Schematic plan · Arab-Israeli, 1956

Battle of Abu Agelia-Um Katef

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 groundCentreCentreLeft wingRight wingLeft wingRight wingReserveGunsArmourArmourCommand01 km2 kmN

Israel (Is Div, 4,700 men under unrecorded commanders) attacked Egypt (Egy Rgt, 4,800 men under unrecorded commanders) in Sinai. The CAA Database of Battles records 48 hours of fighting on a front of 6 km, a frontal attack against fortified defense, and that Egypt held. Losses: Israel 318 (7%), Egypt 3,000 (63%).

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

UnitArmMen
Israel left wingInfantry944
Israel centreInfantry1,259
Israel right wingInfantry944
Israel reserveInfantry787
Israel artillery (27 guns)Artillery405
Israel armour (72 tanks)Armour360
Israel commandCommander—
In this plan4,699

Egypt

UnitArmMen
Egypt left wingInfantry991
Egypt centreInfantry1,322
Egypt right wingInfantry991
Egypt reserveInfantry826
Egypt artillery (32 guns)Artillery480
Egypt armour (38 tanks)Armour190
Egypt commandCommander—
In this plan4,800

What the sources report

IsraelEgypt
Strength, this plan4,7004,800
Losses, this plan3183,000

In the CAA Database of Battles

CDB90 no. 650, “Abu Agelia-Um Katef”, 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 defender
Terrain
Flat, Bare
Weather
Dry, Hot, Autumn, Desert
Defender’s posture
Fortified defense
Front width
6 km (attacker), null km (defender)
ForceStrengthLossesHorseGunsPlan and outcome
Israelattacker4,700318027Frontal attack
Egyptdefender4,8003,000032—

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.