Time Astra

Schematic plan · Arab-Israeli War, 1973 (October War)

Deversoir (Chinese Farm II)

All battlesBattle of the Chinese Farm: engagement 2 of 3The event in the chronicleWikipedia
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.
Rolling, Desert groundCentreCentreLeft wingRight wingLeft wingRight wingReserveGunsReserveArmourArmourGuns02 km4 kmN

One of the 3 engagements of the Battle of the Chinese Farm recorded in the CAA Database of Battles (number 2 in date order). Israel (Is Adan Div(+), 28,900 men under Mg Adan) attacked Egypt (Eg 16th Div(-)(+), 36,840 men under Bg Hafiz) in Egypt. The CAA Database of Battles records 18 hours of fighting on a front of 11 km, a frontal attack, double envelopment against hasty defense and prepared defense, and that Israel won. Losses: Israel 950 (3%), Egypt 2,400 (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

Israel

Mg Adan

UnitArmMen
Israel left wingInfantry6,144
Israel centreInfantry8,192
Israel right wingInfantry6,144
Israel reserveInfantry5,120
Israel artillery (72 guns)Artillery1,080
Israel armour (444 tanks)Armour2,220
Mg AdanCommander—
In this plan28,900

Egypt

Bg Hafiz

UnitArmMen
Egypt left wingInfantry7,090
Egypt centreInfantry9,453
Egypt right wingInfantry7,090
Egypt reserveInfantry5,908
Egypt artillery (347 guns)Artillery5,205
Egypt armour (419 tanks)Armour2,095
Bg HafizCommander—
In this plan36,841

What the sources report

IsraelEgypt
Strength, this plan28,90036,840
Losses, this plan9502,400

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 577, “Deversoir (Chinese Farm Ii)”, compiled for the US Army to study what decides battles. These are the figures a what-if engine can be calibrated against.

Fighting
18 hours
Winner
the attacker
Terrain
Rolling, Desert
Weather
Dry, Sunny, Hot, Autumn, Temperate
Defender’s posture
Hasty defense, Prepared defense
Front width
11 km (attacker), 11 km (defender)
ForceStrengthLossesHorseGunsPlan and outcome
Israelattacker28,900950072Frontal attack; Double envelopment; Penetration
Egyptdefender36,8402,4000347Defensive/offensive plan; Single envelopment; Left flank; Withdrew with heavy losses

Attacker’s advantages leadership +1 · training +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.