Armed forces by country - a reliable estimate

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
There is this old army training film from 1941 that comes to mind, you might find it interesting

Thanks! Supremely cool!

Notably though the video is made in 1941 which for all the world, and in particular in Europe, had improved the tactical knowledge compared to 1938-1939, which the Swedish training I based it upon was from.
 
This is translated from the words of the now deceased Generalmajor C.C Ahnfeldt-Mollerup.

At the decleration of war 9.April 1940 we had an armed force of around 35.000 men excluding the recruits. Most of these were send home in two rounds on the 16.09.39 and 31.01.40.
Already in Septemper had the army's generalcommand organised a plan as per the tense situation we should have a standing force of 20.000 + 10.000 recruits + 30.000 send home with weapons, a plan which was discarded by the Minister of war. If we had not send anyone home we would have had on the 9. April 1940 a force of 35.000 + 8.000 fairly educated recruits. If we had followed the army's generalcommands plan and reacted to alot of the information the first april days and called in the force, that were supposed to be send home with weapons, we would have a force of around 50.000 + recruits avaible to us at the invasion on the 9. April 1940 with 18.000 on Sjælland/Zealand and in Jylland/Jutland 32.000 in the first line and 25.000 in the second.

Updated the post on Denmark and added your figures on the first page. Thank you
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Tommy, could you please provide your estimate of USA army reserve?

I could venture an educated guess based on the information set forth in those long quotes in my post. It said the peace time NG divisions hovered around 6,000 to 8,000 men in the 1920's. So, let's say 7,000 men, times 18 NG divisions, equals 126,000 in the National Guard. The Organized Reserve divisions were shell divisions for future expansion as needed. They only had about 100 enlisted men but an full complement of commissioned officers (905). So, let's say 1,000 per Organized Reserve division, times 33 divisions, equals 33,000 in the Organized Reserve. However, the mere number of men is deceptive. The infrastructure was there to whip draftees through basic training and you would have as many as 60 infantry divisions (9 RA, 18 NG, and 33 OR). Not sure how well they would be equipped though, mostly likely WWI leftovers. This does not cover cavalry, marines, navy and air corps.
 
I could venture an educated guess based on the information set forth in those long quotes in my post. It said the peace time NG divisions hovered around 6,000 to 8,000 men in the 1920's. So, let's say 7,000 men, times 18 NG divisions, equals 126,000 in the National Guard. The Organized Reserve divisions were shell divisions for future expansion as needed. They only had about 100 enlisted men but an full complement of commissioned officers (905). So, let's say 1,000 per Organized Reserve division, times 33 divisions, equals 33,000 in the Organized Reserve. However, the mere number of men is deceptive. The infrastructure was there to whip draftees through basic training and you would have as many as 60 infantry divisions (9 RA, 18 NG, and 33 OR). Not sure how well they would be equipped though, mostly likely WWI leftovers. This does not cover cavalry, marines, navy and air corps.
Thank you. I have updated both the figures and the USA post. Your name is next to your country now.
 
Further on Canada: I have been unable to find anything for 1936 so far but I found this "When war came in 1939 , Canada possessed only about 4500 professional soldiers, while the professional strengths of her naval and air forces were about 1800 and about 3100 respectively." This is from the official history by C.P. Stacey.

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/oh-ho/detail-eng.asp?BfBookLang=1&BfId=33
Thank you. Did you see the references that I have posted about Canada?
 
Austria was subject to force limits based on treaty. If you find that you should be able to find at least a rough estimate of what they had:

http://digital.library.northwestern.edu/league/le0282ad.pdf

and

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpofcp30ldl0bqc/Austrian 1938 Army Capability.pdf


"Complying with Italian suggestions, Jansa reorganized the 6 brigades of the Austrian army into 7 divisions, one brigade (8th) and an armoured division and set out to modernize the battalions with motorized regiments. The goal of divisions 1 - 5 was to obtain 3 regiments with 3 battalions each, whilst the 6th division sought for 7 and the 7th division 6 battalions respectively. In addition, each division received an infantry cannon unit, a light artillery unit, a pioneer battalion, a telegraph battalion and a reconnaissance unit . The 8th brigade was to have both 4 battalions and brigades. The fire power of the infantry battalions was to include 600 rifles, 27 submachine guns, 27 light machine guns, 4 light mortars, 4 infantry cannon and in the MG-Company, ~6 heavy machine guns.


The armoured division followed the Italian model with tank units, motorized infantry units and calvary regiments. It contained five tank companies: 4 consisting of the 72 Italian light tanks (models Fiat-Ansa1do CV33 and CV35); whereas the 5th displayed Austro-Daimler' s updated model ADGZ . Although the tiny 2-man Italian models offered speed, they were only a match for the German tank Mark 1; Mark II and Mark III being of superior quality. However, the Austrian ADGZ was more advanced and afforded a greater fire power . Unfortunately, in March 1938, the Austrian army had only 12 such models. With respect to the munitions r inventory for the 2 cm M35 tank weapon, the Austrian army had an adequate supply for approximately three days .


The expansion plan (Ausbauplan) of the Austrian army intended for 20 infantry regiments with 60 battalions (by 1938 58 had been reached) as well as 3 independent watch battalions. However, rapid development fostered many gaps in the divisions, in some cases with entire units missing or up to one quarter of the appropriate strength (So~L-Starke) lacking. Mussolini voiced his immense disappointment upon learning that Austria had not recruited more than 15,000 conscripts in October 1936. In his opinion, the army needed to calI up 80,000 men."
 
Last edited:
Thank you. Did you see the references that I have posted about Canada?

Yes. At least one looked familiar.

C.P. Stacey wrote the official version of WWII for the Canadian Military. There are more detailed volumes, by him, available as well on the same website.

The best popular histories I have found so far are written by Mark Zuehlke though Farley Mowatt's "The Regiment" is dear to me as well though it's style is a bit florid and I suspect some of it's anecdotes may be slightly embellished.
 
Austria was subject to force limits based on treaty. If you find that you should be able to find at least a rough estimate of what they had:

http://digital.library.northwestern.edu/league/le0282ad.pdf

and

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpofcp30ldl0bqc/Austrian 1938 Army Capability.pdf


"Complying with Italian suggestions, Jansa reorganized the 6 brigades of the Austrian army into 7 divisions, one brigade (8th) and an armoured division and set out to modernize the battalions with motorized regiments. The goal of divisions 1 - 5 was to obtain 3 regiments with 3 battalions each, whilst the 6th division sought for 7 and the 7th division 6 battalions respectively. In addition, each division received an infantry cannon unit, a light artillery unit, a pioneer battalion, a telegraph battalion and a reconnaissance unit . The 8th brigade was to have both 4 battalions and brigades. The fire power of the infantry battalions was to include 600 rifles, 27 submachine guns, 27 light machine guns, 4 light mortars, 4 infantry cannon and in the MG-Company, ~6 heavy machine guns.


The armoured division followed the Italian model with tank units, motorized infantry units and calvary regiments. It contained five tank companies: 4 consisting of the 72 Italian light tanks (models Fiat-Ansa1do CV33 and CV35); whereas the 5th displayed Austro-Daimler' s updated model ADGZ . Although the tiny 2-man Italian models offered speed, they were only a match for the German tank Mark 1; Mark II and Mark III being of superior quality. However, the Austrian ADGZ was more advanced and afforded a greater fire power . Unfortunately, in March 1938, the Austrian army had only 12 such models. With respect to the munitions r inventory for the 2 cm M35 tank weapon, the Austrian army had an adequate supply for approximately three days .


The expansion plan (Ausbauplan) of the Austrian army intended for 20 infantry regiments with 60 battalions (by 1938 58 had been reached) as well as 3 independent watch battalions. However, rapid development fostered many gaps in the divisions, in some cases with entire units missing or up to one quarter of the appropriate strength (So~L-Starke) lacking. Mussolini voiced his immense disappointment upon learning that Austria had not recruited more than 15,000 conscripts in October 1936. In his opinion, the army needed to calI up 80,000 men."
Good references! Your name is next to Austria and I have updated the post.
 
I like how you completely ignored my post. Oh well.
 
I like how you completely ignored my post. Oh well.
Sorry, you are right. The issue is that I could not find any reference on it.
 
Sorry, you are right. The issue is that I could not find any reference on it.
I've not been able to come by any online sources on the topic either, not even in Finnish. Sounds like one of those things that one has to look for in certain books. I guess I could ask around for sources on a few Finnish military forums.

Which brings the question, where did you get this figure of 100k?
 
I've not been able to come by any online sources on the topic either, not even in Finnish. Sounds like one of those things that one has to look for in certain books. I guess I could ask around for sources on a few Finnish military forums.

Which brings the question, where did you get this figure of 100k?
In the first page there is a list of countries and each country has a link to its own post. In that (dedicated) post I mention what I have found and the references. If you see a mistake please report it and I will make the amendment.
 

Attachments

  • navy.PNG
    navy.PNG
    58,9 KB · Views: 429
  • air.PNG
    air.PNG
    59,8 KB · Views: 426
  • army.PNG
    army.PNG
    73,1 KB · Views: 430
In the first page there is a list of countries and each country has a link to its own post. In that (dedicated) post I mention what I have found and the references. If you see a mistake please report it and I will make the amendment.
I made a post to that thread, we'll see what they reply.
 
I don't think the figures in the first post are accurate. Pretty sure Russia had more men than that. Finland sure as hell didn't have an active strength of 100k, not even close.
The 100k number is obviously wrong, as the linked reference explicitly gives the strength of 78,000-100k for the Suojeluskunta (Civil Guard), not the army.
 
The 100k number is obviously wrong, as the linked reference explicitly gives the strength of 78,000-100k for the Suojeluskunta (Civil Guard), not the army.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking too.
 
@Cardus are you planning to make a mod based on these numbers or are you just compiling research?
If you're not planning a mod, I am already going to be working on a mod that adjusts states and population and I would love to include any changes these numbers dictate.
In game terms, what do you think I would need to change to ensure these numbers are accurately reflect in game?

Is it just "army" is OOB and "reserves" are available starting manpower? Or is it something else?