Re: [SG/DS] Unit Size Definitions

----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: [SG/DS] Unit Size Definitions

>
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 09:36:01 +0100 "Germ" <germ@germy.co.uk> writes:
> >> I had sort of just reverted to remembering "most do it look that,
> >except
> >the
> >> Brits who always have to be different..." ;)
> >> Beth
> >
> >Funny, I thought it was those rebelious colonies that had to be
> >different ;)
> >
> >Jeremey
>
> Unique, different, picky, one of those adjectives. <grin>
> Gracias,
> Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com

It's not just us that like TO&E wierdness- pre-WW2 ahem pre-GPW Soviet
RGK
Heavy Tank Brigade (T-35s):
2 tank batallions each of 19 tanks- 1 for the batallion CO, 3 in a staff
platoon and 3 platoons of 5 tanks.  Perhaps they decided that
"companies"
were bourgeois! Or the insane late '41 Tank Brigade - 2 tank batallions,
each of 3 companies, each company differently organized and using
different
tank types!

I recall that the WRG 1925 to 1950 rules have a note before their
organisation summaries on the differences between official
establishments
and organisations seen in reality- something to the effect that a UK
rifle
platoon at full strength had 3 sections of 10 and an HQ of 5 (memory
fades)
but would usually be 3 and 3x7 or 8 and that the minimum usable was 2
short
rifle sections and a combined HQ\rifle section totalling about 24 (i.e.
at
least 3 sections was seen as vital even at that level)

Rob Paul