Schematic plan · Arab-Israeli War, 1967 (Six-Day War)

Battle of Boutmiya

10 June 1967
Golan
Victory for Israel

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.

Israel (Is Div, 17,550 men under unrecorded commanders) attacked Syria (Syr Div, 16,767 men under unrecorded commanders) in Golan. The CAA Database of Battles records 12 hours of fighting on a front of 2.2 km, a frontal attack against prepared defense, and that Israel won. Losses: Israel 50 (0%), Syria 500 (3%).

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

Unit	Arm	Men
Israel left wing	Infantry	3,684
Israel centre	Infantry	4,912
Israel right wing	Infantry	3,684
Israel reserve	Infantry	3,070
Israel artillery (72 guns)	Artillery	1,080
Israel armour (224 tanks)	Armour	1,120
Israel command	Commander	—
In this plan		17,550

Syria

Unit	Arm	Men
Syria left wing	Infantry	3,545
Syria centre	Infantry	4,727
Syria right wing	Infantry	3,545
Syria reserve	Infantry	2,954
Syria artillery (108 guns)	Artillery	1,620
Syria armour (75 tanks)	Armour	375
Syria command	Commander	—
In this plan		16,766

What the sources report

	Israel	Syria
Strength, this plan	17,550	16,767
Losses, this plan	50	500

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 642, “Boutmiya”, 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 attacker
Terrain: Rugged, Mixed
Weather: Dry, Hot, Summer, Desert
Defender’s posture: Prepared defense

Force	Strength	Losses	Horse	Guns	Plan and outcome
Israelattacker	17,550	50	0	72	—
Syriadefender	16,767	500	0	108	—

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

US Army Concepts Analysis Agency; tidy edition by Jeffrey B. Arnold, CAA Database of Battles (CDB90), no. 642 · ODC-BY-1.0Strengths, losses, front widths, hours of fighting, tactics and outcome.

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.