons co. had all the mortars. Learn something knew every day. Great.
direct question....could axis powers defeat allies...how ?
To those talking about "diversions", or how B company had it rough: (1) the best diversion is a legitimate threat. If it can be ignored, then it is a pretty horribly executed diversion. (2) if you think B company had it rough taking fire with no support, think about A company who needs to advance through the enemy, and suffer fire from the [off-screen] enemy equivalent of the C + weapons + HQ companies the entire time.
"Each rifle company had 4 bazookas" *draws 5 bazookas*
Make an UK squad tactics
Can/ have you made a similar video about a German infantry battalion?
at some point very likely. Although I guess the infantry division 43 or 44 is more likely.
The German and American 1944 infantry battalions were strikingly similar, though the German one (assuming it was in relatively good condition, as was very often not the case...) had slightly heavier firepower throughout. Both were based on the tertiary "2 frontline, 1 reserve/1 probe, 2 reserve" layout and the heavy weapons were organized in an almost identical manner. Oh, and for every jeep there was an equivelant horsedrawn cart x) Some had a battery of three (or two, don´t quote me) 120mm mortars at battalion level (otherwise six 82mm). At the company level they had two 82mm mortars (as opposed to three 60mm ones) and four tripod mounted MG-34/42 (might be six for the 44 layout, but heavier than the Am. one nonetheless). Each 9 man squad had a MG-34/42 LMG, which obviously has lot more firepower than the mediocre BAR, but the M1 Garand did balance things out slightly. However, all of these slight advantages were overcome with good and well supplied artillery, tank support and simply "having stuff", whether it be replacements or supplies.
Other countries are always amazed at how many trucks Americans have. A normal amount of trucks for the Americans would make any other countries battalion a mobile unit! I wonder if we could get a count of trucks for the headquarters company, ambulances, (I know the brigade would have a ambulance company), jeeps for the scout platoons. and so on. I know all those heavy weapons were pulled by trucks. Heck even company cooks had trucks.
Would you be interested if Great War channel offered you collaboration on WW1 combined arms tactics?
+Sam Peckinpah was a classical composer yeah, we are already in contact.
Yes! I already send them message before saying take attention to this guy. Before that I said to them this: ''One thing is the problem: nowhere in this series was presented a detailed method of ''bleeding'', i.e. tactical doctrine how it was supposed to be done. Anyone can use whatever term comes to his mind, like ''bleeding'', ''we will bleed France to death...'', but military doctrine is proved or disproved in the field. That tactical level is something that interests me and the same level is something that requires even tighter and more serious presentation. I really recommend special sub-series of detailed analysis of change of tactical use of combined arms presented by Indy but written by a military historian whose interest is aforementioned field. You know what I mean - detailed explanation step by step of every possible small thing - the defense constituted of 3 positions all three 10,5 km deep, each position had 2 to 5 lines of trenches, 1st was 1,5 km deep, 2nd was 2 km deep and 3rd about 1 km deep, in between 1st and 2nd position and 2nd and 3rd there was a space of 2 times 3 km full of individual artillery, mortar and machine guns positions. Divisional artillery was behind 2nd position and corps artillery behind 3rd position. Army corps that had 2-5 divisions was positioned with 2 divisions in 1st position and 3 in 2nd. Individual division had one regiment (3 battalions) in 1st position and 2 regiments (6 battalions) in 2nd position... etc. Then formation of artillery and its tactical usage in: A)-artillery preparation (detailed plans of artillery preparation) and B)-artillery support (various tactical models of single or double line fire wall, i.e. barrage, and its movement, also centralization of artillery fire in preparation phase and decentralization in support phase where individual battalions could ask via telephone line concentration of fire on specific positions... etc. I would like to hear details of individual artillery preparation in last stages of war 1917-1918 because Germans since Riga breakthrough in 1917. solved the penetration of enemy front and effective usage of artillery. The solution was cutting down the preparation to just a hour and a half or 2 hours with detailed plan and minimal concentration of artillery advantage to 3 to 1. Also with extensive usage of concealment with smoke shells and usage of chemical shells. So with the method presented to us we could see on what was based that ''edge'' Germans thought they have over the French to enable them to inflict huge losses to enemy. It had to do something with artillery since of all combat losses in 1st world war artillery inflicted 75% of them.''
+Sam Peckinpah was a classical composer ahh! you were that guy!!! Thank you! do you have some recommendations for this? Because so far I have only found very few books that cover that much in depth and they were usually manuals/handbook from WW2. And I realized when it comes to WW1 the amount of books and their detail decreases extensively. Right now, I have a real hard time to get a division organization for a French infantry division in WW1, so far almost nothing and I am using the library of an Armed Forces University from Germany.
+Military History Visualized I am not sure that I can help you very much, only sources I used are Yugoslav but just as you I would like to have in my hands original infantry, artillery, cavalry... manuals. Only manual I have now is the one from 1973. - Yugoslav Army Artillery Manual in which they analyze simple and double ''fire wave'' i.e. rolling barrage used by Soviet army in WW2. Yugoslav source I also used is monography of Petar Tomac, military historian, officer of Yugoslav People's Army and professor of military history in Military Academy in Belgrade who in 1973. wrote huge book called ''1st World War''. I could see what sources he used because he often cites various authors ranging from French, Russian, German and English languages. I am not sure does he knows those languages or just uses old pre-WW2 literature translated into Serbo-Croat. The trouble is I do not have the book in my hands but it is in library. I will try to give you some references in German sources used in Yugoslav Military Encyclopaedia. But since it is a synthesis I am not sure that they used military manuals or books who in detail present infantry, artillery... tactics.
+Sam Peckinpah was a classical composer thank you, just checked my library doesn't have any books from Petar Tomac. Also nothing on Tomac and Petar alone, well not related to World War 1.
That's why we are the best
...because you don't tell the secondary attacking force that they are a distraction and they are not getting support from the weapon company? I can only imagine that they had a high casualty rate without support while being expected to carry out a full attack.
0:45 and finally the medics had bandages...
Lol
Still trying to figure out when to charge my knights in the order of battle.