Schematic plan · Korean War

Battle of Nam River

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.
CentreLeft wingRight wingReserveCentreLeft wingGunsArmourCommand010 km20 kmN

USA (US Div, 16,400 men under unrecorded commanders) attacked North Korea (Nkor Army, 9,000 men under unrecorded commanders) in Korea. The CAA Database of Battles records 48 hours of fighting on a front of 52 km, a frontal attack against delaying action, and that USA won. Losses: USA 230 (1%), North Korea 1,640 (18%).

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

UnitArmMen
USA left wingInfantry3,444
USA centreInfantry4,592
USA right wingInfantry3,444
USA reserveInfantry2,870
USA artillery (70 guns)Artillery1,050
USA armour (200 tanks)Armour1,000
USA commandCommander—
In this plan16,400

North Korea

UnitArmMen
North Korea left wingInfantry2,059
North Korea centreInfantry2,746
North Korea right wingInfantry2,059
North Korea reserveInfantry1,716
North Korea artillery (28 guns)Artillery420
North Korea commandCommander—
In this plan9,000

What the sources report

USANorth Korea
Strength, this plan16,4009,000
Losses, this plan2301,640

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 628, “Nam River”, compiled for the US Army to study what decides battles. These are the figures a what-if engine can be calibrated against.

Fighting
48 hours
Winner
the attacker
Weather
Dry, Temperate, Autumn, Temperate
Defender’s posture
Delaying action
Front width
52 km (attacker), null km (defender)
ForceStrengthLossesHorseGunsPlan and outcome
USAattacker16,400230070Penetration
North Koreadefender9,0001,640028Withdrew

Attacker’s advantages none recorded

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.