New answers tagged

7

All of the factors you mentioned did play a role in the loss of the ships. But the largest factor in the ships themselves actually blowing up was the absolute horrendousness in the ammunition handling of the battle-cruisers and basically every other British ship. To that point, the battle-cruisers also had less armour than battleships which made it easier ...


1

according to bayeaux, pretty tight: The shield wall tactics are not entitled only to roman origins, almost any culture that develops heavy shields will develop a close formation to take advantage of them. Taking in count the influences of roman military in Brittania, and that during the late empire ( ~400) those tactics were still used and adapted to ...


2

Because the Roman infantry developed a "two wave" attack structure. The phalanxes used long spears, whose advantage was that they could kill enemies at "long range" (15-20 feet). So the Romans broke up their attack into two stages. The first part was with "pilum" (throwing spears), which were launched from 50-60 feet away, and had a greater range than ...


1

As observed elsewhere cutlasses remained in use as boarding weapons on warships until the mid 20th century at least. One documented (aleged) instance of their use was the capture of cruiser RN Pola by the destroyer HMS Jervis at the Battle of Matapan (March 1941): From Clash of Titans by Walter J Boyne: Within three minutes the Italians lost the ...


3

Yes. http://www.pbs.org/pov/afghanistanyear1380/the-horror-of-landmines/ In northern Iraq, during the Persian Gulf War, for instance, we observed six casualties from the explosion of a Valmara-69. The two persons who were trying to defuse the mine to recover its aluminum content — worth about $1 on on the local market — were immediately killed. At the ...


3

When triggered, a bounding mine propels itself into the air, then explodes, spraying shrapnel over a large area. To maximize the effectiveness, the shrapnel pattern is largely horizontal (shrapnel thrown upwards into the air or blown into the ground at the base of the mine is wasted). This means that, in general, the best way to survive a bounding mine is ...


2

To elaborate on Patrick N's answer, the cloth is called "wadding." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadding


2

Yes, it existed, but (as recoil was indeed an issue) it had to wait for some technologies to be developed. First, think of the difference of case use between the zamburak. The first was used by not industrialized nations, who were fighting enemies who could not field big numbers of "true" cannons. Against those undefended troops, the zamburak users could ...


2

A tachanka is a cart with a machine gun mounted on it. What makes you think that cannon were not mounted that way? For a cannon mounted so that the weapon and crew stand on the cart, see the Krupp Ballonabwehrkanone. And of course there were plenty of cannon where the crew would dismount from the cart to fire.


0

There's a safety reason namely should the round explode in the barrel the bolt will flip up but should remain in place forcing the blast forward and protecting the shooter. Since as WW2 showed almost no infantry ever even fired their weapon a bolt action rifle was more than sufficient. As an added bonus with a bolt action you can alway check to see if you've ...


0

Actually, several weapon systems were developed during WW1 that were not bolt action. The Pedersen Device mated to the existing M1903 Springfield rifle, the RSC Model 1917, and the ever popular Browning Automatic Rifle to name a few. I understand that the BAR was not intended to be a standard service rifle, but it does deserve a mention because of its ...



Top 50 recent answers are included