By Thomas Donnelly

Best Defense office of historical force structure analysis, French and Indian War to World War II division

Beyond the official story, that Army chart tells you a couple of things:

1. Army was never as big as planned.

2. It got heavier -- more tanks and more artillery.

3. It got heavier in different ways than planned -- fewer tanks, a lot more artillery.

4. Didn't buy as many aircraft as planned.

5. Needed many more higher-echelon support troops than planned.

Questions why:

1. Were the differences a result of policy, manpower constraints, industrial constraints, tactical learning?

2. For a war that's supposed to be about the rise of tactical aviation and close air support, the increase in artillery and failure to meet aircraft goals is interesting.

3. Higher-echelon support troops: Like other wars, this was fought in coalition and at great strategic distances from the United States and at great operational distances within the theaters. Is "tail" actually "tooth?"