Schematic plan · US-Mexican War

Battle of Palo Alto

A schematic plan, generated from the statistics of the CAA Database of Battles: the armies' size and width, the hours of fighting, the plan of attack and the outcome are as recorded; the ground and the positions are not.
Flat, Bare groundCentreLeft wingRight wingReserveCentreHorseHorseLeft wingRight wingReserveGunsGuns0500 m1 kmN

USA (US Army, 2,288 men under Taylor) attacked Mexico (Mex Army, 6,000 men under Arista) in Texas. The CAA Database of Battles records 5 hours of fighting on a front of 1.2 km, a frontal attack against hasty defense, and that USA won. Losses: USA 48 (2%), Mexico 400 (7%).

This plan is generated from those figures. It shows the shape of the battle the database describes: the size and width of the armies, the plan of attack and the outcome. It does not show where the units actually stood.

The armies

USA

Taylor

UnitArmMen
USA left wingInfantry477
USA centreInfantry636
USA right wingInfantry477
USA reserveInfantry398
USA artillery (20 guns)Artillery300
TaylorCommander—
In this plan2,288

Mexico

Arista

UnitArmMen
Mexico left wingInfantry1,157
Mexico centreInfantry1,542
Mexico right wingInfantry1,157
Mexico reserveInfantry964
Mexico cavalry of the leftCavalry500
Mexico cavalry of the rightCavalry500
Mexico artillery (12 guns)Artillery180
AristaCommander—
In this plan6,000

What the sources report

USAMexico
Strength, this plan2,2886,000
Losses, this plan48400

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 157, “Palo Alto”, compiled for the US Army to study what decides battles. These are the figures a what-if engine can be calibrated against.

Fighting
5 hours
Winner
the attacker
Terrain
Flat, Bare
Weather
Dry, Sunny, Hot, Spring, Temperate
Defender’s posture
Hasty defense
Front width
1.2 km (attacker), 1.6 km (defender)
ForceStrengthLossesHorseGunsPlan and outcome
USAattacker2,28848—20Frontal attack; Penetration
Mexicodefender6,0004001,00012Defensive/offensive plan; Double envelopment; Repulse; Withdrew

Attacker’s advantages leadership +2 · training +1 · initiative +1 · combat effectiveness +1

CDB90 (US Army Concepts Analysis Agency, 1990), tidy edition by Jeffrey B. Arnold; data under ODC-BY 1.0.

Notes

On this reconstruction

Generated automatically from the statistics in CDB90. Frontages, depths, distances, the order of events and the terrain are schematic: they follow the recorded strengths, front widths, hours of fighting, tactical plan and outcome, not maps or accounts of the battle. The sources give no hours; the timing is conjectural.

Sources

Facts gathered from Wikidata (CC0), Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0) and Wikimedia Commons (licence per file); the plan and its text are timeastra’s own.