How about this list:
I think it is fairly consistent with what I know about the Soviet, German, Finnish and US organizations. The British probably have something much much more complicated :) -- JNi 12:46 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
The problem with the table as it was is that it appears quite specific to the US army, and it's hard in that format to make it more general in a clean way. - Khendon
Name | Number of personnel | Number of subordinate units | Officer in charge |
---|---|---|---|
Corps | 30,000+ | 2 divisions | Lieutenant General |
Division | 10,000–20,000 | 2/3 regiments or brigades | Major General |
Regiment(UK)/ Brigade(USA) | 2000–5000 | 2+ battalions | Brigadier |
Battalion | 300–1000 | 2–6 companies | Colonel |
Company | 150–300 | 3–6 platoons | Major |
Platoon | 30–40 | 2+ squads | First lieutenant or captain |
Squad | 8–12 | 2+ fireteams | NCO ( Sergeant) |
Fireteam (Mostly USA) | 4–5 | n/a | NCO |
The numbers and ranks are, afaik, wrong for the British Army. A British company would, unless I'm mistaken, be commanded by a Captain. A Corps isn't two divisions, it's an irregular grouping. A "Squad" is usually a "Section". The Regiment size is far too large, I think. And so on. - Khendon
If we're having multiple tables, why not have them on separate pages? That way they can be combined with extensive notes on irregularities and further information as appropriate. - Khendon
I think the current Finnish army only has battalion/brigade/corps. Skipping division entirely. In WW2 it was battalion/regiment/division/corps. But anyway, If we have separate tables on separate pages what is left for the main page? :) -- JNi 15:06 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
I prefer this table - opinions? - Khendon 09:14 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
British Army | US Armed Forces | |
Corps | Variously sized; administrative grouping by common function | Two divisions (30,000+ soldiers), commanded by a Lieutenant General |
Division | 3 or 4 brigades grouped for a fighting role or for administration | 3 or 4 brigades (10,000–20,000), commanded by a Major General |
Brigade | Regiments and supporting units grouped together for a particular purpose - typically 5,000 soldiers | 2 or more regiments (2,000–5,000), commanded by a Brigadier |
Regiment | Around 650 soldiers, commanded by a Lieutenant Colonel | |
Battalion | 2-6 companies (300-1,000), commanded by a Colonel |
Oops, got to do some work ;-) Feel free to continue, or I'll do it later - Khendon 09:14 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
How about a separate column for size? - Khendon
We only have the army structure. Try to get the structure tables for air forces and navies.- B-101 15:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think unit is a generic term for infantry battalion or armoured regiment; a homogenous organization, as opposed to a smaller organization like a platoon or company, or a larger organization like a battle group, division or army, etc. It seems to me that this article would be better titled military organization. Any objections if I move it and start a new stub for Military unit? — Michael Z. 2005-02-9 06:53 Z
Army group is also called a front, I think it's important to add that to the table since it's very common in WWII's books and films...
Necrothesp, what other branches of service have "regiments" at the battalion (II) level? In the Canadian army, I believe only armoured regiments are at the unit level. Other branches have "battalions" as units, and "regiments" are considered higher up (although I don't think they really exist as permanent organizations). — Michael Z. 2005-03-13 18:58 Z
Regiment instead of Battalion is also used for Signal units of the Canadian Forces. They also use Squadron for Company and Troop for Platoon. SigPig 04:43, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't also be somthing in the article about the Navy Sturacture of units.-- Scott3 18:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion: How about adding a column with deputy (XO) commanders as well?
Question: In the US companies are commanded by a Captain. Where can I find Majors as commpany commanders and how common is it for Majors to be in such position?
I question the inclusion of a major-general as a possible commander of a brigade. Can anyone give examples of this, or is it an error that needs to be rectified? bigpad 19:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the merge. This page a bit small, almost a stub. Colonel Marksman 20:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
How about this list:
I think it is fairly consistent with what I know about the Soviet, German, Finnish and US organizations. The British probably have something much much more complicated :) -- JNi 12:46 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
The problem with the table as it was is that it appears quite specific to the US army, and it's hard in that format to make it more general in a clean way. - Khendon
Name | Number of personnel | Number of subordinate units | Officer in charge |
---|---|---|---|
Corps | 30,000+ | 2 divisions | Lieutenant General |
Division | 10,000–20,000 | 2/3 regiments or brigades | Major General |
Regiment(UK)/ Brigade(USA) | 2000–5000 | 2+ battalions | Brigadier |
Battalion | 300–1000 | 2–6 companies | Colonel |
Company | 150–300 | 3–6 platoons | Major |
Platoon | 30–40 | 2+ squads | First lieutenant or captain |
Squad | 8–12 | 2+ fireteams | NCO ( Sergeant) |
Fireteam (Mostly USA) | 4–5 | n/a | NCO |
The numbers and ranks are, afaik, wrong for the British Army. A British company would, unless I'm mistaken, be commanded by a Captain. A Corps isn't two divisions, it's an irregular grouping. A "Squad" is usually a "Section". The Regiment size is far too large, I think. And so on. - Khendon
If we're having multiple tables, why not have them on separate pages? That way they can be combined with extensive notes on irregularities and further information as appropriate. - Khendon
I think the current Finnish army only has battalion/brigade/corps. Skipping division entirely. In WW2 it was battalion/regiment/division/corps. But anyway, If we have separate tables on separate pages what is left for the main page? :) -- JNi 15:06 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
I prefer this table - opinions? - Khendon 09:14 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
British Army | US Armed Forces | |
Corps | Variously sized; administrative grouping by common function | Two divisions (30,000+ soldiers), commanded by a Lieutenant General |
Division | 3 or 4 brigades grouped for a fighting role or for administration | 3 or 4 brigades (10,000–20,000), commanded by a Major General |
Brigade | Regiments and supporting units grouped together for a particular purpose - typically 5,000 soldiers | 2 or more regiments (2,000–5,000), commanded by a Brigadier |
Regiment | Around 650 soldiers, commanded by a Lieutenant Colonel | |
Battalion | 2-6 companies (300-1,000), commanded by a Colonel |
Oops, got to do some work ;-) Feel free to continue, or I'll do it later - Khendon 09:14 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
How about a separate column for size? - Khendon
We only have the army structure. Try to get the structure tables for air forces and navies.- B-101 15:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think unit is a generic term for infantry battalion or armoured regiment; a homogenous organization, as opposed to a smaller organization like a platoon or company, or a larger organization like a battle group, division or army, etc. It seems to me that this article would be better titled military organization. Any objections if I move it and start a new stub for Military unit? — Michael Z. 2005-02-9 06:53 Z
Army group is also called a front, I think it's important to add that to the table since it's very common in WWII's books and films...
Necrothesp, what other branches of service have "regiments" at the battalion (II) level? In the Canadian army, I believe only armoured regiments are at the unit level. Other branches have "battalions" as units, and "regiments" are considered higher up (although I don't think they really exist as permanent organizations). — Michael Z. 2005-03-13 18:58 Z
Regiment instead of Battalion is also used for Signal units of the Canadian Forces. They also use Squadron for Company and Troop for Platoon. SigPig 04:43, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't also be somthing in the article about the Navy Sturacture of units.-- Scott3 18:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion: How about adding a column with deputy (XO) commanders as well?
Question: In the US companies are commanded by a Captain. Where can I find Majors as commpany commanders and how common is it for Majors to be in such position?
I question the inclusion of a major-general as a possible commander of a brigade. Can anyone give examples of this, or is it an error that needs to be rectified? bigpad 19:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the merge. This page a bit small, almost a stub. Colonel Marksman 20:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)