How / why / what is the deal with numbering military units? Around here, for example, in days gone by, we had 64 TAS (Tactical Airlift Squadron) of the 928 TAG (Tactical Airlift Group).
Does that mean there were 63 others inside the 928, and there's at least 927 other TAGs?
If seems like Army units, especially, whip off their "...this or that and the other of which..." and this means something.
How does this work?
And what about the "1st, 3rd, 8th, 9th, etc., " Airforce? Hasn't there always only been one "Air Force"?
Back in the old days, the primary unit in the army was the regiment (1st Infantry Regiment) which was usually made up of 2 battalions. I think it was in the 50s when they basically stopped using the regiment as the primary unit and switched to battalions. So, while there was always a 1st Battalion of the 1st Infantry, up until that switch the 1st battalion wasn't really an independent unit. When they made that switch they continued to use the regimental designations as a link with the history of that unit even though it had no practical relevance. I've always thought that they should have kept the regimental designation and just shrunk the size of the unit down to the size of a battalion. So instead of having a regiment of 1000 men, they would have it one of 500 (for example).
No, you can't count on there always being 927 other TAGs. I'm not as familiar with AF designations, but they're kind of weird.
An air force is like an army in the Army. ;D
Quote from: MIKE on August 06, 2009, 03:26:07 AM
An air force is like an army in the Army. ;D
Except a numbered army is commanded by a three-star; a numbered air force is commanded by a two-star.
Quote from: Gunner C on August 06, 2009, 04:06:30 AM
Quote from: MIKE on August 06, 2009, 03:26:07 AM
An air force is like an army in the Army. ;D
Except a numbered army is commanded by a three-star; a numbered air force is commanded by a two-star.
Rank structures change over time. Most of the combatant commands (SAC, TAC, ACC, etc.) had Lt Gens commanding Numbered Air Forces.
Here are the recent commanders for 9th AF: Lt Gen James D. Hughes, 1 Dec 1973; Lt Gen James V. Hartinger, 1 Jul 1975; Lt Gen Arnold W. Braswell, 20 Jun 1978; Lt Gen Larry D. Welch, 1 Jun 1981; Lt Gen John L. Piotrowski, 18 Oct 1982; Lt Gen William L. Kirk, 18 Jul 1985; Lt Gen Charles A. Horner, 24 Mar 1987; Lt Gen Michael A. Nelson, 19 Jun 1992; Lt Gen John P. Jumper, 2 Aug 1994; Lt Gen Carl E. Franklin, 7 Jun 1996; Lt Gen Hal M. Hornburg, 11 May 1998; Lt Gen Charles F. Wald, 12 Jan 2000; Lt Gen T. Michael Moseley, 7 Nov 2001; Lt Gen Walter E. L. Buchanan III, 11 Aug 2003; Lt Gen Gary L. North, 16 Feb 2006-.
Quote from: MIKE on August 06, 2009, 03:26:07 AM
An air force is like an army in the Army. ;D
Sounds like DOUBLE TALK!! ;)
I'm thinking the numerical value of said naming conventions was discarded when the military started to develop traditions. As units distinguished themselves and developed linage and histories through honor, it seemed fitting to keep the name around as an hommage.
Tradition dictates lots of odd stuff, like ties (they serve no purpose on a modern suit, where once they were neckerchiefs for wiping sweat from the brow) or the braid on our service coats which was at one time a cuff.
For the sake of your collective sanities, don't try to understand the military system of numbering units. As someone stated, they originally started with the regimental system, going back to the Revolutionary War. Regiments normally are made up of battalions, which also have numbers. The comment about "army" is another gotcha. There used to be numbered armies in the US Army and they were in the regular chain of command. An Army denoted an organization of a particular number of people, but the whole concept of Armies has been dropped, only to be resurrected in time of global conflict(no not now).
The AF system evolved from the Army system, but it has undergone a zillion changes and no longer resembles what it started out to be.
Don't get too wrapped up in the numbering system: just live with it. It is not intended to make any sense to anyone not in the system.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 06, 2009, 03:02:09 AM
Back in the old days, the primary unit in the army was the regiment (1st Infantry Regiment) which was usually made up of 2 battalions. I think it was in the 50s when they basically stopped using the regiment as the primary unit and switched to battalions. So, while there was always a 1st Battalion of the 1st Infantry, up until that switch the 1st battalion wasn't really an independent unit. When they made that switch they continued to use the regimental designations as a link with the history of that unit even though it had no practical relevance. I've always thought that they should have kept the regimental designation and just shrunk the size of the unit down to the size of a battalion. So instead of having a regiment of 1000 men, they would have it one of 500 (for example).
No, you can't count on there always being 927 other TAGs. I'm not as familiar with AF designations, but they're kind of weird.
Regiments have 3 Battalions, not two and they were replaced by BRIGADES which are commanded by Colonels (Bns are commanded by LtCol's).
Someone should take note of how the Marines number units. If you can count on 10 fingers, your good.
Muscles Are Required Intelligence Not Essential
Could you "simli fi" that for me.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 06, 2009, 03:02:09 AM
Back in the old days, the primary unit in the army was the regiment (1st Infantry Regiment) which was usually made up of 2 battalions. I think it was in the 50s when they basically stopped using the regiment as the primary unit and switched to battalions. So, while there was always a 1st Battalion of the 1st Infantry, up until that switch the 1st battalion wasn't really an independent unit. When they made that switch they continued to use the regimental designations as a link with the history of that unit even though it had no practical relevance. I've always thought that they should have kept the regimental designation and just shrunk the size of the unit down to the size of a battalion. So instead of having a regiment of 1000 men, they would have it one of 500 (for example).
From Slate Magazine.......
Anyone watching Iraq war coverage has seen a stream of numbers go by, identifying particular Army divisions—the 101st Airborne, the 3rd Infantry, etc. What do these numbers mean? And if there's a 101st Airborne, what happened to the 100th and 102nd?
The first thing to know is that the Army's divisions were numbered in the order they were created. So the 1st Division was actually the first division; then came the 2nd, 3rd, etc.
There are, of course, gaps in the sequence. Today's Army has eight infantry divisions: the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, along with the 10th, 25th, 82nd, and 101st. What happened to the rest of them? Well, the military has cyclically expanded in wartime, creating lots of new units—during World War II, for example, the Army's had infantry divisions running all the way up to the 106th. But during peacetime, most of the war units are deactivated, which accounts for the holes.
How does the Army pick which divisions to keep? Each unit has its own customs and history, and the Army basically preserves the ones with the most glorious lineage. Take the 101st Airborne Division, which has been part of the Army since 1942. During World War II, the "Screaming Eagles" parachuted into Normandy and fought their way across Europe, making a heroic stand at Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge. The Army has kept the division on active duty ever since. During the same war, the Army's 100th and 102nd Divisions served no less bravely but somewhat less famously. Both were shuttered for good after the war.
TV coverage of Gulf War II also refers to various Army regiments (notably the 7th Cavalry Regiment, which has already tangled with Iraqi forces); but forget about trying to understand that numbering system. For a while, the Army issued regimental numbers in sequence. But the system gave out during the Civil War, when states raised and numbered their own regiments, and became further muddled during World War I, when newly formed federal regiments tried to reclaim the numbers of their Civil War forebears.
To make things more confusing, the Army has a habit of combining many regiments in the same unit. The 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, for example, includes parts of the 7th Infantry and 69th Armor regiments. It also includes a number of support units, whose numbers often bear little or no relation to the number of the combat unit they support.
Bonus Explainer: Division, regiment, battalion—what's the difference?
Divisions have 10,000-to-15,000 soldiers divided in three-to-five combat regiments and a number of support units.
Regiments have 3,000-to-5,000 soldiers and include several combat and support battalions. Each battalion has three-to-five line companies of 100-to-150 soldiers apiece.
Companies break down into three-to-five platoons of 20-to-40 people, which in turn break down into squads of eight-to-12.
----------
I could break out the technical Army/Air Force Officers Guide answers but Slate does a rather good job.
Quote from: Spike on August 06, 2009, 04:01:20 PM
I could break out the technical Army/Air Force Officers Guide answers but Slate does a rather good job.
Link?
In General -- All the land forces are divisible down to 3 (in actuality 3-5)
Fire Team (made up of 3-5) - 3-5 fire teams makes a squad, times 3-5 gives you a platoon, 3-5 platoons a company, 3-5 companies makes a battalion, 3-5 battalions makes a brigade, 3-5 brigades makes a division, 3-5 divisions makes an Army, 3-5 Armies makes an Army Group, 3-5 Army Groups makes up a Theater Command. Accordingly leadership rank moves up with Fire Teams led by Corporals, Squads led by Sgts, Platoons led by 2nd Lts, Company's led by Capt, battalions led by Maj. or Lt. Col., Brigades led by Colonels or Brigadiers, Divisions Maj. Generals, Army's are 3 stars, Army Groups led by full Generals, 4 and 5 stars for the Army and Army Groups, and Theater Command by a 5 Star (WW2 reference only no 5 stars since Omar Bradley, I think) Simple? Marines and Air Force are a little different but those are your basics.
In the Air it used to be the same. In WW1, a "flight" was 3 planes. When radios came along a flight became 2 (lead and Wing man) Sometimes 2 is a flight element but this makes for confusion... so for this discussion a Flight of 2 down from formation of 3 and that was because radio communications, radar, AWACs, gave the flight of 2 the information of having 3 planes or more (force multiplier and command and control multipliers also) The Germans figured this out, the Brits adopted it, and by the time we Americans joined WW2 we did the same.
We have the same basic division of labor in our cockpits. The crew resource management scheme is a pilot, observer, and scanner. It goes all the way back to the Greeks at Thermopylae in 480 BC. And as fortune would have it today (8-6) is the 2,489th anniversary of the first day of this battle.
I'll be lecturing tonight on the same subject at our squadron meeting. Titled; "We are All Spartans." It is the basics of command and control practiced, modified a little, and carried through to today.
Quote from: MSG Mac on August 06, 2009, 06:27:47 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on August 06, 2009, 03:02:09 AM
Back in the old days, the primary unit in the army was the regiment (1st Infantry Regiment) which was usually made up of 2 battalions. I think it was in the 50s when they basically stopped using the regiment as the primary unit and switched to battalions. So, while there was always a 1st Battalion of the 1st Infantry, up until that switch the 1st battalion wasn't really an independent unit. When they made that switch they continued to use the regimental designations as a link with the history of that unit even though it had no practical relevance. I've always thought that they should have kept the regimental designation and just shrunk the size of the unit down to the size of a battalion. So instead of having a regiment of 1000 men, they would have it one of 500 (for example).
No, you can't count on there always being 927 other TAGs. I'm not as familiar with AF designations, but they're kind of weird.
Regiments have 3 Battalions, not two and they were replaced by BRIGADES which are commanded by Colonels (Bns are commanded by LtCol's).
Yes, at one time Regiments had three battalions. But before that they had 2 battalions....
I read somewhere (wish I could recall the source) that in WW1 or 2 US military slapped some high numbers on units to confuse the enemy, make them think we had more divisions in our 'Order of Battle' than we really did...I believe this was banking on the knowledge that US units had previously been numbered sequentially
Quote from: Smithsonia on August 06, 2009, 04:34:53 PM
... 3-5 divisions makes an Army...
Actually, 3 - 5 Divisions make a Corps.
XVIII Airborne Corps consists of 82nd Abn, 101st AASLT, 3rd ID, 10th Mtn
I Corps consists of 1 ID, 2ID (non-Korea units), 25th ID
III Corps consists of 4 ID, 1 Cav, 1AD, 3rd ACR
Quote from: ZigZag911 on August 06, 2009, 09:49:20 PM
I read somewhere (wish I could recall the source) that in WW1 or 2 US military slapped some high numbers on units to confuse the enemy, make them think we had more divisions in our 'Order of Battle' than we really did...I believe this was banking on the knowledge that US units had previously been numbered sequentially
These were the so-called 'Phantom Divisions' in WW2. They even went so far as to have shoulder sleeve insignia (SSI) made for them and staged photos that were 'leaked' to agents of the Reich. These started at the 107th Division as I recall, and featured some really 'unique' patches...including some Airborne ones as well.
Quote from: Spike on August 06, 2009, 04:01:20 PM
I could break out the technical Army/Air Force Officers Guide answers but Slate does a rather good job.
Good thing you aren't quoting AP. That would cost you a fortune.