As an important step to transform its ground forces from bulky, obsolete infantry-oriented forces into a smaller, more flexible and deployable forces, the PLA introduced brigade into its organisational structure in the late 1990s. Before 1996 there was no combat brigade in the PLA ground forces. By 2000 nearly one-third of divisions in the army were downsized to brigades. Brigades in the PLA include almost all arms of its ground forces, including armour, motorised/mechanised infantry, artillery brigades, air defence (AAA/SAM), engineer, and river-crossing.
The introduction of the brigade has caused some dilemmas for the PLA. Historically the PLA’s tactical doctrines and principles were totally based on divisions and regiments. There was no systematic theory addressing the use of brigades in the combat. The PLA’s rank system was also based on division-regiment system, with divisions commanded by senior colonels and regiments by colonels. Brigades were ranked between divisions and regiments with no corresponding rank. The effectiveness of such a change still needs further evaluation.
Brigades are commanded by a senior colonel and could be composed of several combat battalions, but with significantly smaller combat service support units than found in divisions. In some cases brigades also have regiments as intermediate headquarters between brigade and battalion level. Brigades have about one-third to half the personnel strength of divisions of similar type. Divisions that have been downsized to brigades have consolidated their units to one or two centrally located bases in order for them to be able to deploy quickly and train together on a regular basis. In the past the subordinate regiments of a division were often stationed in different locations, making combined arms training more difficult and expensive.
Brigades differs in their order of battle and table of equipment depending on their location, mission and readiness level. A typical motorised infantry brigade may include:
* A tank battalion * Four motorised infantry battalions * An artillery regiment, which is composed of a 122mm howitzer battalion, a 122mm multiple rocket launcher (MRL) battalion, an AAA Battalion, and an anti-tank company * An engineer and chemical defence battalion * A reconnaissance battalion or company * A guard company * A motor transport company * Combat service support units such as medical units
The PLA introduced group army (GA) to replace the old army corps in 1985 to reflect their more combined arms nature . By 1988 the former 35 infantry corps were reduced to 24 group armies. This was further reduced to 21 by 2002. As a result of the new force reduction programme which was announced in late 2004, another three group armies will be cut in 2005, reducing the total number of group armies to 18.
Group armies vary in structure and size depending on their location, mission and readiness category. Gross manpower totals for a group army have ranged from about 25,000 to 60,000. Group armies are commanded by a Major General, and are assigned among the seven military regions. Until 2003 Beijing MR had five GAs, Shenyang MR had four, Jinan MR had three, Lanzhou MR had two, Nanjing MR had three, Guangzhou MR had two, and Chengdu MR had two.
The majority of the group armies are deployed in garrison locations along major avenues of approach into China from the former USSR and Mongolia. Nearly half of the group armies were located to protect Beijing and Northeast China (Manchuria) from Soviet attack. The two group armies in Lanzhou MR were positioned to fight Soviet forces after they had travelled great distance fighting local forces and militia through the barren northwest. Jinan MR is considered to be strategic reserve, with its three GAs capable of moving to reinforce units in the north, west and south. Four group armies are located along the coast directly opposite to Taiwan (three in Nanjing MR and one in Guangzhou MR).
Group armies are currently experiencing radical changes. Many have lost one or more infantry divisions through deactivation, resubordination, or downsizing. Others may gain units or equipment from deactivated headquarters. Many group armies are also experimenting with transforming divisions to brigades. At the same time, new equipment is being introduced into the force and older equipment retired, both of which could have impact on force structure.
Generally speaking, a typical group army is a corps-sized combined units consisting roughly of:
* One armoured division or brigade * Two to three infantry divisions or brigades * An artillery division or brigade * An air defence (SAM/AAA) brigade * A communications regiment * An engineer regiment * A reconnaissance battalion (group) * A pontoon bridge regiment (only in some GAs) * A chemical defence regiment (only in some GAs) * Other combat service support units such as medical and transportation * In a few cases, an army aviation (helicopter) group
Same link just press a button on the upper left.
o_0
In my opinion the change from Army-Division-Brigade-Battalion to Army Group-Brigade-Battalion is beneficial once the initial organization shock has disappated, you see this effectively reduces (IMHO) the number of staffs and increase the reaction time of the PLA by decreasing the number of rungs on the ladder to go up or down on.
Also I should this effectively down sizes the number of generals and will decrease the number of years it takes for good officers to reach suitable command posts, after you like what 60 by the time you a general in some armies (just my impression but I get the feeling most generals are close to being seniors)? Thus this should (IMHO) help in fighting carreerism which is/could be latent in most nations and/or large militaries.
So in conclusion I perceive that the recent downsizing and reorganization in the PLA is something other nations will or should follow if they wish to fight a an intense war under high tech conditions.
posted
Y'know, this might be more appropriate for the Paradox forums, which are full of grognards who thrive on this kind of stuff.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
grognards? I live in Canada China won't have to invade they would've bought us first. And ya whats a grognard?
Argh, this isn't what I'ld call positive feedback y'know I want to discuss the effectiveness of these recent organizational changes and how they'll effect military strategy for other nations.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A grognard is someone who discusses recent organizational changes and how they affect military strategy, basically. But you're going to have to get a beard and wear a beret to cover your bald spot, I'm afraid.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"get a beard and wear a beret to cover your bald spot, I'm afraid."
.... I'm sorry but that sentance lost me, I'm 18 and happily have lots of hair on my head, are you saying that I may be lacking in some sort of knowledge and iof so which one?
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No. I'm saying you don't smoke odd imported tobacco and wear tweed jackets and collect rifles from the Civil War, so you have a way to go to be a real grognard. But you can certainly have those conversations. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sid, try posting this over on Ornery. They're more into this kind of thing and you won't get the snarkiness.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually it's your odd assumptions about the Chinese, who are once again reacting to and copying the West.
The American and British militaries have been planning and arguing about the switchover to the brigade structuring since the 1991 GulfWar. The British have already made the changeover.
In 2001, Rumsfeld was chosen to become the US Secretary of Defense because of his advocacy of military reformation into the "light and fast" brigade-based strike forces. Admittedly, his (and the President's) decision to realign the military has been slowed by the AfghanWar reaction to 9/11. And nearly derailed due to the IraqWar caused by Dubya's desire to detract attention from the various Republican corruption scandals while pushing though his legislative agenda to loot America by relying on the popularity of being a (self-described) "war president".
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
If he was, he likely wouldn't be telling you Tom.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
But you're going to have to get a beard and wear a beret to cover your bald spot, I'm afraid.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
