Would like a definition of military units and hierarchy. Often hear on
news that 'another 2 battalions have been sent to Iraq' etc- but have
no real idea what this entails. Is a battalion 100 troops? 1000?
10,000?
The perfect answer would be something like this-
a company consists of 5 privates, lead by a corporal
a platoon consists of 3 companies, lead by a lieutenant
a division consists of 5 platoons, lead by a captain... etc
Any other info will be welcome- e.g. I assume a full colonel would
control a large number of people/resources, yet Colonel Potter only
(?) commanded MASH 4077.
Why are there Lieutenant Generals and Major Generals, but no Captain
Generals or Colonel Generals (or is it Colonels General)?
Also interested in naval and air force ranks and sizes, and
compare/contrast US military terminology with, say, British or
Australian (not necessary for this question, will ask separately if
too big).

---

Request for Question Clarification by tutuzdad-ga on 20 Dec 2004 19:22 PST

It's much more complicated than that. Some services have divisions and
others have regiments. Still others have Flights or Fleets. Depending
on what the unit does will depend largely on how it is made up. For
example (and this is just for comparision sake):
~ An infantry group might consist of 12 enlisted, 2 NCO's, 1 1st Sgt,
1 LT, and one Captain

~ But the same branch of service might have a medical platoon that
consists of 8 enlisted, 1 NCO and 1 Lt.

~ An armored unit might consist of 2 enlisted and 1 NCO per vehicle
with a total of 12 enlisted, 6 NCO's, all commanded by a Lt, a Captain
and ultimately perhaps even a Major.

So you see, it varties greatly. There may be some rough standards to
go by but it would be extremely difficult to compile an accurate list
of each possible scenario.

tutuzdad-ga

---

Clarification of Question by whino-ga on 20 Dec 2004 20:10 PST

Pinkfreud, thanks, that'll do nicely. I see elsewhere on this site it
list ranks, insignia etc.- nice one. I'm happy with this as an answer.
Tutuzdad- appreciate comments, I'll keep in mind the 'flexibility' of
definitions. Maybe this is why I've had trouble understanding- sounds
a bit Monty Pythonesque.
Thanks both for fast responses.

I'm glad to learn that you are pleased with the link I posted. I have
reposted it below, with some additional material that I think you'll
find interesting.

MilitaryDial: Army Force Structure
http://www.militarydial.com/army-force-structure.htm

The ranks Captain-General and Colonel-General, although absent in the
U.S. Army, do exist in some nations:

"Field marshal: in Germany, Generalfeldmarschall; in Spain
captain-general ; in France (though the rank is in abeyance) marshal."

1911 Edition Encyclopedia: Officers
http://40.1911encyclopedia.org/O/OF/OFFICERS.htm

"Some nations maintain a rank known as Colonel-General which outranks
a full general but is subordinate to a Field Marshal. The rank of
Colonel General is most often used in militaries which do not have an
equivalent to Brigadier General."

Wikipedia: General
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General

"A General usually has overall command of a whole army. His title
comes from the Latin word generalis that meant something pertaining to
a whole unit of anything rather than just to a part. As a military
term General started as an adjective, as in Captain General indicating
the Captain who had overall or 'general' command of the army.

Before the Sixteenth Century armies were usually formed only when
needed for a war or campaign. The king would be the commander but he
might appoint a Captain General to command in his name. Later, when
the title of Colonel became popular some kings called their commanders
Colonel General. The British Army stopped using the Captain part of
the title by the Eighteenth Century leaving just General as-the top
commander. Some nations still use the Colonel General rank, among them
the Soviet Union and East Germany. The king or his Captain General
would often be away from the army since they had interests elsewhere
so the job of actually running the army fell to the Captain General's
assistant--his lieutenant--the Lieutenant General. This was not a
permanent rank until the Seventeenth Century. One of the Colonels
might be appointed Lieutenant General for a particular campaign or war
but he would still command his own regiment. Since he might also be
Captain of a company in his regiment, it was possible for one man to
serve as Captain, Colonel and General simultaneously."

The Website for Young Marines: Rank History
http://www.chadduck.com/ymarines/trivia2/triv4-5m.htm

My Google search strategy:

Google Web Search: army company platoon battalion
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=army+company+platoon+battalion

Google Web Search: rank "colonel general" OR "captain general"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=rank+%22colonel+general%22+OR+%22captain+general%22

Thanks for an interesting question. It's enjoyable to be able to learn
something useful while researching a project; until today, I confess
that I hadn't the vaguest notion of the difference between a battalion
and a brigade, and so forth.

Best regards,
pinkfreud

Thanks Pinkfreud, just what I was looking for.

This may be helpful:

http://www.militarydial.com/army-force-structure.htm

for a similar rundown on the US Air Force, ie MAJCOM, Numbered Air
Force, Wing, Group, Squadron, Flight ETC, see
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usaf/intro.htm

bd

Thanks Pinkfreud, tutuzdad and bdavinga. Very interesting. I have no
military connection or background, just curious. I'm amazed at how big
the military enterprise is- so much Stuff out there. I'm Australian,
our military is relatively small and obscure, rarely do you see any
evidence of it on the streets. In my few trips to the States, every
second person at airports seems to be in uniform. I'm staggered to see
websites such as www.chadduck.com/ymarines in existence- there's
obviously demand and interest for it. Gives new meaning to term
'military complex'.
Thanks again....