In firing first with an elevation of 1800, then with one of 1750 m. (the range being 2000-1600 m. and 254 rounds being expended per gun), on 50 advancing, kneeling targets, placed at intervals of 1 m. 3.10% hits were obtained and 52% figures were placed out of action in 1¹⁄₂ minutes. In firing at the same targets for 2¹⁄₃ minutes, with an elevation of 1900 m. (304 rounds expended), the result dropped to 0.3% hits and 8.3% figures placed out of action. In war the influence of the compact cone of dispersion will be still more potent, for we will then have to reckon with a single, specially selected machine gun marksman who is well protected, while the excitement of battle will produce a far different impression upon an organization composed of men differing materially from each other. The compactness of the cone of dispersion of the machine gun requires that the appropriate elevation be used if the fire is to be effective against well concealed prone skirmishers. This can be accomplished only in part by employing range finders. Since the probable error of these instruments is ±5% of the range, this determination is so inaccurate for machine gun fire that nothing remains but to increase the dispersion artificially. When it is impossible to observe the strike of the bullets, the dispersion may be artificially increased by employing combined sights, two in a single platoon and three in a machine gun battery (company), and above all by sweeping. The employment of combined sights would appear to be too rigid a method; sweeping fire is at any rate better.[285] [285] Lieutenant-General ROHNE, _Schieszlehre_, 2nd Ed. p. 185, et seq. From general ballistic data, Lieutenant-General ROHNE[286] computes that the following results would be obtained by a machine gun and a detachment of skirmishers when firing with the appropriate elevation at a broad target 1 m. high:-- Machine Detachment gun of skirmishers At 500 m. 32.4 16.8% hits „ 1000 „ 15.3 8.1% „ „ 1500 „ 10.2 5.1% „ „ 2000 „ 6.4 3.2% „ [286] _Jahrbücher für Armee und Marine_, 1901, IV, p. 268. This nearly double superiority is reversed, however, when the appropriate elevation is not used: