ROAD divisions

[Hellfish6]

I'm trying to find out what the US Army and Marines were like around 1962. I know some divisions were being reorganized under the ROAD concept, but I can't find out much about what that entailed. Does anyone have any resources I could look up that would tell me how a ROAD division was organized and which units were reorganized as such?

 

Thanks...

[RETAC21]

I'm trying to find out what the US Army and Marines were like around 1962. I know some divisions were being reorganized under the ROAD concept, but I can't find out much about what that entailed. Does anyone have any resources I could look up that would tell me how a ROAD division was organized and which units were reorganized as such?

 

Thanks...

 

Look up the US Center for Military History, among the organisational series and the online bookshelf you will have the info.

[Richard Lindquist]

ROAD Divisions

 

Armored Division TOE 17E

Div HHC

Bde HHC (X3)

Tank Bn (X6)

Mech Inf Bn (X5)

Armd Cav Sqn

DivArty HHB

105mm SP How Bn (X3)

155mm/8in SP How Bn

Honest John Bn

Sig Bn

Engr Bn

Avn Bn

MP Co

DISCOM HQ/Band

Admin Co

Sply & Trans Bn

Medical Bn

Maint Bn

 

Mechanized Division TOE 37E

Div HHC

Bde HHC (X3)

Tank Bn (X3)

Mech Inf Bn (X7)

Armd Cav Sqn

DivArty HHB

105mm SP How Bn (X3)

155mm/8in SP How Bn

Honest John Bn

Sig Bn

Engr Bn

Avn Bn

MP Co

DISCOM HQ/Band

Admin Co

Sply & Trans Bn

Medical Bn

Maint Bn

 

Infantry Division TOE 7E

Div HHC

Bde HHC (X3)

Tank Bn (X2)

Leg Inf Bn (X8)

Armd Cav Sqn

DivArty HHB

105mm Towed How Bn (X3)

155mm Towed/8in SP How Bn

Honest John Bn

Sig Bn

Engr Bn

Avn Bn

MP Co

DISCOM HQ/Band

Admin Co

Sply & Trans Bn

Medical Bn

Maint Bn

 

Airborne Division TOE 57E

Div HHC

Bde HHC (X3)

Airborne Tank Bn

Airborne Inf Bn (X9)

Air Cav Sqn

DivArty HHB

105mm Towed How Bn (X3)

155mm Towed/Little John Bn

Sig Bn

Engr Bn

Avn Bn

MP Co

DISCOM HQ/Band

Admin Co

Sply & Svc Co

QM Abn Equip Co

Medical Bn

Maint Bn

[Richard Lindquist]

In early 1962, only the 1st Armd Div at Fort Hood and the 5th mechanized Division at Ft Carson/Ft Devens were organized under ROAD. The other active army divisions were converted between mid-1963 and mid-1965. Infantry and airborne divisions were under the pentomic organization (five battlegroups of five rifle companies) and armored divisions were under the three combat commands organization.

[Hellfish6]

Thanks guys.

[Ken Estes]

The USMC division had been stripped of the heaviest equipment items post-1958 [M series T/Os] to make it more capable of air transport. The tank, self-propelled artillery and amphibian tractor units went to a corps level pool orgn called Force Troops Atlantic and Pacific. Left in the MarDiv were:

HQ Bn

3xInf Regt [Hq Co, 3 inf bn]

Arty Bn [3-4 bns, varying equipment , 105mm but including the M30 4.2" mortar batteries, repl. by M98 Howtar battery in ea. bn after 1960]

Recon Bn

Combat Engineer Bn

AT Bn [M50 Ontos]

Service Bn

 

 

 

As I recall, the Amphibious Tractor Bn was the first to return to the division, and I lack a date for it. Tanks returned in 1974, SP arty after 1976.

The artillery began to return to normal in 1962, regaining a 155mm 4th Bn, and the 5th Bn [sP arty] arrived c.1977.

 

That will have to do until you find a document. I can look it up next week.

[panzerpelle]

I made a TOE presenetation of the ROAD division on the following site. The source for the TOE was a Swedish Army Information booklet from the 60s.

http://www.tdg.nu/indextoemodern.html

Take look at the lower part of the list.

/Pelle

Edited March 8, 2007 by panzerpelle

[Old Tanker]

I made a TOE presenetation of the ROAD division on the following site. The source for the TOE was a Swedish Army Information booklet from the 60s.

http://www.tdg.nu/indextoemodern.html

Take look at the lower part of the list.

/Pelle

I was in a ROAD div. in CONUS in '63-4.

 

That's pretty accurate but the ROAD div. did vary.

 

Differences between NATO , CONUS and SEA deployed divs. did exist.

 

We had M-56 SPAT intead of ENTAC. The M-41 was replaced by M-48A3s even in the Cav. Sqdr.

No Davy Crocket to SEA.

 

The main one I would question is the both the M-20 RL and the M-67 RR being deployed together , I think the M-67 replaced the M-20 on a one for one basis.

I have never figured out how many tank bns. an inf. div. took to SEA , it seems that only one in some if not all of them.

[Hellfish6]

Thanks, Pelle.

[Hellfish6]

OK, a couple more questions more about the vehicles than the organizations.

 

In 1962/3 what was the most common:

 

Jeep model: The M38? M151?

 

2.5t truck: M35? Same for Marines?

 

5t truck: M809?

 

AVLB: Was the M48 AVLB around in '62?

 

APC: Was the M59 still in widespread use or had the M113 largely replaced most M59s in mech units?

 

Howitzers: Was the M108 in service? Was the M109 in service?

 

Thanks!

[Old Tanker]

OK, a couple more questions more about the vehicles than the organizations.

 

In 1962/3 what was the most common:

 

Jeep model: The M38? M151?

 

2.5t truck: M35? Same for Marines?

 

5t truck: M809?

 

AVLB: Was the M48 AVLB around in '62?

 

APC: Was the M59 still in widespread use or had the M113 largely replaced most M59s in mech units?

 

Howitzers: Was the M108 in service? Was the M109 in service?

 

Thanks!

 

It depends on the location of the units.

Priority was NATO . They tended to get everything first.

In '63 STRAC was set-up and became priority two( 2nd , 82nd & 101st).

Two divs in S. Korea 7th & 1st Cav.

CONUS

N.G. and RFA.

 

The 2nd I.D. was CONUS and received sh*t in '62. Then it was converted to ROAD and into STRAC so starting in the spring of '63 it got all kinds of toys. M-151 , M-113 , M-88 , M-14 , M-79 , M-67 and by the spring of '64 the M-114 and M-48A3 in the cav. sqrd replacing the M-41. So a major upgrade took place in a one year period. Also the airborne started geting the M-16 and the M-60 mg in late '63-early '64. I believe the Cuban Missile Crisis in Oct. '62 setup the massive changes of '63 or so it seemed.

 

So replacements roll out across the active units over a couple of years. The N.G. still had M-1 rifles into the '70s.

[Richard Lindquist]

M67 replaced the bazooka in the rifle companies. Supporting units kept their bazookas until they were replaced by the LAW

 

 

In 1962, our company was authorized 8 jeeps. We had one M151, six M38A1, and one M38. Generally Europe and the 82nd Airborne had the newer stuff, the rest of CONUS was second, and Hawaii and Korea had the oldest stuff.

 

Jeeps M151/M38A1/M38 mix.

 

3/4 ton was pretty much universally Dodge M37B1

 

2-1/2 ton was a mix of M34/M35 Reo vehicles and M135/M211 GMC vehicles. Europe had all Reos, CONUS was a mix of Reo units and GMC units. Generally A GMC unit would have GMC for the cargo trucks and Reo for the shop vans, fuel tankers, and other specialty vehicles. Korea and hawaii were pretty much universally GMC. In CONUS, units with a Europe contingency had Reos and units with a Pacific or Western hemisphere contingency would have GMC

 

5 ton were the M54 based vehicles.

 

10 ton was the M123 tractor and M125 prime mover. LeRoi built the engines.

 

A lot of the old PACCAR M26 tractor were still around as well.

 

Multifuel versions of the 2-1/2 ton and diesel versions of the 5 ton began filtering into units in late 1963. Prior to that, everything was gas.

 

SP artillery included the M52 and M44 on the M41 tank chassis and M53 and M55 on the M48 tank chassis.

 

M41 and M48A2 made up the bulk of the tank fleet, but M60s were just beginning to be fielded. US units in Korea still had M47.

 

Recovery vehicles were a mix of M74, M51, and M88.

 

M59 was the primary APC, but M113 were beginning to appear.

 

AN/VRC-8/9/10 series FM radios were standard

 

High priority units had M14 rifles. Other uynits had a mix of M1 rifles and carbines.

[Hellfish6]

Outstanding info. I don't suppose you have anything on the Marines? I assume they'd have LVTP5 and LVTH6, but other than that I can't make more than educated guesses. I don't know when the Corps swapped M47s for M48s, what their primary truck was, what their artillery was, etc.

[Colin Williams]

What was the thinking behind the mismatch between the number of armored or infantry battalions and the number of brigades? Were one or more battalions supposed to act directly under divisional control or were the brigades expected to be unbalanced?

 

In the armored division there are 3 brigades, 6 tank battalions (potentially 2 per brigade) and 5 infantry battalions. How was the infantry supposed to be distributed?

 

Similarly, the mechanized division has 3 brigades, 3 tank battalions (potentially 1 per brigade) and 7 infantry battalions. Again a mismatch?

 

The infantry division spreads the problem across the board with 3 brigades, 2 tank battalions and 8 infantry battalions.

 

I'm confused.

[Old Tanker]

What was the thinking behind the mismatch between the number of armored or infantry battalions and the number of brigades? Were one or more battalions supposed to act directly under divisional control or were the brigades expected to be unbalanced?

 

In the armored division there are 3 brigades, 6 tank battalions (potentially 2 per brigade) and 5 infantry battalions. How was the infantry supposed to be distributed?

 

Similarly, the mechanized division has 3 brigades, 3 tank battalions (potentially 1 per brigade) and 7 infantry battalions. Again a mismatch?

 

The infantry division spreads the problem across the board with 3 brigades, 2 tank battalions and 8 infantry battalions.

 

I'm confused.

 

There was more confusion than that.

 

We mech'd up I believe two inf. bns. assigning them the M-113s that use to be in the Trans. bn.

 

We didn't go to 2 tk. bns . but cut back from 5 tanks co. of 17 + bn. tanks to 3 cos. of 17 + bn Hq.

 

Plus when the 1st CAV went to SEA I believe it only took 6 inf. bns. and a redo of the Cav. sqdrn.

[Ken Estes]

Outstanding info. I don't suppose you have anything on the Marines? I assume they'd have LVTP5 and LVTH6, but other than that I can't make more than educated guesses. I don't know when the Corps swapped M47s for M48s, what their primary truck was, what their artillery was, etc.

Well, if we use 1962 as the mark, the div arty regt is in midst of reorgn, as I pointed out and had the M114 155mm, the M101A1 105mm and the 107mm HowTar. SP arty in ForTrps were M53/55. The jeeps were all M38s [the last ones were replaced in 2nd MarDiv in mid-1970! - exc for a few comm vehicles]. The 2 1/2 were M35 series gassers, don't know about other motor T [likely M54 and M123 series gassers], so will wait until next week to see. The tanks were M48A1 [last M47s turned in in 1959 - as were the Sherman flame tanks - on Okinawa, 3rd Tk Bn. 1st Tk Bn never used them], M103A1 and M67A1 [all began conversion to diesel engines, coincidence RF, NBC particulates in Dec62/Aug63]. M50 Ontos, 106mm RR on mechanical mules, The LVTP-5, C-5, R-1 and H-6; but the LVTE-1 doesn't enter service until 1963. The heavy stuff is not in the division, though.

 

I don't know when we had completely changed from .30 to 7.62 for infantry weapons, but we retained the M3 .45 SMG for vehicle crews into the 70s. The tanks and amtracs continued using M1919/M37 Browning .30 through 1974.

[Hellfish6]

Great, thanks again Ken.

[Richard Lindquist]

What was the thinking behind the mismatch between the number of armored or infantry battalions and the number of brigades? Were one or more battalions supposed to act directly under divisional control or were the brigades expected to be unbalanced?

 

In the armored division there are 3 brigades, 6 tank battalions (potentially 2 per brigade) and 5 infantry battalions. How was the infantry supposed to be distributed?

 

Similarly, the mechanized division has 3 brigades, 3 tank battalions (potentially 1 per brigade) and 7 infantry battalions. Again a mismatch?

 

The infantry division spreads the problem across the board with 3 brigades, 2 tank battalions and 8 infantry battalions.

 

I'm confused.

 

When I was in 3rd Armd Div Dec 64-Jan 66, the 3rd Bde at Friedburg had two tk and one mech, the 2nd Bde at Gelnhausen had one tk and two mech, while the 1st Bde at Kirchgoens had three tk and two mech.

 

Later, to increase the number of tanks against the Soviets, the mech divs went from three tk and seven mech to four tk and six mech (also a personnel constraint)

 

As the ROAD div evolved, they went to six tk and four mech in the armd div and five tk and five mech in the mech div

 

Inf div finally settled on eight leg inf, one tk, and one mech.

 

Inf divs deploying to VN had either nine inf or nine inf and one tk. After getting into VN, the divs often requested and recived permission to mech up one inf bn.

 

The whole ROAD concept was that brigades were to be "fluid" and that a brigade HQ could have at any one time two to five manuever battalions under control.

 

1st Cav went to VN with six light leg inf bns and two abn inf bns.

[whyhow]

found this online.

 

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/docs/xxi/toc.htm

 

from part 2

"Initially, the ROAD 65 study focused only on the reorganization of the infantry and armored divisions and creating a mechanized division, but on April 16 General Eddleman also directed that CONARC also relook the airborne division design. The divisions CONARC developed each had about 15,000 personnel. Eliminating the Pentomic battle groups, the new divisions looked like modern hybrids of the World War II designs. The new structures incorporated a common division base with a division headquarters, combat support assets and a divisional logistical support command. The predominant type of combat maneuver battalions added to the base determined the type of division (appendices C-11 to C-12). Armored divisions, for example, had six tank and five mechanized infantry battalions.

 

The ROAD-65 division's three maneuver brigades reflected the influence of the old armored division combat commands. The brigades did not have any assigned units. Planners intended for the brigades to serve as tactical headquarters, each capable of controlling the operations of two to five maneuver battalions. Brigade commanders could task organize the battalions to create combined arms task forces.

 

The proliferation of options for how the division could task organize its brigades and battalions was the most significant and controversial innovation in the new design. Lieutenant General Garrison Davidson, the First Army Commander, for example, argued that the division was "too flexible," unnecessarily abandoning traditional organizations like the old fixed infantry regiments. 48

 

Despite criticism, the Army implemented ROAD without testing the concept with a major experimental force. Senior leaders concluded experimentation wasn't needed because they were returning the division design to a more proven, conventional organization. They also believed that enhancing the division's ability to task organize was a prudent response to the Army's need for more flexible forces. The ROAD division reorganization put the Army firmly back on the track of making cumulative improvements on previous combat-tested designs. "

[Richard Lindquist]

Without testing??? The 1st Armored Division at Fort Hood and the 5th Mechanized Division at Fort Carson/Fort Devens were the "guinea pig" organizations and essentially wrung the glitches out of the organization from the draft TOE to the final E-series TOE. The airborne divisions made a two-step move going quickly from the E-seies to the F-series.

 

The concept of brigade HHC with attachable/detachable seoarate manuever battalions had been pretty much wrung out in the combat commands of the armored divisions between 1943 and 1961 and was much superior to the five-by-five battle group concept of the fifties. It sort of makes the decision in the late-thirties to eliminate the divisional brigades unfortunate. McNair should have suggested eliminatiing the regimental echelon with battalions attached to brigades for the WWII infantry division.

 

There were two aspects to the ROAD reorg. The first was to go with the tailorable brigades as used in the armored division combat commands. The second was to "functionalize" support as was used in the pentomic airborne division. The D-series infantry and armored divisions had a "Division Trains" organization with a very small HQ and Ordanance/Quartermaster/ Medical units. In the E-series, the DISCOM had functional supply, transport, maintenance, and medical units.

 

The E-series took the old Ordnance Battalion and subtracted the Div Ord Ammo Officer and the Div Ord Gen Sply Officer and added the Engineer Field Maintenance Section from the Engr Bn, the Signal Field Maintenance Section from the Sig Bn, a few QM Maint types from the QM Co/Bn, and two Chem maint types from the Div Chem Off section. The Transport Aircraft Maint Det was upgraded to a company and made part of the Maint Bn.

[Colin Williams]

When I was in 3rd Armd Div Dec 64-Jan 66, the 3rd Bde at Friedburg had two tk and one mech, the 2nd Bde at Gelnhausen had one tk and two mech, while the 1st Bde at Kirchgoens had three tk and two mech.

 

Later, to increase the number of tanks against the Soviets, the mech divs went from three tk and seven mech to four tk and six mech (also a personnel constraint)

 

As the ROAD div evolved, they went to six tk and four mech in the armd div and five tk and five mech in the mech div

 

Inf div finally settled on eight leg inf, one tk, and one mech.

 

Inf divs deploying to VN had either nine inf or nine inf and one tk. After getting into VN, the divs often requested and recived permission to mech up one inf bn.

 

The whole ROAD concept was that brigades were to be "fluid" and that a brigade HQ could have at any one time two to five manuever battalions under control.

 

1st Cav went to VN with six light leg inf bns and two abn inf bns.

 

Thanks Richard. Would it be wrong to guess that one of the main reasons for the uneven distributions of battalions relative to brigades was to force divisions to operate with this flexibility? Presumably if the TOE gave each division 3 brigade HQs and 9 battalions most would end up using 3 battalions with each brigade, no matter what doctrine said.

[Richard Lindquist]

Thanks Richard. Would it be wrong to guess that one of the main reasons for the uneven distributions of battalions relative to brigades was to force divisions to operate with this flexibility? Presumably if the TOE gave each division 3 brigade HQs and 9 battalions most would end up using 3 battalions with each brigade, no matter what doctrine said.

 

When we first went ROAD, the division commanders would periodically remind the brigade commanders that the battalions were only "on loan" to them and were not part of an "empire".

 

Since that time, division staffs have gotten lazy and don't want to have to deal with a lot of different units. As a result, in many divisions, the division base battalions have all been more or less permently assigned to the manuever brigades, the aviation brigade, and the DISCOM for administration causing some officers to think that one brigade has engineer support while the other two brigades do not.

 

 

1st Log Command did this at Fort hood back in 1963-64, assigning every single attached unit except the 1st Log HHC to either the 29th QM Gp or the 185th Ord Bn. I was in the 185th and we ended up with six companies and five separate detachments and a strength of 1200 all to be controlled by a 37 officer and man HHD.

[FLOZi]

Sorry for the epic bump here (especially if I am violating any forum etiquette), but this thread is full of excellent information I was looking for (thank you) and I had a specific question about ROAD companies.

In the anti-tank section of of a mechanized companies weapon's platoon, were the M40's mounted on jeeps or on M113?

FM 7-11 (62) ( http://www.survivalebooks.com/free manuals/1962 US Army Vietnam War Rifle Company, Infantry, Airborne Infantry 269p.pdf page 8 ) discusses the fact that the 81mm mortars in the weapon's platoon were were in full track mortar carriers (presumably M125) for a mechanized company, but makes no mention of the anti-tank section, implying they are mounted in 1/4ton trucks the same as in an infantry company?

I appreciate that this might differ 'on paper' vs 'in practice' and over time, too.

Edited January 18, 2021 by FLOZi

[RETAC21]

It looks like it:

This is Italy but look in the bacK

[RETAC21]

And here