Misplaced Pages

User:Buckshot06/Sandbox Structure of the Soviet Ground Forces: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User:Buckshot06 Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:28, 5 April 2008 editBuckshot06 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users132,969 edits introduction← Previous edit Revision as of 21:34, 5 April 2008 edit undoBuckshot06 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users132,969 edits importing materialNext edit →
Line 3: Line 3:
The ] was renamed the Soviet Army just after victory. The 500+ rifle divisions that had shed so much blood on the Eastern Front were quickly reduced in number, and the multibrigade tank corps and mechanised corps that had provided the main striking punch were converted to a divisional structure. Cavalry formations were converted into further mechanised divisions, and additional combat support arms added and expanded. The mass, mobilisable, characteristic remained, with the Soviet Ground Forces developing several different tiers of readiness states (A B V etc). During the Cold War the Ground Forces were X, Y, Z in strucural terms.. incl Khruschev's cutbacks (cite numbers as precisely as possible)- ref needed. The ] was renamed the Soviet Army just after victory. The 500+ rifle divisions that had shed so much blood on the Eastern Front were quickly reduced in number, and the multibrigade tank corps and mechanised corps that had provided the main striking punch were converted to a divisional structure. Cavalry formations were converted into further mechanised divisions, and additional combat support arms added and expanded. The mass, mobilisable, characteristic remained, with the Soviet Ground Forces developing several different tiers of readiness states (A B V etc). During the Cold War the Ground Forces were X, Y, Z in strucural terms.. incl Khruschev's cutbacks (cite numbers as precisely as possible)- ref needed.


==introduction== ==introduction/Historical Overview==
, giving an overview of the major trials, tribulations and conflicts, followed by the the main body of the article. The main body needs to acknowledge the legacy of the Imperial Russian Army and the First World War experience that created the Soviet Union, the Civil War, and war with Poland of course. These would represent the introduction to why and how the Red Army was created. , giving an overview of the major trials, tribulations and conflicts, followed by the the main body of the article. The main body needs to acknowledge the legacy of the Imperial Russian Army and the First World War experience that created the Soviet Union, the Civil War, and war with Poland of course. These would represent the introduction to why and how the Red Army was created.


At the beginning of its existence, the Red Army functioned as a voluntary formation, without ranks or insignia. Democratic elections selected the officers. However, a decree of ], ] imposed obligatory military service for men of ages 18 to 40.<ref>Scott and Scott, 1979, p.5</ref> To service the massive draft, the Bolsheviks formed regional military commissariats (''voyennyy komissariat'', abbr. ''voyenkomat''), which today still exist in Russia in this function and under this name.

==Historical Overview==
of the development of the Ground Forces through its significant periods: formative (1925 - 1936), combat (1936 - 1946), transformative (1947 - 1961), consolidating (1962 - 1984), and final (1985 - 1993), and explain what happened for them to deserve these appellations (ok, not those actual words - I just used one word for what would be a sentence). of the development of the Ground Forces through its significant periods: formative (1925 - 1936), combat (1936 - 1946), transformative (1947 - 1961), consolidating (1962 - 1984), and final (1985 - 1993), and explain what happened for them to deserve these appellations (ok, not those actual words - I just used one word for what would be a sentence).
* For Historical section, I'd like to suggest combining the event narrative with doctrinal development, and not just another "List of..." type section. This means actual writing-in of the lessons and mistakes that resulted from, or contributed to development of the Ground Forces * For Historical section, I'd like to suggest combining the event narrative with doctrinal development, and not just another "List of..." type section. This means actual writing-in of the lessons and mistakes that resulted from, or contributed to development of the Ground Forces

At the beginning of its existence, the Red Army functioned as a voluntary formation, without ranks or insignia. Democratic elections selected the officers. However, a decree of ], ] imposed obligatory military service for men of ages 18 to 40.<ref>Scott and Scott, 1979, p.5</ref> To service the massive draft, the Bolsheviks formed regional military commissariats (''voyennyy komissariat'', abbr. ''voyenkomat''), which today still exist in Russia in this function and under this name.


==Higher direction - Politburo and MOD == ==Higher direction - Politburo and MOD ==
Line 19: Line 18:
Main Staff of the Ground Forces directorates .. technology developmental Directorates, mobilisation, budgets, test centres etc Main Staff of the Ground Forces directorates .. technology developmental Directorates, mobilisation, budgets, test centres etc


Conscription, and officer recruitment (briefly) ===Conscription, and officer recruitment===
In the mid-1920s the territorial principal of manning the Red Army was introduced. In each region able-bodied men were called up for a limited period of active duty in territorial units, which comprised about half the Army's strength, each year, for five years.<ref>Scott and Scott, 1979, p.12</ref> The first call-up period was for three months, with one month a year thereafter. A regular cadre provided a stable nucleus. By 1925 this system provided 46 of the 77 infantry divisions and one of the eleven cavalry divisions. The remainder consisted of regular officers and enlisted personnel serving two-year terms. The territorial system was finally abolished, with all remaining formations converted to the cadre divisions, in 1937–38.<ref>David Glantz, Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War 1941–43, University Press of Kansas, 2005, p.717 note 5.</ref>


Rifle forces, artillery, tank forces, engineers, signals, support organisations Rifle forces, artillery, tank forces, engineers, signals, support organisations
Line 106: Line 106:
:Rifle Corps was a formation that existed in the pre-Revolution Imperial Russian Army, and was inherited by the Red Army. First suggestions for creation of large mechanised or tank formations in the Soviet Union were suggested based on development of doctrine for publication as PU-36, the field regulations largely authored by ], and was created where "In the attack tanks must be employed in mass", envisaged as "Strategic cavalry"<ref>p.179, Simpkin</ref>. Although the name of "mechanised" may seem to the modern reader as referring to the infantry components of the Corps, in 1936 they referred to armoured vehicles only<ref>ibid., p180.</ref> with the word "motorised" referring to the units equipped with trucks. :Rifle Corps was a formation that existed in the pre-Revolution Imperial Russian Army, and was inherited by the Red Army. First suggestions for creation of large mechanised or tank formations in the Soviet Union were suggested based on development of doctrine for publication as PU-36, the field regulations largely authored by ], and was created where "In the attack tanks must be employed in mass", envisaged as "Strategic cavalry"<ref>p.179, Simpkin</ref>. Although the name of "mechanised" may seem to the modern reader as referring to the infantry components of the Corps, in 1936 they referred to armoured vehicles only<ref>ibid., p180.</ref> with the word "motorised" referring to the units equipped with trucks.
* ] — originally rifle or cavalry, later motor-rifle, tank, artillery, aviation, sapper or airborne. See ], ] * ] — originally rifle or cavalry, later motor-rifle, tank, artillery, aviation, sapper or airborne. See ], ]

===Wartime===
War experience prompted changes to the way front-line forces were organized. After six months of combat against the Germans, ] abolished the Rifle Corps intermediate level between the ] and ] level because while useful in theory, in the inexperienced state of the Red Army, they proved ineffective in practice.<ref>Glantz, Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War 1941–43, University Press of Kansas, 2005, p.179</ref> Following victory in the ] in summer of 1942, the High Command began to reintroduce Rifle Corps into its most experienced formations. The total number of Rifle Corps started at 62 on 22 June 1941, dropped to six by 1 January 1942, but then increased to 34 by February 1943, and 161 by New Years' Day 1944. Actual strengths of front-line divisions, authorized to contain 11,000 men in July 1941, were mostly no more than 50% of established strengths during 1941,<ref>David Glantz, 2005, p.189</ref> and divisions were often worn down on continuous operations to hundreds of men or even less.

On the outbreak of war the Red Army deployed mechanized corps and tank divisions whose development has been described above. The German attack battered many severely, and in the course of 1941 virtually all (barring two in the ]) were disbanded.<ref>Glantz, 2005, p.217–230</ref> It was much easier to coordinate smaller forces, and separate tank brigades and battalions were substituted. It was late 1942 and early 1943 before larger ] were fielded in order to employ armor en mass again. By mid 1942 these corps were being grouped together into Tank Armies whose strength by the end of the war could be up to 700 tanks and 50,000 men.
{{seealso|Red Army's tactics in World War II}}

===After the Second World War===
At the end of the Great Patriotic War the Red Army had over 500 rifle divisions and about a tenth that number of tank formations.<ref> Mark L Urban, Soviet Land Power</ref> Their experience of war gave the Soviets such faith in tank forces that from that point the number of tank divisions remained virtually unchanged, whereas the wartime infantry force was cut by two-thirds. The ] of the late war period were converted to tank divisions, and from 1957 the Rifle Divisions were converted to Motor Rifle Divisions (MRDs). MRDs had three motorized rifle regiments and a tank regiment, for a total of ten motor rifle battalions and six tank battalions; tank divisions had the proportions reversed.

By the middle of the 1980s the Ground Forces contained ]. About three-quarters were motor rifle divisions and the remainder tank divisions.<ref>M J Orr, The Russian Ground Forces and Reform 1992–2002, January 2003, Conflict Studies Research Centre, UK Defence Academy, Sandhurst, p.1</ref> There were also a large number of artillery divisions, separate artillery brigades, engineer formations, and other combat support formations. However only relatively few formations were fully war ready. Three readiness categories, A, B, and V, after the first three letters of the Cyrillic alphabet, were in force. The Category A divisions were certified combat-ready and were fully equipped. B and V divisions were lower-readiness, 50–75% (requiring at least 72 hours of preparation) and 10–33% (requiring two months) respectively.<ref>M J Orr, 2003, p.1 and David C Isby, Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, Jane's Publishing Company, 1988, p.30</ref> The internal military districts usually contained only one or two A divisions, with the remainder B and V series formations.

Soviet planning for most of the ] period would have seen ] of four to five divisions operating in ] made up of around four armies (and roughly equivalent to Western ]s). In the late 1970s and early 1980s new High Commands in the Strategic Directions<ref>], ], Hamish Hamilton, 1982, gives this title, Odom (1998) also discusses this development</ref> were created to control multi-Front operations in Europe (the Western and South-Western Strategic Directions) and at ] to handle southern operations, and in the Soviet Far East.


==Criticisms(?)== ==Criticisms(?)==

Revision as of 21:34, 5 April 2008

The Structure of the Soviet Ground Forces evolved from the early loose groupings and Red Guards of the Bolsheviks, through an increasingly formalised military system through the Russian Civil War, to a regular army in the 1920s. Not fully prepared for the German onslaught of 1941, due to Stalin's purges of the officer corps and some remaining military conservatism, amongst other factors, by the end of the Second World War (the 'Great Patriotic War' to the Soviet population) the Red Army had become the most formidable land force on Earth.

The Red Army was renamed the Soviet Army just after victory. The 500+ rifle divisions that had shed so much blood on the Eastern Front were quickly reduced in number, and the multibrigade tank corps and mechanised corps that had provided the main striking punch were converted to a divisional structure. Cavalry formations were converted into further mechanised divisions, and additional combat support arms added and expanded. The mass, mobilisable, characteristic remained, with the Soviet Ground Forces developing several different tiers of readiness states (A B V etc). During the Cold War the Ground Forces were X, Y, Z in strucural terms.. incl Khruschev's cutbacks (cite numbers as precisely as possible)- ref needed.

introduction/Historical Overview

, giving an overview of the major trials, tribulations and conflicts, followed by the the main body of the article. The main body needs to acknowledge the legacy of the Imperial Russian Army and the First World War experience that created the Soviet Union, the Civil War, and war with Poland of course. These would represent the introduction to why and how the Red Army was created.

of the development of the Ground Forces through its significant periods: formative (1925 - 1936), combat (1936 - 1946), transformative (1947 - 1961), consolidating (1962 - 1984), and final (1985 - 1993), and explain what happened for them to deserve these appellations (ok, not those actual words - I just used one word for what would be a sentence).

  • For Historical section, I'd like to suggest combining the event narrative with doctrinal development, and not just another "List of..." type section. This means actual writing-in of the lessons and mistakes that resulted from, or contributed to development of the Ground Forces

At the beginning of its existence, the Red Army functioned as a voluntary formation, without ranks or insignia. Democratic elections selected the officers. However, a decree of May 29, 1918 imposed obligatory military service for men of ages 18 to 40. To service the massive draft, the Bolsheviks formed regional military commissariats (voyennyy komissariat, abbr. voyenkomat), which today still exist in Russia in this function and under this name.

Higher direction - Politburo and MOD

Then go to the Structure and say how decisions were taken at strategic level, including the link to the Politburo,

  • An introduction on the relationship between the Party-political policy-setting organs and the General Staff strategic planning roles within the Soviet general strategy and relationship of Ground Forces to other Services

Administrative organisation

Main Staff of the Ground Forces directorates .. technology developmental Directorates, mobilisation, budgets, test centres etc

Conscription, and officer recruitment

In the mid-1920s the territorial principal of manning the Red Army was introduced. In each region able-bodied men were called up for a limited period of active duty in territorial units, which comprised about half the Army's strength, each year, for five years. The first call-up period was for three months, with one month a year thereafter. A regular cadre provided a stable nucleus. By 1925 this system provided 46 of the 77 infantry divisions and one of the eleven cavalry divisions. The remainder consisted of regular officers and enlisted personnel serving two-year terms. The territorial system was finally abolished, with all remaining formations converted to the cadre divisions, in 1937–38.

Rifle forces, artillery, tank forces, engineers, signals, support organisations

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Like other armies, the Red Army used administrative departments (called Directorates) to develop, train and equip the many combat Arms of Service troops and their Service Corps support echelons. These were:

airborne troops
anti tank troops
armoured division staff
armoured engineer companies
armoured training regiments
armoured trains
armoured units
army AA units
army map and military survey
army propaganda troops
army dogs units
artillery observation training units
artillery observation units
artillery troops
artillery training units
barrier troops
cavalry units
chemical troops
fortification engineers
fortification signals
Frunze Military Academy
general armoured commands
general command
machine gun troops
medical officers and NCO
medical training units
medical troops
Military District and Front command
military field police
military justice units
mobilisation processing personnel
mortar battalions (MRL)
motor maintenance troops
motorcycle units
motorised troops
mountain troop divisional staff
mounted artillery troops
Officers of the Stavka
railway engineer training companies
railway troops
reconnaissance (mounted)
reconnaissance (motorised)
rifle troops
rifle divisional staff
rifle training regiments
rifle and mountaineering units
rifle unit staff
sapper troops
sapper training battalions
signals training regiment
signals troops
ski troops
smoke training units
smoke troops
specialist officers
supply officers
technical officers
transport supply officer
transport training units
transport troops
veterinary officers and NCOs
veterinary troops

Operational organisation

Formations of the Soviet Army The Soviet division The corps, the Army (Soviet Army) (iv) then the section on the organisation, and how that relates to the operational art as a doctrine. ->links to orders of battle by period ->A full OOB would be several separate articles, listing ~500++ divs in midwar, plus mech/tank corps, ~300(?) odd divs in 1946-7, and 200 odd divs in 1960s-80s. Finally, the OOB and how and why the Ground Forces were organised, stationed and equipped in the way that they were. There are good sources, primarily Simpkin and Glantz again (his job for US Army was in Soviet doctrine, not history).

Do you mean Race to the Swift? And which Glantz books? Buckshot06 (talk) 11:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, the late Brigadier wrote several books on the operational art, and was an expert on the Soviet doctrine bar none in terms of published material.
Glantz wrote Soviet Military Operational Art - In pursuit of deep battle which is not on his article. I would highly recommend it as it recapitulates the Simpkin research, and adds to it in a relatively slim volume. Somewhat more readable also because Simpkin wrote not only in the British style, but one from another era.
Rifle Corps was a formation that existed in the pre-Revolution Imperial Russian Army, and was inherited by the Red Army. First suggestions for creation of large mechanised or tank formations in the Soviet Union were suggested based on development of doctrine for publication as PU-36, the field regulations largely authored by Marshal Tukhachevsky, and was created where "In the attack tanks must be employed in mass", envisaged as "Strategic cavalry". Although the name of "mechanised" may seem to the modern reader as referring to the infantry components of the Corps, in 1936 they referred to armoured vehicles only with the word "motorised" referring to the units equipped with trucks.

Wartime

War experience prompted changes to the way front-line forces were organized. After six months of combat against the Germans, STAVKA abolished the Rifle Corps intermediate level between the Army and Division level because while useful in theory, in the inexperienced state of the Red Army, they proved ineffective in practice. Following victory in the Battle of Moscow in summer of 1942, the High Command began to reintroduce Rifle Corps into its most experienced formations. The total number of Rifle Corps started at 62 on 22 June 1941, dropped to six by 1 January 1942, but then increased to 34 by February 1943, and 161 by New Years' Day 1944. Actual strengths of front-line divisions, authorized to contain 11,000 men in July 1941, were mostly no more than 50% of established strengths during 1941, and divisions were often worn down on continuous operations to hundreds of men or even less.

On the outbreak of war the Red Army deployed mechanized corps and tank divisions whose development has been described above. The German attack battered many severely, and in the course of 1941 virtually all (barring two in the Transbaikal Military District) were disbanded. It was much easier to coordinate smaller forces, and separate tank brigades and battalions were substituted. It was late 1942 and early 1943 before larger tank formations of corps size were fielded in order to employ armor en mass again. By mid 1942 these corps were being grouped together into Tank Armies whose strength by the end of the war could be up to 700 tanks and 50,000 men.

See also: Red Army's tactics in World War II

After the Second World War

At the end of the Great Patriotic War the Red Army had over 500 rifle divisions and about a tenth that number of tank formations. Their experience of war gave the Soviets such faith in tank forces that from that point the number of tank divisions remained virtually unchanged, whereas the wartime infantry force was cut by two-thirds. The Tank Corps of the late war period were converted to tank divisions, and from 1957 the Rifle Divisions were converted to Motor Rifle Divisions (MRDs). MRDs had three motorized rifle regiments and a tank regiment, for a total of ten motor rifle battalions and six tank battalions; tank divisions had the proportions reversed.

By the middle of the 1980s the Ground Forces contained about 210 manoeuvre divisions. About three-quarters were motor rifle divisions and the remainder tank divisions. There were also a large number of artillery divisions, separate artillery brigades, engineer formations, and other combat support formations. However only relatively few formations were fully war ready. Three readiness categories, A, B, and V, after the first three letters of the Cyrillic alphabet, were in force. The Category A divisions were certified combat-ready and were fully equipped. B and V divisions were lower-readiness, 50–75% (requiring at least 72 hours of preparation) and 10–33% (requiring two months) respectively. The internal military districts usually contained only one or two A divisions, with the remainder B and V series formations.

Soviet planning for most of the Cold War period would have seen Armies of four to five divisions operating in Fronts made up of around four armies (and roughly equivalent to Western Army Groups). In the late 1970s and early 1980s new High Commands in the Strategic Directions were created to control multi-Front operations in Europe (the Western and South-Western Strategic Directions) and at Baku to handle southern operations, and in the Soviet Far East.

Criticisms(?)

(vi) Lastly, you can include a section on "Suvorov" and his views as criticisms, something other articles on Armies lack completely as if no one has ever criticises then.

Sources and References

  1. Marshal Grigory Kulik and his horses - need ref
  2. This is a judgement which will need sourcing and maybe changing, but will do for now.
  3. Scott and Scott, 1979, p.5
  4. Scott and Scott, 1979, p.12
  5. David Glantz, Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War 1941–43, University Press of Kansas, 2005, p.717 note 5.
  6. p.179, Simpkin
  7. ibid., p180.
  8. Glantz, Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War 1941–43, University Press of Kansas, 2005, p.179
  9. David Glantz, 2005, p.189
  10. Glantz, 2005, p.217–230
  11. Mark L Urban, Soviet Land Power
  12. M J Orr, The Russian Ground Forces and Reform 1992–2002, January 2003, Conflict Studies Research Centre, UK Defence Academy, Sandhurst, p.1
  13. M J Orr, 2003, p.1 and David C Isby, Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, Jane's Publishing Company, 1988, p.30
  14. Viktor Suvorov, Inside the Soviet Army, Hamish Hamilton, 1982, gives this title, Odom (1998) also discusses this development
  • The Soviet Army: Troops, Organization, and Equipment. FM 100-2-3, June 1991. Washington DC: United States Department of the Army.
  • Fomin, N.N., Great Soviet Encyclopaedia (Template:Lang-ru), Moscow, 1978
  • Simpkin, R., Deep battle: The brainchild of Marshal Tukhachevskii, Brassey's, London, 1987