Talk:Division (military)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bold textDivison is a part in math thiat i think is hard

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Armored divisions The development of the tank near the end of World War I prompted some nations to experiment with forming them into division-size units. Many did this the same way as they did cavalry, by merely replacing infantry with tank units and giving motorization to the support units. This proved unwieldy in combat, as the units had many tanks but few infantry units. Instead, a more balanced approach of balancing the number of tank, infantry, and artillery units within the division took place.

By the end of World War II, in most cases armored division referred to divisions with significant tank battalions and motorization for its infantry, artillery, and support units. Infantry division referred to divisions with a majority of infantry units.

Since the end of the war, most armored and infantry divisions have had significant numbers of both tank and infantry units within them. The difference has usually been in the mix of battalions assigned. Additionally, in some militaries, armored divisions would be equipped with the most advanced or powerful tanks - such as the M1A2 Abrams in the United States.

---

--86.136.79.241 12:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Division (military) vs. Division (army) + Division (navy) + Division (air force)

This article disambiguates as the sole authority on all military uses of "division". It does not, however, deal with naval or air force divisions. I'm not part of the Wikipedia Military History Project so I think I'd do more harm than good trying to fix things: whether a quick paragraph at the top of this article could adequately deal with the naval and air uses of division or whether articles are needed for ground, naval, and air uses of the term--I don't know.

Reference: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/data/d/01750.html If that link goes bad, use: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.232.126.235 (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC).

Added short blurb to the effect that divisions are subsets of departments in the US and other navies. Not much, but at least a mention. Haoleguy30 01:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Reading article about Chester W. Nimitz one can see he commanded submarine, cruiser, battleship divisions. While it is not a contemporary Navy unit it is worth mentioning in the article. --Tigga en 10:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)