EPW Brief - 31 Aug 2000
45
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUVLQ&RPEDW 3DUWRIWKH (QHP\3ULVRQHURI:DU(3:&DSWXUH5DWH6WXG\ &KULVWRSKHU$/DZUHQFH 7KH'XSX\,QVWLWXWH 31 August 2000
Transcript of EPW Brief - 31 Aug 2000
������������� ��������������
���������
���������������������������������������
�������
����� ���
��
��� ����!��������
31 August 2000
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Purp
ose
�T
o D
evel
op a
n E
stim
atio
n of
Cap
ture
R
ates
for
Ene
my
Pris
oner
s of
War
(E
PW)
–R
ates
to b
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to th
e H
QD
A T
otal
A
rmy
Ana
lysi
s (T
AA
) pr
oces
s
–U
sabl
e fo
r ot
her
Arm
y an
alys
is a
nd m
odel
ing
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dat
a C
onsi
sts
of:
�76
Ita
lian
Cam
paig
n E
ngag
emen
ts
�49
Kur
sk E
ngag
emen
ts
�77
Ard
enne
s E
ngag
emen
ts
�71
Wor
ld W
ar I
I O
pera
tions
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
The
Rep
ort I
nclu
des
�M
easu
ring
Hum
an F
acto
rs in
Com
bat
–T
he I
talia
n C
ampa
ign
Eng
agem
ents
C
ompa
riso
ns–
The
Ard
enne
s C
ampa
ign
Eng
agem
ents
C
ompa
riso
ns–
The
Bat
tle o
f K
ursk
Eng
agem
ents
C
ompa
riso
ns–
The
Cam
paig
n D
atab
ase
Com
pari
sons
–D
eser
tion
and
Uni
t Coh
esio
n–
Con
clus
ions
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Perf
orm
ance
Dif
fere
nces
in
Opp
osin
g C
omba
t For
ces
�M
ay b
e ex
amin
ed u
sing
3 m
easu
rem
ents
:–
Mis
sion
Acc
ompl
ishm
ent
•W
in/lo
se (
eith
er ju
dgm
ent o
r ad
vanc
e)•
Scor
ing
–C
asua
lty E
ffec
tiven
ess
•T
otal
bat
tle c
asua
lties
–Sp
atia
l Eff
ectiv
enes
s•
Adv
ance
rat
es
�D
id n
ot a
ccou
nt f
or th
e co
nditi
ons
of c
omba
t ex
cept
for
for
ce r
atio
s an
d po
stur
e (a
ttack
er/d
efen
der)
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m I
talia
n D
ata:
Mis
sion
Suc
cess
�D
oes
not s
how
a s
tron
g in
dica
tion
of a
ny
sign
ific
ant p
erfo
rman
ce d
iffe
rent
ials
be
twee
n U
S an
d U
K f
orce
s
�D
ata
may
sho
w a
10-
20%
adv
anta
ge o
n th
e pa
rt o
f th
e G
erm
ans
as th
ey a
re a
ble
to
succ
eed
with
a lo
wer
ave
rage
for
ce r
atio
(o
nly
17 c
ases
)
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m I
talia
n D
ata:
Cas
ualty
Eff
ectiv
enes
s�
US
and
UK
ver
sus
Ger
man
s–
Ger
man
cas
ualty
eff
ectiv
enes
s ad
vant
age
of a
roun
d 30
% w
hen
defe
ndin
g ag
ains
t US
atta
cks
–G
erm
an c
asua
lty e
ffec
tiven
ess
adva
ntag
e of
aro
und
70%
whe
n de
fend
ing
agai
nst U
K a
ttack
s–
Ger
man
cas
ualty
eff
ectiv
enes
s pa
rity
US/
UK
whe
n at
tack
ing
(17
case
s)
�U
S co
mpa
red
to U
K–
Ten
denc
y fo
r U
S fo
rces
to ta
kean
d ca
use
high
er c
asua
lties
–C
asua
lty e
ffec
tiven
ess
adva
ntag
e in
the
atta
ck o
f 30
% b
y th
e U
S ov
er th
e U
K (
com
pare
d to
opp
osin
g G
erm
ans)
–C
asua
lty e
ffec
tiven
ess
adva
ntag
e of
4 b
y U
S ov
er U
K in
the
defe
nse
(7 c
ases
vs.
10
case
s)
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
�C
oncl
usio
ns–
Ger
man
and
US
forc
es r
ough
ly e
quiv
alen
t in
com
bat
capa
bilit
y•
US
may
hav
e be
en a
s m
uch
as 2
0% le
ss e
ffec
tive
than
the
Ger
man
s
–C
omba
t per
form
ance
of
UK
for
ces
rela
tive
to U
S fo
rces
was
cle
arly
infe
rior
, pro
babl
y 20
-30%
.•
Thi
s m
akes
UK
for
ces
defi
nite
ly in
feri
or to
Ger
man
for
ces,
by
as
muc
h as
50%
–D
iffe
renc
es a
re n
oted
, no
sign
ific
ant i
mpa
ct o
n E
PW
ra
tes
Res
ults
fro
m I
talia
n D
ata:
Cas
ualty
Eff
ectiv
enes
s (c
ont.)
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m A
rden
nes
Dat
a:M
issi
on S
ucce
ss�
It d
oes
not a
ppea
r th
at th
e U
S A
rmy
perf
orm
ed b
ette
r in
the
atta
ck in
the
Ard
enne
s en
gage
men
ts th
an it
did
in th
e It
alia
n en
gage
men
ts
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m A
rden
nes
Dat
a:C
asua
lty E
ffec
tiven
ess
�U
S vs
Ger
man
s–
Cle
ar r
elat
ive
perf
orm
ance
dif
fere
nce
rela
tive
to th
e U
S vs
Ger
man
Arm
y in
the
Ard
enne
s co
mpa
red
to
Ital
y–
Fact
or o
f 2
shif
t in
casu
alty
eff
ectiv
enes
s be
twee
n It
aly
and
Ard
enne
s w
hen
US
atta
ckin
g–
Ard
enne
s da
ta s
elec
tion
may
be
bias
ed–
Impr
oved
air
sup
port
may
hav
e be
en a
fac
tor
•B
ut c
anno
t exp
lain
the
2-to
-1 d
iffe
renc
e
–D
eclin
e in
Ger
man
mor
ale
may
hav
e be
en r
espo
nsib
le
for
the
diff
eren
ce in
cas
ualty
eff
ectiv
enes
s
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m A
rden
nes
Dat
a:C
asua
lty E
ffec
tiven
ess
(con
t.)
�C
oncl
usio
ns–
Poss
ible
that
the
rela
tive
perf
orm
ance
bet
wee
n U
S an
d G
erm
an f
orce
s in
the
Ard
enne
s w
as
diff
eren
t (in
fav
or o
f U
S) f
rom
Ita
ly
–T
his
diff
eren
ce m
ay e
xpla
in th
e ca
ptur
e ra
te
diff
eren
ces
betw
een
the
two
data
set
s
–M
ore
rese
arch
is n
eede
d
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m K
ursk
Dat
a:M
issi
on E
ffec
tiven
ess
�61
% o
f G
erm
an a
ttack
s su
cces
sful
–A
vera
ge f
orce
rat
io o
f 1.
34 to
1
�17
% o
f So
viet
atta
cks
succ
essf
ul–
Ave
rage
for
ce r
atio
of
1.43
to 1
�N
umbe
rs m
atte
r–
Onl
y 2
case
s of
Ger
man
suc
cess
whe
n at
tack
ing
outn
umbe
red
–31
cas
es o
f at
tack
er o
utnu
mbe
red
in th
e 19
5 at
tack
s re
view
ed
�O
nly
1 ca
se w
hen
Ger
man
atta
ck f
aile
d w
hen
they
ou
tnum
bere
d th
e So
viet
s (1
.09
to 1
)�
In a
ll ot
her
faile
d G
erm
an a
ttack
s, th
ey w
ere
outn
umbe
red
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m K
ursk
Dat
a:C
asua
lty E
ffec
tiven
ess
�Si
gnif
ican
t inf
luen
ce o
f na
tiona
lity
on c
asua
lty a
nd
capt
ure
rate
s�
Whe
n at
tack
ing:
–So
viet
s lo
st 5
.63
men
per
Ger
man
lost
–G
erm
ans
infl
icte
d 3.
33 c
asua
lties
per
Ger
man
lost
�W
hen
odds
wer
e ev
en in
the
atta
ck:
–So
viet
s lo
st 4
.83
men
per
Ger
man
lost
–G
erm
ans
infl
icte
d 2.
44 c
asua
lties
per
Ger
man
lost
Ave
rag
e
Fo
rce
Ra
tio
Ave
rag
e
Lo
ss R
ati
oA
ll S
ovie
t A
ttac
ks (
18)
1.42
to
15.
63 t
o 1
Sov
iet
Low
-odd
s A
ttac
ks (
12)
1.00
to
14.
83 t
o 1
.51
- 1
.34
to 1
All
Ger
man
Att
acks
(31
)1.
66 t
o 1
.30
to
1G
erm
an L
ow-o
dds
Att
acks
(21
) .
93 t
o 1
.41
to
1 .
63 -
1.4
2 to
1
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Cas
ualty
Dif
fere
ntia
l:Im
pact
on
MIA
s an
d C
IAs
Ge
rma
nS
ovi
et
Ra
tio
Tota
l Cas
ualti
es10
,233
40,6
441
to
3.97
W
hen
atta
ckin
g7,
963
13,7
031
to
1.72
W
hen
defe
ndin
g2,
270
26,9
411
to 1
1.87
Tota
l Blo
ody
Cas
ualti
es9,
936
27,0
461
to 2
.72
To
tal
KIA
1,52
38,
008
1 to
5.2
6W
IA t
o K
IA R
atio
5.52
to
12.
38 t
o 1
W
hen
atta
ckin
g5.
63 t
o 1
2.90
to
1
Whe
n de
fend
ing
5.16
to
12.
06 t
o 1
To
tal
MIA
297
13,5
981
to
45.7
8
Whe
n at
tack
ing
190
1,90
91
to
10.0
5
Whe
n de
fend
ing
107
11,6
891
to 1
09.2
4T
ota
l C
IA22
712
,436
1 to
54.
78P
erce
nt o
f MIA
is C
IA76
.43
91.4
5To
tal D
eser
ters
459
91
to 1
49.7
5P
erce
nt o
f CIA
des
erte
rs1.
764.
82
�A
s an
asi
de, t
he w
ound
ed-t
o-ki
lled
ratio
is h
ighe
r fo
r th
e at
tack
er th
an f
or th
e de
fend
er
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Issu
e of
Sov
iet D
eser
ters
�Pr
obab
le c
orre
latio
n be
twee
n nu
mbe
r of
de
sert
ers
and
num
ber
of C
IA
�A
for
ce w
ith m
ore
dese
rter
s w
ill p
roba
bly
have
cor
resp
ondi
ngly
mor
e C
IA
�M
easu
rem
ent o
f de
sert
ers
and
AW
OL
is
prob
ably
a r
efle
ctio
n of
the
gene
ral s
tate
of
a un
it’s
mor
ale
and
cohe
sion
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m K
ursk
Dat
a:O
ther
Fac
tors
�T
he te
rrai
n w
as e
asie
r fo
r th
e at
tack
er th
an w
as
typi
cal i
n th
e It
alia
n an
d A
rden
nes
enga
gem
ents
�T
echn
olog
y an
d w
eapo
ns w
ere
sim
ilar
�T
he m
ix o
f w
eapo
ns w
as d
iffe
rent
, esp
ecia
lly in
ar
tille
ry�
The
Ger
man
Air
For
ce e
stab
lishe
d ai
r su
peri
ority
, eve
n th
ough
it w
as o
utnu
mbe
red.
It
dow
ned
enem
y pl
anes
at a
rat
e gr
eate
r th
an 5
to 1
�B
oth
side
s ha
d ex
tens
ive
com
bat e
xper
ienc
e,
plen
ty o
f re
st a
nd tr
aini
ng, a
nd w
ere
wel
l sto
cked
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ults
fro
m K
ursk
Dat
a:C
oncl
usio
ns�
Def
inite
Ger
man
adv
anta
ge in
com
bat
capa
bilit
y–
In m
issi
on e
ffec
tiven
ess
in b
oth
offe
nse
and
defe
nse
–In
cas
ualty
eff
ectiv
enes
s in
bot
h of
fens
e an
d de
fens
e
�T
he d
iffe
renc
e ap
pear
s to
be
by a
fac
tor
of 3
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Cam
paig
n D
atab
ase
Com
pari
sons
�C
onfi
rms
3 of
the
4 m
ajor
poi
nts
dete
rmin
ed
from
the
enga
gem
ent d
ata
–T
here
is a
dif
fere
nce
betw
een
Alli
ed a
nd G
erm
an
perf
orm
ance
–T
his
diff
eren
ce a
ppea
rs to
cha
nge
over
tim
e–
The
re is
a d
iffe
renc
e be
twee
n U
S an
d U
K
perf
orm
ance
–So
me
arm
ies
(in
this
cas
e, I
talia
n) p
erfo
rm n
otic
eabl
y w
orse
than
the
norm
s as
est
ablis
hed
by G
erm
any,
US,
an
d U
K
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
Alli
ed v
s G
erm
an�
The
Ita
lian
Cam
paig
n da
ta f
rom
Sal
erno
to
Rom
e (2
6 ca
ses)
sho
ws:
–W
hile
out
num
beri
ng th
e de
fend
er a
roun
d 3
to
1, th
e at
tack
er s
uffe
red
30-5
0% m
ore
casu
altie
s
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
Cha
nge
Ove
r T
ime
�C
ompa
red
Sale
rno-
to-R
ome
oper
atio
ns (
26
case
s) to
late
r It
alia
n C
ampa
ign
oper
atio
ns (
14
case
s)�
Deg
ree
of c
asua
lty e
ffec
tiven
ess
appe
ars
to b
e ab
out 7
0%–
In e
arly
ope
ratio
ns: 1
.29
to 1
–In
late
r op
erat
ions
: 1 to
1.3
6
�D
oes
not a
ppea
r to
be
any
othe
r si
gnif
ican
t in
flue
ncin
g fa
ctor
s
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
US
vs U
K�
Thi
s po
int i
s no
tsup
port
ed b
y th
e op
erat
ions
dat
a
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
US
vs U
K (c
ont.)
�D
ata
is n
ot “
clea
n,”
both
sid
es h
ad A
llied
con
tinge
nts
–U
K c
orps
in F
ifth
US
Arm
y–
UK
Eig
hth
Arm
y in
clud
ed A
ustr
alia
ns, N
ew Z
eala
nder
s, P
oles
, C
anad
ians
, Sou
th A
fric
ans,
Ind
ians
, etc
.
�M
ode
of f
ight
ing
was
dif
fere
nt–
US
atta
cked
at l
ower
odd
s–
Aga
inst
str
onge
r ar
mor
ed f
orce
s–
Bot
h su
ffer
ed a
nd in
flic
ted
high
er c
asua
lties
per
day
�U
K h
ad m
ore
favo
rabl
e ca
sual
ty e
xcha
nge
ratio
–U
S ca
used
.9 c
asua
lties
for
eve
ry 1
suf
fere
d–
UK
cau
sed
1.21
cas
ualti
es f
or e
very
1 s
uffe
red
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
�A
rmy-
leve
l dat
a sh
ows
oppo
site
pat
tern
fro
m d
ivis
ion-
leve
l dat
a�
Six
poss
ible
rea
sons
:–
The
Bri
tish
divi
sion
s m
easu
red
may
not
hav
e be
en ty
pica
l of
Bri
tish
perf
orm
ance
–Si
nce
US/
UK
ope
ratio
ns o
ften
incl
uded
oth
er A
llied
uni
ts, t
his
may
not
be
a va
lid c
ompa
riso
n of
US/
UK
per
form
ance
–O
ppos
ing
Ger
man
for
ce o
n th
e w
est c
oast
may
hav
e be
en b
ette
r–
Incl
usio
n of
Anz
io a
nd S
aler
no d
ata
in th
e U
S co
lum
n (e
ven
thou
gh th
ey in
clud
ed s
tron
g B
ritis
h fo
rces
) he
avily
infl
uenc
es th
e re
sults
–U
S en
gage
d in
hig
h-ca
sual
ty o
pera
tions
that
bia
s th
e av
erag
e ca
sual
ty r
ate
(Sal
erno
, Anz
io, F
irst
Cas
sino
)
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
US
vs U
K (c
ont.)
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Thr
ee C
ases
of
Ger
man
s A
ttack
ing
the
US
�C
ause
d an
ave
rage
of
1.13
US
casu
altie
s fo
r ev
ery
1 th
ey lo
st
�A
vera
ge a
ggre
gate
for
ce r
atio
was
1.2
2 to
1
�A
ggre
gate
arm
or a
dvan
tage
was
1.1
3 to
1
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Oth
er N
atio
nalit
ies’
Per
form
ance
�So
me
arm
ies
(in
this
cas
e, th
e It
alia
ns)
perf
orm
ed n
otic
eabl
y w
orse
than
the
norm
s es
tabl
ishe
d by
Ger
man
y, U
S, a
nd
UK
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
�E
ven
whe
n th
e la
rge
num
ber
of e
xten
uatin
g ci
rcum
stan
ces
are
cons
ider
ed, t
he p
erfo
rman
ce o
f th
e It
alia
n A
rmy
was
stil
l aby
smal
–In
the
offe
nse,
the
Ital
ians
lost
31.
25 c
asua
lties
for
ev
ery
one
they
infl
icte
d–
In th
e de
fens
e th
e It
alia
ns lo
st 1
5.25
cas
ualti
es f
or
ever
y on
e th
ey in
flic
ted
–In
the
defe
nse,
ove
r 90
% o
f th
e It
alia
n fo
rce
surr
ende
red
( >
4%
per
day
)
�It
alia
n pe
rfor
man
ce c
erta
inly
wor
se th
an th
at o
f th
e So
viet
s
Oth
er N
atio
nalit
ies’
Per
form
ance
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Des
ertio
n an
d U
nit C
ohes
ion
�Si
gnif
ican
t des
ertio
n ra
te d
iffe
renc
es
betw
een
nativ
e G
erm
ans
and
ethn
ic
Ger
man
s (V
olks
deut
sche
)
�Si
gnif
ican
t des
ertio
n ra
te d
iffe
renc
es
betw
een
Ger
man
s an
d no
n-G
erm
ans
�A
llied
des
ertio
n (a
cros
s lin
es)
was
min
imal
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Con
clus
ions
�G
erm
ans
and
US
roug
hly
equi
vale
nt in
com
bat
effe
ctiv
enes
s–
US
with
in 2
0-30
% o
f G
erm
ans,
may
be lo
wer
–T
rue
for
Ital
y, a
lthou
gh th
ey h
ave
sam
e co
mba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s in
th
e A
rden
nes
–O
vera
ll im
pact
of
US
vs G
erm
an c
omba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s no
t en
ough
to b
ias
furt
her
anal
ysis
�G
erm
ans
and
UK
with
in s
ame
orde
r of
mag
nitu
de o
f co
mba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s–
UK
som
ewha
t inf
erio
r (2
0-50
%)
–M
ay h
ave
som
e im
pact
on
battl
e re
sults
, but
not
eno
ugh
to b
ias
furt
her
anal
ysis
�A
ll da
ta f
rom
Ita
lian
and
Ard
enne
s en
gage
men
ts c
an b
e us
ed in
terc
hang
eabl
y to
est
ablis
h E
PW r
ates
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Con
clus
ions
(con
t.)
�It
alia
n co
mba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s ap
pear
s to
be
low
er
than
Sov
iet c
omba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s�
Hum
an f
acto
rs a
re a
maj
or d
eter
min
ant o
f de
sert
ion
and
capt
ure
rate
s–
Furt
her
anal
ysis
nee
ded
�Pr
obab
le c
orre
latio
n be
twee
n de
sert
ion
rate
s (a
nd
may
be A
WO
L r
ates
) an
d ca
ptur
e ra
tes
�Pr
obab
le c
orre
latio
n be
twee
n de
sert
ion
rate
s (a
nd
may
be A
WO
L r
ates
) an
d co
mba
t eff
ectiv
enes
s
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Impa
ct o
f M
oral
e (B
eing
Sov
iet)
�T
enta
tive
conc
lusi
ons:
–If
ther
e is
a r
elat
ive
casu
alty
eff
ectiv
enes
s di
spar
ity
betw
een
two
arm
ies
(ord
er o
f m
agni
tude
of
3), t
here
w
ill b
e a
disp
arity
in th
e ca
ptur
e ra
tes
(ord
er o
f m
agni
tude
10)
, whi
ch m
ay b
e re
flec
ted
by d
ecre
asin
g th
e ca
ptur
e ra
te o
f th
e si
de w
ith th
e hi
ghes
t mor
ale
–M
ore
enga
gem
ents
nee
d to
be
deve
lope
d an
d an
alyz
ed
to s
tren
gthe
n/di
spro
ve th
is h
ypot
hesi
s.–
Reg
ardl
ess
of th
e “s
haki
ness
” of
the
data
, the
impa
ct
of h
uman
fac
tors
on
EPW
cap
ture
rat
es c
anno
t be
igno
red
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Stud
y C
oncl
usio
ns
�O
utco
me
is a
sig
nifi
cant
det
erm
inan
t of
EPW
rat
e–
Eff
ect i
s by
a f
acto
r of
10+
, and
can
ris
e to
100
+ w
ith
pene
trat
ions
and
env
elop
men
ts
�B
eing
atta
cker
or
defe
nder
is a
sig
nifi
cant
det
erm
inan
t–
Eff
ect i
s by
a f
acto
r of
10+
�Fo
rce
mix
is a
sig
nifi
cant
det
erm
inan
t–
Eff
ect i
s by
a f
acto
r of
10+
for
the
atta
cker
–E
ffec
t is
by a
fac
tor
of a
bout
4 f
or th
e de
fend
er
�M
oral
e (b
eing
Sov
iet)
is a
sig
nifi
cant
det
erm
inan
t–
Eff
ect i
s by
a f
acto
r of
abo
ut 1
0–
His
tori
cally
ther
e ha
ve b
een
arm
ies
muc
h w
orse
than
the
Sovi
et
Arm
y in
194
3
�W
e ha
ve a
bas
is f
or a
mul
tiple
reg
ress
ion
mod
el w
ith f
our
maj
or in
depe
nden
t var
iabl
es
Bac
kup
Slid
esB
acku
p Sl
ides
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
�O
vera
ll, th
e si
mila
ritie
s be
twee
n th
e It
alia
n an
d A
rden
nes
Cam
paig
n en
gage
men
ts a
re m
ore
com
pelli
ng th
an th
e di
ffer
ence
sIt
ali
an
Ard
en
ne
sN
umbe
r of
Eng
agem
ents
7571
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r S
tren
gth
16,9
4515
,024
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r S
tren
gth
8,50
69,
311
Ave
rage
For
ce R
atio
2.34
2.79
Wei
ghte
d F
orce
Rat
io1.
991.
61A
vera
ge B
attle
Len
gth
(day
s)2.
411.
61A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Tank
Str
engt
h77
84A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Tank
Str
engt
h40
37A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es42
925
6A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Cas
ualti
es42
154
8A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay17
816
0A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay17
434
1A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y1.
351.
87A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y1.
937.
16W
eigh
ted
Att
acke
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
1.05
1.71
Wei
ghte
d D
efen
der
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r D
ay2.
055.
89A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s14
028
3A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s pe
r D
ay60
176
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
5228
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
per
Day
2218
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
0.41
0.24
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
Day
0.17
0.15
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
1.56
7.21
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
per
Day
0.65
4.49
Ave
rage
Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
13.5
814
.37
Ave
rage
Per
cent
Def
ende
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
33.0
733
.69
Tota
l Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
12.2
411
Tota
l Per
cent
Def
ende
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
33.2
051
.59
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Kur
sk is
Dif
fere
ntN
umbe
r of
Eng
agem
ents
49A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Str
engt
h28
,521
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r S
tren
gth
20,7
82A
vera
ge F
orce
Rat
io1.
67W
eigh
ted
For
ce R
atio
1.37
Ave
rage
Bat
tle L
engt
h (d
ays)
1.39
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r Ta
nk S
tren
gth
86A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Tank
Str
engt
h59
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
442
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
596
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
per
day
319
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
per
day
430
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
1.38
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
4.38
Wei
ghte
d A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y1.
55W
eigh
ted
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
2.87
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of A
ttac
ker
EP
Ws
236
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of A
ttac
ker
EP
Ws
per
day
170
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
22A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Def
ende
r E
PW
s pe
r da
y16
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
0.08
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
day
0.06
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
2.79
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
per
day
2.76
Ave
rage
Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
6.10
Ave
rage
Per
cent
Def
ende
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
26.5
0To
tal P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA4.
98To
tal P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA39
.66
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
The
Cam
paig
n D
atab
ase
Con
sist
s of
:�
The
fir
st y
ear
and
a ha
lf o
f th
e N
orth
Afr
ica
Cam
paig
n
�T
he S
icili
an
Cam
paig
n
�T
he E
ntir
e It
alia
n C
ampa
ign
(alm
ost t
wo
year
s)
Ca
mp
aig
nS
tart
Da
teE
nd
Da
te#
of
Op
era
tio
ns
Firs
t N
orth
Afri
can
6/11
/194
02/
7/19
419
Sec
ond
Nor
th A
frica
n2/
8/19
4111
/17/
1941
9Th
ird N
orth
Afri
can
11/1
8/19
417/
1/19
423
Fou
rth
Nor
th A
frica
n7/
2/19
421/
14/1
943
1To
rch
11/8
/194
211
/14/
1942
0Tu
nisi
an11
/15/
1942
5/12
/194
30
Sic
ilian
7/10
/194
38/
17/1
943
2C
alab
rian
9/3/
1943
9/30
/194
31
Sal
erno
9/9/
1943
9/30
/194
31
Nap
les
10/1
/194
310
/10/
1943
2V
oltu
rno
10/1
1/19
4311
/10/
1943
1Tr
igno
10/1
1/19
4311
/20/
1943
1G
arig
liano
11/1
1/19
431/
20/1
944
2S
angr
o11
/21/
1943
2/20
/194
43
Cas
sino
1/21
/194
43/
31/1
944
4A
nzio
1/22
/194
45/
22/1
944
7G
usta
v Li
ne3/
21/1
944
5/10
/194
42
Rom
e5/
11/1
944
6/30
/194
45
Got
hic
Line
7/1/
1944
4/10
/194
514
Po
Val
ley
4/11
/194
55/
6/19
454
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Thi
s A
llow
s U
s to
Com
pare
the
Eng
agem
ent
Dat
a to
the
Ope
ratio
ns D
ata
Ita
lia
n D
ivis
ion
-le
vel
En
ga
ge
me
nts
Ita
lia
n A
rmy-
leve
l O
pe
rati
on
sR
ati
o,
Div
isio
n-
leve
l to
Arm
y-le
vel
Alli
ed O
ffens
ive
Act
ions
5926
Ger
man
Offe
nsiv
e A
ctio
ns17
3A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Str
engt
h16
,945
184,
949
1 to
10.
9A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Str
engt
h8,
506
70,9
281
to
8.3
Ave
rage
For
ce R
atio
2.3
4 to
1
3.25
to
1W
eigh
ted
For
ce R
atio
1.9
9 to
1
2.61
to
1A
vera
ge B
attle
Len
gth
(Day
s)2.
4125
.14
1 to
10.
4A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Tank
Str
engt
h77
562
1 to
7.
3A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Tank
Str
engt
h40
157
1 to
3.
9A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es42
95,
974
1 to
13.
9A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Cas
ualti
es42
14,
799
1 to
11.
4A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay17
823
81
to
1.3
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
per
day
174
191
1 to
1.
1A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y1.
350.
191
to
.1
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
1.93
0.30
1 to
.
2W
eigh
ted
Att
acke
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
1.05
0.13
1 to
.
1W
eigh
ted
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
2.05
0.25
1 to
.
1A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s14
01,
559
1 to
11.
1A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s pe
r da
y60
621
to
1.0
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
5241
11
to
7.9
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
per
day
2216
1 to
.
7A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Att
acke
r C
IA0.
410.
301
to
.7
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
day
0.17
0.02
1 to
.
1A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Def
ende
r C
IA1.
562.
111
to
1.4
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
per
day
0.65
0.11
1 to
.
2A
vera
ge P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA13
.58
6.77
1 to
.
5A
vera
ge P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA33
.07
25.8
81
to
.8
Tota
l Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
12.2
46.
881
to
.6
Tota
l Per
cent
Def
ende
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
33.2
032
.49
1 to
1.
0
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Com
pari
son
of O
pera
tions
Afr
ica
n a
nd
Sic
ilia
nC
am
pa
ign
Op
era
tio
ns
Sa
lern
o t
o R
om
eO
pe
rati
on
sR
om
e t
o S
urr
en
de
rO
pe
rati
on
sA
llied
Offe
nsiv
e A
ctio
ns16
2618
Axi
s O
ffens
ive
Act
ions
83
0A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Str
engt
h92
,940
184,
949
274,
243
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r S
tren
gth
75,8
1470
,928
102,
914
Ave
rage
For
ce R
atio
1.3
6 to
1
3.25
to
1
3.58
to
1W
eigh
ted
For
ce R
atio
1.2
3 to
1
2.61
to
1
2.66
to
1A
vera
ge B
attle
Len
gth
(Day
s)29
.21
25.1
434
.44
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r Ta
nk S
tren
gth
258
562
1,02
1A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Tank
Str
engt
h17
915
718
8A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es3,
900
5,97
46,
718
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
16,7
454,
799
19,8
07A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay10
623
819
5A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay57
319
157
5A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y0.
140.
190.
07A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y1.
380.
303.
33W
eigh
ted
Att
acke
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
0.14
0.13
0.07
Wei
ghte
d D
efen
der
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y0.
760.
250.
56A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s14
,950
1,55
914
,149
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of A
ttac
ker
EP
Ws
per
day
512
6241
1A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Def
ende
r E
PW
s53
141
115
7A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Def
ende
r E
PW
s pe
r da
y17
165
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
3.41
0.30
0.06
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
day
0.14
0.02
0A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Def
ende
r C
IA24
.63
2.11
20.9
7A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Def
ende
r C
IA p
er d
ay1.
380.
113.
15A
vera
ge P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA9.
516.
771.
31A
vera
ge P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA44
.63
25.8
851
.66
Tota
l Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
13.6
26.
882.
33To
tal P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA89
.28
32.4
971
.43
Ita
lia
n C
am
pa
ign
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Thi
s C
ompa
riso
n Sh
ows
�A
rmy-
leve
lope
ratio
ns a
re a
bout
10
times
th
e si
ze a
nd d
urat
ion
of th
e di
visi
on-l
evel
enga
gem
ents
�Fo
rce
ratio
s ar
e si
mila
r
�A
vera
ge d
aily
cas
ualti
es a
nd E
PWs
are
sim
ilar
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Con
clus
ions
�T
he c
asua
lty r
ate
and
capt
ure
rate
for
ar
my-
leve
lope
ratio
ns a
re a
bout
1/5
to 1
/10
of th
ose
for
divi
sion
-lev
elen
gage
men
ts
�T
he e
ngag
emen
t dat
a fo
r th
e It
alia
n C
ampa
ign
is a
fai
rly
repr
esen
tativ
e sa
mpl
e of
bat
tles
from
the
cam
paig
n
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Ope
ratio
nal T
empo
The
issu
e he
re is
ope
ratio
nal t
empo
. With
for
ces
10 ti
mes
la
rger
and
ope
ratio
ns th
at a
re 1
0 tim
es lo
nger
, the
ca
mpa
igns
sho
w th
e co
unt o
f th
e av
erag
e da
ily c
asua
lties
and
aver
age
daily
cap
ture
sar
e si
mila
r to
thos
e fo
und
in
the
enga
gem
ents
. Thi
s na
tura
lly tr
ansl
ates
into
dai
ly
casu
alty
rat
esan
d da
ily c
aptu
re r
ates
bein
g 1/
10 o
f th
e en
gage
men
ts. W
hat t
his
mea
ns is
that
thes
e ar
mie
s of
6 to
20
div
isio
ns, b
etw
een
the
activ
e an
d in
activ
e se
ctor
s of
th
eir
lines
, and
bet
wee
n th
e qu
iet a
nd a
ctiv
e pe
riod
s of
th
eir
oper
atio
ns, a
re o
n av
erag
e m
aint
aini
ng o
ne m
ajor
di
visi
on-l
evel
eng
agem
ent a
day
. The
ope
ratio
nal t
empo
fo
r ar
my-
leve
l ope
ratio
ns is
abo
ut 1
/10
of th
e op
erat
iona
l te
mpo
for
a d
ivis
ion-
leve
l atta
ck.
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Res
ult:
Cha
nge
of T
empo
�O
ne o
f th
e re
sults
of
a re
volu
tion
in
mili
tary
aff
airs
(R
MA
) or
evo
lutio
n in
m
ilita
ry a
ffai
rs m
ay b
e a
chan
ge in
op
erat
iona
l tem
po�
May
res
ult i
n op
erat
ions
of
3-4
days
bei
ng
far
mor
e in
tens
e�
May
res
ult i
n lo
nger
per
iods
of
rest
be
twee
n op
erat
ions
In P
hase
III
, with
mod
ern
data
, we
will
look
for
a
sym
met
rica
l cha
nge
in in
tens
ity in
div
isio
n-le
vel
enga
gem
ents
whe
n co
mpa
red
to a
rmy-
leve
lope
ratio
ns.
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Com
pari
son
of I
talia
n an
d A
rden
nes
Perf
orm
ance
sA
rde
nn
es
Ita
lyU
S S
ucc
ess
ful
Att
ack
N
umbe
r of
Cas
es28
22
Ave
rage
US
loss
es20
746
3
Ave
rage
Ger
man
loss
es54
153
8
Tim
es U
S lo
sses
low
er23
10
No.
of T
ype
5+ A
ttac
ks14
11
Ave
rage
US
loss
es -
Typ
e 5+
212
456
A
vera
ge G
erm
an lo
sses
- T
ype
5+60
672
7
Ave
rage
US
loss
es -
Typ
e 4
203
470
A
vera
ge G
erm
an lo
sses
- T
ype
447
635
0U
S F
ail
ed
Att
ack
N
umbe
r of
Cas
es13
15
Ave
rage
US
loss
es22
341
3
Ave
rage
Ger
man
loss
es50
242
7
Tim
es U
S lo
sses
low
er8
7
Ave
rage
US
loss
less
out
lier
231
425
A
vera
ge G
erm
an lo
ss le
ss o
utlie
r37
534
2G
erm
an
Su
cce
ssfu
l A
tta
ck
Num
ber
of C
ases
115
A
vera
ge G
erm
an lo
ses
428
851
A
vera
ge U
S lo
sses
1185
727
Ti
mes
Ger
man
loss
es lo
wer
83
Ge
rma
n F
ail
ed
Att
ack
N
umbe
r of
Cas
es19
12
Ave
rage
Ger
man
loss
es25
341
9
Ave
rage
US
loss
es22
248
2
Tim
es G
erm
an lo
sses
low
er7
6
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Com
pari
ng th
e W
eigh
ted
Forc
e L
oss
Rat
ios
Ku
rsk
Ca
mp
aig
n D
ata
To
tal
Fo
rce
R
ati
oT
ota
l L
oss
R
ati
oA
ll S
ovie
t A
ttac
ks (
18)
1.43
to
16.
04 t
o 1
Sov
iet
Low
-odd
s A
ttac
ks (
12)
1.02
to
13.
92 t
o 1
.51
- 1
.34
to 1
All
Ger
man
Att
acks
(31
)1.
34 t
o 1
.30
to
1G
erm
an L
ow-o
dds
Att
acks
(21
) .
99 t
o 1
.27
to
1 .
63 -
1.4
2 to
1
Ita
lia
n C
am
pa
ign
Da
taT
ota
l F
orc
e
Ra
tio
To
tal
Lo
ss
Ra
tio
All
US
Att
acks
(37
)2.
18 t
o 1
.89
to
1U
S L
ow-o
dds
Att
acks
(3)
1.15
to
1 .
27 t
o 1
.72
- 1
.31
to 1
All
UK
Att
acks
(21
)2.
07 t
o 1
1.33
to
1U
K lo
w-o
dds
Att
acks
(4)
1.30
to
12.
31 t
o 1
1.
17 -
1.4
1 to
1A
ll G
erm
an A
ttac
ks (
17)
1.59
to
1 .
99 t
o 1
Ger
man
Low
-odd
s A
ttac
ks (
7) .
85 t
o 1
.57
to
1 .
73 -
1.4
8 to
1
Ard
en
ne
s C
am
pa
ign
Da
taT
ota
l F
orc
e
Ra
tio
To
tal
Lo
ss
Ra
tio
All
US
Att
acks
(41
)1.
69 t
o 1
.40
to
1U
S L
ow-o
dds
Att
acks
(12
)1.
29 t
o 1
.69
to
1 1
.15
- 1.
48 t
o 1
All
Ger
man
Att
acks
(30
)1.
52 t
o 1
.55
to
1G
erm
an L
ow-o
dds
Att
acks
(13
) .
85 t
o 1
.38
to
1 .
34 -
1.3
7 to
1
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Dif
fere
nce
in P
erfo
rman
ce:
US
vs U
K�
Thi
s po
int i
s no
tsup
port
ed
by th
e op
erat
ions
da
ta
Ita
lia
n C
am
pa
ign
US
Op
era
tio
ns
UK
Op
era
tio
ns
All
ied
Off
en
sive
Act
ion
s22
18A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Str
engt
h21
9,33
423
3,18
3A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Str
engt
h88
,923
74,4
70A
vera
ge F
orce
Rat
io
2.68
to
1
4.20
to
1W
eigh
ted
For
ce R
atio
2.
47 t
o 1
3.
13 t
o 1
Ave
rage
Bat
tle L
engt
h (D
ays)
3132
.56
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r Ta
nk S
tren
gth
733
737
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r Ta
nk S
tren
gth
193
105
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
7,82
35,
206
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
7,04
36,
285
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
per
day
252
160
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
per
day
227
193
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
0.17
0.06
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
0.30
0.27
Wei
ghte
d A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r da
y0.
120.
07W
eigh
ted
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
day
0.26
0.26
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of A
ttac
ker
EP
Ws
2,49
11,
758
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of A
ttac
ker
EP
Ws
per
day
8054
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
455
151
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
per
day
155
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
0.29
0.05
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
day
0.02
0A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Def
ende
r C
IA3.
192.
58A
vera
ge P
erce
nt o
f Def
ende
r C
IA p
er d
ay0.
130.
07A
vera
ge P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA5.
243.
18A
vera
ge P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA33
.25
25.8
4To
tal P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA5.
822.
90To
tal P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA35
.37
27.9
7A
vera
ge D
aily
Adv
ance
Rat
e
1
.05
km
1.71
km
Ave
rage
Out
com
e V
alue
3.36
3.33
Ave
rage
Cas
ualty
Rat
io1.
381.
53W
eigh
ted
Cas
ualty
Rat
io1.
110.
83
��$XJXVW����
0HDVXULQJ+XPDQ)DFWRUV
LQ&RPEDW
Oth
er N
atio
nalit
ies’
Per
form
ance
�So
me
arm
ies
(in
this
cas
e, th
e It
alia
ns)
perf
orm
ed
notic
eabl
y w
orse
th
an th
e no
rms
esta
blis
hed
by
Ger
man
y, U
S, a
nd
UK
Ita
lia
n A
rmy
Op
era
tio
ns
Off
en
sive
Op
era
tio
ns
De
fen
sive
Op
era
tio
ns
Act
ion
s5
6A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Str
engt
h10
4,50
056
,749
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r S
tren
gth
65,8
0973
,099
Ave
rage
For
ce R
atio
1.
91 t
o 1
0.
89 t
o 1
Wei
ghte
d F
orce
Rat
io
1.59
to
1
0.78
to
1A
vera
ge B
attle
Len
gth
(Day
s)36
.223
.17
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r Ta
nk S
tren
gth
5516
3A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Tank
Str
engt
h10
459
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
1,75
03,
384
Ave
rage
Def
ende
r C
asua
lties
5651
,631
Ave
rage
Att
acke
r C
asua
lties
per
day
1914
6A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Cas
ualti
es p
er d
ay2
2,22
9A
vera
ge A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r D
ay0.
030.
14A
vera
ge D
efen
der
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r D
ay0
4.55
Wei
ghte
d A
ttac
ker
Per
cent
Los
s pe
r D
ay0.
050.
26W
eigh
ted
Def
ende
r P
erce
nt L
oss
per
Day
03.
05A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s2
46,6
12A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Att
acke
r E
PW
s pe
r da
y0
2,01
2A
vera
ge N
umbe
r of
Def
ende
r E
PW
s72
101
Ave
rage
Num
ber
of D
efen
der
EP
Ws
per
day
24
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
0.07
0.12
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of A
ttac
ker
CIA
per
day
00
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
073
.32
Ave
rage
Per
cent
of D
efen
der
CIA
per
day
04.
32A
vera
ge P
erce
nt A
ttac
ker
Loss
es a
re C
IA9.
841.
90A
vera
ge P
erce
nt D
efen
der
Loss
es a
re C
IA1.
8290
.44
Tota
l Per
cent
Att
acke
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
4.11
2.98
Tota
l Per
cent
Def
ende
r Lo
sses
are
CIA
3.57
90.2
8A
vera
ge D
aily
Adv
ance
Rat
e
3
.50
km
1
3.23
km
Ave
rage
Out
com
e V
alue
1.60
5.33
Ave
rage
Cas
ualty
Rat
io14
.04
0.08
Wei
ghte
d C
asua
lty R
atio
31.2
50.
07
