Ok, so what was the name of the TO&E with 12000 men which you found in these links and books?
That can solved very simply. Just give me any example of this alleged "training center" in existence from 1 April to 21 June 41 - how it was called, where it was located etc, and I admit that I was wrong.Try reading the links, you will learn that the training centres existed and what function they served
Because they were no empty of personnel. Again, there were two tables of peace-time organization with 10300 and 5900 men. This peace-time strength was provided by regular military personnel. Reservists that came to divisions for a training period were a surplus to this peace-time strength. After their release the actual number of men would simply return to a level prescribed by peace-time TO&Es (10300 or 5900 again). I just don't see which part of this explanation can be a problem to understand.Your not even going to try and explain why everyone went home after 45 days, leaving 00s of newly raised Divisons empty of personne
Yep, I was sort of hinting at that in one of my previous messages.means every data point on existing formations we have is wrong then
Which didn't exist before July 41 either.Your quite right about STAVKA, its "The Main directorate of Formation and Staffing of the Red Army" that did that in 41.(Glavuprafrom)
No, that's a fact, and more than that - a common knowledge in relatively modern literature. See, for example, "Stalin's missed chance" by M. Meltyukhov (*). By the start of 1941 almost no reservists were left in the Red Army and it was almost entirely composed of recruits serving regular term, and carrier officers and NCOs.Fact free.
(*) I would recommend this book to those interested in the organization history of the RA in 1939-41 on a serious level.
Eh, what kind of error?Your own post of 25 million excluding those already in service, means your last post was a rather large error in maths.
The Soviet law on military service of 1939 said a completely opposite thing:There is no such thing as a reservists temporarily inducted for training.
From Article 33: Reservists who have completed military service are called for a two-months training up to six times while they stay below 35 years old. Reservists who are trained as NCOs are called for training up to three months long. Reserve NCO are called for a three-months training up to six time while they stay 35 below years old. etc etc
Article 46: All reservists called for training in the Army or Navy are provided with material supplies form the state.
Article 48: Workers and employees called for training retain their jobs and positions for a duration of a call-up and receive a half of their average wages from their employers....
Article 49. Reserve officers for a duration of a call-up receive wages from their units in accordance with the regulation on wages for Army and Navy personnel.
And so on ans so forth.
The same law draws a clear distinction between regular military personnel (военнослужащие) and reservists called for training with the military (военнообазанные, призванные на учебный сбор). They are even called with different terms, as you can see.
Generally, speaking call-up of reservists for training is a usual thing in military forces of the modern time. One can easily find recent examples:
https://www.baltictimes.com/estonian_go ... eservists/
So, returning to the original question, what type of personnel your numbers are supposed to mean exactly? What do you think?
Good for them. However, what the Soviet military understood by mobilization was a different and specific thing. Namely, a transition from peace-time to wartime organization and TO&Es. No transition - no mobilization.The books and links already given refer to vpolzanie v voinu, and the authors understand