The Russian Army and the Japanese War, Vol. 2 (of 2): Being Historical and Critical Comments on the Military Policy and Power of Russia and on the Campaign in the Far EastKuropatkin, A. N. (Alekseĭ Nikolaevich)
History
The Russian Army and the Japanese War, Vol. 2 (of 2): Being Historical and Critical Comments on the Military Policy and Power of Russia and on the Campaign in the Far East
Kuropatkin, A. N. (Alekseĭ Nikolaevich)
Russo-Japanese War, 1904-1905
The war shows very clearly the immense importance of rapidly repairing
the wastage in units directly after an action. The Japanese succeeded
in doing this, with the result that they were greatly superior to
us in numbers. It was more important for us to be able to replace
casualties by drafts than to receive reinforcements, and it would have
made us stronger. For instance, with five troop trains available in the
twenty-four hours, a complete army corps with its baggage and parks
took twenty days to reach the front, and increased our strength by some
25,000 rifles. If drafts had been sent up during those twenty-days
instead of an army corps, we should have received 90,000 to 100,000
men. In place of cavalry, baggage, artillery, parks, and a small number
of infantry, we should have got a large number of the latter. It was
infantry we wanted, for in our big battles it was the infantry that
suffered so heavily. The number of guns per 1,000 rifles was too large,
and the amount of transport and baggage was prodigious, with the result
that the 10,000 to 12,000 rifles left in corps resembled an escort to
the artillery, parks, baggage, etc.,[43] more than anything else.
TROOPS IN REAR—COMMUNICATION TROOPS.
By troops in rear I mean those at rest camps, railway troops, road
working parties, telegraph sections, motor troops, transport of various
kinds, all of which should be under the general officer commanding
communications. There is also a large number of men in the departments,
institutions, and depôts of all the field administrations, but as in
Manchuria these were mostly fixed by the authorized establishment,
I will not refer to them. The absence of any prepared organization
of troops for the line of communication, however, led to their being
formed at the expense of the fighting strength of the infantry. While
officers commanding regiments complained of the great wastage of their
men on duties in the rear, those in rear complained that the numbers
they had were insufficient. Troops for the duties in rear should of
course be formed on mobilization. In the part of my report upon the 1st
Army which deals with the organization of the communications there is
much valuable material which is based on war experience, and may be a
useful guide for the future. By the end of August, 1905, the strength
of the 1st Army alone was 300,000. Its own communications in rear
had a depth of 150 miles and a frontage of 330 miles, including the
detachments guarding the extreme left flank and the left flank corps
under General Rennenkampf, with which we permanently occupied a front
of about 70 miles. Under the general commanding the communications of
the 1st Army, which consisted of six army corps, were 650 officers
and officials, 12,000 men, and 25,000 horses, and this number was
considered inadequate. In my report, I gave as my estimate for the
numbers required for one army corps per day’s march in length of
communications—
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account