Ask An Expert- LAND Forces.

[Albany Rifles]

I will do one better, Patton's relief of Bastogne. Never mind if Patton did actually lift the seige or not but his manouver. An entire army swung 90% while both refusing the flank and direct all traffic down to the troop level over unexpected terrain in less than 36 hours. All this while preventing a German counter-attack into our rears. Rommel was kids league by comparison.

Sir, you nailed it.

Moving the combat part of an army easy. You basically say "Go kill there!" and they are off. It is getting the 80% of the army tail to reposition and sustain that axis of attack. The US Army is World War 2 did that on a regular basis and Patton was the best at it.

[jlvfr]

Sir, you nailed it.

Moving the combat part of an army easy. You basically say "Go kill there!" and they are off. It is getting the 80% of the army tail to reposition and sustain that axis of attack. The US Army is World War 2 did that on a regular basis and Patton was the best at it.

Indeed. Large-scale logistics are a US game. Which it masters.

[drhuy]

so i came across a youtube clip which said its a Saudi M1 got cook-off after being hit by a Houthi ATGM. What's the chance of survival of the crew in this scenario? I never heard of a case when the whole crew of a M1 got killed when the tank hit, at least not with the US force. And which version of M1 does Saudi have?

[SteveDaPirate]

What's the chance of survival of the crew in this scenario? I never heard of a case when the whole crew of a M1 got killed when the tank hit, at least not with the US force. And which version of M1 does Saudi have?

The Saudis have the M1A2 version. I'd bet there are pretty good odds the crew survived that hit and subsequent cookoff. The M1 has armor around the crew compartment and uses blow-off panels designed to vent a cookoff outside the tank and away from the crew.

If the blow-off panels had failed and the explosion had entered the crew compartment, you would probably have seen a Jack-in-the-box effect where the tank's turret gets blown clear of the hull.

[gunnut]

Indeed. Large-scale logistics are a US game. Which it masters.

What is the reason behind this? How did the US army develop the type of logistics that no one else could master?

By extension, US civilian sector also operates the most advanced logistics in the world. Amazon, UPS, and FedEx rule the field. I live in the "Greater Los Angeles area" that's included in Amazon's "Prime Now" plan. I ordered a FireTV Stick and it was delivered to my door in 97 minutes. Seriously, it takes me 20 minutes to drive to Fry's Electronics, at least 20 minutes to locate and check out an item, and another 20 minutes to drive back with my merchandise. Here I can have something delivered to my door in about the same amount of time it takes for me to watch a B-movie, and I don't have to change out of my pajamas....

[jlvfr]

What is the reason behind this? How did the US army develop the type of logistics that no one else could master?

My theory: the large distances the US had to deal from day 1. The sheer size of the US, much of it empty space, mandates proper logistics for anything to be done. For the average EU country, 100km is quite a distance. In the case of my country, it's almost a third of our lengh! What's that for a US citizen? Comute? Not only that, the EU's average population and habitacional density means that supplies are always relatively near (hence Napoleon's tactic of moving with few supplies; he knew he could get more on a quick march into enemy territory). Add the need to cover great distances with a good industrial capacity, and you get good long-range logistics.

Incidently, this also helped develop US long-range aviation. While all countries started thinking of "cross country flying" very soon, to the average EU country this meant aircraft with 300-500km range. To the US, that's just half of what was needed...

Thus proving, again, the old proverb: "Necessity is the mother of invention".

[gunnut]

My theory: the large distances the US had to deal from day 1. The sheer size of the US, much of it empty space, mandates proper logistics for anything to be done. For the average EU country, 100km is quite a distance. In the case of my country, it's almost a third of our lengh! What's that for a US citizen? Comute? Not only that, the EU's average population and habitacional density means that supplies are always relatively near (hence Napoleon's tactic of moving with few supplies; he knew he could get more on a quick march into enemy territory). Add the need to cover great distances with a good industrial capacity, and you get good long-range logistics.

Incidently, this also helped develop US long-range aviation. While all countries started thinking of "cross country flying" very soon, to the average EU country this meant aircraft with 300-500km range. To the US, that's just half of what was needed...

Thus proving, again, the old proverb: "Necessity is the mother of invention".

Good point. I remember telling our tour guide in Budapest that I am fortunate to live so close to work, 10 miles, and she was amazed because Budapest is only about 5 miles in diameter. In a more extreme case, I have a friend who commutes weekly to her work 140 miles away. She drives almost 30k miles a year. We are very used to dealing with longer distances than most of the world.

[Stitch]

Good point. I remember telling our tour guide in Budapest that I am fortunate to live so close to work, 10 miles, and she was amazed because Budapest is only about 5 miles in diameter. In a more extreme case, I have a friend who commutes weekly to her work 140 miles away. She drives almost 30k miles a year. We are very used to dealing with longer distances than most of the world.

You guys are probably on the right track; our states are roughly the same size as your countries, and some of them (like Alaska and Texas) are actually quite a bit bigger. And, yes, especially here in Kalifornia, people are used to driving a ways to get to work; I know of people in the Bay Area who regularly drive 100 miles+ each way to get to work. Personally, I think they're crazy; I've got better things to do than spend three or four hours a day in my vehicle driving to and from work.

In any case, we have gotten used to moving/transporting things long distances here in the US; in Europe, a few hundred kilometers might be a big deal, but in the US we regularly deal with thousands of kilometers, so we have, out of necessity, had to build an infrastructure that is capable of moving stuff long distances reliably.

[Albany Rifles]

Keep in mind sustaining a force over long distances....in often very inhospitable terrain...has been the standard for US forces for quite some time.

Sherman sustained 100,000 men (and associated animals) over a single rail line which stretched 250 miles form Nashville to Atlanta. The US Army made a scientific study during the war of how to sustain a force. They quickly learned that no offensive could operate beyond 40 miles from a railhead or port. Why? Because the draught animals would consume all of the fodder they were hauling over that distance. And even on the March to the Sea Sherman kept a hefty train of fodder for his draught animals.

The distances for the Indian Wars are mind boggling.

And keep in mind, after that, ALL our wars were away games. So we had to sustain our forces across a nation into and through the combat zone.

And look at the ability to conduct underway replenishment operations...the Kriegsmarine had milch cows. The US Navy kept entire Task forces at sea bringing food, ammo, spare parts, fuel, personnel replacements, spare aircraft, heck, ice cream and movies!

We will spare part you to death...not because we have an iron mountain of them. But because we made a scientific study of reliability of our weapons systems and predict when parts go bad.

Oh, and that reliabilty drives up costs, but....you only need to buy 10 and not 25 because the 10 stay in the fight.

[gunnut]

At the risk of diverting attention from this fascinating discussion of logistics (not being sarcastic), I have a quick question. What is the purpose/reason for independent brigades and regiments in an army?

[Shek]

What is the reason behind this? How did the US army develop the type of logistics that no one else could master?

AR lives miles away from the original iron mountain - City Point. Prior to the 1864 Overland Campaign, LTG Grant instructed MG Halleck to put 1,000,000 rations afloat - he would tell him later where to send them. The military railroad that ran behind the U.S. Army's lines at Petersburg would deliver freshly baked bread each day to the soldiers in the earthworks.

It's the arsenal of democracy combined with industrial sized warfare. The American Civil War saw the projection and sustainment of military power on a continental scale. By World War 2, this would be on a global scale. The most efficient use of strategic land power was enabling Soviet logistics via Lend Lease, which used the Persian Gulf SOS command (which included GEN Schwarzkopf's dad as a BG) to push supplied through Iran.

[jlvfr]

At the risk of diverting attention from this fascinating discussion of logistics (not being sarcastic), I have a quick question. What is the purpose/reason for independent brigades and regiments in an army?

Afaik, these are usually either specialized in some funtion (airborne, artillery, engineers, spec ops, etc) or set up for specific tasks: special assaults, raids...

Or the army could simply be too small for divisions (hello from the little portguese army!)

[gunnut]

Afaik, these are usually either specialized in some funtion (airborne, artillery, engineers, spec ops, etc) or set up for specific tasks: special assaults, raids...

Or the army could simply be too small for divisions (hello from the little portguese army!)

The examples I saw were regular function units, but independent. Like the independent tank brigades in the Red Army during WW2, or the independent mixed brigades or infantry brigade/regiment in the IJA.

[Officer of Engineers]

Independent Brigades and Regiments are usually the result of requiring an effective force in an area of some importance but cannot assigned a full division to the area. As such, they usually hold the same political authority as a regular division for that area.

[gunnut]

Independent Brigades and Regiments are usually the result of requiring an effective force in an area of some importance but cannot assigned a full division to the area. As such, they usually hold the same political authority as a regular division for that area.

Got it. Thanks!