Question for profesional army officers about troop leading p

[pamak]

Everything started when i tried to create a scenario for steel beasts.I wanted first to describe the general situation (corps- division level) before i give the details of the task force mission in the scenario.The situation was something like that.There is war between Greece and Turkey
The first greek armor division executes a march mission towards the front in general east direction (from a previous received corps order) during a fluid battle condition.During this time there is a serious development in the north sector of the greek front where the 3rd Turkish army corp manages to achieve surprise and break through the defense of 5th infantry division threatening the collapse of the whole greek front.At that time the 2nd greek corps realises that the only available force in the area to stop the enemy advance is the first greek armor division and issues a radio order to the commander of the division to cancel the existing movement of his division and instead adopt a new marching mission towards north-north east direction having the mission to establish a defense position at a certain area and perform delay operations after contact with the enemy.
In this scenario we have a situation where an armor division performs an operational maneuver (march movement towards east) during whish it receives a new order to execute a new operational maneuver(march north-northeast).The question now is that.
How much time is needed for a large formation(division) with thousands of vehicles to react after receiving the new order ,cancel the existing movement -and then plan and execute the new one.
Of course i know that there is not a simple answer cause i just gave a general situation .In real many factors affect this(current doctrine -capabilitites of commander and staff,road network-supply situation ,posture of unit...)
I just ask for a clue(average time ) according lets say to USA doctrine for a big formation like a division to plan and execute new plans in a time limited enviroment.
I tried to make a research in various military manuals .I also visited the call army library (which is really amazing !!) and found many monographs of students of the USA general army staff college.The problem is that there are no data for things like my question.One of the monographs that i found pointed the same thing.The author thought that there should be a more scientific approach which should produce various data as planning guides.He thought that USA might have benefits to adopt certain aspects of the old Soviet doctrine(which by the way sees war more like a science,and is full of certain nomographs and mathematical models as planning guides).
In the US army officers tend to learn these factors through repeated training and experience.It is the US concept that sees war more as an art.
I am not judging the two different approaches.The only thing i ask is if someone has any answers or can recomment any bibliography to give me some clues to the above questions.

[Chaplain]

Greetings, Pamak.

You have certainly opened up a can of worms, but hey, we like that here.

I think history will be a better guide for you than current doctrine. With our reliance on computer simulations, I think there is a belief that units can react far more quickly than they really can. No simulation accounts for the inertia of large units very well.

For example, during the Battle of the Bulge, the Allied corps commanders were briefed of the form of the operation on the 19th of December. Patton gave orders to his division commanders on the 20th, and the actual counter-attack began on the 22nd. Remember, Patton was being sent to relieve Bastonge, and time was of the essence.

When you consider that operational communication today (in most armies) is not much better than in late WWII, it is hard for me to believe that a division could change direction and commence operations in less time: two days.

I would also question whether your idea of a corps commander giving radio orders for a major operational change is realistic. He might use electronic communication to call the division to a halt, but I think he would more likely want a face-to-face meeting to work out the new battle plan. Therefore, you should allow for at least 6 hours from the corps commander's decision to make the change until the time the division commander had his orders and could start working on the details.

[I2R06]

Excellent reply Chaplain. And I concur. It would take two days to start the movement for the change of direction.

I also thought of the same historical example. But we have to remember that Patton was moving an Army composed of several Corps. A bigger force than a the division we are taking about. We also have to remember that a modern US Division would be in people and vehicles compared to a WWII Corps and a Corps in just about any other modern army. The US likes BIG units.

[Ssnake]

Another frequent experience is that even if the planning starts early, friction and delays in mission order transmission often reduce the time for mission briefings and planning down at company level to a quick "We're going to attack this hill, and we'll have artillery support. Watch for enemy on that ridge, and be careful. Now move!, we're behind schedule already!"

[bewing77]

To true Ssnake. As a platoon commander you are always forced to make alot decisions without proper time to plan ahead, and that's not because the CO doesn't like you. IMO that may be a determining factor between a good and a not so good officer. Most people with some tactical training can jot down a plan for a platoon given infinite time and recon resources. In reality though, both those factors are usually severely limited, and a good officer is the one that still can handle the situation at hand.