A design from 1932 (Part I)
I can't help but feel the then Maj. Patton knew Adolf von Schell, or at least his work. This reads a lot like the kind of light infantry formations von Schell was an advocate for while still managing to keep some of the character then traditional American formations had of being so light on officers
Interesting organization. It would certainly have a good deal of strategic and tactical mobility, as it is very lean, as well as good platoon level fire power. Note the lack of a third maneuver element (unless one of the two platoons provides a squad or section), a company weapons platoon with mortars and machine guns, anti-tank weapons, submachine guns, a supply sergeant or an armorer (unless one or more of the NCOs doubles up). One wonders what additional support was provided at battalion level and how many companies such a battalion would have in Patton’s idealized structure?
Speaking for the airborne in WWII, they couldn’t get their hands on enough BARs. The weight to punch ratio seemed to be desirous to them. I wrote a little about it here: https://open.substack.com/pub/ridgwaysnotebook/p/lighthorse-harrys-notes-fighting?r=2e66kq&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
When Major Patton was made a General, did he get to put his ideal rifle company into action?
More firepower. Only half should be rifles. More grenadiers .
4 man team would include at least heavy weapon RPG or GPMG and at least one SDM.
Rifles should be 50-60% tops.
Rest firepower- either MG or grenade launcher.
The above isn’t out of line for WW2 either, sorry the rifle can’t be a mainstay.
I do like 6 MGs at plt HQ, if I read that right.
Interesting; sounds very much like the company organization of the Italian army in World War 2. Essentially each platoon was a rifle section and a machine gun section; three platoons made a company. This obviously didn't perform well though that can't be blamed on the TOS. https://www.quartermastersection.com/italian/companies/802/Itinf