Tactics, Volume 1 (of 2). Introduction and Formal Tactics of InfantryBalck, W. (William)
History
Tactics, Volume 1 (of 2). Introduction and Formal Tactics of Infantry
Balck, W. (William)
Military art and science; Tactics
Thus we have here the German united attack, on the one hand, and
the French group attack, on the other. Since group tactics no
doubt diminish losses, they should be used in delaying actions, in
holding attacks, and in defense; they should unquestionably not be
employed when a concerted, rapid movement of skirmishers to the front
becomes necessary. How should the Vth Corps at Wörth and the Guard
at St. Privat, for instance, have attacked, according to the French
regulations?
VI. MACHINE GUNS.[273]
[273] _Exerzierreglement und Schieszvorschrift für die
Maschinengewehrabteilungen_, 1904.
Captain BRAUN, _Das Maxim-Maschinengewehr und seine Verwendung_,
Berlin, 1905.
1. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARM.
The effect of canister had decreased considerably with the introduction
of rifled guns, and this was the more noticeable, because,
simultaneously therewith, the accuracy and rate of fire of the infantry
rifle was greatly increased. The attempts to re-invest the artillery
with its one-time superiority were directed in two channels: one aimed
at perfecting shrapnel, which had been rather neglected up to this
time (England, Prussia, Austria), while the other resurrected the
mediaeval idea of the “barrel-organ gun,” with a view of assembling a
number of rifle barrels and of combining thereby the accuracy of the
small arm with the moral effect of canister. Thus, among others, the
4-10 barreled _Gatling_ gun was invented in America in 1861, it being
the oldest representative of this type of weapon. In order to obtain
a weapon matching the Prussian _needle_ gun, Bavaria adopted the 4
barreled _Feldl_ gun and France the 25 barreled _mitrailleuse_.[274]
The name _canon à balles_, which was given the gun, sufficed to
indicate the manner in which it was intended to be used. As these guns
frequently failed in action, offered the same target and required the
same equipment and approximately the same road space as field guns,
the states who had first adopted them, finally decided to dispense
with them on European theaters of war. The further development of
machine guns was not especially accelerated by the fact that the French
_mitrailleuses_ had not fulfilled the expectations entertained for
them during the Franco-German war, isolated cases excepted,[275] and
that they were quickly silenced by the German artillery, which was
equipped only with percussion shell, as soon as their position was
ascertained. Thus, these guns seemed useful only in colonial wars and
on board war ships for warding off torpedo boats. Although they took up
very little room when in position, they were not considered useful for
flank defense in fortresses, on account of the frequent breakdowns. In
addition to their height, other defects developed; for example, they
could obtain only a very insignificant rate of fire, betrayed their
position by the powder smoke, and lacked the means for ascertaining
ranges.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account