Schematic plan · World War II

Battle of Rapido North I

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 wingReserveGunsCentreLeft wingRight wingReserveGunsArmourArmour0250 m500 mN

USA (US 141st Rct (+), 36th Inf Div, 8,000 men under Col Wyatt) attacked Germany (Ger 1st/129th Pgr, 15th Pgd, 2,200 men under Gen Rodt) in Italy. The CAA Database of Battles records 12 hours of fighting on a front of 1 km, a frontal attack, river crossing against fortified defense, and that Germany held. Losses: USA 408 (5%), Germany 13 (1%).

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

Col Wyatt

UnitArmMen
USA left wingInfantry1,572
USA centreInfantry2,096
USA right wingInfantry1,572
USA reserveInfantry1,310
USA artillery (105 guns)Artillery1,200
USA armour (50 tanks)Armour250
Col WyattCommander—
In this plan8,000

Germany

Gen Rodt

UnitArmMen
Germany left wingInfantry432
Germany centreInfantry576
Germany right wingInfantry432
Germany reserveInfantry360
Germany artillery (42 guns)Artillery330
Germany armour (14 tanks)Armour70
Gen RodtCommander—
In this plan2,200

What the sources report

USAGermany
Strength, this plan8,0002,200
Losses, this plan40813

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 605, “Rapido North I”, compiled for the US Army to study what decides battles. These are the figures a what-if engine can be calibrated against.

Fighting
12 hours
Winner
the defender
Terrain
Flat, Bare
Weather
Wet, Cold, Winter, Temperate
Defender’s posture
Fortified defense
Front width
1 km (attacker), 1 km (defender)
ForceStrengthLossesHorseGunsPlan and outcome
USAattacker8,0004080105Frontal attack; River crossing; Penetration; Stalemate; Withdrew with heavy losses
Germanydefender2,20013042Defensive/offensive plan; Double envelopment; Penetration

Attacker’s advantages logistics +1 · air superiority +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.