History of the Army Ground Forces. Study Number 27. History of the Armored Force, Command and Center
Contributor(s)ARMY GROUND FORCES WASHINGTON DC HISTORICAL SECTION
KeywordsHumanities and History
Military Operations, Strategy and Tactics
DIVISION LEVEL ORGANIZATIONS
*WORLD WAR 2
DANIEL VAN VOORHIS
ADNA R CHAFFEE
JACOB L DEVERS
ALVAN C GILLEM
HUGH J GAFFEY
I ARMORED CORPS
2D ARMORED DIVISION
FORT KNOX KY
NATIONAL DEFENSE ACT 1920
ARMORED FORCE SCHOOL
ARMORED FORCE REPLACEMENT TRAINING CENTER
ARMORED TRAINING REPLACEMENT CENTER
FLAME THROWER TANKS
713TH TANK BATTALION
Full recordShow full item record
AbstractThe history presented in this study is written from the point of view of officers who were directly responsible for the development of armor in the U. S. Army in World War II. The facts were supplied by them or obtained from the files of the armored headquarters at Fort Knox, successively designated as the Armored Force, the Armored Command, and the Armored Center. In World War I and II the development of tanks went through a cycle marked by three phases: the determination and drive of a few foward looking men; the inertia of the great majority too involved in routine to give their proposals serious attention or support; and the crucible of war forcing new ideas to the front. Inspired by the advanced thinking of its commanding generals and implemented by American inventive genius, its development could never have come about had not military necessity broken through the inertia of a peacetime Army.
Army Ground Forces Historical Studies.
Copyright/LicenseApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Armor in VietnamARMY ARMOR SCHOOL FORT KNOX KY; Oldinsky, Frederick E. (1976-05)This thesis begins with a brief history of armored vehicles from their earliest concepts to the modern battle tank of today. It critically examines the decision not to include tank units with the first American combat forces deployed in Vietnam and the irrationality of that decision in light of a similar decision made prior to the Korean conflict. Tanks were deployed in limited numbers in Vietnam in spite of a decision to the contrary and, once there, proved their usefulness and their ability to perform in a tropical environment against an elusive enemy. Examples of the tank's effectiveness in Vietnam are given and the feasibility of deploying major armored forces to that country is discussed.
Not Just an Infantryman's War: United States Armored Cavalry of the Vietnam WarARMY COMMAND AND GENERAL STAFF COLL FORT LEAVENWORTH KS; Kerns, Brian D. (2006-06-16)This is a study of the organization and equipment of the United States Army's armored cavalry squadrons that fought in the Vietnam War. It begins with background information on the buildup of armored forces in Vietnam, the country's terrain, and the enemy. Next, the doctrinal missions of the armored cavalry are compared to the actual missions armored cavalry executed in Vietnam. The author then describes the equipment and organization used by armored cavalry squadrons in Vietnam and modifications that were made to adapt the cavalry for fighting on a nonlinear, restrictive terrain battlefield against an asymmetric threat. He concludes that the inherent combined arms task organization of armored cavalry squadrons made them an extremely successful force during the Vietnam War. The most capable of the various armored cavalry squadron organizations was the regimental armored cavalry squadron that was fielded with the M551 Sheridan tank in 1969. This cavalry squadron was successful because it was able to achieve an effective balance of mobility, firepower, protection, and shock effect. The study provides some insight into how to effectively organize and equip armored cavalry forces to fight on a nonlinear battlefield against an asymmetric enemy.
Armor in BattleARMY ARMOR SCHOOL FORT KNOX KY (1986-03)Armor in Battle continues the Leadership series of publications by the Command and Staff Department of the US Army Armor School at Fort Knox, KY. Although the majority of military history is written at the division, corps and echelons above corps level, small unit leaders can best learn from military history at an applicable level - Small Unit Actions. The emphasis in this volume is the Small Unit Armor actions. Examples are cited from the history of Armor and Combined Arms Warfare dating from World War 1 to the 1973 Arab Israeli War on the Golan Heights.