LouieD Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Found this n the Carl Vuono Papers........ TAA 92 page 7.pdf https://emu.usahec.org/alma/multimedia/514836/20184784MNBT989110553F025463I001.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 (edited) Bit confused by this one Louie, what do the numbers represent, battalions, numbers of battalions or other? I find it hard to believe they had 199 companies in Berlin for example.... Thanks as always for sharing. Edited April 30, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 16 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Bit confused by this one Louie, what do the numbers represent, battalions, numbers of battalions or other? I find it hard to believe they had 199 companies in Berlin for example.... Thanks as always for sharing. It's the designation of the unit: 199 Brigade in Berlin Very interesting paper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Of course it was! Pardon my complete ignorance. I always knew of it as the Berlin Brigade.🙄 Was 1st Army CONUS based? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 29 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Of course it was! Pardon my complete ignorance. I always knew of it as the Berlin Brigade.🙄 Was 1st Army CONUS based? I Corps, yes, composed of National Guard units, it's interesting that V Corps has NG units to fill in, and 5th ID (active) is kept as CENTAG reserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 I remember looking through one of my old Janes books, and they actually had a National Guard Armored Division. Was that the 49th that appears in III Corp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted April 30, 2021 Author Share Posted April 30, 2021 More about CAPSTONE: 3-1. History and principles a. The WARTRACE Program dates back to 1973 when the Affil¬ iation Program was approved. The intent of Affiliation was to im¬ prove the training and readiness of RC combat battalions and brigades by associating them with AA units. Under this program, AA divisions formed training relationships with ARNG and USAR units and worked with these units during both AT and IDT. In 1976, combat support (CS) and combat service support (CSS) units were added to the program. In 1978, two ARNG divisions were linked with two AA divisions under the Division Partnership Program to increase the readiness of ARNG divisions. b. The success of the Affiliation Program led to an expansion of the program’s goal in 1979. The goal was to integrate RC units into war plans. The Affiliation Program, other readiness programs, RC force modernization programs, and wartime requirements were all rolled into the CAPSTONE Program. The program's original objectives— (1) Clearly defined the role of every unit in the Army (AA and RC) for either USAREUR wartime or CONUS sustaining base requirements. (2) Established both planning and training associations between RC units and the wartime AA headquarters. (3) Established a Total Army program for force planning. (4) Established a Total Army program for POMCUS, moderniza¬ tion, training, and readiness. (5) Established a basis from which to plan mobilization and deployment of RC units in wartime. c. The Army CAPSTONE Program was established by the Chief of Staff of the Army on 6 December 1979. FORSCOM was desig¬ nated as the coordinating authority for CAPSTONE and published initial CAPSTONE alignments in August 1980. d. In 1983, the program was expanded to encompass three war¬ time scenarios - Europe, Pacific, and Southwest Asia. A fourth set of alignments for CONUS sustaining and training base and the Theater Defense Brigades was also developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted April 30, 2021 Author Share Posted April 30, 2021 Some more info, to be read in conjunction with my original post..... Prior to the end of the Cold War, the Army’s force requirements were daunting. For example, intelligence estimates credited the Soviet Army with more than two hundred divisions, eighty of which were manned at more than 50 percent strength and ready for operations with minimal mobilization and training.4 To address this kind of threat, the JCS developed a “Minimum-Risk Force” intended for a “high assurance of success” general war. In 1987, this force required 66 Army divisions: 40 for assignment to the European Command (EUCOM), 10 for the Central Command, 12 for the Pacific Command (PACOM), 2 for the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), and 2 for defense of the continental United States (CONUS). Lacking the resources required to provide U.S. troops to all contingencies simultaneously, the Joint Staff reduced force levels to those of a “Planning Force,” which could meet U.S. strategic objectives with “reasonable risk.” Planning Force requirements were 36 Army divisions in 1987: 26 EUCOM, 6 CENTCOM, 2 PACOM, 0 SOUTHCOM, and 2 CONUS. The Army’s actual “Current Force” for that year was somewhat smaller: 18 active divisions (5 of which had reserve component “round-out” brigades) and 10 Army National Guard divisions. This “Current Force” obviously accepted increased risk, especially in lower priority theaters. Based on risk analysis and political priorities, it apportioned the twenty-eight existing Army divisions to the regional combatant commands as follows: 19 EUCOM, 5 CENTCOM, 2 PACOM, 0 SOUTHCOM, and 2 CONUS. page 18 of..... https://history.army.mil/html/books/Defense_Reshaping/CMH 40-1-1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FALightFighter Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: I remember looking through one of my old Janes books, and they actually had a National Guard Armored Division. Was that the 49th that appears in III Corp? At one point, the ARNG had both the 49th and 50th Armored Divisions. IIRC, 49th was all Texas, while 50th was based in NJ, but also had units from New England and TX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Thanks for that FAL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted April 30, 2021 Author Share Posted April 30, 2021 4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: I remember looking through one of my old Janes books, and they actually had a National Guard Armored Division. Was that the 49th that appears in III Corp? Stuart, I will refer you to Chapters 13 & 14 for the era...... https://history.army.mil/html/books/060/60-14-1/cmhPub_60-14-1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted April 30, 2021 Author Share Posted April 30, 2021 4 hours ago, RETAC21 said: I Corps, yes, composed of National Guard units, it's interesting that V Corps has NG units to fill in, and 5th ID (active) is kept as CENTAG reserve. I believe this was because the POMCUS for 5 ID (M) was not stocked yet in 1987(Supposed to be in the Netherlands) and it was coming via fast sealift from the Gulf ports. I base my time frame on the fact that 81 IB (M) is still shown as separate and not as a Roundout for 9 ID (IIRC this happened in FY88). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted May 1, 2021 Share Posted May 1, 2021 Many thanks for that Louie, ive not see that before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 Thanks mate, great work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Stalin Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 On 4/30/2021 at 11:13 AM, LouieD said: More about CAPSTONE: 3-1. History and principles a. The WARTRACE Program dates back to 1973 when the Affil¬ iation Program was approved. The intent of Affiliation was to im¬ prove the training and readiness of RC combat battalions and brigades by associating them with AA units. Under this program, AA divisions formed training relationships with ARNG and USAR units and worked with these units during both AT and IDT. In 1976, combat support (CS) and combat service support (CSS) units were added to the program. In 1978, two ARNG divisions were linked with two AA divisions under the Division Partnership Program to increase the readiness of ARNG divisions. b. The success of the Affiliation Program led to an expansion of the program’s goal in 1979. The goal was to integrate RC units into war plans. The Affiliation Program, other readiness programs, RC force modernization programs, and wartime requirements were all rolled into the CAPSTONE Program. The program's original objectives— (1) Clearly defined the role of every unit in the Army (AA and RC) for either USAREUR wartime or CONUS sustaining base requirements. (2) Established both planning and training associations between RC units and the wartime AA headquarters. (3) Established a Total Army program for force planning. (4) Established a Total Army program for POMCUS, moderniza¬ tion, training, and readiness. (5) Established a basis from which to plan mobilization and deployment of RC units in wartime. c. The Army CAPSTONE Program was established by the Chief of Staff of the Army on 6 December 1979. FORSCOM was desig¬ nated as the coordinating authority for CAPSTONE and published initial CAPSTONE alignments in August 1980. d. In 1983, the program was expanded to encompass three war¬ time scenarios - Europe, Pacific, and Southwest Asia. A fourth set of alignments for CONUS sustaining and training base and the Theater Defense Brigades was also developed. This comes out from that: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a402044.pdf And nevertheless, thanks for info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted November 6, 2021 Author Share Posted November 6, 2021 More from the Carl Vuono papers, October 1986 Separate Infantry Bdes and Theatre Defense Bdes https://emu.usahec.org/alma/multimedia/589679/20184784MNBT989110548F024486I001.pdf Berlin Bde reorganization for the 1990's https://emu.usahec.org/alma/multimedia/993000/20181760MN000646.pdf MEMORANDUM FROM EDWARD C. NORMAN TO VARIOUS REGARDING FORCE MANAGEMENT DIVISION BLACK BOOK WITH ATTACHMENTS (ARNG Units and equipment October 1990) https://emu.usahec.org/alma/multimedia/590605/20183794MN002102.pdf Finally, for now, detailed conversion plans (down to BN and Coy level) of 28, 34, & 38 Inf Divs 1990 https://emu.usahec.org/alma/multimedia/590625/20183794MN002111.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted November 9, 2021 Share Posted November 9, 2021 Nice and interested documents. Thanks mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 This could be interested CIA-RDP85M00366R000100050023-2.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 And this LOC-HAK-533-3-3-3.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now