Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: dxb105@csc.anu.oz.au
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Deploying Divisions
Message-ID: <1990Nov16.054727.24406@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 16 Nov 90 05:47:27 GMT
References: <1990Oct24.115039.4212@cbnews.att.com> <1990Nov6.044434.1391@cbnews.att.com> <1990Nov15.013229.1464@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Theoretical Physics, R.S.Phys.S., A.N.U., Australia
Lines: 18
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: dxb105@csc.anu.oz.au
In article <1990Nov15.013229.1464@cbnews.att.com>, bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) writes:
>    The weight and size of heavy divisions (4,700 vehicles, 100 helicoptors)
>    means they must go by sea.  A Mech Inf Div requires 85,000 short tons
>    and an Arm Div requires 90,000 short tons (deployment weight).

This was in reference to a desert shield type of scenario - a sudden decision
to send a division to somewhere the US hadn't thought it needed to. How much
could you trim off that if a lot of the gear was already in place (e.g. POMCUS
in Western Europe) and all you needed to send was the grunts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Bofinger	AARNet:	dxb105@phys.anu.edu.au
                Snail:	Dept. of Theoretical Physics, RSPhysS, ANU, ACT, 2601
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"To our friends, the good guys. And to our enemies, the bad guys. And to the
hope that someday we will be able to tell the difference." - Keith Laumer