How long frontline for battalion?

[Marek Tucan]

How long parts of frontline were typical (or doctrinal) for battalions of various types (infantry, armor...) during WWII in various armies? Typical Bn assault and defensive fronts?

 

Thanks for replies!

[capt_starlight]

How long parts of frontline were typical (or doctrinal) for battalions of various types (infantry, armor...) during WWII in various armies? Typical Bn assault and defensive fronts?

 

Thanks for replies!

 

Pacific - Australia - frontage - how long is a piece of string ? Time in tropics was usually not more than a year but could be less dependent on casualties and operations. 39Bn AMF existed for 20 months, went down the Track, up the Track and into the Battle of Beach Heads with a short rest at Koitaki. It was disbanded soon after. At Koitaki it was started with 50 all ranks - after reinforcements of 400 personnel it was sent into the Beach Heads. At the conclusion of that couple of months it was 32 all ranks (including the CO and RMO) and had received some reinforcements......

 

In the desert, 2/48 Bn AIF started El Alamein at full strength (around 800 after LOB details). At the conclusion, the roll was called for the 25 personnel on parade.....

 

As to doctrine - see British equivalents. By the end of WW1 a division would control a front of some 5 miles in the trenches - with the equivalent of a couple of battalions actually in the line. I don't think it had "thinned" over much by the second "innings".

[Richard Lindquist]

How long parts of frontline were typical (or doctrinal) for battalions of various types (infantry, armor...) during WWII in various armies? Typical Bn assault and defensive fronts?

 

Thanks for replies!

 

Rule of thumb for units in the defense from say 1955-1985 was as follows:

 

Squad = 100 meters

 

Platoon = 400 meters

 

Company = 1,000 meters

 

Battalion = 2,500 meters

 

These figures assume that parts of the front (intervals between units) will be covered by direct fire of the units involved.

[Gregory]

Check this thread:

http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.p...&highlight=

[Marek Tucan]

Thanks!

[Redbeard]

8-10 km of Divisional frontline for defense would appear luxurious, 20km was not unusual, and much depending on terrain and availability of troops.

 

If only 8-10km, a "standard" triangular Division in defense would usually deploy "two up and one back", i.e. two Regiments/Brigades in front and the 3rd in a 2nd echelon, and each with two battalions in fronnt and the 3rd in 2nd echelon. That would give four line battalions with 12 line companies up front, and deployed in platoon to company sized hedgehog positions in chequerboard formation (as opposed to the continious frontline of WWI and early WWII). With company positions along the most dangerous terrain and platoon positions or simple observation posts/lines in closed/impassable terrain it will be very difficult to find a route through the first line without coming under heavy fire from two or more company positions + artillery. Next would come the front regt./bdes 2nd echelon and the entire 3rd regt./bde and independent battalions - usually counterattcaking.

 

If putting all the battalions of the front regts/bdes in front 15km in fairly open terrain would still give a strong first line and still with the 3rd regt/bde and independent battalions in reserve. If putting all regts/bdes in front, you have to count on artillery and corps/army reserves to stop serious enemy breakthroughs, that went terribly wrong for the Germans during Bagration in mid 1944. By mid/late WWII most armies had AT/TD battalions included or attached to the infantry division. Usually not deployed in the first line, but preferably in (several alternate) blocking positions in front of (potential) enemy armoured breakthroughs (PAKfront in German doctrine, but original US Army TD doctrine appear very similar, never got much used though).

 

Apart from the great plains of Ukraine and southern Russia the battlefields of WWII usually had varied terrain, meaning that a Divisional frontline would be unevenly manned. Although not much if any terrain is 100% impassable it makes a big difference if you have before you terrain that will only allow through a few men over a given span of time (like swamp, river, dense forrest or mountains) or you have open terrain with good roads. The first can often be well defended by some observatioin posts and a few MGs whereas the later will need your full attention. Not by placing all your eggs in the frontline basket, but by preparring firesupport, counterattack, obstacles and the co-ordination of those elements. If there is only one good road inside 60km a single Division will be a very tough opponent at that piece of frontline, but if good roads are only 1km apart 6 km of frontline to defend might easily be stretching it for a single Division.

 

On the offense concentration would naturally be bigger, but again much dependent on the terrain. In open terrain with good roads you simply can mass much more units and more freely choose where to place your main focus (Schwerpunkt/tyngde). In terrain less favourable to the attacker it will be obvious where you come and even if you have superior numbers having them leapfrog along a single good road is a logistic and trafficcontrol nightmare (not to mnetion the moral problem of having the unit next to attack allways pass by those just repelled).

 

The different armies would of course have varrying theories and practices, but by late WWII I think the above pretty much sums it up.

 

Regards

 

Steffen Redbeard

[Mk 1]

According to Soviet Field Fortifications 1941-45 by Gordon Rottman (Osprey, 2007), Red Army standard frontages were:

 

Section (squad): 40-50m wide x 35-45m deep

Platoon: 300m wide x 250m deep

Company: 700m wide x 700m deep

Battalion: 1-2km wide x 1.5-2km deep

Regiment: 3-4km wide x 2-4km deep

Division: 6-10km wide x 4-6km deep

 

This was "standard", but could vary by needs. From the book:

In sectors assessed as the most likely for the enemy main attack, divisions would be assigned narrower frontages and would establish more in-depth defenses. Conversely, divisions in less threatened sectors would defend fronts three times wider than was normal.... Because of these factors infantry unit frontages varied greatly. Table 1 [the information I provided above -mk1]indicates the prescribed defensive frontages and depths; they were slightly wider in the pre-war regulations.

 

-Mark 1