PDW said:Morgan_Keyes wrote:
Then we have the inverting of 'Division' and 'Regiment'. Every military across the world that uses these terms, a Regiment is smaller then a Division. In fact their definition of Regiment in relation to Division is actually the definition between Brigade and Regiment in the US military. IOW to paraphrase, 'Brigades are not formal organizations but refer to a given regiment plus any temporary or permenantly assigned auxiliary support units'.
This is the American usage...things are slightly different in Britain.
In the UK Battalions are organised into Brigades (permenant units) which are then organised into divisions. Generally 4 battalions to a brigade and three brigades to a division.
The concept of a regiment is differnet in Britain too. Each 'regiment' is made up of one or more battalions and they have traditional names (Royal Greenjackets, Royal Regiment of Fusiliers (my old unit), THe GReen Howards, etc). THe battalions of a regiment are linked by a common heritage but do not necessarily serve together...except in the Guards where they form the Guards Brigade (Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Coldream and Grenadier Guards).
El Cid said:I wouldn't get too hung up on what the terms mean today.
Remember that JMS had the Hyperions as cruisers and the Omegas as Destroyers.
In mordern navies, I believe that these two terms would have the cruiser as a heavier ship than the Destroyer.
I do agree with APC concept that to have the troops on the outside is ludicrious.
Morgan_Keyes said:When I finish de-mobilization and get back to California in FEB I'll have to dig out my AoG GROPOS book on the EA and post the organizational make-up of the various companies and battalions for those interested. That or build them from the ground up.