Pacific Island Hopping during WW II

[quincannon]

Montrose: Let's talk strategy.

There were four reasons for the Central Pacific arm of the multi pronged Pacific Strategy. I reject out of hand your comments about King.

The first was to keep the IJN divided between two theaters thereby unable to concentrate,

The second was to provide bases for the strategic bombing of Japan. That could not be done from China, as all supplies for that effort would have to be transported over the Hump. It was tried and it failed (miserably and with great loss). It could also not be done in the South Pacific Theater until the Philippines were cleared and that did not happen until mid-1945.

The third was the central pacific islands offered better fleet bases for the anticipated invasion of Japan, which were much easier to sustain logistically than any route through the South Pacific.

The fourth reason is that the central pacific islands offered closer basing for submarines, particularly Guam, and closer means more time on station and less time in transit, which ultimately means more merchant ships sunk, and a further restriction of Japanese raw material.

Only in the South Pacific could islands be bypassed and let die on the vine. Everything with an air strip in the Central Pacific must either be taken or neutralized to make it work.

I have no love for King either, and yes he did want more resources for the Pacific, but the fact that he was personally a womanizing horses ass does not mean that he was not a brilliant, but caustic strategist. In the end though it was not King, nor Nimitz, or MacArthur that approved the two pronged Pacific strategy, but rather Roosevelt aboard USS Baltimore sitting in Pearl Harbor in 1943.

[yanmacca]

Talking about these documents, a friend of mine is searching for the “D-Series" T/O 1st Marine Division December 1941, he too has his own web site which concentrates on military formations of every country in the world. The docs he wants have to complete and be from the original source.

Any takers?

[quincannon]

Write the U S Marine Corps Museum in Quantico, Virginia. The probably have them in PDF format.

I am not sure what the tables would or could do for anyone in that the tables were written for a lot of equipment expected but not yet available, and there was a huge amount of equipment substitutions made, and with equipment substitutions there must also be personnel modifications. That is why there was a D series up to the end of 41, early 42, and another D series from the early part of 42 onward to early 43.

[yanmacca]

I have based the one on the site on the F-Series May 1944.

I shall pass on your suggestion Chuck, thanks.

[yanmacca]

I will have to contact my friend as his Marine Company circa May 1944, differs from mine;
This is his;

PLATOON HQ:
2nd Lieutenant / Platoon Leader (M1 Carbine + M8 Grenade Launcher)

3 x RIFLE SQUADS EACH CONTAINING:
RIFLE SQUAD:
3 x FIRE TEAMS EACH CONTAINING:
Pvt or PFC/ Team Leader (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
Pvt or PFC/Automatic Rifleman (B.A.R. M1918)
Pvt or PFC/Asst. Automatic Rifleman (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
Pvt or PFC/Rifleman (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)

This is mine;

PLATOON HQ:
2nd Lieutenant / Platoon Leader (M1 Carbine + M8 Grenade Launcher)
Platoon Sergeant (M1 Carbine + M8 Grenade Launcher)
Sergeant / Platoon Guide (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
Corporal / Demolitions (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
3 x Pvt or PFC / Messengers (M1 Rifles + M7 Grenade Launchers)
6 x M2 Flame-Throwers

3 x RIFLE SQUADS EACH CONTAINING:

RIFLE SQUAD:
Sergeant / Squad Leader (M1 Carbine + M8 Grenade Launcher)
3 x FIRE TEAMS EACH CONTAINING:
Corporal / Team Leader (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
Pvt or PFC /Automatic Rifleman (B.A.R. M1918)
Pvt or PFC /Asst. Automatic Rifleman (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)
Pvt or PFC /Rifleman (M1 Rifle + M7 Grenade Launcher)

[quincannon]

I do have some figures for both of the D series organizations but they are on the macro level, and probably not all that helpful for what he is probably after.

The Marines are usually very responsive. They have a first rate historical organization. Much better than the Army.

They also publish a series of large paperback histories, which are first rate. I think I only have two remaining, one on the 3rd MARDIV and the other on Quantico. That second is the best of any I have read.

The Marine Corps Museum also has an on line book store, and among those items for sale are the official Marine Corps multi volume histories of WWII and Korean War operations. The Marines write better than the Army too.

[yanmacca]

I work very closely with an e-marine on my company set up, it took a while too.

I have just e-mailed him and he has altered his platoon, apparently he did it a while ago, here it is;

PLATOON HQ:
2nd Lieutenant / Platoon Leader
Platoon Sergeant
Sergeant / Platoon Guide
4 x Pvt or PFC / Messengers (M1 Rifles + M7 Grenade Launchers)

3 x RIFLE SQUADS EACH CONTAINING:

RIFLE SQUAD:
Sergeant / Squad Leader
3 x FIRE TEAMS EACH CONTAINING:
PFC / Team Leader
Pvt or PFC /Automatic Rifleman (B.A.R. M1918)
Pvt or PFC /Asst. Automatic Rifleman
Pvt or PFC /Rifleman

[yanmacca]

Would you class a corporal as a EM or NCO?
Apparently in his marine organization he has EMs were I have corporals.

[quincannon]

Your's is accurate. His revised is more so with the addition of the fourth messanger.

The 3 team rifle squad was dreamed up by Edson in the 1930's at tested by him unofficially in Nicaragua. Edson later tested it again while with the 4th Marines in China.

When Edson commanded the 1st Raiders he organized them around the concept, and I believe he wrote his own tables, Carlso with the 2nd Raiders was completely different.

The concept was combat tested with the 22nd Marines on Eniwetok in early 44. When the Raiders became the 4th Marines the 3 team squad concept was retained. Keep in mind these were local adaptations and I do not know if they were documented or not. I suspect not. The 24th Marines were the first unit to test the 3 team squad using experimental tables of March 1944. The tests proved the concept, and all the regiments reorganized as their particular situation dictated. It did not all happen at once, but was probably complete by the end of 44.

A Corporal is both an enlisted man and a Noncommissioned officer. We only have three categories, Officer, Warrant Officer, and Enlisted. Anyone in the enlisted ranks Corporal and above is a Noncommissioned officer 

[yanmacca]

I have two marine raider companies on the site, I am sure the 1942 version is Edison's, I am sure I did Carlson's as well, but would 1944 be too late for his? I honestly can't remember, I am sure I have the data somewhere, I really should name them Edison and Carlson.

link

link

[yanmacca]

I have added your data for the site, you know the tank destroyer brigades etc.
But I was waiting for my technical staff to resize the insignias as they are a bit squashed, it should be done soon, but if you want to check them over to see if I have up loaded them correctly then here is a link, sorry about the insignias though Chuck.

link

[sgttyree]

I've read through this thread and don't have much to add but I will toss out a few random thoughts:

Raider TOE has been mentioned.  I know that Carlson followed the British Commando template of six smaller rifle companies for his battalion but I don't think Edson did.  All the Army Ranger Battalions had six rifle companies as well.  

Three fire team squads have been mentioned.  Carlson originally had a 10 man squad: three fire teams of three Marines and a squad leader.  Apparently this was not robust enough and four man fire teams were adopted. 

And the last thought I want to toss out is that the Army had an advantage the Marines did not have with guerrilla networks, both in the Philippines and in Burma.  Russell Volckmann and Carl Eifler were some interesting and impressive men.

[carl]

The basic TO&E in so far as enlisted puts

limits on how many can be in a grade.

What position they have is up to the

unit.

for example, in 1950, the Personnel

section in a FA Hq Btry was authorized

2 E5 Sergeats, 1 E6 SFC,

The Personnel Section in my unit

had 1 E7, 1 E6, and 5 E5's.

These were stolen from other

slots.  For example, the Intelligence

Sergeant per TO$E was an E7.  The

person filling the slot was an E4

In 1954 the number of E7s in EuCom

was at or near the limit. Promotions to E7

has to be approved by EUCom, I was an

E6 filling an E7 slot and was 2nd

in my Bns request to promote following

one of the Firing Batteries lst Sgt

who was an E6.

An officer example - in 1950 Radar

Sections were organized from scratch

the Radar Officer was per TO&E a

lst Lt, but in our unit a Captain

filled the position.

[quincannon]

Poor Ian.

[yanmacca]

What have I missed?
Chuck, is there any errors with the site?