filename
stringclasses 1
value | title
stringlengths 3
66
| text
stringlengths 41
12.8k
⌀ |
|---|---|---|
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Resource war | History:
Chincha Islands War: One of the most prolific examples of resource war in history is the conflict over Chincha Island guano in the late 19th century. The Chincha Islands of Peru are situated off of the southern coast of Peru, where many seabirds were known to roost and prey on fish brought there by the currents of the Pacific Ocean. The guano of these seabirds is incredibly dense in nutrients and became a sought-after resource as a fertilizer. Soil that was nutrient rich allowed for higher crop yields, which subsequently translated to better sustenance of the population and overall improved economic performance. Known colloquially as "white gold", guano from the Chincha Islands began to catch the interest of Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States, and other industrial powers at the time.
The international interest for that resource resulting in a number of conflicts including the Chincha Islands War between Spain and Peru and the War of the Pacific between Chile, Bolivia, and Peru. Although the primary inciting force of the conflict originated over possession of the nutrient-rich guano, Spain also attempted to exercise prior colonial control over Peru during its aggressions during this conflict. The Chincha Islands guano became a resource of imperialism with foreign nations inciting conflict and establishing dominion over it. In 1856, United States President Franklin Pierce passed the Guano Islands Act with the exclusive purpose of addressing American scarcity over guano. Under the Guano Islands Act, any piece of uninhabited land that harbors a guano deposit could be claimed as a territory of the United States to extract the resource. The legislation acted as a workaround for the United States to access Peruvian seabird guano since direct trade was not an option because of a treaty between Peru and the United Kingdom.
Perspectives:
Geopolitical: Under the geopolitical lens for interpreting resource wars, the main rationale behind resource conflict is strategic. It assumes that control over the resource provides a particular advantage to that nation and interprets hostile attempts to take over the resource as a means to acquire that advantage for themselves. Resources that are deemed strategic shift over time and pertain to what is required for economic expansion or success at the time. Examples of this include timber during the seventeenth century for naval development or oil during the twentieth century onward for enabling military technology and transportation.
Environmental security: Also known as the environmental scarcity or political economy, the environmental security perspective interprets resource conflict as a response to resource scarcity. A notable proponent of the environmental security perspective is Dr. Thomas Homer-Dixon, a Canadian political scientist and professor at the University of Waterloo. The work of Homer-Dixon focuses on two different phenomena regarding the effect of resources on violent conflict: resource scarcity and resource abundance. Under the environmental security perspective, resource scarcity perpetuates conflict by inciting pressures on a society that is dealing with resource deprivation. According to Homer-Dixon, populations struggling with resource scarcity are also impacted by overpopulation and inequitable resource allocation. Overpopulation and inequitable resource allocation can make resource scarcity even more pronounced, creating a cyclical instability in the society.
Conversely, countries with natural resource abundance are impacted in a different way. Countries that are wealthy in resources have been shown to have disproportionate economic growth, less democracy, and overall insufficient development outcomes. This permeates from an overdependence on their resource from an economic standpoint, where authoritarian traits may begin to take effect. This creates pressure on the citizens as a whole due to undermined governance of the nation and volatile economic state if the resource fluctuates heavily in price. This phenomenon is known as the resource curse.
Conflict resources: Conflict resources are natural resources extracted in a conflict zone and sold to perpetuate the fighting. There is both statistical and anecdotal evidence that the presence of precious commodities can prolong conflicts (a "resource curse"). An unfortunate irony is that many countries rich in minerals are impoverished in terms of their capacity for governance. Conflict, corruption and bribery may be seen as the typical costs of doing business. The extraction and sale of blood diamonds, also known as "conflict diamonds", is a better-known phenomenon which occurs under virtually identical conditions. Petroleum can also be a conflict resource. Other commodities are also involved in financing conflict.
History: The concept of "conflict resource", or "conflict commodity" emerged in the late 1990s, initially in relation to the "blood diamonds" that were financing rebellions in Angola and Sierra Leone. Then "conflict timber" financed hostilities in Cambodia and Liberia.
Conventions: The concept was first officially discussed by the UN General Assembly in the context of 'conflict diamonds': The UN Security Council has since referred to conflict resources in several resolutions, particularly resolutions 1533 and I698.97.
Since 1996 the Bonn International Center for Conversion has tracked resource governance and conflict intensity by country. Aside from fossil fuels, metals, diamonds, and timber it tracks the governance of other primary goods that might fund conflicts, including: poppy seeds and talc (Afghanistan), rubber (Côte d'Ivoire), cotton (Zambia), and cocoa (Indonesia).
Legal frameworks: Several countries and organizations, including the United States, European Union, and OECD have designated tantalum, tin, tungsten, and gold connected to conflict in the DRC as conflict minerals and legally require companies to report trade or use of conflict minerals as a way to reduce incentives for armed groups to extract and fight over the minerals.
Supporting external conflicts: In the 2020s, the concept of conflict minerals was extended to those mined to support conflicts in parts of the world other than where the mining takes place. The Wagner Group has been granted mining rights in the Central African Republic in return for securing the continuity of the government. This "blood gold" is then sold to support Russia in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Wagner also has gold-related operations in Mali and Sudan.
See also: Oil war
Petro-aggression
Resource curse
Territorial disputes in the South China Sea
Water conflict
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Retreat (military) | Tactical withdrawal: A withdrawal may be anticipated, as when a defending force is outmatched or on disadvantageous ground, but it must cause as much damage to an enemy as possible. In such a case, the retreating force may use a number of tactics and strategies to further impede the enemy's progress. That could include setting mines or booby traps during or before the withdrawal, leading the enemy into prepared artillery barrages, or using of scorched-earth tactics.
Rout: In warfare, the long-term objective is the defeat of the enemy. An effective tactical method is the demoralisation of the enemy by defeating its army and routing it from the battlefield. Once a force has become disorganized and has lost its ability to fight, the victors can chase down the enemy's remnants and attempt to cause as many casualties or to take as many prisoners as possible.
However, a commander must weigh the advantages of pursuit of a disorganised enemy against the possibility that the enemy may rally and leave the pursuing force vulnerable, with longer lines of communications that are vulnerable to a counterattack. That causes the value of a feigned retreat.
Feigned retreat: The act of feigning a withdrawal or rout to lure an enemy away from a defended position or into a prepared ambush is an ancient tactic, which has been used throughout the history of warfare.
Three famous examples are:
William the Conqueror used a feigned retreat at the Battle of Hastings to lure much of Harold's infantry from their advantageous defenses on higher ground, leading to its annihilation by a charge of William's Norman cavalry.
Medieval Mongols were famed for, among other things, their extensive use of feigned retreats during their conquests, as their fast light cavalry made successful pursuit by an enemy almost impossible. In the heat and muddle of a battle, the Mongol Army would pretend to be defeated, exhausted and confused, and would suddenly retreat from the battlefield. The opposing force, thinking that it had routed the Mongols, would give chase. The Mongol cavalry would, while retreating, fire upon its pursuers and dishearten them (see Parthian shot). When the pursuing forces stopped chasing the (significantly faster) Mongol cavalry, the Mongols would then turn and charge the pursuers and generally succeed. That was used partly as a defeat in detail tactic to allow the Mongols to defeat larger armies by breaking them into smaller groups.
Early on during the Battle of Kasserine Pass in 1943, tanks of the US 1st Armored Division followed what appeared to be a headlong retreat by elements of the 21st Panzer Division. The advancing US forces then met a screen of German anti-tank guns, who opened fire and destroyed nearly all the American tanks. A US forward artillery observer, whose radio and landlines had been cut by shellfire, recalled:
"It was murder. They rolled right into the muzzles of the concealed eighty-eights and all I could do was stand by and watch tank after tank blown to bits or burst into flames or just stop, wrecked. Those in the rear tried to turn back but the eighty-eights seemed to be everywhere."
References:
External links: Barton, James. "Tactical Reasons for Retreat". Retrieved 2021-05-06. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Right of conquest | History and arguments: Proponents state that the right of conquest acknowledges the status quo, and that denial of the right is meaningless unless one is able and willing to use military force to deny it. Further, the right was traditionally accepted because the conquering force, being by definition stronger than any lawfully entitled governance which it may have replaced, was, therefore, more likely to secure peace and stability for the people, and so the right of conquest legitimizes the conqueror towards that end.
The completion of colonial conquest of much of the world (see the Scramble for Africa), the devastation of World War I and World War II, and the alignment of both the United States and the Soviet Union with the principle of self-determination led to the abandonment of the right of conquest in formal international law. The 1928 Kellogg–Briand Pact, the post-1945 Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, the UN Charter, and the UN role in decolonization saw the progressive dismantling of this principle. The UN Charter's guarantees the "territorial integrity" of member states, but enforcement difficulties in the 21st century lead to a contentious debate on possible re-emergence of the right of conquest as international law.
Conquest and military occupation: Until 1945, the disposition of territory acquired under the principle of conquest had to be conducted according to the existing laws of war. This meant that there had to be military occupation followed by a peace settlement, and there was no reasonable chance of the defeated sovereign regaining the land. While a formal peace treaty "makes good any defects in title", it was not required. Recognition by the losing party was not a requirement: "the right of acquisition vested by conquest did not depend on the consent of the dispossessed state". However, the alternative was annexation (part or in whole) which if protested as unlawful, a peace treaty was the only means to legitimize conquest in a time of war. Essentially, conquest itself was a legal act of extinguishing the legal rights of other states without their consent. Under this framework, it is notable that conquest and subsequent occupation outside of war were illegal.
In the post-World War II era, not all wars involving territorial acquisitions ended in a peace treaty. For example, the fighting in the Korean War paused with an armistice, without any peace treaty covering it. North Korea is still technically at war with South Korea and the United States as of 2024.
See also: Colonialism
Conquest
Debellatio
Discovery doctrine
Fait accompli
Franz Oppenheimer's "conquest theory" of the State
Imperialism
Invasion
Jungle justice
Just war theory
Mandate of Heaven
Manifest destiny
Might makes right
Prize (law)
Prize of war
Realism (international relations)
Revanchism
Responsibility to protect
Roerich Pact
Status quo ante bellum
Survival of the fittest
Uti possidetis
Vae victis
War of aggression
War trophy
References:
Works cited: Korman, Sharon (1996). The Right of Conquest: The Acquisition of Territory by Force in International Law and Practice. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-828007-6. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Rules of engagement | Authoritative sources: While many countries have their own rules of engagement documents, many others do not. There are two primary international rules of engagement manuals that are internationally available: NATO ROE Manual MC 362-1 (restricted to NATO and Partnership for Peace countries); and the San Remo Rules of Engagement Handbook, which is freely available to all on the International Institute of Humanitarian Law (IIHL) website. Created for the IIHL by Commander Alan Cole, Major Phillip Drew, Captain Rob McLaughlin and Professor Dennis Mandsager, the San Remo ROE Handbook has been translated from its English original into French, Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, Hungarian, Russian, Bosnian, and Thai and several other languages. Several countries, such as the UK, have used the San Remo Manual as a model for creating their own ROE systems.
Training: The International Institute of Humanitarian Law in San Remo, Italy conducts rules of engagement training course at least once per year, usually in September. Taught by some of the world's foremost authorities on ROE, the course attracts students from around the globe. Similar training by the San Remo ROE drafting team is conducted for the United Nations, staff colleges and other organizations as requested.
See also: Law of War
IDF Code of Ethics
References:
External links: San Remo Handbook on Rules of Engagement |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Salaries | History:
First paid salary: While there is no first pay-stub for the first work-for-pay exchange, the first salaried work would have required a society advanced enough to have a barter system which allowed for the even exchange of goods or services between tradesmen. More significantly, it presupposes the existence of organized employers—perhaps a government or a religious body—that would facilitate work-for-hire exchanges on a regular enough basis to constitute salaried work. From this, most infer that the first salary would have been paid in a village or city during the Neolithic Revolution, sometime between 10,000 BCE and 6000 BCE.
A cuneiform inscribed clay tablet dated about 3100 BCE provides a record of the daily beer rations for workers in Mesopotamia. The beer is represented by an upright jar with a pointed base. The symbol for rations is a human head eating from a bowl. Round and semicircular impressions represent the measurements.
By the time of the Hebrew Book of Ezra (550 to 450 BCE), receiving salt from a person was synonymous with drawing sustenance, taking pay, or being in that person's service. At that time, salt production was strictly controlled by the monarchy or ruling elite. Depending on the translation of Ezra 4:14, the servants of King Artaxerxes I of Persia explain their loyalty variously as "because we are salted with the salt of the palace" or "because we have maintenance from the king" or "because we are responsible to the king".
Salarium: The Latin word salarium linked employment, salt, and soldiers, but the exact link is not clear. Modern sources maintain that although Roman soldiers were typically paid in coin, the word salarium is derived from the word sal (salt) because at some point a soldier's salary may have been an allowance for the purchase of salt or the price of having soldiers conquer salt supplies and guard the Salt Roads (Via Salaria) that led to Rome. However, there is no ancient evidence for either of these hypotheses.
Roman empire and medieval and pre-industrial Europe: Regardless of the exact connection, the salarium paid to Roman soldiers has defined a form of work-for-hire ever since in the Western world, and gave rise to such expressions as "being worth one's salt".
Within the Roman Empire or (later) medieval and pre-industrial Europe and its mercantile colonies, salaried employment appears to have been relatively rare and mostly limited to servants and higher status roles, especially in government service. Such roles were largely remunerated by the provision of lodging, sex, and livery clothes (i.e., "food, clothing, and shelter" in modern idiom). Many courtiers, such as valets de chambre, in late medieval courts were paid annual amounts, sometimes supplemented by large if unpredictable extra payments. At the other end of the social scale, those in many forms of employment either received no pay, as with slavery (although many slaves were paid some money at least), serfdom, and indentured servitude, or received only a fraction of what was produced, as with sharecropping. Other common alternative models of work included self- or co-operative employment, as with masters in artisan guilds, who often had salaried assistants, or corporate work and ownership, as with medieval universities and monasteries.
Commercial Revolution: Even many of the jobs initially created by the Commercial Revolution in the years from 1520 to 1650 and later during Industrialisation in the 18th and 19th centuries would not have been salaried, but, to the extent they were paid as employees, probably paid an hourly or daily wage or paid per unit produced (also called piece work).
Share in earnings: In corporations of this time, such as the several East India Companies, many managers would have been remunerated as owner-shareholders. Such a remuneration scheme is still common today in accounting, investment, and law firm partnerships where the leading professionals are equity partners, and do not technically receive a salary, but rather make a periodic "draw" against their share of annual earnings.
Second Industrial Revolution: From 1870 to 1930, the Second Industrial Revolution gave rise to the modern business corporation powered by railroads, electricity and the telegraph and telephone. This era saw the widespread emergence of a class of salaried executives and administrators who served the new, large-scale enterprises being created.
New managerial jobs lent themselves to salaried employment, in part because the effort and output of "office work" were hard to measure hourly or piecewise, and in part because they did not necessarily draw remuneration from share ownership.
As Japan rapidly industrialized in the 20th century, the idea of office work was novel enough that a new Japanese word (salaryman) was coined to describe those who performed it, as well as referencing their remuneration.
20th century: In the 20th century, the rise of the service economy made salaried employment even more common in developed countries, where the relative share of industrial production jobs declined, and the share of executive, administrative, computer, marketing, and creative jobs—all of which tended to be salaried—increased.
Salary and other forms of payment today: Today, the concept of a salary continues to evolve as part of a system of the total compensation that employers offer to employees. Salary (also now known as fixed pay) is coming to be seen as part of a "total rewards" system which includes bonuses, incentive pay, commissions, benefits and perquisites (or perks), and various other tools which help employers link rewards to an employee's measured performance.
Compensation has evolved considerably. Consider the change from the days of and before the industrial evolution, when a job was held for a lifetime, to the fact that, from 1978 to 2008, individuals who aged from 18 to 44, held an average number of 11 jobs. Compensation has evolved gradually moving away from fixed short-term immediate compensation towards fixed + variable outcomes-based compensation. An increase in knowledge-based work has also led to pursuit of partner (as opposed to employee) like engagement.
Salary surveys provide data on salaries for specific jobs throughout the market. Organizations may use salary survey data to develop and update their compensation packages. Individuals may use salary survey data in salary negotiations.
By country:
Botswana: In Botswana, salaries are almost entirely paid on a monthly basis with pay dates falling on different dates of the second half of the month. Pay day usually ranges from the 15th of the month to the last day. The date of disbursement of the salary is usually determined by the company and in some cases in conjunction with the recognized Workers Union.
The Botswana Employment Act Cap 47:01 Chapter VII regulates the aspect of protection of wages in the contracts of employment. The minimum and maximum wage payment period with the exception of casual employees should not be less than one week or more than a month, and where not expressly stipulated a month is the default wage period per section 75 of the Act payable before the third working day after the wage period. The wages are to be paid during working hours at the place of employment, or in any other way, such as through a bank account with the consent of the employee. Salaries should be made in legal tender, however, part payment in kind is not prohibited provided it is appropriate for the personal use and benefit of employee and his family, and the value attributable to such payment in kind is fair and reasonable. The payment in kind should not exceed forty per cent of the total amount paid out to the employee.
The minimum wage is set, adjusted and can even be abolished by the Minister on the advice of the Minimum Wages Advisory Board for specified trade categories. The stipulated categories include building, construction, hotel, catering, wholesale, watchmen, the domestic service sector, the agricultural sector etc. The current minimum wages set for these sectors are set out in the Subsidiary legislation in the Act.
Women on maternity leave are entitled to 25% of their salaries as stipulated by the Employment Act but the majority of the companies pay out at about 50% for the period.
Denmark: Trilateral negotiations (Danish: "trepartsforhandlinger") between employers', employees' & state organizations determine a collective remuneration agreement for most Danish privately employed blue-collar employees for a period of typically 3 or 4 years. Such an agreement is known as an "overenskomst" or just OK and covers an agreement between a specific employee union ("fagforening"/"fagforbund") and a specific employer organization ("arbejdsgiverforening"/"arbejdsgiverorganisation").
Political agreements made in 1997, known as "Ny Løn" (English: "new remuneration"), instigated a formal remuneration system that almost all employees in the Danish Government are employed under. An individual's remuneration consist of five components;
grundløn (lit. "base salary"): base salary derived from education level & seniority
kvalifikationsløn (lit. "qualification salary"): additional salary based on qualifications (additional formal or non-formal education, language or social skills etc.)
funktionstillæg (functional supplement): additional salary paid for responsibilities of the specific role not covered by the above
resultatillæg (achievement supplement): additional salary paid for specific predetermined achievements, typically used for long-term motivation of leadership
engangstillæg (one-time supplement): additional salary paid to honor an outstanding effort, typically paid yearly
There is no minimum salary determined by law. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Salaries | Political agreements made in 1997, known as "Ny Løn" (English: "new remuneration"), instigated a formal remuneration system that almost all employees in the Danish Government are employed under. An individual's remuneration consist of five components;
grundløn (lit. "base salary"): base salary derived from education level & seniority
kvalifikationsløn (lit. "qualification salary"): additional salary based on qualifications (additional formal or non-formal education, language or social skills etc.)
funktionstillæg (functional supplement): additional salary paid for responsibilities of the specific role not covered by the above
resultatillæg (achievement supplement): additional salary paid for specific predetermined achievements, typically used for long-term motivation of leadership
engangstillæg (one-time supplement): additional salary paid to honor an outstanding effort, typically paid yearly
There is no minimum salary determined by law. A salary is often discussed or given as a gross monthly salary ("månedlig bruttoløn") which is pre-tax but including any pension benefits required by collective agreements ("overenskomst") to be deposited by the employer. This typically amounts to 8-12% of the monthly net salary ("månedlig nettoløn"), of which the employee is also obligated to deposit a part, typically another 4-6%.
European Union: According to European law, the movement of capital, services and (human) resources is unlimited between member states. Salary determination, such as minimum wage, is still the prerogative of each member state. Other social benefits, associated with salaries are also determined on member-state level.
India: In India, salaries are generally paid on the last working day of the month (Government, Public sector departments, Multi-national organisations as well as majority of other private sector companies). According to the Payment of Wages Act, if a company has less than 1,000 Employees, salary is paid by the 7th of every month. If a company has more than 1,000 Employees, salary is paid by the 10th of every month.
Minimum wages in India are governed by the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Employees in India are notified of their salary being increased through a hard copy letter given to them.
Italy: In Italy, the Constitution guarantees a minimum wage, as stated in Article 36, Paragraph 1
"Workers have the right to a remuneration commensurate to the quantity and quality of their work and in any case such as to ensure them and their families a free and dignified existence."
This constitutional guarantee is implemented not through a specific legislation, but rather through collective bargaining which sets minimum wage standards in a sector by sector basis. Collective bargaining is protected by trade unions, which have constitutional rights such as legal personality.
The Constitution also guarantees equal pay for women, as stated in Article 37, Paragraph 1
"Working women are entitled to equal rights and, for comparable jobs, equal pay as men."
A salary is often discussed or given in terms of "Retribuzione Annuale Lorda" (RAL), similar to gross annual salary. Also a severance pay, "Trattamento di Fine Rapporto" (TFR), is required to be deposited by the employer to be paid to the employee on termination.
Japan: In Japan, owners would notify employees of salary increases through "jirei". The concept still exists and has been replaced with an electronic form, or E-mail in larger companies.
The position and world of "salarymen" is open to only one third of Japanese men. From school age these young potentials are groomed and pre-selected to one day join a company as a "salaryman". The selection process is rigorous and thereafter the process initiation speaks of total dedication to the company.
Poland: Article 65 section 4 of Polish Constitution states that "the minimum amount of salary for work or the method of determining this amount will be specified by separate act". In consequence, Polish Parliament (Sejm) has enacted an Act of 10 October 2002 on the minimum salary for work, which determines the rules and the procedure of establishing minimum salary for each year. The amount of the minimum salary (for employment contracts) and the amount of minimum hourly rate (for service contacts) is announced by the Council of Ministers by September 15 each year in the Official Journal of the Republic of Poland "Monitor Polski". As a result, full-time employees cannot be offered monthly salary lower than the statutory minimum, part-time employees are also covered by the statutory minimum calculated proportionally.
South Africa: Minimum wages are used widely in developing countries to protect vulnerable workers, reduce wage inequality, and lift the working poor out of poverty. The political popularity of minimum wages stems in part from the fact that the policy offers a means for redistributing income without having to increase government spending or establish formal transfer mechanisms. The challenge to policymakers is to find that wage level that is considered fair given workers' needs and the cost of living, but does not harm employment or a country's global competitiveness.
South African median employee earning is R2800 a month (USD 189.45) and the average earning is around R8500. These figures are found in SA statistics. Indeed, they reflect the huge gap in the South African society with a large proportion of the population under poverty line that does not have the same opportunities for employment.
Median monthly earnings of white (R9500) and Indian/Asian (R6000) population were substantially higher
than the median monthly earnings of their coloured (R2652) and black African (R2167) counterparts. Black
Africans earned 22,% of what the white population earned; 36,1% of what Indians/Asians earned; and
81,7% of what the coloured population earned. In the bottom 5%, black Africans earned R500 or less per month while the white population earned R2 000 or less, while in the top 5% they earned R12 567 or more compared to the white population who earned R34000 or more per month.
The Netherlands: In the Netherlands the salary which occurs most frequently is referred to as Jan Modaal. The term "modaal" is derived from the statistical term Modus. If the government's macro economic policy negatively affects this "Modaal" income or salary-group often the policy is adjusted in order to protect this group of income earners. The Dutch word "soldij" can be directly linked to the word "soldaat" or soldier, which finds its origin in the word for the gold coin solidus, with which soldiers were paid during the Roman Empire.
The Netherlands is in the top 5 of the highest salary-paying countries in the EU. The focus has been on the salary levels and accompanying bonuses whereas secondary benefits, though present, has been downplayed yet that is changing. The Netherlands claims a 36th position when it comes to secondary benefits when compared to other countries in Europe.
The minimum wage is determined through collective labor negotiations (CAOs). The minimum wage is age dependent; the legal minimum wage for a 16-year-old is lower than, for instance, a 23-year-old (full minimum wage). Adjustments to the minimum wage are made twice a year; on January 1 and on July 1. The minimum wage for a 21-year-old on January 1, 2013, is 1,065.30 Euro netto per month and on July 1, 2013, this minimum wage is 1,071.40 Euro netto per month.
For a 23 year old on 1 January 2014 is 1485,60 Euro gross salary / month plus 8% holiday subsidy so 1604,45 Euro gross salary / month
United States: In the United States, the distinction between periodic salaries (which are normally paid regardless of hours worked) and hourly wages (meeting a minimum wage test and providing for overtime) was first codified by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. At that time, five categories were identified as being "exempt" from minimum wage and overtime protections, and therefore salariable. In 1991, some computer workers were added as a sixth category but effective August 23, 2004 the categories were revised and reduced back down to five (executive, administrative, professional, computer, and outside sales employees).
In June 2015 the Department of Labor proposed raising "the salary threshold from $455 a week (the equivalent of $23,660 a year) to about $970 a week ($50,440 a year) in 2016" On May 18, 2016, the Final rule updating the overtime regulations was announced. Effective December 1, 2016 it says:
The Final Rule sets the standard salary level at the 40th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers in the lowest-wage Census Region, currently the South ($913 per week, equivalent to $47,476 per year for a full-year worker).
The Final Rule sets the HCE total annual compensation level equal to the 90th percentile of earnings of full-time salaried workers nationally ($134,004 annually). To be exempt as an HCE, an employee must also receive at least the new standard salary amount of $913 per week on a salary or fee basis and pass a minimal duties test.
Although the FLSA ensures minimum wage and overtime pay protections for most employees covered by the Act, some workers, including bona fide EAP employees, are exempt from those protections. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Salaries | Effective December 1, 2016 it says:
The Final Rule sets the standard salary level at the 40th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers in the lowest-wage Census Region, currently the South ($913 per week, equivalent to $47,476 per year for a full-year worker).
The Final Rule sets the HCE total annual compensation level equal to the 90th percentile of earnings of full-time salaried workers nationally ($134,004 annually). To be exempt as an HCE, an employee must also receive at least the new standard salary amount of $913 per week on a salary or fee basis and pass a minimal duties test.
Although the FLSA ensures minimum wage and overtime pay protections for most employees covered by the Act, some workers, including bona fide EAP employees, are exempt from those protections. Since 1940, the Department's regulations have generally required each of three tests to be met for the FLSA's EAP exemption to apply:
the employee must be paid a predetermined and fixed salary that is not subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quantity of work performed ("salary basis test");
the amount of salary paid must meet a minimum specified amount ("salary level test"); and
the employee's job duties must primarily involve executive, administrative, or professional duties as defined by the regulations ("duties test"). "
The Final Rule includes a mechanism to automatically update the standard salary level requirement every three years to ensure that it remains a meaningful test for distinguishing between overtime-protected white collar workers and bona fide EAP workers who may not be entitled to overtime pay and to provide predictability and more graduated salary changes for employers. Specifically, the standard salary level will be updated to maintain a threshold equal to the 40th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers in the lowest-wage Census Region.
For the first time, employers will be able to use nondiscretionary bonuses and incentive payments (including commissions) to satisfy up to 10 percent of the standard salary level. Such payments may include, for example, nondiscretionary incentive bonuses tied to productivity and profitability.
A general rule for comparing periodic salaries to hourly wages is based on a standard 40-hour work week with 50 weeks per year (minus two weeks for vacation). (Example: $40,000/year periodic salary divided by 50 weeks equals $800/week. Divide $800/week by 40 standard hours equals $20/hour).
Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe operates on a two tier system being wages and salaries. Wages are managed by the National Employment Council (NEC). Each sector has its own NEC; i.e. agriculture, communications, mining, catering, educational institutions, etc. On the council are representatives from the unions and the employers. The public sector is under the Public Service Commission and wages and salaries are negotiated there.
Wages are negotiated annually or biennially for minimum wages, basic working conditions and remunerations. If there is a stalemate it goes for arbitration with the Ministry of labour. The ruling will become binding on all companies in that industry. Industries often then use their associations to negotiate and air their views. For example, the mining industry nominates an employee within the chamber of mines to attend all meetings and subcommittee with industry players is a forum for discussions.
Salaries are negotiated by the respective employees. However, NEC obviously affects the relativity and almost acts as a barometer for salaried staff. Salaries and wages in Zimbabwe are normally paid monthly. Most companies' pay around the 20th does allow various statutory payments and processing for the month end. Government employees are also staggered to ease the cash flow though teachers are paid around mid-month being 16th. Agricultural workers are normally paid on the very last day of the month as they are contract employees.
Zimbabwe is a highly banked society with most salaries being banked. All government employees are paid through the bank. Since "dollarisation" (movement from the Zimbabwean dollar to USD) Zimbabwe has been moving toward a more informal sector and these are paid in 'brown envelopes'.
PAYE (Pay As You Earn) is a significant contributor to tax being 45%. Given the high unemployment rate the tax is quite heavy. This of course captures those that pay and keep records properly. The average salary is probably $250. This is skewed downwards by the large number of government employees whose average salary is around there. At the top end salaries are quite competitive and this is to be able to attract the right skills though the cost of living is high so it balances this out. A top-earning Zimbabwean spends a lot more money on necessities than say a South African top earner. This is more evident when a comparison with USA or England is done. The need to have a generator, borehole or buy water or take care of the extended family since there is no welfare given the government's financial position.
In the hyperinflation days salaries was the cheapest factor of production given that it was paid so irregularly though it went to twice monthly. As workers could not withdraw their money, remuneration was often in the following forms:
Fuel coupons were most popular and individuals were paid in liters of fuel
The product that the company is selling; e.g. pork/meat for the abattoirs
Foreign currency payment was illegal and one had to seek special dispensation or had to show that their revenue/funding was received in foreign currency like NGOs or exporters
Shares for the listed companies on the stock market (not in the traditional option scheme but just getting shares)
Prices were price controlled. By remunerating in the product it basically allowed the employees to side sell for real value.
Zimbabwe traditionally had a competitive advantage in its cost of labor. With "dollarisation" and higher cost of living this is slowly being eroded. For example, an average farm employee probably earned the equivalent of $20 but could buy a basket of goods currently worth $500. Now, the average farm worker earns $80 and that basket of goods is, as mentioned, $500, the basket being soap, meal, school fees, protein foods, etc.
Negotiation of salary: Prior to the acceptance of an employment offer, the prospective employee usually has the opportunity to negotiate the terms of the offer. This primarily focuses on salary, but extends to benefits, work arrangements, and other amenities as well. Negotiating salary can potentially lead the prospective employee to a higher salary. In fact, a 2009 study of employees indicated that those who negotiated salary saw an average increase of $4,913 from their original salary offer. In addition, the employer is able to feel more confident that they have hired an employee with strong interpersonal skills and the ability to deal with conflict. Negotiating salary will thus likely yield an overall positive outcome for both sides of the bargaining table.
Perhaps the most important aspect of salary negotiation is the level of preparation put in by the prospective employee. Background research on comparable salaries will help the prospective employee understand the appropriate range for that position. Assessment of alternative offers that the prospective employee has already received can help in the negotiation process. Research on the actual company itself will help identify where concessions can be made by the company and what may potentially be considered off-limits. These items, and more, can be organized into a
negotiations planning document that can be used in the evaluation of the offers received from the employer.
Effects of perspective: The same 2009 study highlighted the personality differences and negotiation mind-sets that contributed to successful outcomes. Overall, individuals who are risk-averse (e.g., worried about appearing ungrateful for the job offer) tended to avoid salary negotiations or use very weak approaches to the negotiation process. On the contrary, those who were more risk-tolerant engaged in negotiations more frequently and demonstrated superior outcomes. Individuals who approached the negotiation as a distributive problem (i.e. viewing the a higher salary as a win for him/her and a loss to the employer) ended up with an increased salary, but lower rate of satisfaction upon completion. Those who approached the negotiation as an integrative problem (i.e. viewing the negotiation process an opportunity to expand the realm of possibilities and help both parties achieve a “win” outcome) were able to both secure an increased salary and an outcome they were truly satisfied with.
Gender differences: Salary disparities between men and women may partially be explained by differences in negotiation tactics used by men and women. Although men and women are equally likely to initiate in a salary negotiation with employers, men will achieve higher outcomes than women by about 2% of starting salary Studies have indicated that men tend to use active negotiation tactics of directly asking for a higher salary, while women tend to use more of an indirect approach by emphasizing self-promotion tactics (e.g. explaining the motivation to be a good employee). Other research indicates that early-childhood play patterns may influence the way men and women negotiate. Men and women tend to view salary differently in terms of relative importance. Overall level of confidence in a negotiation may also be a determinant of why men tend to achieve higher outcomes in salary negotiations. Finally, the awareness of this stereotype alone may directly cause women to achieve lower outcomes as one study indicates. Regardless of the cause, the outcome yields a disparity between men and women that contributes to the overall wage gap observed in many nations. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Salaries | Although men and women are equally likely to initiate in a salary negotiation with employers, men will achieve higher outcomes than women by about 2% of starting salary Studies have indicated that men tend to use active negotiation tactics of directly asking for a higher salary, while women tend to use more of an indirect approach by emphasizing self-promotion tactics (e.g. explaining the motivation to be a good employee). Other research indicates that early-childhood play patterns may influence the way men and women negotiate. Men and women tend to view salary differently in terms of relative importance. Overall level of confidence in a negotiation may also be a determinant of why men tend to achieve higher outcomes in salary negotiations. Finally, the awareness of this stereotype alone may directly cause women to achieve lower outcomes as one study indicates. Regardless of the cause, the outcome yields a disparity between men and women that contributes to the overall wage gap observed in many nations.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 239 provides for the right to fair labour practices in terms of article 23. article 9 of the Constitution makes provision for equality in the Bill of Rights, which an employee may raise in the event of an equal pay dispute. In terms of article 9(1) “everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law'” Furthermore, “the state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language, and birth.”
South African employees who were in paid employment had median monthly earnings of R2 800. The median monthly earnings for men (R3 033) were higher than that for women (R2 340) - women in paid employment earned 77,1% of what men did.
Role of weight: Research done in 2011 showed that the “weight double standard” may be more complex that what past research has suggested. This is not only relevant to women, but also to men. The smallest income gap differences occur at thin weights (where men are penalized and women are rewarded) and the opposite happens at heavier weights, where the women are affected more negatively.
See also: Executive compensation
List of countries by average wage
List of countries in Europe by average wage
List of largest sports contracts
List of salaries of heads of state and government
List of single-digit salary earners
Peak earning years
Salaryman (Japan)
Stipend
References:
External links:
Media related to Wages at Wikimedia Commons |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Saturation attack | Theoretical calculations: Taking the design of an anti-ship missile as a theoretical example, one can begin with the goal of creating a missile which will get through and destroy its target 100% of the time. It is also understood, however, that an opponent will develop counter measures if given enough time, meaning that the missile will, at some later date, no longer be 100% effective. Therefore, given that even the best designed missile will only ever be less than 100% effective, it is more practical and cost-effective to instead develop a missile that will get through to the target 70% or even 50% of time, for example.
Launched individually, a missile with a 50% chance of getting through to its target will only get to its target 50% of the time, but with a salvo two such missiles the chance of at least one missile getting through is 75%, with three missiles 87.5% etc., with the probability that at least one missile will get through to its target becoming closer to certainty with each missile fired. If each missile has a warhead capable of destroying the target, then no individual missile can be ignored by the target warship and counter-measures. Thus, SAMs and CIW resources will have to be expended to defend the target. To further overload a target's ability to defend itself, an attacker can attempt to launch multiple missiles from multiple directions using different guidance options.
The main subscribers to the concept of the saturation missile attack were the Soviet Union and its client states. The Komar class missile boat for example being designed and operated around the calculations that it would take 12 P-15 Termit missiles to destroy a single NATO destroyer. At a time when British destroyers were equipped with just four anti-ship missiles, Soviet ships were going to sea with anything up to 20 anti-ship missiles, with even destroyers fielding 8 large missiles. With the NATO allies having followed the route of individually smaller and lighter missiles, NATO warships had the appearance of being underarmed when compared to Soviet ships with their multiple missiles in large container/launch tube housings.
Bomber stream: The bomber stream was a tactic pioneered by the RAF to overwhelm German air defences during the Second World War. The tactic relied on routing a greater number of bombers through a defensive sector than the amount which Germans could generate interception sorties. Although it was certain that bombers would be lost, it was impossible for the defending fighters to destroy every bomber and stop the bombers gaining their objective.
During the Cold War British and American air defences aimed to stop massed Soviet bomber streams, leading to the US fielding nuclear tipped Nike missiles, and at a later date the British equipping trainers as interceptors in order to have enough fighters.
Countering: During the Cold War, United States Navy aircraft carriers were the primary target of saturation attacks from Soviet Naval Aviation. In response the United States adopted the doctrine of attempting to destroy Soviet missile aircraft before they could launch their missiles. This led to the Douglas F6D Missileer, which gave rise to the Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye and Grumman F-14 Tomcat/AIM-54 Phoenix pairing.
In naval warfare, the incorporation of stealth technology in surface combatants, the general adoption of vertical launching systems, modern radar systems which can simultaneously scan, track, and engage multiple targets, and fire and forget close in defense missiles has decreased the utility of saturation attacks by unsophisticated anti-ship missiles.
See also: Human wave attack
Force concentration
Swarming (military)
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | Origin of the term: The term was found in English in a 1937 report on the Second Sino-Japanese War. The retreating Chinese forces burned crops and destroyed infrastructure including cities to sabotage the logistics of the advancing Japanese forces.
Military theory: Clausewitz wrote in Principles of War:
In defensive just as in offensive warfare, it is necessary to pursue a great aim: the destruction of the enemy army, either by battle or by rendering its subsistence extremely difficult. Thus we shall disorganize it and force it into a retreat, during which it will necessarily suffer great losses. Wellington's campaign in 1810 and 1811 is a good example.
Clausewitz wrote in On War:
All that the country yields will be taken for the benefit of the retreating army first, and will be mostly consumed. Nothing remains but wasted villages and towns, fields from which the crops have been gathered, or which are trampled down, empty wells, and muddy brooks.The pursuing army, therefore, from the very first day, has frequently to contend with the most pressing wants.
Historic examples: Notable historic examples of successful scorched-earth tactics include the failed Swedish, French and German invasion of Russia, Sherman's march to the sea during the American Civil War, Kit Carson's campaign during the Navajo Wars in 1863 and Lord Kitchener's methods in the Anglo-Boer War.
6th century BCE:
European Scythian campaign: The Scythians used scorched-earth methods against the Persian Achaemenid Empire, led by King Darius the Great, during his European Scythian campaign. The Scythians, who were nomadic herders, evaded the Persian invaders and retreated into the depths of the steppes after they had destroyed food supplies and poisoned wells.
4th century BCE:
March of the Ten Thousand: The Greek general Xenophon recorded in his Anabasis that the withdrawing enemy burnt up the grass and everything else that was good for use in front of the Ten Thousand.
3rd century BCE:
Second Punic War: During the Second Punic War in 218–202 BCE, both Carthaginians and Romans used the method selectively during Hannibal's invasion of Italy. After the Roman defeat at Lake Trasimene, Quintus Fabius Maximus instructed those living in the path of the invading Carthaginians to burn their houses and grain.
2nd century BCE:
Third Punic War: After the end of the Third Punic War in 146 BCE, the Roman Senate also elected to use this method to permanently destroy the Carthaginian capital city, Carthage (near modern-day Tunis). The buildings were torn down, their stones scattered so not even rubble remained, and the fields were burned. However, the story that they salted the earth is apocryphal.
1st century BCE:
Gallic Wars: The system of punitive destruction of property and subjugation of people when accompanying a military campaign was known as vastatio. Two of the first uses of scorched earth recorded happened in the Gallic Wars. The first was used when the Celtic Helvetii were forced to evacuate their homes in Southern Germany and Switzerland because of incursions of unfriendly Germanic tribes: to add incentive to the march, the Helvetii destroyed everything they could not bring.
The second case shows actual military value: during the Great Gallic War the Gauls under Vercingetorix planned to lure the Roman armies into Gaul and then trap and obliterate them. They thus ravaged the countryside of what are now the Benelux countries and France. This caused immense problems for the Romans, but the Roman military triumphs over the Gallic alliance showed that the ravaging alone was not to be enough to save Gaul from subjugation by Rome.
4th century CE:
Roman invasion of Persia: In the year CE 363, the Emperor Julian's invasion of Persia was turned back by a scorched-earth policy:
The extensive region that lies between the River Tigris and the mountains of Media ...was in a very improved state of cultivation. Julian might expect, that a conqueror, who possessed the two forcible instruments of persuasion, steel and gold, would easily procure a plentiful subsistence from the fears or avarice of the natives. But, on the approach of the Romans, the rich and smiling prospect was instantly blasted. Wherever they moved ... the cattle was driven away; the grass and ripe corn were consumed with fire; and, as soon as the flames had subsided which interrupted the march of Julian, he beheld the melancholy face of a smoking and naked desert. This desperate but effectual method of defence can only be executed by the enthusiasm of a people who prefer their independence to their property; or by the rigor of an arbitrary government, which consults the public safety without submitting to their inclinations the liberty of choice.
7th century CE:
First Fitna: During the First Fitna (656–661), Muawiyah I sent Busr ibn Abi Artat to a campaign in the Hejaz and Yemen to ravage territory loyal to Muawiyah's opponent Ali ibn Abi Talib. According to Tabari, 30,000 civilians are estimated to have been killed during that campaign of the civil war. Muawiyah also sent Sufyan ibn Awf to Iraq to burn the crops and homes of Ali's supporters.
9th century CE:
Viking invasion of England: During the Viking invasion of England, the Viking chieftain Hastein tried to occupy the ruined Roman fortress of Chester in late summer 893, planning to raid northern Mercia from the refortified fortress. But the Mercians destroyed all crops and livestock in the surrounding countryside and expelled the Vikings successfully.
11th century:
Harrying of the North: In the Harrying of the North, William the Conqueror's solution to stop a rebellion in 1069 was the brutal conquest and subjugation of northern England. William's men burnt whole villages from the Humber to Tees and slaughtered the inhabitants. Food stores and livestock were destroyed so that anyone surviving the initial massacre would soon succumb to starvation over the winter. The destruction is depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry. The survivors were reduced to cannibalism, with one report stating that the skulls of the dead were cracked open so that their brains could be eaten. Between 100,000 and 150,000 perished, and the area took centuries to recover from the damage.
14th century:
Hundred Years' War: During the Hundred Years' War, both the English and the French conducted chevauchée raids over the enemy territory to damage its infrastructure.
Robert the Bruce counselled using scorched earth to frustrate the invasion of Scotland by Edward I of England, according to an anonymous 14th-century poem:
Wars of Scottish Independence: A slighting is the deliberate destruction, whether partial or complete, of a fortification without opposition. Sometimes, such as during the Wars of Scottish Independence and the English Civil War, it was done to render the structure unusable as a fortress. In England, adulterine (unauthorised) castles would usually be slighted if captured by a king. During the Wars of Scottish Independence, Robert the Bruce adopted a strategy of slighting Scottish castles to prevent them from being occupied by the invading English.
Crusades: A strategy of slighting castles in Palestine was also adopted by the Mamlukes during their wars with the Crusaders.
15th century:
Moldavian–Ottoman Wars: Stephen the Great used scorched earth in the Carpathians against the Ottoman Army in 1475 and 1476.
Wallachian–Ottoman Wars: In 1462, a massive Ottoman army, led by Sultan Mehmed II, marched into Wallachia. Vlad the Impaler retreated to Transylvania. During his departure, he conducted scorched-earth tactics to ward off Mehmed's approach. When the Ottoman forces approached Tirgoviste, they encountered over 20,000 people impaled by the forces of Vlad the Impaler, creating a "forest" of dead or dying bodies on stakes. The atrocious, gut-wrenching sight caused Mehmed to withdraw from battle and send instead Radu, Vlad's brother, to fight Vlad the Impaler.
16th century:
Anglicisation of the Irish: Further use of scorched-earth policies in war was seen during the 16th century in Ireland, where it was used by English commanders such as Walter Devereux and Richard Bingham.
The Desmond Rebellions were a famous case in Ireland. Much of the province of Munster was laid waste. The poet Edmund Spenser left an account of it:
In those late wars in Munster; for not withstanding that the same was a most rich and plentiful country, full of corn and cattle, that you would have thought they could have been able to stand long, yet ere one year and a half they were brought to such wretchedness, as that any stony heart would have rued the same. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | The atrocious, gut-wrenching sight caused Mehmed to withdraw from battle and send instead Radu, Vlad's brother, to fight Vlad the Impaler.
16th century:
Anglicisation of the Irish: Further use of scorched-earth policies in war was seen during the 16th century in Ireland, where it was used by English commanders such as Walter Devereux and Richard Bingham.
The Desmond Rebellions were a famous case in Ireland. Much of the province of Munster was laid waste. The poet Edmund Spenser left an account of it:
In those late wars in Munster; for not withstanding that the same was a most rich and plentiful country, full of corn and cattle, that you would have thought they could have been able to stand long, yet ere one year and a half they were brought to such wretchedness, as that any stony heart would have rued the same. Out of every corner of the wood and glens they came creeping forth upon their hands, for their legs could not bear them; they looked Anatomies [of] death, they spoke like ghosts, crying out of their graves; they did eat of the carrions, happy where they could find them, yea, and one another soon after, in so much as the very carcasses they spared not to scrape out of their graves; and if they found a plot of water-cresses or shamrocks, there they flocked as to a feast for the time, yet not able long to continue therewithal; that in a short space there were none almost left, and a most populous and plentiful country suddenly left void of man or beast.
Great Siege of Malta: In early 1565, Grandmaster Jean Parisot de Valette ordered the harvesting of all the crops in Malta, including unripened grain, to deprive the Ottomans of any local food supplies since spies had warned of an imminent Ottoman attack. Furthermore, the Knights poisoned all of the wells with bitter herbs and dead animals. The Ottomans arrived on 18 May, and the Great Siege of Malta began. The Ottomans managed to capture one fort but were eventually defeated by the Knights, the Maltese militia and a Spanish relief force.
17th century:
Thirty Years' War: In 1630, Field-Marshal General Torquato Conti was in command of the Holy Roman Empire's forces during the Thirty Years' War. Forced to retreat from the advancing Swedish army of King Gustavus Adolphus, Conti ordered his troops to burn houses, destroy villages and cause as much harm generally to property and people as possible.:
To revenge himself upon the Duke of Pomerania, the imperial general permitted his troops, upon his retreat, to exercise every barbarity on the unfortunate inhabitants of Pomerania, who had already suffered but too severely from his avarice. On pretence of cutting off the resources of the Swedes, the whole country was laid waste and plundered; and often, when the Imperialists were unable any longer to maintain a place, it was laid in ashes, in order to leave the enemy nothing but ruins.
Nine Years' War: In 1688, France attacked the German Electoral Palatinate. The German states responded by forming an alliance and assembling a sizeable armed force to push the French out of Germany. The French had not prepared for such an eventuality. Realising that the war in Germany was not going to end quickly and that the war would not be a brief and decisive parade of French glory, Louis XIV and War Minister Marquis de Louvois resolved upon a scorched-earth policy in the Palatinate, Baden and Württemberg. The French were intent on denying enemy troops local resources and on preventing the Germans from invading France. By 20 December 1688, Louvois had selected all the cities, towns, villages and châteaux intended for destruction. On 2 March 1689, the Count of Tessé torched Heidelberg, and on 8 March, Montclar levelled Mannheim. Oppenheim and Worms were finally destroyed on 31 May, followed by Speyer on 1 June, and Bingen on 4 June. In all, French troops burnt over 20 substantial towns as well as numerous villages.
Mughal–Maratha Wars: In the Maratha Empire, Shivaji Maharaj had introduced scorched-earth tactics, known as Ganimi Kava. His forces looted traders and businessmen from Aurangzeb's Mughal Empire and burnt down his cities, but they were strictly ordered not to rape or hurt the innocent civilians and not to cause any sort of disrespect to any of the religious institutes.
Shivaji's son, Sambhaji Maharaj, was detested throughout the Mughal Empire for his scorched-earth tactics until he and his men were captured by Muqarrab Khan and his Mughal Army contingent of 25,000. On 11 March 1689, a panel of Mughal qadis indicted and sentenced Sambhaji to death on accusations of casual torture, arson, looting and massacres but most prominently for giving shelter to Sultan Muhammad Akbar, the fourth son of Aurangzeb, who had sought Sambhaji's aid in winning the Mughal throne from the emperor, his father. Sambhaji was particularly condemned for the three days of ravaging committed after the Battle of Burhanpur.
18th century:
Great Northern War: During the Great Northern War, Russian Emperor Peter the Great's forces used scorched-earth tactics to hold back Swedish King Charles XII's campaign towards Moscow in 1707-1708.
Sullivan–Clinton genocide: In 1779 Congress decided to defeat the four British allied nations of the Iroquois decisively during the American Revolutionary War with the Sullivan Expedition. General John Sullivan used a scorched earth campaign by destroying more than 40 Iroquois villages and their stores of winter crops resulting in many deaths by starvation and cold in the following winter.
Haitian Revolution against Napoleon: In a letter to Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Toussaint Louverture outlined his plans for defeating the French in the Haitian Revolution starting in 1791 using scorched-earth: "Do not forget, while waiting for the rainy reason which will rid us of our foes, that we have no other resource than destruction and fire. Bear in mind that the soil bathed with our sweat must not furnish our enemies with the smallest sustenance. Tear up the roads with shot; throw corpses and horses into all the foundations, burn and annihilate everything in order that those who have come to reduce us to slavery may have before their eyes the image of the hell which they deserve".
19th century:
Napoleonic Wars: During the third Napoleonic invasion of Portugal in 1810, the Portuguese population retreated towards Lisbon and was ordered to destroy all the food supplies the French might capture as well as forage and shelter in a wide belt across the country. (Although effective food-preserving techniques had recently been invented, they were still not fit for military use because a suitably-rugged container had not yet been invented.) The command was obeyed as a result of French plundering and general ill-treatment of civilians in the previous invasions. The civilians would rather destroy anything that had to be left behind, rather than leave it to the French. When the French armies reached the Lines of Torres Vedras on the way to Lisbon, French soldiers reported that the country "seemed to empty ahead of them". Low morale, hunger, disease and indiscipline greatly weakened the French army and compelled the forces to retreat, see also Attrition warfare against Napoleon.
In 1812, Emperor Alexander I was able to render Napoleon's invasion of Russia useless by using a scorched-earth policy. As Russians withdrew from the advancing French army, they burned the countryside over which they passed (and allegedly Moscow), leaving nothing of value for the pursuing French army. Encountering only desolate and useless land Napoleon's Grande Armée was prevented from using its usual doctrine of living off the lands that it conquered. Pushing relentlessly on despite dwindling numbers, the Grand Army met with disaster as the invasion progressed. Napoleon's army arrived in a virtually-abandoned Moscow, which was a tattered starving shell of its former self, largely because of scorched-earth tactics by the retreating Russians. Having conquered essentially nothing, Napoleon's troops retreated, but the scorched-earth policy came into effect again because even though some large supply dumps had been established on the advance, the route between them had both been scorched and marched over once already. Thus, the French army starved as it marched along the resource-depleted invasion route.
South American War of Independence: In August 1812, Argentine General Manuel Belgrano led the Jujuy Exodus, a massive forced displacement of people from what is now Jujuy and Salta Provinces to the south. The Jujuy Exodus was conducted by the patriot forces of the Army of the North, which was battling a Royalist army.
Belgrano, faced with the prospect of total defeat and territorial loss, ordered all people to pack their necessities, including food and furniture, and to follow him in carriages or on foot together with whatever cattle and beasts of burden that could endure the journey. The rest (houses, crops, food stocks and any objects made of iron) was to be burned to deprive the Royalists of resources. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | Thus, the French army starved as it marched along the resource-depleted invasion route.
South American War of Independence: In August 1812, Argentine General Manuel Belgrano led the Jujuy Exodus, a massive forced displacement of people from what is now Jujuy and Salta Provinces to the south. The Jujuy Exodus was conducted by the patriot forces of the Army of the North, which was battling a Royalist army.
Belgrano, faced with the prospect of total defeat and territorial loss, ordered all people to pack their necessities, including food and furniture, and to follow him in carriages or on foot together with whatever cattle and beasts of burden that could endure the journey. The rest (houses, crops, food stocks and any objects made of iron) was to be burned to deprive the Royalists of resources. The strict scorched-earth policy made him ask on 29 July 1812 the people of Jujuy to "show their heroism" and to join the march of the army under his command "if, as you assure, you want to be free". The punishment for ignoring the order was execution, with the destruction of the defector's properties. Belgrano labored to win the support of the populace and later reported that most of the people had willingly followed him without the need for force.
The exodus started on 23 August and gathered people from Jujuy and Salta. People travelled south about 250 km and finally arrived at the banks of the Pasaje River, in Tucumán Province in the early hours of 29 August. They applied a scorched-earth policy and so the Spaniards advanced into a wasteland. Belgrano's army destroyed everything that could provide shelter or be useful to the Royalists.
Greek War of Independence: In 1827, Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt led an Ottoman-Egyptian combined force in a campaign to crush Greek revolutionaries in the Peloponnese. In response to Greek guerrilla attacks on his forces in the Peloponnese, Ibrahim launched a scorched earth campaign that threatened the population with starvation and deported many civilians into slavery in Egypt. The fires of burning villages and fields were clearly visible from Allied ships standing offshore. A British landing party reported that the population of Messinia was close to mass starvation. Ibrahim's scorched-earth policy caused much outrage in Europe, which was one factor for the Great Powers (United Kingdom, the Kingdom of France and the Russian Empire) decisively intervening against him in the Battle of Navarino.
American Civil War: In the American Civil War, Union forces under Philip Sheridan and William Tecumseh Sherman used the policy widely:
supplies within the reach of Confederate armies I regarded as much contraband as arms or ordnance stores. Their destruction was accomplished without bloodshed and tended to the same result as the destruction of armies. I continued this policy to the close of the war. Promiscuous pillaging, however, was discouraged and punished. Instructions were always given to take provisions and forage under the direction of commissioned officers who should give receipts to owners, if at home, and turn the property over to officers of the quartermaster or commissary departments to be issued as if furnished from our Northern depots. But much was destroyed without receipts to owners when it could not be brought within our lines and would otherwise have gone to the support of secession and rebellion. This policy I believe exercised a material influence in hastening the end.
General Sherman used that policy during his March to the Sea.
Another event, in response to William Quantrill's raid on Lawrence, Kansas and the many civilian casualties, including the killing of 150 men, Brigadier General Thomas Ewing Jr., Sherman's brother-in-law, issued US Army General Order No. 11 (1863) to order the near-total evacuation of three-and-a-half counties in western Missouri, south of Kansas City, which were subsequently looted and burned by US Army troops. Under Sherman's overall direction, General Philip Sheridan followed that policy in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and then in the Indian Wars of the Great Plains.
When General Ulysses Grant's forces broke through the defenses of Richmond, Virginia, Confederate President Jefferson Davis ordered the destruction of Richmond's military supplies. The resulting fires quickly spread to other buildings, as well as to the Confederate warships docked on the James River. Civilians in panic were forced to escape the city as it quickly burned.
Native American Wars: During the wars with Native American tribes of the American West, Kit Carson, under James Henry Carleton's direction, instituted a scorched-earth policy, burning fields and homes destroying any livestock. He was aided by other Indian tribes with long-standing enmity toward the Navajos, chiefly the Ute tribe. The Navajo were forced to surrender because of the destruction of their livestock and food supplies. In the spring of 1864, 8000 Navajo men, women, and children were forced to march 300 miles to Fort Sumner, New Mexico. Navajos call it "The Long Walk."
Second Boer War: During the Second Boer War (1899–1902), British forces applied a scorched-earth policy in the occupied Boer republics under the direction of General Lord Kitchener. Numerous Boers, refusing to accept military defeat, adopted guerrilla warfare despite the capture of both of their capital cities. As a result, under Lord Kitchener's command British forces initiated a policy of the destruction of the farms and the homes of civilians in the republics to prevent the Boers who were still fighting from obtaining food and supplies. Boer noncombatants inhabiting the republics (mostly women and children) were interned in concentration camps to prevent them from supplying guerillas still in the field.
The existence of the concentration camps was exposed by English activist Emily Hobhouse, who toured the camps and began petitioning the British government to change its policy. In an attempt to counter Hobhouse's activism, the British government commissioned the Fawcett Commission, but it confirmed Hobhouse's findings. The British government then claimed that it perceived the concentration camps to be humanitarian measure and were established to care for displaced noncombatants until the war's end, in response to mounting criticism of the camps in Britain. A number of factors, including outbreaks of infectious diseases, a lack of planning and supplies for the camps, and overcrowding led to numerous internees dying in the camps. A decade after the war, historian P. L. A. Goldman estimated that 27,927 Boers died in the concentration camps, 26,251 women and children (of whom more than 22,000 were under the age of 16) and 1,676 men over the age of 16, with 1,421 being above the age of 16.
The number of Black Africans who also suffered the same is unknown.
New Zealand Wars: In 1868, the Tūhoe, who had sheltered the Māori leader Te Kooti, were thus subjected to a scorched-earth policy in which their crops and buildings were destroyed and the people of fighting age were captured.
20th century:
World War I: On the Eastern Front of World War I, the Imperial Russian Army created a zone of destruction by using a massive scorched-earth strategy during their retreat from the Imperial German Army in the summer and the autumn of 1915. The Russian troops, retreating along a front of more than 600 miles, destroyed anything that might be of use to their enemy, including crops, houses, railways and entire cities. They also forcibly removed huge numbers of people. In pushing the Russian troops back into Russia's interior, the German army gained a large area of territory from the Russian Empire that is now Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia and Lithuania.
In late 1916 the British army set fire to the Romanian oil fields in order to prevent the central powers from capturing them. 800 million litres of oil were burned.
On the Western Front on 24 February 1917, the German army made a strategic scorched-earth withdrawal (Operation Alberich) from the Somme battlefield to the prepared fortifications of the Hindenburg Line to shorten the line that had to be occupied. Since a scorched-earth campaign requires a war of movement, the Western Front provided little opportunity for the policy as the war was mostly a stalemate and was fought mostly in the same concentrated area for its entire duration.
Greco-Turkish War: During the Greco-Turkish War (1919–22), the retreating Greek Army carried out a scorched-earth policy while it was fleeing from Anatolia in the final phase of the war. The historian Sydney Nettleton Fisher wrote, "The Greek army in retreat pursued a burned-earth policy and committed every known outrage against defenceless Turkish villagers in its path".
Norman Naimark noted that "the Greek retreat was even more devastating for the local population than the occupation".
Second Sino-Japanese War: During the Second Sino-Japanese War, the Imperial Japanese Army had a scorched-earth policy, known as "Three Alls Policy", which caused immense environmental and infrastructure damage to be recorded. It contributed to the complete destruction of entire villages and partial destruction of entire cities.
The Chinese National Revolutionary Army destroyed dams and levees in an attempt to flood the land to slow down the advancement of Japanese soldiers, which further added to the environmental impact and resulted in the 1938 Yellow River flood. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | The historian Sydney Nettleton Fisher wrote, "The Greek army in retreat pursued a burned-earth policy and committed every known outrage against defenceless Turkish villagers in its path".
Norman Naimark noted that "the Greek retreat was even more devastating for the local population than the occupation".
Second Sino-Japanese War: During the Second Sino-Japanese War, the Imperial Japanese Army had a scorched-earth policy, known as "Three Alls Policy", which caused immense environmental and infrastructure damage to be recorded. It contributed to the complete destruction of entire villages and partial destruction of entire cities.
The Chinese National Revolutionary Army destroyed dams and levees in an attempt to flood the land to slow down the advancement of Japanese soldiers, which further added to the environmental impact and resulted in the 1938 Yellow River flood. In the 1938 Changsha fire, the city of Changsha was put on fire by the Kuomintang to prevent any wealth from falling into enemy hands.
World War II: At the start of the Winter War in 1939, the Finns used the tactic in the vicinity of the border in order to deprive the invading Soviet Red Army's provisions and shelter for the forthcoming cold winter. In some cases, fighting took place in areas that were familiar to the Finnish soldiers who were fighting it. There were accounts of soldiers burning down their very own homes and parishes. One of the burned parishes was Suomussalmi.
When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, many district governments took the initiative to begin a partial scorched-earth policy to deny the invaders access to electrical, telecommunications, rail, and industrial resources. Parts of the telegraph network were destroyed, some rail and road bridges were blown up, most electrical generators were sabotaged through the removal of key components, and many mineshafts were collapsed.
The process was repeated later in the war by the German forces of Army Group North and Erich von Manstein's Army Group Don, which stole crops, destroyed farms, and razed cities and smaller settlements during several military operations. The rationale for the policy was that it would slow pursuing Soviet forces by forcing them to save their own civilians. The best-known victims of the German scorched-earth policy were the people of the historic city of Novgorod, which was razed during the winter of 1944 to cover Army Group North's retreat from Leningrad.
Near the end of the summer of 1944, Finland, which had made a separate peace with the Allies, was required to evict the German forces, which had been fighting against the Soviets alongside Finnish troops in northern Finland. The Finnish forces, under the leadership of General Hjalmar Siilasvuo, struck aggressively in late September 1944 by making a landfall at Tornio. That accelerated the German retreat, and by November 1944, the Germans had left most of northern Finland. The German forces, forced to retreat because of an overall strategic situation, covered their retreat towards Norway by devastating large areas of northern Finland by using a scorched-earth strategy. More than a third of the area's dwellings were destroyed, and the provincial capital Rovaniemi was burned to the ground. All but two bridges in Lapland Province were blown up, and all roads were mined.
In northern Norway, which was also being invaded by Soviet forces in pursuit of the retreating Wehrmacht in 1944, the Germans also undertook a scorched-earth policy of destroying every building that could offer shelter and thus interposing a belt of "scorched earth" between themselves and the allies.
In 1945, Adolf Hitler ordered his minister of armaments, Albert Speer, to carry out a nationwide scorched-earth policy, in what became known as the Nero Decree. Speer, who was looking to the future, actively resisted the order, just as he had earlier refused Hitler's command to destroy French industry when the Wehrmacht was being driven out of France. Speer managed to continue doing so even after Hitler became aware of his actions.
During the Second World War, the railroad plough was used during retreats in Germany, Czechoslovakia and other countries to deny enemy use of railways by partially destroying them.
Malayan Liberation War: Britain was the first nation to employ herbicides and defoliants (chiefly Agent Orange) to destroy the crops and the bushes of Malayan National Liberation Army (MNLA) insurgents in Malaya during the Malayan Emergency. The intent was to prevent MNLA insurgents from utilizing rice fields to resupply their rations and using them as a cover to ambush passing convoys of Commonwealth troops.
Goa War: In response to India's invasion of Portuguese Goa in December 1961 during the annexation of Portuguese India, orders delivered from Portuguese President Américo Tomás called for a scorched-earth policy for Goa to be destroyed before its surrender to India.
However, despite his orders from Lisbon, Governor General Manuel António Vassalo e Silva took stock of the superiority of the Indian troops and of his forces' supplies of food and ammunition and took the decision to surrender. He later described his orders to destroy Goa as "a useless sacrifice" (um sacrifício inútil)".
Vietnam War: The United States used Agent Orange as a part of its herbicidal warfare program Operation Ranch Hand to destroy crops and foliage to expose possible enemy hideouts during the Vietnam War. Agent Blue was used on rice fields to deny food to the Viet Cong.
Persian Gulf War: During the 1990 Persian Gulf War, when Iraqi forces were driven out of Kuwait, they set more than 600 Kuwaiti oil wells on fire. That was done as part of a scorched-earth policy during the retreat from Kuwait in 1991 after Iraqi forces had been driven out by Coalition military forces. The fires were started in January and February 1991, and the last one was extinguished by November 1991.
Guatemalan Civil War: Efraín Ríos Montt used the policy in Guatemala's highlands in 1981 and 1982, but it had been used under the previous president, Fernando Romeo Lucas García. Upon entering office, Ríos Montt implemented a new counterinsurgency strategy that called for the use of scorched earth to combat the Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity rebels. Plan Victoria 82 was more commonly known by the nickname of the rural pacification elements of the strategy, Fusiles y Frijoles (Bullets and Beans). Ríos Montt's policies resulted in the death of thousands, most of them indigenous Mayans.
Indonesia: The Indonesian military used the method during Indonesian National Revolution when the British forces in Bandung gave an ultimatum for Indonesian fighters to leave the city. In response, the southern part of Bandung was deliberately burned down in an act of defiance as they left the city on 24 March 1946. This event is known as the Bandung Sea of Fire (Bandung Lautan Api).
The Indonesian military and pro-Indonesia militias also used the method in the 1999 East Timorese crisis. The Timor-Leste scorched-earth campaign was around the time of East Timor's referendum for independence in 1999.
Yugoslav Wars: The method was used during the Yugoslav Wars that started in 1991, such as against the Serbs in Krajina by the Croatian Army, and by Serbian paramilitary groups.
Soviet–Afghan War: The Soviet army used scorched-earth tactics against towns and villages in 1983 to 1984 in the Soviet–Afghan War to prevent the return of the Mujahideen by a migratory genocide. The Soviet army used mines extensively in the bordering provinces to Pakistan to cut off weapon supply.
21st century:
Darfur War: The government of Sudan used scorched earth as a military strategy in the Darfur War that started in 2003.
Sri Lankan Civil War: During the 2009 Sri Lankan Civil War, the United Nations Regional Information Centre accused the government of Sri Lanka of using scorched-earth tactics.
Myanmar civil war: In March 2023, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights condemned the Burmese military's use of a scorched earth strategy, which has killed thousands of civilians, displaced 1.3 million people and destroyed 39,000 houses throughout the country since the 2021 Myanmar coup d'état, as the military has denied humanitarian access to survivors, razed entire villages, and used indiscriminate airstrikes and artillery shelling.
In business world: The concept of scorched-earth defense is sometimes applied figuratively to the business world in which a firm facing a takeover attempts to make itself less valuable by selling off its assets.
See also:
Explanatory notes:
Notes:
References: Ambler, Sophie; Bailey, Mark; Seel, Graham E. (2018). British Depth Studies c. 500–1100 (Anglo-Saxon and Norman Britain). London: Anthem Press. ISBN 978-1-78308-808-9. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
american.edu (2010). "The Economic and Environmental Impact of the Gulf War on Kuwait and the Persian Gulf". Washington, DC: American University. Archived from the original on 19 December 2010.
Billows, Richard A (2008). Julius Caesar: The Colossus of Rome. Routledge. ISBN 9781134318322.
Blackmore, David S.T. (2014). |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | See also:
Explanatory notes:
Notes:
References: Ambler, Sophie; Bailey, Mark; Seel, Graham E. (2018). British Depth Studies c. 500–1100 (Anglo-Saxon and Norman Britain). London: Anthem Press. ISBN 978-1-78308-808-9. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
american.edu (2010). "The Economic and Environmental Impact of the Gulf War on Kuwait and the Persian Gulf". Washington, DC: American University. Archived from the original on 19 December 2010.
Billows, Richard A (2008). Julius Caesar: The Colossus of Rome. Routledge. ISBN 9781134318322.
Blackmore, David S.T. (2014). Warfare on the Mediterranean in the Age of Sail: A History, 1571–1866. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Bostock, Andrew (2010). Greece: The Peloponnese. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Vaughan, Don (2023). "scorched-earth policy". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 17 February 2024.
Chandler, David (1966). The Campaigns of Napoleon.
Childs, John Charles Roger; Childs, John (1991). The Nine Years' War and the British Army, 1688–1697: The Operations in the Low Countries. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-3461-9. OCLC 1166971747. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
Clausen, Wendell (1945). "The Scorched Earth Policy, Ancient and Modern". The Classical Journal. 40 (5): 298–299. ISSN 0009-8353. JSTOR 3292233.
Clausewitz, Carl von (1812). Principles of War. Translated by Hans W. Gatzke.
Clausewitz, Carl von (1832). On War. Translated by J.J. Graham.
Cunliffe, Barry (2019). The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe. Retrieved 2 July 2023.
deoxy (1954). "Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Convention, 1977". Deoxy.org. Archived from the original on 6 July 1997. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
Derry, T. K. (1972). A History of Modern Norway: 1814–1972. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-822503-4.
Desāī, Raṇajita (2003). Shivaji the Great. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
Desai, B.H. (2022). Envisioning Our Environmental Future. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Doel, Marcus (2017). Geographies of Violence: Killing Space, Killing Time. ISBN 9781526413901. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Dologa, Laurentiu (12 June 2020). "Sabotaging the German war machine: The destruction of the Romanian oilfields in November 1916". Europe Centenary. Retrieved 24 June 2023.
Downes, Alexander B. (1 December 2007). "Draining the Sea by Filling the Graves: Investigating the Effectiveness of Indiscriminate Violence as a Counterinsurgency Strategy". Civil Wars. 9 (4): 420–444. doi:10.1080/13698240701699631. ISSN 1369-8249. S2CID 144793055.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
Dyker, David A.; Vejvoda, Ivan (2014). Yugoslavia and After: A Study in Fragmentation, Despair and Rebirth. Routledge. pp. 113–. ISBN 978-1-317-89135-2.
Eagles, Jonathan (2013). Stephen the Great and Balkan Nationalism: Moldova and Eastern European History. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Fawcett, M. H. (1901). The Concentration Camps in South Africa. London: Westminster Gazette.
Finch, Steve (2013). "In Sri Lanka, Will Mass Grave Case Be Buried?". The Diplomat. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
Fisher, Sydney Nettleton (1959). The Middle East, a History. Retrieved 2 July 2023.
Forczyk, Robert (2016). The Dnepr 1943: Hitler's eastern rampart crumbles. Retrieved 4 July 2023.
Forester, Thomas (1854). The Chronicle of Florence of Worcester. London: Henry G. Bohn.
Fraser, George MacDonald (1971). The Steel Bonnets.
Fulton, Michael S (2020). Siege Warfare During the Crusades. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Gates, John M. (1984). "War-Related Deaths in the Philippines, 1898–1902". Pacific Historical Review. 53 (3): 367–378. doi:10.2307/3639234. JSTOR 3639234. PMID 11635503. Archived from the original on 2014-06-29.
Gibbon, Edward (1788). The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Gilbert, Martin (1989). The Second World War: A Complete History. New York: Henry Holt and Company. ISBN 978-0-8050-0534-9.
goacom (2012). "The Church in Goa". Goacom.com. Archived from the original on 2 April 2012. Retrieved 9 November 2009.
Grant, Ulysses S. (2017). The Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant: The Complete Annotated Edition. Retrieved 4 July 2023.
Grey, Orrin (2022). Toussaint Louverture: Self-Freed Slave and Hero of the Haitian Revolution. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
Hardenbergh, John L.; McKendry, William; Griffis, William Elliott (2010). Narratives of Sullivan's Expedition, 1779: Against the Four Nations of the Iroquois & Loyalists by the Continental Army. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
historyinanhour (2012). "A Great Medieval Massacre, 1069". History in an Hour. Archived from the original on 2012-06-19. Retrieved 2015-09-19.
Hobhouse, E. (1901). Report of a visit to the camps of women and children in the Cape and Orange River Colonies. London: Friars Printing Association Ltd.
Hobhouse, E. (1907). The Brunt of War and Where it Fell. London: Portrayer Publishers.
Hochschild, Adam (2011). To End All Wars – a story of loyalty and rebellion 1914-1918. Boston & New York: Mariner Books, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. p. 156. ISBN 978-0-547-75031-6.
Hoyos, Dexter (2011). A Companion to the Punic Wars. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9781444393705.
Kakar, Mohammed (1995). Afghanistan: The Soviet Invasion and the Afghan Response, 1979-1982. Retrieved 7 July 2023.
Kershaw, Ian (2000). Hitler: 1936–1945: Nemesis. New York: Norton. p. 785. ISBN 978-0-393-04994-7.
Kramer, Andrew E.; Sonne, Paul; Kim, Victoria (7 June 2023). "Zelensky warns that hundreds of thousands of people don't have 'normal access to drinking water'". New York Times. Archived from the original on 8 June 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
Kuhn, Anthony (2008). "Rivers and the Destruction of Napoleon's Grand Army". napoleon-series.org.
Lowry, Bernard (2006). Discovering Fortifications: From the Tudors to the Cold War. Princes Risborough, UK: Shire Publications. ISBN 978-0-7478-0651-6.
Lynn, John A. (2013). The Wars of Louis XIV 1667–1714. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
Manganiello, Stephen C. (2004). The Concise Encyclopedia of the Revolutions and Wars of England,. Scotland, and Ireland, 1639–1660. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Scorched earth | New York Times. Archived from the original on 8 June 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
Kuhn, Anthony (2008). "Rivers and the Destruction of Napoleon's Grand Army". napoleon-series.org.
Lowry, Bernard (2006). Discovering Fortifications: From the Tudors to the Cold War. Princes Risborough, UK: Shire Publications. ISBN 978-0-7478-0651-6.
Lynn, John A. (2013). The Wars of Louis XIV 1667–1714. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
Manganiello, Stephen C. (2004). The Concise Encyclopedia of the Revolutions and Wars of England,. Scotland, and Ireland, 1639–1660. Scarecrow Press. ISBN 0-8108-5100-8.
Mehta, Jaswant Lal (2005). Advanced Study in the History of Modern India 1707–1813. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
Melton, J. Gordon (2014). Faiths Across Time: 5,000 Years of Religious History. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Miller, Scott (2011). The President and the Assassin: McKinley, Terror, and Empire at the Dawn of the American Century.
Mojzes, Paul (2016). Yugoslavian Inferno: Ethnoreligious Warfare in the Balkans. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 166–. ISBN 978-1-4742-8838-5.
Muir, Richard (1997). The Yorkshire Countryside: A Landscape History. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-1-85331-198-7.
Naimark, Norman M. (2002). Fires of Hatred: Ethnic Cleansing in Twentieth-Century Europe.
Oman, Charles (1905). A History of the Art of War: The Middle Ages from the Fourth to the Fourteenth Century. London: Meuthen & Co.
Pavkovic, A. (2000). The Fragmentation of Yugoslavia: Nationalism and War in the Balkans. Springer. pp. 154–. ISBN 978-0-230-28584-2.
Perry, David R.; Blackburn, M (2000). Castle Park, Dunbar: two thousand years on a fortified headland. Monograph Series. Vol. 16. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.
Phifer, Michiko (2012). A Handbook of Military Strategy and Tactics. Vij Books India Pvt. ISBN 9789382573289.
Phifer, Michiko (2012a). A Handbook of Military Strategy and Tactics. Retrieved 4 July 2023.
Pivka, Otto von (2013). The King's German Legion. Bloomsbury. ISBN 9781472801692.
Pringle, Heather (April 2010). "Digging the Scorched Earth". Archaeology. 63 (2): 20–25.
Richards, John F. (1993). The Mughal Empire. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
Ridley, R. T. (1986). "To Be Taken with a Pinch of Salt: The Destruction of Carthage". Classical Philology. 81 (2): 140–146. doi:10.1086/366973. JSTOR 269786. S2CID 161696751.
Riehn, Richard K. (1990). 1812 : Napoleon's Russian campaign. New York : McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780070527317. Retrieved 10 April 2021.
rootsweb (22 January 1999). "RootsWeb: South-Africa – L Re: Boer War Records". Archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com. Archived from the original on 22 December 2008. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
Roy, Kaushik (2020). India's Historic Battles: From Alexander the Great to Kargil. Retrieved 24 February 2014.
sahistory (2008). "Women's struggle in South Africa". Archived from the original on 21 August 2008. Retrieved 2 July 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
Schiller, Friedrich (1799). The History of the Thirty Years' War in Germany. Translated by Christoph Martin Wieland. W. Miller.
Schirmer, Jennifer (1998). The Guatemalan military project: a violence called democracy. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Sitaresmi, Ratnayu (24 March 1946). "Social History of The Bandung Lautan Api (Bandung Sea of Fire)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 June 2017. Retrieved 22 August 2008.
Snaith, Anna (2014). Modernist Voyages: Colonial Women Writers in London, 1890–1945. Retrieved 4 July 2023.
Spenser, Edmund (1849). The Works of Edmund Spenser: With Observations of His Life and Writings. Retrieved 3 July 2023.
Tabari (2015). History of al-Tabari Vol. 18, The: Between Civil Wars: The Caliphate of Mu'awiyah A.D. 661–680/A.H. 40–60. SUNY Press. ISBN 9781438413600 – via Google Books.
Taylor, Jay (2009). The Generalissimo: Chiang Kai-shek and the Making of Modern China. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. p. 158. ISBN 9780674033382.
Thomas, Steven (4 April 2015). "Battle of Tucuman 24–25 September 1812". balagan.info.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
Tisdall, Simon (17 May 2010). "Sri Lanka faces new calls for Tamil inquiry". The Guardian. London.
Todd, Douglas (2016). "Douglas Todd: Lest we overlook the 'Asian Holocaust'". Vancouver Sun. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 2 July 2021.
Traquar, Peter (1998). Freedom's Sword.
Tuunainen, Pasi (2016). Finnish Military Effectiveness in the Winter War, 1939–1940. Retrieved 4 July 2023.
un.org (3 March 2023). "Myanmar: Tatmadaw army's 'scorched earth' policy in spotlight". UN News. Retrieved 14 March 2023.
unric (2017). "Why Sri Lanka matters". UNRIC. London. Archived from the original on 23 June 2017. Retrieved 28 September 2013.
Wellman, Robert Campbell (14 February 1999). ""Iraq and Kuwait: 1972, 1990, 1991, 1997." Earthshots: Satellite Images of Environmental Change". U.S. Geological Survey. Archived from the original on 28 October 2002. Retrieved 27 July 2010.
Willcox, Tilton (January 1988). "The Use and Abuse of Executive Powers in Warding off Corporate Raiders". Journal of Business Ethics. 7 (1/2): 51. doi:10.1007/BF00381997. S2CID 154719523.
Xenophon (403). "VI". Anabasi. Translated by H. G. Dakyns. Project Gutenberg. Retrieved 1 July 2023. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Screening (tactical) | Screening force: Screening is often done by reconnaissance units such as cavalry, which operate within range of supporting artillery. In contrast to a guard force, a screening force may consist of a scout platoon rather than a task force or squadron; and its mission is less ambitious, focusing on early warning to the main body rather than preventing enemy observation and direct fire on the main body. Also, unlike a guard force, a screening force is deployed over an extended area, to the rear and flanks of the main force, rather than to the front. The screening force's minimal tasks enable it to have a wide frontage. The screen line describes the trace along which the protecting unit is providing security. Aerial assets are used when ground assets cannot keep pace with the main body.
A screening force normally uses direct fire only for self-defense and does not seek to become decisively engaged with enemy forces.
Examples: During the American Civil War, at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, Maj. Gen. John Buford set the conditions for Maj. Gen. George Meade's success by ensuring the Army of the Potomac occupied the high ground, which destroyed General Robert E. Lee's army when it attacked.
See also: Covering force
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sea denial | Methods: Sea denial is achieved in many different ways. The method depends on factors such as geography, ambition, and capabilities. Geographically it is easier to conduct sea denial operations in choke points such as narrow waters, straights, or congested waters.
Example techniques include naval mines, anti-ship missiles, drones, and submarines.
Barrier operations seek to hinder access to certain areas. Commerce raiding requires the enemy to put resources into escorting merchant ships. Asymmetrical warfare can involve attacking expensive ships with low cost uncrewed vessels. A fleet in being can threaten offensive operations without actually conducting them.
History: During World War I and World War II, Germany pursued sea denial using U-boats. Owing to the substantial superiority of the Royal Navy's surface forces, Germany's Imperial Navy (in World War I) and Kriegsmarine (in World War II) had little hope of sea control, but with submarines, the Germans hoped to choke off their access to seaborne commerce. In both wars, the United Kingdom successfully resisted the German strategy with a combination of strict rationing and anti-submarine weapons and techniques.
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union invested heavily in submarines and would likely have pursued a similar strategy of sea denial had tensions with NATO escalated to open warfare.
Since World War II, the most notable example of a sea denial involved the so-called 'Tanker War,' wherein Iran and Iraq sought to close the Persian Gulf.
Today the term A2/AD has gained traction, and refers to a sort of sea denial strategy where a state aspires to challenge access to certain areas while hindering freedom of movement in an adjacent area. It can include a combined effort of navy, air force, and army. The army deploys missiles and sensors. The air force deploys assets to gather intelligence, conduct surveillance and reconnaissance and target ships with airborne weaponry. The navy deploys sea mines, surface ships, and submarines in a layered defence and distributed lethality.
Modern sea denial addresses area denial weapons, for example in the context of a land power using land-based missiles to strike sea targets. Such missiles can follow cruise missile (terrain-skimming) or ballistic missile trajectories.
See also: Fleet in being
Sea control or command of the sea ( same article )
Commerce raiding
References:
Bibliography: Corbett, Julian S. 2018. Some Principles of Maritime Strategy. Bd. 1911. Adansonia Press.
Speller, Ian. 2019. Understanding Naval Warfare. 2. edition. Routledge.
Till, Geoffrey. 2018. Seapower. A Guide for the Twenty-First Century. 4th edition. Cass Series: Naval Policy and History. 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abdingdon Oxon, OX14 4RN: Routledge. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Seabed warfare | Overview: Seabed warfare is defined as “operations to, from and across the ocean floor.”
In general the target of seabed warfare is infrastructure in place on the seabed such as power cables, telecom cables, or natural resource extraction systems. Seabed warfare capabilities are expensive and because of that significant capabilities are only possessed by major powers.
Conflicts on the seabed can be both conventional and unconventional, the latter encompassing non-kinetic approaches such as lawfare.
France has integrated seabed warfare into their military strategy with the concept of Seabed Control Operations which involves expanding their existing mine warfare and hydro-oceanography capabilities to deal with a more comprehensive spectrum of threats.
Platforms: The American Block VI Virginia-class submarines will include the organic ability to employ seabed warfare equipment.
The Russian submarine Losharik is thought to be capable of seabed warfare.
The Chinese HSU-001 is a small UUV, speculated to be optimized for seabed warfare.
See also: Naval mine
SOSUS
Anti-submarine warfare
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Security dilemma | Basic components: Tang identified the following core components between interpretations of the security dilemma by Herbert Butterfield, John H. Herz, and Robert Jervis:
Butterfield viewed the security dilemma as the root cause of all war, but he did not view anarchy as being the ultimate source of the security dilemma. Instead he attributed the source to fear and the "universal sin" of humanity — that humanity can commit evil. Herz and Jervis did not view the security dilemma as being the root cause of all war. A counterexample frequently given is the Second World War, where there was no dilemma over war with a malign Nazi Germany.
Defensive realism: The security dilemma is the core assumption of defensive realism. According to Kenneth Waltz, because the world does not have a common government and is "anarchic", survival is the main motivation of states. States are distrustful of other states' intentions and as a consequence always try to maximize their own security. The security dilemma explains why security-seeking (as opposed to non-security seeking) states could end up in conflict, even though they have benign intentions.
The offense-defense balance accounts for why the security dilemma is more intense in certain circumstances. Defensive realists argue that in situations where offensive actions have the advantage (for example, due to geography or military technology), the security dilemma will be particularly intensive because states will be more distrustful of each other and be more encouraged to take preemptive offensive actions. In situations where the defense has the advantage, security-seeking states can afford to focus strictly on their defense without as much fear of being attacked. Security-seeking states can also signal benign intentions without adversely affecting their own security.
Defensive realists often regard the success of the United States in World War I as being a result of the defensive approach taken by the United States. Had the United States taken an offensive stance, defensive realists argue that the United States would not have been secure. The conclusion from defensive realism is that in some circumstances states can escape the security dilemma.
Offensive realism: Offensive realism and defensive realism are variants of structural realism. They share the basic beliefs of survivalism, statism (state as the primary unit), self-help and anarchy. (See international relations theory.) However, contrary to defensive realism, offensive realism regards states as aggressive power maximizers and not as security maximizers. According to John Mearsheimer, "Uncertainty about the intentions of other states is unavoidable, which means that states can never be sure that other states do not have offensive intentions to go along with their offensive capabilities". According to Mearsheimer, though achieving hegemony by any state is not likely in today's international system, there is no such thing as a status quo and "the world is condemned to perpetual great power competition".
Supporting the belief that the international system is anarchic and that each state must independently seek its own survival, Waltz argues that weaker states try to find a balance with their rivals and to form an alliance with a stronger state to obtain a guarantee of security against offensive action by an enemy state. On the other hand, Mearsheimer and other offensive realists argue that anarchy encourages all states to always increase their own power because one state can never be sure of other states' intentions. In other words, defensive realism contends that security can be balanced in some cases and that the security dilemma is escapable. While offensive realists do not disagree, they do not agree fully with the defensive view instead contending that if states can gain an advantage over other states then they will do so. In short, since states want to maximize their power in this anarchic system and since states cannot trust one another, the security dilemma is inescapable.
Offensive realists dispute that the offense-defense is a major determinant of state behavior, arguing the concept is vague, that offense and defense cannot be distinguished, that the offense-defense balance does not vary significantly over time, perceptions among leaders of the offense-defense balance varies even within the same time periods, and attackers and defender can use most types of weapons to achieve their goals.
Offense–defense theory: The offense–defense theory of Robert Jervis helps decide the intensity of the security dilemma. Jervis uses four scenarios to describe the intensity of the security dilemma:
When offensive and defensive behaviour are not distinguishable but offense has an advantage, the security dilemma is "very intense" and environment is "doubly dangerous". Status quo states will behave in an aggressive manner and they will arise the possibility of an arms race. Chances of cooperation between states are low.
Where offensive and defensive behavior are not distinguishable but defense has an advantage, the security dilemma is "intense" in explaining states' behaviour but not as intense as in the first case. In such situation, a state might be able to increase its security without being a threat to other states and without endangering the security of other states.
Where offensive and defensive behavior are distinguishable but offense has an advantage, the security dilemma is "not intense" but security issues exist. The environment is safe, but offensive behaviour has an advantage that might result in aggression at some future time.
Where offensive and defensive behavior are distinguishable and defense has advantage, the security dilemma has little or no intensity, and the environment is "doubly safe". Since there is little danger of offensive action by other states, a state would be able to expend some of its defense budget and other resources on useful development within the state.
According to Jervis, the technical capabilities of a state and its geographical position are two essential factors in deciding whether offensive or defensive action is advantageous. He argues that at a strategic level, technical and geographical factors are of greater favor to the defender. For example, in the 19th century railway and roads construction were rapidly changing the composition of capabilities of states to attack or defend themselves from other states. Thus, considerable effort in diplomatic relations and intelligence were specifically focused on this issue.
The spiral model identifies the next step in reasoning about states' behavior after identifying the intensity of the security dilemma. In particular, under given circumstances of the security dilemma, what steps might a threatened state take to derive advantage by attacking first. In other words, the spiral model seeks to explain war. In the spiral model of Jervis, there are two reasons why a state might end up in war. "Preventive war" might take place as one state might decide to attack first when it perceives the balance of power shifting to the other side creating an advantage in attacking sooner rather than later as conditions may not be as favorable in the future as in the present. "Preemptive war" might take place as a state might decide to attack another state first to prevent the other state from attacking or to obstruct the other state's attack because it fears the other state is preparing to attack.
The deterrence model is contrary to the spiral model, but also purports to explain war. While the spiral model presumes that states are fearful of each other, the deterrence model is based on the belief that states are greedy. Paul K. Huth divides deterrence into three main types:
Preventing armed attack against a country's own territory ("direct deterrence")
Preventing armed attack against the territory of another country ("extended deterrence")
Using deterrence against a short-term threat of attack ("immediate deterrence")
Under some circumstances attempts at deterrence can "backfire" when a potential attacker misinterprets the state's deterrence measures as a "prelude to offensive measures". In such cases the security dilemma can arise generating perceptions of a "first strike advantage". According to Huth "most effective deterrence policies are those that decrease the expected utility of using force while not reducing the expected utility of the status quo; optimally deterrent policies would even increase the utility of not using the force." It is more likely that deterrence will succeed if the attacker finds deterrence threat "credible" and a credible deterrence threat might not necessarily be a military threat.
Jervis claims that the security dilemma can lead to arms races and alliance formation.
Arms race: According to Robert Jervis, since the world is anarchic, a state might, for defensive purposes, build its military capability. However, since states are not aware of each other's intentions, other states might interpret a defensive buildup as offensive; if so and if offensive action against the state that is only building its defenses is advantageous, the other states might prefer to take an aggressive stance, which will "make the situation unstable". In such situation, an arms race may become a strong possibility. Robert Jervis gives the example of Germany and Britain before World War I. "Much of the behaviour in this period was the product of technology and beliefs that magnified the security dilemma". In that example, strategists believed that offense would be more advantageous than defense, but that ultimately turned out to not be the case. Competition on nuclear weapons construction between the United States and the Soviet Union, during the Cold War, is a well-known example of an arms race.
Alliance formation: The security dilemma might force states to form new alliances or to strengthen existing alliances. "If offense has less advantage, stability and cooperation are likely". According to Glenn H. Snyder, under a security dilemma there are two reasons that alliances will form. First, a state that is dissatisfied with the amount of security it has forms alliances in order to bolster its security. Second, a state is in doubt about the reliability of existing allies in coming to its aid, and thus decides to court another ally or allies. According to Thomas Christensen and Jack Snyder, in a multipolar world two types of alliance dilemma exist which are contrary in nature. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Security dilemma | In that example, strategists believed that offense would be more advantageous than defense, but that ultimately turned out to not be the case. Competition on nuclear weapons construction between the United States and the Soviet Union, during the Cold War, is a well-known example of an arms race.
Alliance formation: The security dilemma might force states to form new alliances or to strengthen existing alliances. "If offense has less advantage, stability and cooperation are likely". According to Glenn H. Snyder, under a security dilemma there are two reasons that alliances will form. First, a state that is dissatisfied with the amount of security it has forms alliances in order to bolster its security. Second, a state is in doubt about the reliability of existing allies in coming to its aid, and thus decides to court another ally or allies. According to Thomas Christensen and Jack Snyder, in a multipolar world two types of alliance dilemma exist which are contrary in nature. These alliance dilemmas are known as chain ganging and buck passing.
Chain ganging: In a multipolar world, alliance security is interconnected. When one ally decides to participate in war, it pulls its alliance partners into the war too, which is referred to as chain ganging. If the partner does not participate in the war fully, it will endanger the security of its ally. For example, in World War I, to the alliance between Austria-Hungary and Germany, according to Waltz, did this: "If Austria-Hungary marched, Germany had to follow: the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire would have left Germany alone in the middle of Europe". On the other side, if "France marched, Russia had to follow; a German victory over France would be a defeat for Russia. And so it was all around the vicious circle, because the defeat or defection of a major alliance would have shaken the balance, each alliance partner would have shaken the balance, each state was constrained to adjust its strategy".
Buck passing: In the face of a rising threat, balancing alignments fail to form in a timely fashion as states try to freeride on other states. States might do so to avoid the expense of war for themselves. For example, to use Waltz's example, in World War II, the French Foreign Minister told the British Prime Minister that Britain was justified in taking "the lead in opposing Germany" when the Nazis had taken over the Rhineland, but as "the German threat grew", France and Britain hoped that Germany and the Soviet Union "would balance each other off or fight to the finish. Uncertainties about... who will gain or lose from the action of other states accelerate as number of states increases".
Criticisms and responses: According to Alexander Wendt, "Security dilemmas are not given by anarchy or nature" but, rather, are "a social structure composed of intersubjective understandings in which states are so distrustful that they make worst-case assumptions about each other's intentions". Jennifer Mitzen mirrors Wendt's critique, arguing that the security dilemma can be caused and maintained by the pursuit for ontological security rather than rationalist security-seeking.
Glaser argues that Wendt mischaracterised the security dilemma. "Wendt is using the security dilemma to describe the result of states' interaction whereas Jervis and the literature he has spawned use the security dilemma to refer to a situation created by the material conditions facing states, such as geography and prevailing technology". According to Wendt because the security dilemma is the result of one state's interaction with another, a state can adopt policies which hinder the security dilemma. Glaser blames Wendt for "exaggerating the extent to which structural realism calls for competitive policies and, therefore, the extent to which it leads to security dilemmas". Glaser argues that though offensive realists presume that in an international system a state has to compete for power, the security dilemma is a concept mainly used by defensive realists and according to defensive realists it is beneficial for nations to cooperate under certain circumstances.
Another mode of criticism of the security dilemma concept is to question the validity of the offence-defense balance. Since weapons of offense and of defense are the same, how can the distinction between the two be connected with a state's intentions? As a result, critics have questioned whether the offense-defense balance can be used as a variable in explaining international conflicts.
According to Charles Glaser, criticisms of the offense-defense balance are based on two misunderstandings. First, the sameness or difference of offensive weapons compared with defensive weapons does not impact the offense-defense balance itself. Offense-defense theory assumes that both parties in conflict will use those weapons that suit their strategy and goals. Second, whether both states involved in the conflict have some common weapons between them is the wrong question to ask in seeking to understand the offense-defense balance. Instead, critics should focus on the influence or net effect of weapons used in the conflict. According to Glaser, "Distinguishability should be defined by comparative net assessment" or the comparison of the balance of offense-defense when both sides use weapons versus when neither side is using weapons.
See also: Balance of power in international relations
Escalation of commitment
Hobbesian trap
Red Queen's race
Prisoner's dilemma
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sexual harassment in the military | Definitions: Sexual harassment is unwanted sexual behaviour experienced as threatening or otherwise upsetting. Definitions in use by state armed forces include:
Australian Defence Forces: Unwanted sexual advances or sexual requests towards to another person
British Army: Unwanted sexually based conduct or other conduct affecting the dignity of women and men at work.
Canadian Armed Forces: Improper conduct directed at and offensive to others, which the perpetrator ought reasonably know would be so.
United States Armed Forces: Unwanted sexual advances and other behaviour of a sexual nature.
Behaviour: Sexual harassment in the military includes a broad spectrum of behaviour.
Undirected behaviours are those not personally targeted but which affect the working environment, such as sexist and sexual jokes and the prominent display of pornographic material.
Directed behaviours target one or more individuals, such as hazing rituals, unwanted sexual advances, and sexual assault.
Research in Canada has found that a military culture of undirected sexual harassment increases the risk of directed sexual harassment and assault.
Case examples: A woman in the British army told researchers in 2006:A friend was out on an exercise when a group of men ducked her head in a bucket of water and each time she came up for breath she had to repeat "I am useless and I am a female". She told the story and said it was a joke but I could see she was upset.The Deschamps Review of 2015 found pervasive demeaning attitudes to women in the Canadian armed forces:Interviewees reported regularly being told of orders to "stop being pussies" and to "leave your purses at home" [...] The use of the word "cunt", for example, is commonplace, and rape jokes are tolerated. [...] A commonly held attitude is that, rather than be a soldier, a sailor or an aviator, a woman will be labeled an "ice princess", a "bitch", or a "slut". Another saying is that women enter the CAF "to find a man, to leave a man, or to become a man".A woman in the French army was raped by her commanding officer:It was months before I could pronounce the word "rape"... I blamed myself. I said: "We are trained in hand to hand combat. Why didn't I stop him?" But when that happens you are terrorised.Many incidents of sexual harassment and assault in the US armed forces have been documented. For example:
When a woman in the US army attended a sexual harassment awareness training, the senior officer teaching the class asked participants whether they would hit on "a naked, drunk girl on the bench outside your barracks", adding, "you're not supposed to but I probably would".
US Senator Martha McSally, formerly of the US Air Force and the first female pilot to fly combat operations, testified to a Senate meeting that she was raped by a superior officer. McSally explained that she never reported the incident for lack of trust in the military justice system. She added that she blamed herself, and that although she had thought herself strong, she felt powerless.
The US Navy Tailhook Association scandal exposed multiple acts of sexual violence during the organisation's annual convention of aviators in Las Vegas. Lieutenant Paula Puopolo (then Coughlin) blew the whistle on a run-the-gauntlet ritual, in which male officers lined the third-floor corridor of the convention hotel to harass and assault women passing through. In 1991, the men sexually assaulted 83 women, including Puopolo, and seven men. As reported in the Wall Street Journal:Puopolo says up to 200 disheveled airmen set upon her. She was fondled and passed along from one groping, pinching set of hands to another before being dropped to the ground. At breakfast, Puopolo reported the incident to [Rear Admiral] Snyder, himself a former president of the association. "He said that's what you get when you go down a hallway full of drunken aviators," she recalls.
Principal targets:
Female personnel: While some male personnel are sexually harassed, women are much more likely to be targeted.
Younger women and girls face a greater risk, according to American, British, Canadian, and French research. For example, girls aged under 18 in the British armed forces were ten times as likely as adult female personnel to be the victim of a sexual offence in 2021.
Intimate partners: In 2022, research in the UK armed forces found that experience of intimate partner violence (IPV), a category that includes sexual abuse, was three times more prevalent among partners of military personnel than among partners of civilians. 10% of male and 7% of female personnel told the researchers they had abused their partner in the previous 12 months. The study found that physical and sexual abuse of partners was particularly common where personnel had traumatic experiences of war.
In the US armed forces, estimates of the sexual abuse of military partners indicate a similarly high rate of annual incidence, ranging from 12% to 40%.
Child cadets: Cadet forces, common worldwide, are military youth organisations in communities and schools. Some evidence from the UK, where hundreds of complaints of the sexual abuse of cadets have been recorded since 2012, and from Canada, where one in ten complaints of sexual assault in the military are from the cadet organisations, indicate that these institutions are susceptible to a culture of sexual harassment.
Detainees: Individuals detained by militaries are particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment. During the Iraq War, for example, personnel of the U.S. Army and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) committed multiple human rights violations against detainees in Abu Ghraib prison, including rape, sodomy, and other forms of sexual abuse. Similarly, two Iraqi men detained on a Coalition warship at the start of the war were made to strip naked and were sexually humiliated.
Prevalence: While prevalence varies by country, military branch, and other factors, official statistics and peer-reviewed research from Canada, France, the UK, and the US indicate that between a quarter and a third of military women in these countries are sexually harassed at work at least once each year.
Military training settings are characterised by a particularly high level of sexual harassment and assault relative to both the civilian population and other military settings.
Research further shows an increase in perpetration during and after deployment on military operations.
Studies of sexual harassment have found that it is markedly more common in military than civilian settings For example, between 2015 and 2020, girls aged 16 or 17 in the British armed forces were twice as likely as their same-age civilian peers to report rape or other sexual assault.
Risk factors: Several reasons for a high prevalence of sexual harassment in the military have been suggested.
A Canadian study has found that key risk factors associated with military settings are the typically young age of personnel, the isolated locations of bases, the minority status of women, and the disproportionate number of men in senior positions.
An emphasis in military organisations on conformity, obedience, and hierarchical power relations, combine to increase the risk, particularly to personnel of low rank, who are less able than others to resist inappropriate expectations made of them.
Traditionally masculine values and behaviours that are rewarded and reinforced in military settings are also thought to play a role.
In the UK, the 2019 Wigston Review into inappropriate sexual behaviours in the armed forces reported that several military factors contributed to risk: "tight-knit units that perceive themselves as 'elite'; masculine cultures with low gender diversity; rank gradients; age gradients; weak or absent controls, especially after extensive operational periods; and alcohol."
Effects: Women affected by sexual harassment are more likely than other women to suffer stress-related mental illness afterwards.
Research in the US found that when sexual abuse of female military personnel was psychiatrically traumatic, the odds of suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after deployment on operations increased by a factor of nine, and the odds of suicide more than doubled.
Research in the US has found that personnel affected by sexual harassment are somewhat less likely to develop depression or PTSD if a formal report leads to effective action to address the issue.
Institutional responses: The military leadership in some countries has begun to acknowledge a culture of sexual misconduct among personnel. For example:
The British armed forces co-commissioned their first formal study of the problem in 2006. In 2016, the head of the British army noted that soldier culture remained "overly sexualised" and committed to reducing the extent of sexual misconduct.
In 2016, after a major study uncovered widespread sexual harassment and assault in the Canadian armed forces, General Jonathan Vance, Chief of the Defence Staff, acknowledged: "Harmful sexual behaviour is a real problem in our institution."
The US established the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office in 2005, which reports annually. In 2019, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin remarked nonetheless that prevention efforts remained "far short of what is required to make lasting change".
Since the number of official complaints represents only a fraction of sexual harassment incidence, armed forces committed to reducing prevalence produce periodic estimates of its true extent by means of anonymised surveys.
Other prevention initiatives, varying by country, include bystander and diversity training, and helplines. Despite these steps, official statistics in Canada, the UK, and the US over the last decade show high and increasing rates of harassment.
Barriers to redress: Military personnel are frequently reluctant to report incidents of sexual misconduct:
An official report of the Australian Defence Force concluded that women affected by harassment were less likely to make a complaint because they do not expect a serious response.
Leila Minano, the co-author of a book documenting sexual abuse in the French armed forces, has commented that women are systematically discouraged from complaining, and often moved out of their unit if they do. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sexual harassment in the military | In 2019, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin remarked nonetheless that prevention efforts remained "far short of what is required to make lasting change".
Since the number of official complaints represents only a fraction of sexual harassment incidence, armed forces committed to reducing prevalence produce periodic estimates of its true extent by means of anonymised surveys.
Other prevention initiatives, varying by country, include bystander and diversity training, and helplines. Despite these steps, official statistics in Canada, the UK, and the US over the last decade show high and increasing rates of harassment.
Barriers to redress: Military personnel are frequently reluctant to report incidents of sexual misconduct:
An official report of the Australian Defence Force concluded that women affected by harassment were less likely to make a complaint because they do not expect a serious response.
Leila Minano, the co-author of a book documenting sexual abuse in the French armed forces, has commented that women are systematically discouraged from complaining, and often moved out of their unit if they do.
The ombudsperson of the Canadian armed forces confirmed that women fear the consequences if they report a sexual offence to their chain of command: "The fear of repercussions is blatant", he said in 2014. In 2015, the Deschamps Review reported that one of the main reasons why personnel do not lodge a complaint is a fear of the consequences for their career and that many complainants had indeed faced reprisals.
An official report on sexual harassment in the British army in 2015 found that almost half of personnel who had an 'upsetting' experience of sexual harassment did not complain to their chain of command for fear of damaging their career. A major report by the House of Commons Defence Committee in 2021 called on the Ministry of Defence to "remove the chain of command entirely from complaints of a sexual nature".
In the US armed forces, a study in 2016 found that 58% of women who reported sexual misconduct by peers said that they had met with retaliation. The Department of Defense estimated in 2017 that two in three victims of sexual assault do not report it.
Sexual harassment in the military: country examples:
Australia: Widespread reports of sexual harassment in the Australian armed forces led to the establishment of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce to investigate complaints from women between 1991 and 2011. It received 2,439 complaints, of which it deemed 1,751 to be plausible.
A Royal Commission into institutional child sexual abuse was established in 2012, which investigated widespread allegations of historical abuse in the navy. The Commission took evidence from 8,000 individuals and reported in 2017 that many recruits of both sexes and from the age of 15 had been repeatedly sexually abused by older recruits between 1967 and 1971, including by anal gang rape, and in some cases young recruits had been forced to rape each other. The practice was "tolerated" by senior staff, according to the Commission.
Canada: In 2014, the ombudsman of the Canadian armed forces described sexual harassment in the institution as "'a huge proble"'.
In 2015, after widespread allegations of sexual misconduct in the military, a major official report, the External Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces (the Deschamps Review), was published. It found that sexual harassment was commonplace and embedded in military culture, and that pervasive degrading attitudes to women and LGBTQ+ personnel were jeopardising their safety. The Deschamps Review also criticised the armed forces for a culture of dismissiveness; one male interviewee told the Review, for example: "Girls that come to the Army know what to expect." The Review stated that senior NCOs are frequently seen as tolerating sexual harassment and discouraging the individuals affected from making a complaint.
The Canadian Armed Forces have since conducted major surveys of personnel in 2016 and 2018. In each instance, the following proportions of female personnel reported being personally targeted by sexualised or discriminatory behaviour in the previous 12 months:
2016: 31%.
2018: 28%.
In 2022, a further major report, the Arbour Review, concluded that female armed forces personnel were more likely to be attacked by their peers than the enemy.
Higher rates of harassment have been identified in military training centres. The rate of sexual harassment of women at military colleges in Canada was found in 2019 to be approximately twice (28%) that found in civilian colleges (15%). According to the Arbour Review, training centres are characterised by a "hostile environment and mistreatment of many female cadets", including the Collège militaire royal de Saint-Jean which trains new recruits from age 16.
A notable case of a perpetrator is that of Russell Williams, a colonel in the Royal Canadian Air Force, who was charged with the sexual assault of two women in connection with two home invasions near Tweed, Ontario in September 2009. Williams was also charged in the death of Corporal Marie-France Comeau, a 37-year-old military traffic technician, who had been found dead at home in late November 2009. He was sentenced in 2010 to two concurrent terms of life imprisonment.
France: The extent of sexual harassment in the French armed forces first came to prominence in 2014 when 35 cases of harassment and assault were detailed in La Guerre Invisible, a book by Leila Minano and Julia Pascual. According to the Independent newspaper, the armed forces had not been required to report incidents or to keep statistics, and an official report acknowledged that awareness of the problem had been institutionally suppressed.
A study in 2021 found that 37% of women and 18% of men in a representative sample from the French military had experienced verbal or physical sexual harassment in the previous 12 months, and that 13% of women and 4% of men had been sexually assaulted. The incidence rates of sexual harassment and sexual assault experienced by women aged under 25 were particularly high, at 41% and 21% respectively. 22% of women of the lowest rank, who are typically those who have recently enlisted, said they had been sexually assaulted.
Germany: In 2014, the German armed forces reported that 55% of female and 12% of male personnel had experienced sexual harassment during their career, and that 3% of women said they had been sexually assaulted or raped.
Japan: There have been several reports of sexual assaults in the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (JSDF).
Norway: In 2021, the Armed Forces Research Institute found that 46% of all military women, 63% of women under 30, and 73% of new female recruits had experienced sexual harassment at least once in the previous 12 months.
United Kingdom:
UK armed forces: Following concerns expressed in 2004 by the UK Equal Opportunities Commission (now the Equality and Human Rights Commission) about persistent sexual harassment in the British armed forces, a number of anonymised, official surveys have been undertaken. The first, in 2006, found that a male-dominated culture sexualised women and diminished their military competence. Among the comments made to researchers by male personnel about their female counterparts were: "Ok there are a few exceptions but on the whole they [women] shouldn't be here"; "They're all lesbians or sluts"; and "They are emotionally unstable." The report found that 15% of women had had a 'particularly upsetting' experience of sexual harassment in the previous 12 months; the proportion rose to 20% in the youngest age group.
Since 2009, official surveys asking the same question have found steadily rising rates of women in the army reporting particularly upsetting experiences, as follows:
2009: 8%
2015: 13%
2018: 15%
2021: 35%
In 2021, the same question asked of women in the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force found rates of 43% and 35%, respectively.
In 2021, 37 girls aged under 18 across the British armed forces (from a total population at the time of 290) were victims of a sexual offence. 22 were new recruits at the training centre for the army's youngest recruits (aged from 16 years), the Army Foundation College; three of the accused in these cases were members of staff.
Military youth organisations: In 2017, a BBC Panorama documentary found multiple cases of the sexual abuse of cadets from age 11 during the 1980s. It reported that the victims and their parents were discouraged from making a formal complaint or contacting the police. In 2012 and 2013, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) paid £2 million to settle the allegations out of court. Between 2012 and 2017, the MOD recorded a further 363 allegations, of which 282 were referred to the police.
United States: Since 2014, surveys of US military personnel have found a high prevalence of sexual harassment. The following rates refer to the proportion of women reporting that they had experienced harassment in the previous 12 months.
2014: 21.5%
2016: 21.4%
2018: 24.2%
In the same years, 5–6% of servicewomen said they had been sexually assaulted in the previous 12 months; rates at initial training centres were found to be substantially higher.
In 2017, the Department of Defense reported that an estimated 14,900 military personnel were sexually assaulted in 2016, of whom 6,172 made an official complaint. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sexual harassment in the military | Between 2012 and 2017, the MOD recorded a further 363 allegations, of which 282 were referred to the police.
United States: Since 2014, surveys of US military personnel have found a high prevalence of sexual harassment. The following rates refer to the proportion of women reporting that they had experienced harassment in the previous 12 months.
2014: 21.5%
2016: 21.4%
2018: 24.2%
In the same years, 5–6% of servicewomen said they had been sexually assaulted in the previous 12 months; rates at initial training centres were found to be substantially higher.
In 2017, the Department of Defense reported that an estimated 14,900 military personnel were sexually assaulted in 2016, of whom 6,172 made an official complaint.
In the same year, the Department reported that an active duty military woman who reported sexual harassment to a superior was 16% more likely to be sexually assaulted than one who did not report, while a man who reported increased his chance of sexual assault thereafter by 50%.
See also: Sexual harassment
Wartime sexual violence
Military sexual trauma
Sexual misconduct in the British military
Sexual assault in the Canadian forces
Sexual assault in the United States military
Sexual assault in the Japan Self-Defense Forces
2022 JSDF sexual assault incident
Misconduct in the military
Suicide in the military
Women in the military
Children in the military
Dedovshchina (hazing ritual in the Russian military)
References:
Further reading: Crowley, Kacy; Sandhoff, Michelle (2017). "Just a Girl in the Army". Armed Forces & Society. 43 (2): 221–237. doi:10.1177/0095327X16682045. S2CID 151623237.
External links:
Research: British armed forces: Rutherford Report, 2006; Army sexual harassment reports: 2015, 2018, 2021; David Gee, The First Ambush? Effects of military training and employment, 2017 Archived 12 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine
Canadian armed forces: Dechamps Review, 2016; Arbour Review, 2022.
French armed forces: La Guerre Invisible, 2014
US armed forces: Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office
Testimony and recent reportage: Rachel Thompson (British army), 2017 [video]
Lara Whyte for The Times: "I was sexually assaulted in uniform. I can't get over it", 2021.
Lara Whyte for The Times: 'Tenfold rise in rapes and sexual assaults on girls in military', 2021.
Lara Whyte for Vice World News: 'Teenage girls serving in British army report record levels of assault', 2022. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | History of analogue fire control systems: Naval fire control resembles that of ground-based guns, but with no sharp distinction between direct and indirect fire. It is possible to control several same-type guns on a single platform simultaneously, while both the firing guns and the target are moving.
Though a ship rolls and pitches at a slower rate than a tank does, gyroscopic stabilization is extremely desirable. Naval gun fire control potentially involves three levels of complexity:
Local control originated with primitive gun installations aimed by the individual gun crews.
The director system of fire control was incorporated first into battleship designs by the Royal Navy in 1912. All guns on a single ship were laid from a central position placed as high as possible above the bridge. The director became a design feature of battleships, with Japanese "Pagoda-style" masts designed to maximize the view of the director over long ranges. A fire control officer who ranged the salvos transmitted elevations and angles to individual guns.
Coordinated gunfire from a formation of ships at a single target was a focus of battleship fleet operations. An officer on the flagship would signal target information to other ships in the formation. This was necessary to exploit the tactical advantage when one fleet succeeded in crossing the T of the enemy fleet, but the difficulty of distinguishing the splashes made walking the rounds in on the target more difficult.
Corrections can be made for surface wind velocity, roll and pitch of the firing ship, powder magazine temperature, drift of rifled projectiles, individual gun bore diameter adjusted for shot-to-shot enlargement, and rate-of-change of range with additional modifications to the firing solution based upon the observation of preceding shots. More sophisticated fire control systems consider more of these factors rather than relying on simple correction of observed fall of shot. Differently colored dye markers were sometimes included with large shells so individual guns, or individual ships in formation, could distinguish their shell splashes during daylight. Early "computers" were people using numerical tables.
Pre-dreadnought control system: The Royal Navy was aware of the fall of shot observation advantage of salvo firing through several experiments as early as 1870 when Commander John A. Fisher installed an electric system enabling a simultaneous firing of all the guns to HMS Ocean, the flagship of the China Station as the second in command. However, the Station or Royal Navy had not yet implemented the system fleet-wide in 1904. The Royal Navy considered Russia a potential adversary through The Great Game, and sent Lieutenant Walter Lake of the Navy Gunnery Division and Commander Walter Hugh Thring of the Coastguard and Reserves, the latter with an early example of Dumaresq, to Japan during the Russo-Japanese War. Their mission was to guide and train the Japanese naval gunnery personnel in the latest technological developments, but more importantly for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN), they were well aware of the experiments.
During the 10 August 1904 Battle of the Yellow Sea against the Russian Pacific Fleet, the British-built IJN battleship Asahi and her sister ship, the fleet flagship Mikasa, were equipped with the latest Barr and Stroud range finders on the bridge, but the ships were not designed for coordinated aiming and firing. Asahi's chief gunnery officer, Hiroharu Kato (later Commander of Combined Fleet), experimented with the first director system of fire control, using speaking tube (voicepipe) and telephone communication from the spotters high on the mast to his position on the bridge where he performed the range and deflection calculations, and from his position to the 12-inch (305 mm) gun turrets forward and astern.
With the semi-synchronized salvo firing upon his voice command from the bridge, the spotters using stopwatches on the mast could identify the distant salvo of splashes created by the shells from their own ship more effectively than trying to identify a single splash among the many. Kato gave the firing order consistently at a particular moment in the rolling and pitching cycles of the ship, simplifying firing and correction duties formerly performed independently with varying accuracy using artificial horizon gauges in each turret. Moreover, unlike in the gun turrets, he was steps away from the ship commander giving orders to change the course and the speed in response to the incoming reports on target movements.
Kato was transferred to the fleet flagship Mikasa as the Chief Gunnery Officer, and his primitive control system was in fleet-wide operation by the time the Combined Fleet destroyed the Russian Baltic Fleet (renamed the 2nd and 3rd Pacific Fleet) in the Battle of Tsushima during 27–28 May 1905.
Central fire control and World War I: Centralized naval fire control systems were first developed around the time of World War I. Local control had been used up until that time, and remained in use on smaller warships and auxiliaries through World War II. Specifications of HMS Dreadnought were finalized after the report on the Battle of Tsushima was submitted by the official observer to IJN onboard Asahi, Captain Pakenham (later Admiral), who observed how Kato's system worked first hand. From this design on, large warships had a main armament of one size of gun across a number of turrets (which made corrections simpler still), facilitating central fire control via electric triggering.
The UK built their first central system before the Great War. At the heart was an analogue computer designed by Commander (later Admiral Sir) Frederic Charles Dreyer that calculated range rate, the rate of change of range due to the relative motion between the firing and target ships. The Dreyer Table was to be improved and served into the interwar period at which point it was superseded in new and reconstructed ships by the Admiralty Fire Control Table.
The use of Director-controlled firing together with the fire control computer moved the control of the gun laying from the individual turrets to a central position (usually in a plotting room protected below armor), although individual gun mounts and multi-gun turrets could retain a local control option for use when battle damage prevented the director setting the guns. Guns could then be fired in planned salvos, with each gun giving a slightly different trajectory. Dispersion of shot caused by differences in individual guns, individual projectiles, powder ignition sequences, and transient distortion of ship structure was undesirably large at typical naval engagement ranges. Directors high on the superstructure had a better view of the enemy than a turret mounted sight, and the crew operating it were distant from the sound and shock of the guns.
Analogue computed fire control: Unmeasured and uncontrollable ballistic factors like high altitude temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, wind direction and velocity required final adjustment through observation of fall of shot. Visual range measurement (of both target and shell splashes) was difficult prior to availability of radar. The British favoured coincidence rangefinders while the Germans and the US Navy, stereoscopic type. The former were less able to range on an indistinct target but easier on the operator over a long period of use, the latter the reverse.
During the Battle of Jutland, while the British were thought by some to have the finest fire control system in the world at that time, only three percent of their shots actually struck their targets. At that time, the British primarily used a manual fire control system. This experience contributed to computing rangekeepers becoming standard issue.
The US Navy's first deployment of a rangekeeper was on USS Texas in 1916. Because of the limitations of the technology at that time, the initial rangekeepers were crude. For example, during World War I the rangekeepers would generate the necessary angles automatically but sailors had to manually follow the directions of the rangekeepers. This task was called "pointer following" but the crews tended to make inadvertent errors when they became fatigued during extended battles. During World War II, servomechanisms (called "power drives" in the US Navy) were developed that allowed the guns to automatically steer to the rangekeeper's commands with no manual intervention, though pointers still worked even if automatic control was lost. The Mark 1 and Mark 1A computers contained approximately 20 servomechanisms, mostly position servos, to minimize torque load on the computing mechanisms.
Radar and World War II: During their long service life, rangekeepers were updated often as technology advanced and by World War II they were a critical part of an integrated fire control system. The incorporation of radar into the fire control system early in World War II provided ships with the ability to conduct effective gunfire operations at long range in poor weather and at night.
In a typical World War II British ship the fire control system connected the individual gun turrets to the director tower (where the sighting instruments were) and the analogue computer in the heart of the ship. In the director tower, operators trained their telescopes on the target; one telescope measured elevation and the other bearing. Rangefinder telescopes on a separate mounting measured the distance to the target. These measurements were converted by the Fire Control Table into bearings and elevations for the guns to fire on. In the turrets, the gunlayers adjusted the elevation of their guns to match an indicator which was the elevation transmitted from the Fire Control Table—a turret layer did the same for bearing. When the guns were on target they were centrally fired.
The Aichi Clock Company first produced the Type 92 Shagekiban low angle analog computer in 1932. The US Navy Rangekeeper and the Mark 38 GFCS had an edge over Imperial Japanese Navy systems in operability and flexibility. The US system allowing the plotting room team to quickly identify target motion changes and apply appropriate corrections. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | In the director tower, operators trained their telescopes on the target; one telescope measured elevation and the other bearing. Rangefinder telescopes on a separate mounting measured the distance to the target. These measurements were converted by the Fire Control Table into bearings and elevations for the guns to fire on. In the turrets, the gunlayers adjusted the elevation of their guns to match an indicator which was the elevation transmitted from the Fire Control Table—a turret layer did the same for bearing. When the guns were on target they were centrally fired.
The Aichi Clock Company first produced the Type 92 Shagekiban low angle analog computer in 1932. The US Navy Rangekeeper and the Mark 38 GFCS had an edge over Imperial Japanese Navy systems in operability and flexibility. The US system allowing the plotting room team to quickly identify target motion changes and apply appropriate corrections. The newer Japanese systems such as the Type 98 Hoiban and Shagekiban on the Yamato class were more up to date, which eliminated the Sokutekiban, but it still relied on seven operators.
In contrast to US radar aided system, the Japanese relied on averaging optical rangefinders, lacked gyros to sense the horizon, and required manual handling of follow-ups on the Sokutekiban, Shagekiban, Hoiban as well as guns themselves. This could have played a role in Center Force's battleships' dismal performance in the Battle off Samar in October 1944.
In that action, American destroyers pitted against the world's largest armored battleships and cruisers dodged shells for long enough to close to within torpedo firing range, while lobbing hundreds of accurate automatically aimed 5-inch (127 mm) rounds on target. Cruisers did not land hits on splash-chasing escort carriers until after an hour of pursuit had reduced the range to 5 miles (8.0 km). Although the Japanese pursued a doctrine of achieving superiority at long gun ranges, one cruiser fell victim to secondary explosions caused by hits from the carriers' single 5-inch guns. Eventually with the aid of hundreds of carrier based aircraft, a battered Center Force was turned back just before it could have finished off survivors of the lightly armed task force of screening escorts and escort carriers of Taffy 3. The earlier Battle of Surigao Strait had established the clear superiority of US radar-assisted systems at night.
The rangekeeper's target position prediction characteristics could be used to defeat the rangekeeper. For example, many captains under long range gun attack would make violent maneuvers to "chase salvos." A ship that is chasing salvos is maneuvering to the position of the last salvo splashes. Because the rangekeepers are constantly predicting new positions for the target, it is unlikely that subsequent salvos will strike the position of the previous salvo. The direction of the turn is unimportant, as long as it is not predicted by the enemy system. Since the aim of the next salvo depends on observation of the position and speed at the time the previous salvo hits, that is the optimal time to change direction. Practical rangekeepers had to assume that targets were moving in a straight-line path at a constant speed, to keep complexity to acceptable limits. A sonar rangekeeper was built to include a target circling at a constant radius of turn, but that function had been disabled.
Only the RN and USN achieved 'blindfire' radar fire-control, with no need to visually acquire the opposing vessel. The Axis powers all lacked this capability. Classes such as Iowa and South Dakota battleships could lob shells over visual horizon, in darkness, through smoke or weather. American systems, in common with many contemporary major navies, had gyroscopic stable vertical elements, so they could keep a solution on a target even during maneuvers. By the start of World War II British, German and American warships could both shoot and maneuver using sophisticated analog fire-control computers that incorporated gyro compass and gyro Level inputs. In the Battle of Cape Matapan the British Mediterranean Fleet using radar ambushed and mauled an Italian fleet, although actual fire was under optical control using starshell illumination. At the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal USS Washington, in complete darkness, inflicted fatal damage at close range on the battleship Kirishima using a combination of optical and radar fire-control; comparisons between optical and radar tracking, during the battle, showed that radar tracking matched optical tracking in accuracy, while radar ranges were used throughout the battle.
The last combat action for the analog rangekeepers, at least for the US Navy, was in the 1991 Persian Gulf War when the rangekeepers on the Iowa-class battleships directed their last rounds in combat.
British Royal Navy systems: Dreyer Table
Arthur Pollen's Argo Clock
Admiralty Fire Control Table – from 1920s
HACS – A/A system from 1931
Fuze Keeping Clock – simplified HACS A/A system for destroyers from 1938
Pom-Pom Director – pioneered use of gyroscopic tachymetric fire-control for short range weapons – From 1940
Gyro Rate Unit – pioneered use of gyroscopic Tachymetric fire-control for medium calibre weapons – From 1940
Royal Navy radar – pioneered the use of radar for A/A fire-control and centimetric radar for surface fire-control – from 1939
Ferranti Computer Systems developed the GSA4 digital computerised gunnery fire control system that was deployed on HMS Amazon (Type 21 frigate commissioned in 1974) as part of the WAS4 (Weapon Systems Automation - 4) system.
BAE Systems' Sea Archer – computerised gunnery system. Royal Navy designation GSA.7 from 1980 and GSA.8 from 1985. Production was completed for Royal Navy Type 23 frigates in 1999. Remains in active service as of 2022 on Type 23 (Duke class). Replaced in 2012 on Type 45 destroyers by Ultra Electronics Series 2500 Electro-Optical Gun Control System.
US Navy analogue Gun Fire Control Systems (GFCS):
Mark 33 GFCS: The Mark 33 GFCS was a power-driven fire control director, less advanced than the Mark 37. The Mark 33 GFCS used a Mark 10 Rangekeeper, analog fire-control computer. The entire rangekeeper was mounted in an open director rather than in a separate plotting room as in the RN HACS, or the later Mark 37 GFCS, and this made it difficult to upgrade the Mark 33 GFCS. It could compute firing solutions for targets moving at up to 320 knots, or 400 knots in a dive. Its installations started in the late 1930s on destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers with two Mark 33 directors mounted fore and aft of the island. They had no fire-control radar initially, and were aimed only by sight. After 1942, some of these directors were enclosed and had a Mark 4 fire-control radar added to the roof of the director, while others had a Mark 4 radar added over the open director. With the Mark 4 large aircraft at up to 40,000 yards could be targeted. It had less range against low-flying aircraft, and large surface ships had to be within 30,000 yards. With radar, targets could be seen and hit accurately at night, and through weather. The Mark 33 and 37 systems used tachymetric target motion prediction. The USN never considered the Mark 33 to be a satisfactory system, but wartime production problems, and the added weight and space requirements of the Mark 37 precluded phasing out the Mark 33:
Although superior to older equipment, the computing mechanisms within the range keeper ([Mark 10]) were too slow, both in reaching initial solutions on first picking up a target and in accommodating frequent changes in solution caused by target maneuvers. The [Mark 33] was thus distinctly inadequate, as indicated to some observers in simulated air attack exercises prior to hostilities. However, final recognition of the seriousness of the deficiency and initiation of replacement plans were delayed by the below decks space difficulty, mentioned in connection with the [Mark 28] replacement. Furthermore, priorities of replacements of older and less effective director systems in the crowded wartime production program were responsible for the fact the [Mark 33's] service was lengthened to the cessation of hostilities.
The Mark 33 was used as the main director on some destroyers and as secondary battery / anti-aircraft director on larger ships (i.e. in the same role as the later Mark 37). The guns controlled by it were typically 5 inch weapons: the 5-inch/25 or 5-inch/38.
Deployment: destroyers (1 per vessel, total 48)
8 Farragut-class(launched ca. 1934)
18 Mahan-class(ca. 1935) (Cassin, Downes later rebuilt with Mk37)
4 Gridley-class(ca. 1937)
8 Bagley-class(ca. 1937)
10 Benham-class(ca. 1938)
heavy cruisers
7 New Orleans-class(launched ca. 1933): for the 5"/25 secondary battery
Wichita(1937): for the 5"/38 secondary battery
light cruisers
9 Brooklyn-class(launched ca. 1937): for the 5"/25 and 5"/38 secondary batteries
Mark 34 GFCS: The Mark 34 was used to control the main batteries of large gun ships. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | The guns controlled by it were typically 5 inch weapons: the 5-inch/25 or 5-inch/38.
Deployment: destroyers (1 per vessel, total 48)
8 Farragut-class(launched ca. 1934)
18 Mahan-class(ca. 1935) (Cassin, Downes later rebuilt with Mk37)
4 Gridley-class(ca. 1937)
8 Bagley-class(ca. 1937)
10 Benham-class(ca. 1938)
heavy cruisers
7 New Orleans-class(launched ca. 1933): for the 5"/25 secondary battery
Wichita(1937): for the 5"/38 secondary battery
light cruisers
9 Brooklyn-class(launched ca. 1937): for the 5"/25 and 5"/38 secondary batteries
Mark 34 GFCS: The Mark 34 was used to control the main batteries of large gun ships. Its predecessors include Mk18 (Pensacola class), Mk24 (Northampton class), Mk27 (Portland class) and Mk31 (New Orleans class)
Deployment: 2 Alaska-class large cruisers (2 per vessel)
heavy cruisers
Wichita (2x)
14 Baltimore-class (2 per vessel, 28 total)
several Northampton-class (as upgrade)
Portland-class (as upgrade)
light cruisers
9 Brooklyn-class
27 Cleveland-class
Mark 37 GFCS: According to the US Navy Bureau of Ordnance,
While the defects were not prohibitive and the Mark 33 remained in production until fairly late in World War II, the Bureau started the development of an improved director in 1936, only 2 years after the first installation of a Mark 33. The objective of weight reduction was not met, since the resulting director system actually weighed about 8,000 pounds (3,600 kg) more than the equipment it was slated to replace, but the Gun Director Mark 37 that emerged from the program possessed virtues that more than compensated for its extra weight. Though the gun orders it provided were the same as those of the Mark 33, it supplied them with greater reliability and gave generally improved performance with 5-inch (13 cm) gun batteries, whether they were used for surface or antiaircraft use. Moreover, the stable element and computer, instead of being contained in the director housing were installed below deck where they were less vulnerable to attack and less of a jeopardy to a ship's stability. The design provided for the ultimate addition of radar, which later permitted blind firing with the director. In fact, the Mark 37 system was almost continually improved. By the end of 1945 the equipment had run through 92 modifications—almost twice the total number of directors of that type which were in the fleet on December 7, 1941. Procurement ultimately totalled 841 units, representing an investment of well over $148,000,000. Destroyers, cruisers, battleships, carriers, and many auxiliaries used the directors, with individual installations varying from one aboard destroyers to four on each battleship. The development of the Gun Directors Mark 33 and 37 provided the United States Fleet with good long range fire control against attacking planes. But while that had seemed the most pressing problem at the time the equipments were placed under development, it was but one part of the total problem of air defense. At close-in ranges the accuracy of the directors fell off sharply; even at intermediate ranges they left much to be desired. The weight and size of the equipments militated against rapid movement, making them difficult to shift from one target to another.Their efficiency was thus in inverse proportion to the proximity of danger.
The computer was completed as the Ford Mark 1 computer by 1935. Rate information for height changes enabled complete solution for aircraft targets moving over 400 miles per hour (640 km/h). Destroyers starting with the Sims class employed one of these computers, battleships up to four. The system's effectiveness against aircraft diminished as planes became faster, but toward the end of World War II upgrades were made to the Mark 37 System, and it was made compatible with the development of the VT (Variable Time) proximity fuze which exploded when it was near a target, rather than by timer or altitude, greatly increasing the probability that any one shell would destroy a target.
Mark 37 Director: The function of the Mark 37 Director, which resembles a gun mount with "ears" rather than guns, was to track the present position of the target in bearing, elevation, and range. To do this, it had optical sights (the rectangular windows or hatches on the front), an optical rangefinder (the tubes or ears sticking out each side), and later models, fire control radar antennas. The rectangular antenna is for the Mark 12 FC radar, and the parabolic antenna on the left ("orange peel") is for the Mark 22 FC radar. They were part of an upgrade to improve tracking of aircraft.
The director was manned by a crew of 6: Director Officer, Assistant Control Officer, Pointer, Trainer, Range Finder Operator and Radar Operator.
The Director Officer also had a slew sight used to quickly point the director towards a new target. Up to four Mark 37 Gun Fire Control Systems were installed on battleships. On a battleship, the director was protected by 1+1⁄2 inches (38 mm) of armor, and weighs 21 tons. The Mark 37 director aboard USS Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. is protected with one-half inch (13 mm) of armor plate and weighs 16 tons.
Stabilizing signals from the Stable Element kept the optical sight telescopes, rangefinder, and radar antenna free from the effects of deck tilt. The signal that kept the rangefinder's axis horizontal was called "crosslevel"; elevation stabilization was called simply "level". Although the stable element was below decks in Plot, next to the Mark 1/1A computer, its internal gimbals followed director motion in bearing and elevation so that it provided level and crosslevel data directly. To do so, accurately, when the fire control system was initially installed, a surveyor, working in several stages, transferred the position of the gun director into Plot so the stable element's own internal mechanism was properly aligned to the director.
Although the rangefinder had significant mass and inertia, the crosslevel servo normally was only lightly loaded, because the rangefinder's own inertia kept it essentially horizontal; the servo's task was usually simply to ensure that the rangefinder and sight telescopes remained horizontal.
Mark 37 director train (bearing) and elevation drives were by D.C. motors fed from Amplidyne rotary power-amplifying generators. Although the train Amplidyne was rated at several kilowatts maximum output, its input signal came from a pair of 6L6 audio beam tetrode vacuum tubes (valves, in the U.K.).
Plotting room: In battleships, the Secondary Battery Plotting Rooms were down below the waterline and inside the armor belt. They contained four complete sets of the fire control equipment needed to aim and shoot at four targets. Each set included a Mark 1A computer, a Mark 6 Stable Element, FC radar controls and displays, parallax correctors, a switchboard, and people to operate it all.
(In the early 20th century, successive range and/or bearing readings were probably plotted either by hand or by the fire control devices (or both). Humans were very good data filters, able to plot a useful trend line given somewhat-inconsistent readings. As well, the Mark 8 Rangekeeper included a plotter. The distinctive name for the fire-control equipment room took root, and persisted even when there were no plotters.)
Ford Mark 1A Fire Control Computer: The Mark 1A Fire Control Computer was an electro-mechanical analog ballistic computer. Originally designated the Mark 1, design modifications were extensive enough to change it to "Mark 1A". The Mark 1A appeared post World War II and may have incorporated technology developed for the Bell Labs Mark 8, Fire Control Computer. Sailors would stand around a box measuring 62 by 38 by 45 inches (1.57 by 0.97 by 1.14 m). Even though built with extensive use of an aluminum alloy framework (including thick internal mechanism support plates) and computing mechanisms mostly made of aluminum alloy, it weighed as much as a car, about 3,125 pounds (1,417 kg), with the Star Shell Computer Mark 1 adding another 215 pounds (98 kg). It used 115 volts AC, 60 Hz, single phase, and typically a few amperes or even less. Under worst-case fault conditions, its synchros apparently could draw as much as 140 amperes, or 15,000 watts (about the same as 3 houses while using ovens). Almost all of the computer's inputs and outputs were by synchro torque transmitters and receivers.
Its function was to automatically aim the guns so that a fired projectile would collide with the target. This is the same function as the main battery's Mark 8 Rangekeeper used in the Mark 38 GFCS except that some of the targets the Mark 1A had to deal with also moved in elevation—and much faster. For a surface target, the Secondary Battery's Fire Control problem is the same as the Main Battery's with the same type inputs and outputs. The major difference between the two computers is their ballistics calculations. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | It used 115 volts AC, 60 Hz, single phase, and typically a few amperes or even less. Under worst-case fault conditions, its synchros apparently could draw as much as 140 amperes, or 15,000 watts (about the same as 3 houses while using ovens). Almost all of the computer's inputs and outputs were by synchro torque transmitters and receivers.
Its function was to automatically aim the guns so that a fired projectile would collide with the target. This is the same function as the main battery's Mark 8 Rangekeeper used in the Mark 38 GFCS except that some of the targets the Mark 1A had to deal with also moved in elevation—and much faster. For a surface target, the Secondary Battery's Fire Control problem is the same as the Main Battery's with the same type inputs and outputs. The major difference between the two computers is their ballistics calculations. The amount of gun elevation needed to project a 5-inch (130 mm) shell 9 nautical miles (17 km) is very different from the elevation needed to project a 16-inch (41 cm) shell the same distance.
In operation, this computer received target range, bearing, and elevation from the gun director. As long as the director was on target, clutches in the computer were closed, and movement of the gun director (along with changes in range) made the computer converge its internal values of target motion to values matching those of the target. While converging, the computer fed aided-tracking ("generated") range, bearing, and elevation to the gun director. If the target remained on a straight-line course at a constant speed (and in the case of aircraft, constant rate of change of altitude ("rate of climb"), the predictions became accurate and, with further computation, gave correct values for the gun lead angles and fuze setting.
The target's movement was a vector, and if that didn't change, the generated range, bearing, and elevation were accurate for up to 30 seconds. Once the target's motion vector became stable, the computer operators told the gun director officer ("Solution Plot!"), who usually gave the command to commence firing. Unfortunately, this process of inferring the target motion vector required a few seconds, typically, which might take too long.
The process of determining the target's motion vector was done primarily with an accurate constant-speed motor, disk-ball-roller integrators, nonlinear cams, mechanical resolvers, and differentials. Four special coordinate converters, each with a mechanism in part like that of a traditional computer mouse, converted the received corrections into target motion vector values. The Mark 1 computer attempted to do the coordinate conversion (in part) with a rectangular-to polar converter, but that didn't work as well as desired (sometimes trying to make target speed negative!). Part of the design changes that defined the Mark 1A were a re-thinking of how to best use these special coordinate converters; the coordinate converter ("vector solver") was eliminated.
The Stable Element, which in contemporary terminology would be called a vertical gyro, stabilized the sights in the director, and provided data to compute stabilizing corrections to the gun orders. Gun lead angles meant that gun-stabilizing commands differed from those needed to keep the director's sights stable. Ideal computation of gun stabilizing angles required an impractical number of terms in the mathematical expression, so the computation was approximate.
To compute lead angles and time fuze setting, the target motion vector's components as well as its range and altitude, wind direction and speed, and own ship's motion combined to predict the target's location when the shell reached it. This computation was done primarily with mechanical resolvers ("component solvers"), multipliers, and differentials, but also with one of four three-dimensional cams.
Based on the predictions, the other three of the three-dimensional cams provided data on ballistics of the gun and ammunition that the computer was designed for; it could not be used for a different size or type of gun except by rebuilding that could take weeks.
Servos in the computer boosted torque accurately to minimize loading on the outputs of computing mechanisms, thereby reducing errors, and also positioned the large synchros that transmitted gun orders (bearing and elevation, sight lead angles, and time fuze setting).These were electromechanical "bang-bang", yet had excellent performance.
The anti-aircraft fire control problem was more complicated because it had the additional requirement of tracking the target in elevation and making target predictions in three dimensions. The outputs of the Mark 1A were the same (gun bearing and elevation), except fuze time was added. The fuze time was needed because the ideal of directly hitting the fast moving aircraft with the projectile was impractical. With fuze time set into the shell, it was hoped that it would explode near enough to the target to destroy it with the shock wave and shrapnel. Towards the end of World War II, the invention of the VT proximity fuze eliminated the need to use the fuze time calculation and its possible error. This greatly increased the odds of destroying an air target. Digital fire control computers were not introduced into service until the mid-1970s.
Central aiming from a gun director has a minor complication in that the guns are often far enough away from the director to require parallax correction so they aim correctly. In the Mark 37 GFCS, the Mark 1/1A sent parallax data to all gun mounts; each mount had its own scale factor (and "polarity") set inside the train (bearing) power drive (servo) receiver-regulator (controller).
Twice in its history, internal scale factors were changed, presumably by changing gear ratios. Target speed had a hard upper limit, set by a mechanical stop. It was originally 300 knots (350 mph; 560 km/h), and subsequently doubled in each rebuild.
These computers were built by Ford Instrument Company, Long Island City, Queens, New York. The company was named after Hannibal C. Ford, a genius designer, and principal in the company. Special machine tools machined face cam grooves and accurately duplicated 3-D ballistic cams.
Generally speaking, these computers were very well designed and built, very rugged, and almost trouble-free, frequent tests included entering values via the handcranks and reading results on the dials, with the time motor stopped. These were static tests. Dynamic tests were done similarly, but used gentle manual acceleration of the "time line" (integrators) to prevent possible slippage errors when the time motor was switched on; the time motor was switched off before the run was complete, and the computer was allowed to coast down. Easy manual cranking of the time line brought the dynamic test to its desired end point, when dials were read.
As was typical of such computers, flipping a lever on the handcrank's support casting enabled automatic reception of data and disengaged the handcrank gear. Flipped the other way, the gear engaged, and power was cut to the receiver's servo motor.
The mechanisms (including servos) in this computer are described superbly, with many excellent illustrations, in the Navy publication OP 1140.
There are photographs of the computer's interior in the National Archives; some are on Web pages, and some of those have been rotated a quarter turn.
Stable Element: The function of the Mark 6 Stable Element (pictured) in this fire control system is the same as the function of the Mark 41 Stable Vertical in the main battery system. It is a vertical seeking gyroscope ("vertical gyro", in today's terms) that supplies the system with a stable up direction on a rolling and pitching ship. In surface mode, it replaces the director's elevation signal. It also has the surface mode firing keys.
It is based on a gyroscope that erects so its spin axis is vertical. The housing for the gyro rotor rotates at a low speed, on the order of 18 rpm. On opposite sides of the housing are two small tanks, partially filled with mercury, and connected by a capillary tube. Mercury flows to the lower tank, but slowly (several seconds) because of the tube's restriction. If the gyro's spin axis is not vertical, the added weight in the lower tank would pull the housing over if it were not for the gyro and the housing's rotation. That rotational speed and rate of mercury flow combine to put the heavier tank in the best position to make the gyro precess toward the vertical.
When the ship changes course rapidly at speed, the acceleration due to the turn can be enough to confuse the gyro and make it deviate from true vertical. In such cases, the ship's gyrocompass sends a disabling signal that closes a solenoid valve to block mercury flow between the tanks. The gyro's drift is low enough not to matter for short periods of time; when the ship resumes more typical cruising, the erecting system corrects for any error.
The Earth's rotation is fast enough to need correcting. A small adjustable weight on a threaded rod, and a latitude scale makes the gyro precess at the Earth's equivalent angular rate at the given latitude. The weight, its scale, and frame are mounted on the shaft of a synchro torque receiver fed with ship's course data from the gyro compass, and compensated by a differential synchro driven by the housing-rotator motor. The little compensator in operation is geographically oriented, so the support rod for the weight points east and west.
At the top of the gyro assembly, above the compensator, right on center, is an exciter coil fed with low-voltage AC. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | The gyro's drift is low enough not to matter for short periods of time; when the ship resumes more typical cruising, the erecting system corrects for any error.
The Earth's rotation is fast enough to need correcting. A small adjustable weight on a threaded rod, and a latitude scale makes the gyro precess at the Earth's equivalent angular rate at the given latitude. The weight, its scale, and frame are mounted on the shaft of a synchro torque receiver fed with ship's course data from the gyro compass, and compensated by a differential synchro driven by the housing-rotator motor. The little compensator in operation is geographically oriented, so the support rod for the weight points east and west.
At the top of the gyro assembly, above the compensator, right on center, is an exciter coil fed with low-voltage AC. Above that is a shallow black-painted wooden bowl, inverted. Inlaid in its surface, in grooves, are two coils essentially like two figure 8s, but shaped more like a letter D and its mirror image, forming a circle with a diametral crossover. One coil is displaced by 90 degrees. If the bowl (called an "umbrella") is not centered above the exciter coil, either or both coils have an output that represents the offset. This voltage is phase-detected and amplified to drive two DC servo motors to position the umbrella in line with the coil.
The umbrella support gimbals rotate in bearing with the gun director, and the servo motors generate level and crosslevel stabilizing signals.
The Mark 1A's director bearing receiver servo drives the pickoff gimbal frame in the stable element through a shaft between the two devices, and the Stable Element's level and crosslevel servos feed those signals back to the computer via two more shafts.
(The sonar fire-control computer aboard some destroyers of the late 1950s required roll and pitch signals for stabilizing, so a coordinate converter containing synchros, resolvers, and servos calculated the latter from gun director bearing, level, and crosslevel.)
Fire Control Radar: The fire-control radar used on the Mark 37 GFCS has evolved. In the 1930s, the Mark 33 Director did not have a radar antenna. The Tizard Mission to the United States provided the USN with crucial data on UK and Royal Navy radar technology and fire-control radar systems. In September 1941, the first rectangular Mark 4 Fire-control radar antenna was mounted on a Mark 37 Director, and became a common feature on USN Directors by mid 1942. Soon aircraft flew faster, and in c1944 to increase speed and accuracy the Mark 4 was replaced by a combination of the Mark 12 (rectangular antenna) and Mark 22 (parabolic antenna) "orange peel" radars. (pictured) in the late 1950s, Mark 37 directors had Western Electric Mark 25 X-band conical-scan radars with round, perforated dishes. Finally, the circular SPG 25 antenna was mounted on top.
Deployment: destroyers (1 per vessel, 456 total)
2 rebuilt Mahan-class: Downes, Cassin
several modernized Porter-class: Phelps, Selfridge, Winslow
12 Sims-class (launched ca. 1939)
30 Benson-class (1939 - 1942)
66 Gleaves-class (1940 - 1942)
175 Fletcher-class (1942 - 1944)
58 Allen M. Sumner-class (ca. 1944)
12 Robert H. Smith-class (ca. 1944)
98 Gearing-class (ca. 1945)
possibly on USS Castle (DD-720) and USS Seaman (DD-791) which were launched incomplete and never commissioned
light cruisers (63 total)
TBD: Atlanta, Fargo classes
3 Juneau-class(ca. 1945) (2 per vessel, 6 total)
27 Cleveland-class(launched ca. 1942 - 1945) (2 per vessel, 54 total)
one Mk37 removed on Oklahoma City during CLG conversion
2 Worcester-class(ca. 1947) (4 per vessel, 8 total)
1 Brooklyn-class ( Savannah, refitted as upgrade in 1944)
heavy cruisers (46 total)
14 Baltimore-class(ca. 1942 - 1945) (2 per vessel, 28 total)
3 Oregon City-class(ca. 1945) (2 per vessel, 6 total)
3 Des Moines-class(ca. 1947) (4 per vessel, 12 total)
2 Alaska-class large cruisers (ca. 1943) (2 per vessel, 4 total)
aircraft carriers (2 total)
TBD: Yorktown, Essex classes, Midway(?)
Saratoga: 2xMk37 refitted by May 1942
battleships (16 total)
TBD: North Carolina, South Dakota classes, all the old ones that were upgraded with 5in/38(?)
4 Iowa-class(launched ca. 1942 - 1943) (4 per vessel)
Mark 38 GFCS: The Mark 38 Gun Fire Control System (GFCS) controlled the large main battery guns of Iowa-class battleships. The radar systems used by the Mark 38 GFCS were far more advanced than the primitive radar sets used by the Japanese in World War II. The major components were the director, plotting room, and interconnecting data transmission equipment. The two systems, forward and aft, were complete and independent. Their plotting rooms were isolated to protect against battle damage propagating from one to the other.
Director: The forward Mark 38 Director (pictured) was situated on top of the fire control tower. The director was equipped with optical sights, optical Mark 48 Rangefinder (the long thin boxes sticking out each side), and a Mark 13 Fire Control Radar antenna (the rectangular shape sitting on top). The purpose of the director was to track the target's present bearing and range. This could be done optically with the men inside using the sights and Rangefinder, or electronically with the radar. (The fire control radar was the preferred method.) The present position of the target was called the Line-Of-Sight (LOS), and it was continuously sent down to the plotting room by synchro motors. When not using the radar's display to determine Spots, the director was the optical spotting station.
Plotting room: The Forward Main Battery Plotting Room was located below the waterline and inside the armored belt. It housed the forward system's Mark 8 Rangekeeper, Mark 41 Stable Vertical, Mark 13 FC Radar controls and displays, Parallax Correctors, Fire Control Switchboard, battle telephone switchboard, battery status indicators, assistant Gunnery Officers, and Fire Controlmen (FC's)(between 1954 and 1982, FC's were designated as Fire Control Technicians (FT's)).
The Mark 8 Rangekeeper was an electromechanical analog computer whose function was to continuously calculate the gun's bearing and elevation, Line-Of-Fire (LOF), to hit a future position of the target. It did this by automatically receiving information from the director (LOS), the FC Radar (range), the ship's gyrocompass (true ship's course), the ships Pitometer log (ship's speed), the Stable Vertical (ship's deck tilt, sensed as level and crosslevel), and the ship's anemometer (relative wind speed and direction). Also, before the surface action started, the FT's made manual inputs for the average initial velocity of the projectiles fired out of the battery's gun barrels, and air density. With all this information, the rangekeeper calculated the relative motion between its ship and the target. It then could calculate an offset angle and change of range between the target's present position (LOS) and future position at the end of the projectile's time of flight. To this bearing and range offset, it added corrections for gravity, wind, Magnus Effect of the spinning projectile, stabilizing signals originating in the Stable Vertical, Earth's curvature, and Coriolis effect. The result was the turret's bearing and elevation orders (LOF). During the surface action, range and deflection Spots and target altitude (not zero during Gun Fire Support) were manually entered.
The Mark 41 Stable Vertical was a vertical seeking gyroscope, and its function was to tell the rest of the system which-way-is-up on a rolling and pitching ship. It also held the battery's firing keys.
The Mark 13 FC Radar supplied present target range, and it showed the fall of shot around the target so the Gunnery Officer could correct the system's aim with range and deflection spots put into the rangekeeper. It could also automatically track the target by controlling the director's bearing power drive. Because of radar, Fire Control systems are able to track and fire at targets at a greater range and with increased accuracy during the day, night, or inclement weather. This was demonstrated in November 1942 when the battleship USS Washington engaged the Imperial Japanese Navy battlecruiser Kirishima at a range of 18,500 yards (16,900 m) at night. The engagement left Kirishima in flames, and she was ultimately scuttled by her crew. This gave the United States Navy a major advantage in World War II, as the Japanese did not develop radar or automated fire control to the level of the US Navy and were at a significant disadvantage. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | It could also automatically track the target by controlling the director's bearing power drive. Because of radar, Fire Control systems are able to track and fire at targets at a greater range and with increased accuracy during the day, night, or inclement weather. This was demonstrated in November 1942 when the battleship USS Washington engaged the Imperial Japanese Navy battlecruiser Kirishima at a range of 18,500 yards (16,900 m) at night. The engagement left Kirishima in flames, and she was ultimately scuttled by her crew. This gave the United States Navy a major advantage in World War II, as the Japanese did not develop radar or automated fire control to the level of the US Navy and were at a significant disadvantage.
The parallax correctors are needed because the turrets are located hundreds of feet from the director. There is one for each turret, and each has the turret and director distance manually set in. They automatically received relative target bearing (bearing from own ship's bow), and target range. They corrected the bearing order for each turret so that all rounds fired in a salvo converged on the same point.
The fire control switchboard configured the battery. With it, the Gunnery Officer could mix and match the three turrets to the two GFCSs. He could have the turrets all controlled by the forward system, all controlled by the aft system, or split the battery to shoot at two targets.
The assistant Gunnery Officers and Fire Control Technicians operated the equipment, talked to the turrets and ship's command by sound-powered telephone, and watched the Rangekeeper's dials and system status indicators for problems. If a problem arose, they could correct the problem, or reconfigure the system to mitigate its effect.
Mark 51 Fire Control System: The Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft guns were arguably the best light anti-aircraft weapon of World War II., employed on almost every major warship in the U.S. and UK fleet during World War II from about 1943 to 1945. They were most effective on ships as large as destroyer escorts or larger when coupled with electric-hydraulic drives for greater speed and the Mark 51 Director (pictured) for improved accuracy, the Bofors 40 mm gun became a fearsome adversary, accounting for roughly half of all Japanese aircraft shot down between 1 October 1944 and 1 February 1945.
Mark 56 GFCS: This GFCS was an intermediate-range, anti-aircraft gun fire-control system. It was designed for use against high-speed subsonic aircraft. It could also be used against surface targets. It was a dual ballistic system. This means that it was capable of simultaneously producing gun orders for two different gun types (e.g.: 5"/38cal and 3"/50cal) against the same target. Its Mark 35 Radar was capable of automatic tracking in bearing, elevation, and range that was as accurate as any optical tracking. The whole system could be controlled from the below decks Plotting Room with or without the director being manned. This allowed for rapid target acquisition when a target was first detected and designated by the ship's air-search radar, and not yet visible from on deck. Its target solution time was less than 2 seconds after Mark 35 radar "Lock on". It was designed toward the end of World War II, apparently in response to Japanese kamikaze aircraft attacks. It was conceived by Ivan Getting, mentioned near the end of his Oral history, and its linkage computer was designed by Antonín Svoboda. Its gun director was not shaped like a box, and it had no optical rangefinder. The system was manned by crew of four. On the left side of the director, was the Cockpit where the Control Officer stood behind the sitting Director Operator (Also called Director Pointer). Below decks in Plot, was the Mark 4 Radar Console where the Radar Operator and Radar Tracker sat. The director's movement in bearing was unlimited because it had slip-rings in its pedestal. (The Mark 37 gun director had a cable connection to the hull, and occasionally had to be "unwound".) Fig. 26E8 on this Web page shows the director in considerable detail.
The explanatory drawings of the system show how it works, but are wildly different in physical appearance from the actual internal mechanisms, perhaps intentionally so. However, it omits any significant description of the mechanism of the linkage computer. That chapter is an excellent detailed reference that explains much of the system's design, which is quite ingenious and forward-thinking in several respects.
In the 1968 upgrade to USS New Jersey for service off Vietnam, three Mark 56 Gun Fire Control Systems were installed. Two on either side just forward of the aft stack, and one between the aft mast and the aft Mark 38 Director tower. This increased New Jersey's anti-aircraft capability, because the Mark 56 system could track and shoot at faster planes.
Mark 63 GFCS: The Mark 63 was introduced in 1953 for the twin QF 4-inch naval gun Mk XVI and Mk.33 twin 3"/50 cal guns. The GFCS consists of an AN/SPG-34 radar tracker and a Mark 29 gun sight.
Mark 68 GFCS: Introduced in the early 1950s, the Mark 68 was an upgrade from the Mark 37 effective against air and surface targets. It combined a manned topside director, a conical scan acquisition and tracking radar, an analog computer to compute ballistics solutions, and a gyro stabilization unit.
The gun director was mounted in a large yoke, and the whole director was stabilized in crosslevel (the yoke's pivot axis). That axis was in a vertical plane that included the line of sight.
At least in 1958, the computer was the Mark 47, an hybrid electronic/electromechanical system. Somewhat akin to the Mark 1A, it had electrical high-precision resolvers instead of the mechanical one of earlier machines, and multiplied with precision linear potentiometers. However, it still had disc/roller integrators as well as shafting to interconnect the mechanical elements. Whereas access to much of the Mark 1A required time-consuming and careful disassembly (think days in some instances, and possibly a week to gain access to deeply buried mechanisms), the Mark 47 was built on thick support plates mounted behind the front panels on slides that permitted its six major sections to be pulled out of its housing for easy access to any of its parts. (The sections, when pulled out, moved fore and aft; they were heavy, not counterbalanced. Typically, a ship rolls through a much larger angle than it pitches.) The Mark 47 probably had 3-D cams for ballistics, but information on it appears very difficult to obtain.
Mechanical connections between major sections were via shafts in the extreme rear, with couplings permitting disconnection without any attention, and probably relief springs to aid re-engagement. One might think that rotating an output shaft by hand in a pulled-out section would misalign the computer, but the type of data transmission of all such shafts did not represent magnitude; only the incremental rotation of such shafts conveyed data, and it was summed by differentials at the receiving end. One such kind of quantity is the output from the roller of a mechanical integrator; the position of the roller at any given time is immaterial; it is only the incrementing and decrementing that counts.
Whereas the Mark 1/1A computations for the stabilizing component of gun orders had to be approximations, they were theoretically exact in the Mark 47 computer, computed by an electrical resolver chain.
The design of the computer was based on a re-thinking of the fire control problem; it was regarded quite differently.
Production of this system lasted for over 25 years. A digital upgrade was available from 1975 to 1985, and it was in service into the 2000s. The digital upgrade was evolved for use in the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
The AN/SPG-53 was a United States Navy gun fire-control radar used in conjunction with the Mark 68 gun fire-control system. It was used with the 5"/54 caliber Mark 42 gun system aboard Belknap-class cruisers, Mitscher-class destroyers, Forrest Sherman-class destroyers, Farragut-class destroyers, Charles F. Adams-class destroyers, Knox-class frigates as well as others.
US Navy computerized fire control systems:
Mark 86 GFCS: The US Navy desired a digital computerized gun fire-control system in 1961 for more accurate shore bombardment. Lockheed Electronics produced a prototype with AN/SPQ-9 radar fire control in 1965. An air defense requirement delayed production with the AN/SPG-60 until 1971. The Mark 86 did not enter service until when the nuclear-powered missile cruiser was commissioned in February 1974, and subsequently installed on US cruisers and amphibious assault ships. The last US ship to receive the system, USS Port Royal was commissioned in July 1994.
The Mark 86 on Aegis-class ships controls the ship's 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun mounts, and can engage up to two targets at a time. It also uses a Remote Optical Sighting system which uses a TV camera with a telephoto zoom lens mounted on the mast and each of the illuminating radars.
Mark 34 Gun Weapon System (GWS): The Mark 34 Gun Weapon System comes in various versions. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Ship gun fire-control system | Lockheed Electronics produced a prototype with AN/SPQ-9 radar fire control in 1965. An air defense requirement delayed production with the AN/SPG-60 until 1971. The Mark 86 did not enter service until when the nuclear-powered missile cruiser was commissioned in February 1974, and subsequently installed on US cruisers and amphibious assault ships. The last US ship to receive the system, USS Port Royal was commissioned in July 1994.
The Mark 86 on Aegis-class ships controls the ship's 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun mounts, and can engage up to two targets at a time. It also uses a Remote Optical Sighting system which uses a TV camera with a telephoto zoom lens mounted on the mast and each of the illuminating radars.
Mark 34 Gun Weapon System (GWS): The Mark 34 Gun Weapon System comes in various versions. It is an integral part of the Aegis combat weapon system on Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers and modified Ticonderoga-class cruisers. It combines the Mark 45 5"/54 or 5"/62 Caliber Gun Mount, Mark 46 Optical Sight System or Mark 20 Electro-Optical Sight System and the Mark 160 Mod 4–11 Gunfire Control System / Gun Computer System. Other versions of the Mark 34 GWS are used by foreign navies as well as the US Coast Guard, with each configuration having its own unique camera and/or gun system. It can be used against surface ship and close hostile aircraft, and as in Naval Gunfire Support (NGFS) against shore targets.
Mark 92 Fire Control System (FCS): The Mark 92 fire control system, an Americanized version of the WM-25 system designed in The Netherlands, was approved for service use in 1975. It is deployed on board the relatively small and austere Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate to control the Mark 75 Naval Gun and the Mark 13 Guided Missile Launching System (missiles have since been removed since retirement of its version of the Standard missile). The Mod 1 system used in PHMs (retired) and the US Coast Guard's WMEC and WHEC ships can track one air or surface target using the monopulse tracker and two surface or shore targets. Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates with the Mod 2 system can track an additional air or surface target using the Separate Track Illuminating Radar (STIR).
Mark 160 Gun Computing System: Used in the Mark 34 Gun Weapon System, the Mark 160 Gun Computing System (GCS) contains a gun console computer (GCC), a computer display console (CDC), a magnetic tape recorder-reproducer, a watertight cabinet housing the signal data converter and gun mount microprocessor, a gun mount control panel (GMCP), and a velocimeter.
See also: Close-in weapon system
Director (military)
Fire-control system Ground, sea and air based systems
Mathematical discussion of rangekeeping
Rangekeeper shipboard analog fire-control computer
Notes:
Citations:
Bibliography: Campbell, John (1985). Naval Weapons of World War Two. Naval Institute Press. ISBN 0-87021-459-4.
Fairfield, A.P. (1921). Naval Ordnance. The Lord Baltimore Press.
Fischer, Brad D. & Jurens, W. J. (2006). "Fast Battleship Gunnery During World War II: A Gunnery Revolution, Part II". Warship International. XLIII (1): 55–97. ISSN 0043-0374.
Frieden, David R. (1985). Principles of Naval Weapons Systems. Naval Institute Press. ISBN 0-87021-537-X.
Friedman, Norman (2008). Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era. Seaforth. ISBN 978-1-84415-701-3.
Jurens, W. J. (1991). "The Evolution of Battleship Gunnery in the U. S. Navy, 1920–1945". Warship International. XXVIII (3): 240–271. ISSN 0043-0374.
Pollen, Antony (1980). The Great Gunnery Scandal – The Mystery of Jutland. Collins. ISBN 0-00-216298-9.
Schleihauf, William (2001). "The Dumaresq and the Dreyer". Warship International. XXXVIII (1). International Naval Research Organization: 6–29. ISSN 0043-0374.
Schleihauf, William (2001). "The Dumaresq and the Dreyer, Part II". Warship International. XXXVIII (2). International Naval Research Organization: 164–201. ISSN 0043-0374.
Schleihauf, William (2001). "The Dumaresq and the Dreyer, Part III". Warship International. XXXVIII (3). International Naval Research Organization: 221–233. ISSN 0043-0374.
Friedman, Norman (2004). US Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History (Revised ed.). Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 1-55750-442-3.
Friedman, Norman (1986). U.S. Battleships: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 0870217151. OCLC 12214729.
Friedman, Norman (1984). U.S. Cruisers: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, Maryland: U.S. Naval Institute Press. ISBN 9780870217180.
Stille, Mark (2014). Us Heavy Cruisers 1941-45: Pre-War Classes. OSPREY PUB INC. ISBN 9781782006299.
This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the United States Navy.
External links: The British High Angle Control System (HACS)
Best Battleship Fire control – Comparison of World War II battleship systems
Appendix one, Classification of Director Instruments
HACS III Operating manual Part 1
HACS III Operating manual Part 2
USS Enterprise Action Log
The RN Pocket Gunnery Book
Fire Control Fundamentals
Manual for the Mark 1 and Mark 1a Computer
Maintenance Manual for the Mark 1 Computer
Manual for the Mark 6 Stable Element
Gun Fire Control System Mark 37 Operating Instructions at ibiblio.org
Director section of Mark 1 Mod 1 computer operations at NavSource.org
Naval Ordnance and Gunnery, Vol. 2, Chapter 25, AA Fire Control Systems |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Shock and awe | Doctrine of rapid dominance: Rapid dominance is defined by its authors, Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade, as attempting
to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fight or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe.
Further, rapid dominance will, according to Ullman and Wade,
impose this overwhelming level of Shock and Awe against an adversary on an immediate or sufficiently timely basis to paralyze its will to carry on ... [to] seize control of the environment and paralyze or so overload an adversary's perceptions and understanding of events that the enemy would be incapable of resistance at the tactical and strategic levels.
Introducing the doctrine in a report to the United States' National Defense University in 1996, Ullman and Wade describe it as an attempt to develop a post-Cold War military doctrine for the United States. Rapid dominance and shock and awe, they write, may become a "revolutionary change" as the United States military is reduced in size and information technology is increasingly integrated into warfare. Subsequent U.S. military authors have written that rapid dominance exploits the "superior technology, precision engagement, and information dominance" of the United States.
Ullman and Wade identify four vital characteristics of rapid dominance:
near total or absolute knowledge and understanding of self, adversary, and environment;
rapidity and timeliness in application;
operational brilliance in execution; and
(near) total control and signature management of the entire operational environment.
The term "shock and awe" is most consistently used by Ullman and Wade as the effect that rapid dominance seeks to impose upon an adversary. It is the desired state of helplessness and lack of will. It can be induced, they write, by direct force applied to command and control centers, selective denial of information and dissemination of disinformation, overwhelming combat force, and rapidity of action.
The doctrine of rapid dominance has evolved from the concept of "decisive force". Ulman and Wade contrast the two concepts in terms of objective, use of force, force size, scope, speed, casualties, and technique.
Civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure: Although Ullman and Wade claim that the need to "[m]inimize civilian casualties, loss of life, and collateral damage" is a "political sensitivity [which needs] to be understood up front", their doctrine of rapid dominance requires the capability to disrupt "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure", and, in practice, "the appropriate balance of Shock and Awe must cause ... the threat and fear of action that may shut down all or part of the adversary's society or render his ability to fight useless short of complete physical destruction."
Using as an example a theoretical invasion of Iraq 20 years after Operation Desert Storm, the authors claimed, "Shutting the country down would entail both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese."
Reiterating the example in an interview with CBS News several months before Operation Iraqi Freedom, Ullman stated, "You're sitting in Baghdad and all of a sudden you're the general and 30 of your division headquarters have been wiped out. You also take the city down. By that I mean you get rid of their power, water. In 2, 3, 4, 5 days they are physically, emotionally and psychologically exhausted."
Historical applications: Ullman and Wade argue that there have been military applications that fall within some of the concepts of shock and awe. They enumerate nine examples:
Overwhelming force: The "application of massive or overwhelming force" to "disarm, incapacitate, or render the enemy militarily impotent with as few casualties to ourselves and to noncombatants as possible."
Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The establishment of shock and awe through "instant, nearly incomprehensible levels of massive destruction directed at influencing society writ large, meaning its leadership and public, rather than targeting directly against military or strategic objectives even with relatively few numbers or systems."
Massive bombardment: Described as "precise destructive power largely against military targets and related sectors over time."
Blitzkrieg: The "intent was to apply precise, surgical amounts of tightly focused force to achieve maximum leverage but with total economies of scale."
Sun Tzu: The "selective, instant beheading of military or societal targets to achieve shock and awe."
Haitian example: This example (occasionally referred to as the Potemkin village example) refers to a martial parade staged in Haiti on behalf of the (then) colonial power France in the early 1800s in which the native Haitians marched a small number of battalions in a cyclical manner. This led the colonial power into the belief that the size of the native forces was large enough so as to make any military action infeasible.
The Roman legions: "Achieving shock and awe rests in the ability to deter and overpower an adversary through the adversary's perception and fear of his vulnerability and our own invincibility."
Decay and default: "The imposition of societal breakdown over a lengthy period, but without the application of massive destruction."
First Chechen War: Russia's military strategy in the First Chechen War, and particularly the Battle of Grozny, was described as "shock and awe."
Iraq War:
Buildup: Before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, United States armed forces officials described their plan as employing shock and awe. But, Tommy Franks, commanding general of the invading forces, "had never cared for the use of the term 'shock and awe' " and "had not seen that effect as the point of the air offensive."
Conflicting pre-war assessments: Before its implementation, there was dissent within the Bush administration as to whether the shock and awe plan would work. According to a CBS News report, "One senior official called it a bunch of bull, but confirmed it is the concept on which the war plan is based." CBS Correspondent David Martin noted that during Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan in the prior year, the U.S. forces were "badly surprised by the willingness of al Qaeda to fight to the death. If the Iraqis fight, the U.S. would have to throw in reinforcements and win the old fashioned way by crushing the Republican Guards, and that would mean more casualties on both sides."
Campaign: Continuous bombing began on March 19, 2003, as United States forces unsuccessfully attempted to kill Saddam Hussein with decapitation strikes. Attacks continued against a small number of targets until March 21, 2003, when, at 1700 UTC, the main bombing campaign of the US and their allies began. Its forces launched approximately 1,700 air sorties (504 using cruise missiles). Coalition ground forces had begun a "running start" offensive towards Baghdad on the previous day. Coalition ground forces seized Baghdad on April 5, and the United States declared victory on April 15. The term "shock and awe" is typically used to describe only the very beginning of the invasion of Iraq, not the larger war, nor the ensuing insurgency.
Conflicting post-war assessments: To what extent the United States fought a campaign of shock and awe is unclear as post-war assessments are contradictory. Within two weeks of the United States' victory declaration, on April 27, The Washington Post published an interview with Iraqi military personnel detailing demoralization and lack of command. According to the soldiers, Coalition bombing was surprisingly widespread and had a severely demoralizing effect. When United States tanks passed through the Iraqi military's Republican Guard and Special Republican Guard units outside Baghdad to Saddam's presidential palaces, it caused a shock to troops inside Baghdad. Iraqi soldiers said there was no organization intact by the time the United States entered Baghdad and that resistance crumbled under the presumption that "it wasn't a war, it was suicide."
In contrast, in an October 2003 presentation to the United States House Committee on Armed Services, staff of the United States Army War College did not attribute their performance to rapid dominance. Rather, they cited technological superiority and "Iraqi ineptitude". The speed of the coalition's actions ("rapidity"), they said, did not affect Iraqi morale. Further, they said that Iraqi armed forces ceased resistance only after direct force-on-force combat within cities.
According to National Geographic researcher Bijal Trivedi, "Even after several days of bombing the Iraqis showed remarkable resilience. Many continued with their daily lives, working and shopping, as bombs continued to fall around them. According to some analysts, the military's attack was perhaps too precise. It did not trigger shock and awe in the Iraqis and, in the end, the city was only captured after close combat on the outskirts of Baghdad."
Criticism of execution: According to The Guardian correspondent Brian Whitaker in 2003, "To some in the Arab and Muslim countries, Shock and Awe is terrorism by another name; to others, a crime that compares unfavourably with September 11." Anti-war protesters in 2003 also claimed that "the shock and awe pummeling of Baghdad [was] a kind of terrorism."
Casualties: A dossier released by Iraq Body Count, a project of the U.K. non-governmental non-violent and disarmament organization Oxford Research Group, attributed approximately 6,616 civilian deaths to the actions of U.S.-led forces during the "invasion phase", including the shock-and-awe bombing campaign on Baghdad. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Shock and awe | According to some analysts, the military's attack was perhaps too precise. It did not trigger shock and awe in the Iraqis and, in the end, the city was only captured after close combat on the outskirts of Baghdad."
Criticism of execution: According to The Guardian correspondent Brian Whitaker in 2003, "To some in the Arab and Muslim countries, Shock and Awe is terrorism by another name; to others, a crime that compares unfavourably with September 11." Anti-war protesters in 2003 also claimed that "the shock and awe pummeling of Baghdad [was] a kind of terrorism."
Casualties: A dossier released by Iraq Body Count, a project of the U.K. non-governmental non-violent and disarmament organization Oxford Research Group, attributed approximately 6,616 civilian deaths to the actions of U.S.-led forces during the "invasion phase", including the shock-and-awe bombing campaign on Baghdad.
These findings were disputed by both the U.S. military and the Iraqi government. Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan, the spokesman for the U.S. military in Baghdad, stated, "I don't know how they are doing their methodology and can't talk to how they calculate their numbers," as well as "we do everything we can to avoid civilian casualties in all of our operations." National Geographic researcher Bijal Trivedi stated, "Civilian casualties did occur, but the strikes, for the most part, were surgical."
In popular culture: Following the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the US, the term "shock and awe" has been used for commercial purposes. The United States Patent and Trademark Office received at least 29 trademark applications in 2003 for exclusive use of the term. The first came from a fireworks company on the day the US started bombing Baghdad. Sony registered the trademark the day after the beginning of the operation for use in a video game title but later withdrew the application and described it as "an exercise of regrettable bad judgment."
In an interview, Harlan Ullman stated that he believed that using the term to try to sell products was "probably a mistake", and that "the marketing value will be somewhere between slim and none".
Shock and awe is the job of Jane Doe, most commonly known as The Soldier from Valve's 2007 multi-player FPS game Team Fortress 2.
In the 2009 theatrical movie Avatar, the genocide attack on the Na'vi is described as a "Shock and Awe" campaign by doctor Max Patel.
In the 2011 theatrical film Battle: Los Angeles, the invasion by the alien force is described as using "rapid dominance" along the world's coastlines, including indiscriminate use of heavy ordnance.
A mission entitled "Shock and Awe" in the video game Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare concludes with the detonation of a nuclear warhead.
In the 2008 video game Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, one of the songs in the soundtrack of the game is titled "Shock and Awe".
In the 2016 video game Hearts of Iron IV, one doctrine the player can select is named “Shock and Awe”, focussing on overwhelming Artillery- and Air support. However, the game is set before Ullman and Wade’s explanation of the terminology.
See also: Demoralization (military)
Hearts and minds (Iraq)
Powell Doctrine
Psychological warfare
Rumsfeld Doctrine
Terror (politics)
London Blitz
Blitzkrieg
Notes:
Further reading: Blakesley, Paul J. "Shock and Awe: A Widely Misunderstood Effect". United States Army Command and General Staff College, June 17, 2004.
Branigin, William. "A Brief, Bitter War for Iraq's Military Officers". Washington Post, October 27, 2003.
Peterson, Scott. "US mulls air strategies in Iraq". Christian Science Monitor, January 30, 2003.
Ullman, Harlan K. and Wade, James P. Rapid Dominance: A Force for All Seasons. Royal United Services Institute in Defense Studies, 1998.
External links:
Shock and awe Archived 2007-03-12 at the Wayback Machine, from SourceWatch
Command and Control Research Program |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Show of force | Function: Shows of force have historically been undertaken mostly by a military actor unwilling to engage in all-out hostilities, but fearing to 'lose face' (to appear weak). By performing a carefully calculated provocation, the opponent is to be shown that violent confrontation remains an option, and there will be no backing off on the principle that the show of force is to defend.
Shows of force may be actual military operations, but in times of official peace, they may also be limited to military exercises.
Shows of force also work on a smaller scale: military forces on a tactical level using mock attacks to deter potential opponents, especially when a real attack on suspected (but unconfirmed) enemies might harm civilians. As an example, most air "attacks" during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom have been simple shows of force with jet aircraft dropping flares only while making loud, low-level passes. A 2009 12-month report for Afghanistan noted 18,019 strike sorties by US military aircraft, with weapons use for only 3,330 of the missions.
Notable examples: Operation Paul Bunyan, a dawn-period military raid on August 21, 1976 by US and UNC forces into the Korean Demilitarized Zone, a reaction to the unprovoked slaying of two US Army officers by North Korean troops following the infamous "Axe Murder Incident."
Operation Poomalai, on 4 June 1987, the Indian Air Force mounted a mercy mission to airdrop humanitarian relief supplies over the besieged town of Jaffna in Sri Lanka during the Sri Lankan Civil War. The mission was undertaken as a symbolic act of support for the Tamil Tigers two days after a previous unarmed effort which was mounted in the form of a small naval flotilla and was thwarted by the Sri Lankan Navy.
Third Taiwan Strait Crisis, was the effect of a series of missile tests conducted by the People's Republic of China in the waters surrounding Taiwan including the Taiwan Strait from 21 July 1995 to 23 March 1996. The first set of missiles fired in mid to late 1995 were allegedly intended to send a strong signal to the Republic of China government under Lee Teng-hui, who had been seen as moving ROC foreign policy away from the One-China policy. The second set of missiles were fired in early 1996, allegedly intending to intimidate the Taiwanese electorate in the run-up to the 1996 presidential election.
Operation Restore Democracy in Gambia to remove the former president Yahya Jammeh. Nigerian jets flew over Banjul and ECOWAS forces surrounded Gambia's borders to deter resistance from the smaller Gambian army.
See also: Demoralization (warfare)
Deterrence theory
Gunboat diplomacy
Peace through strength
Shock and awe
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Ancient period:
The necessity of city walls: The Assyrians deployed large labour forces to build new palaces, temples, and defensive walls. Some settlements in the Indus Valley civilization were also fortified. By about 3500 BC, hundreds of small farming villages dotted the Indus River floodplain. Many of these settlements had fortifications and planned streets.
The stone and mud brick houses of Kot Diji were clustered behind massive stone flood dikes and defensive walls, for neighbouring communities quarrelled constantly about the control of prime agricultural land. Mundigak (c. 2500 BC) in present-day south-east Afghanistan has defensive walls and square bastions of sun-dried bricks.
City walls and fortifications were essential for the defence of the first cities in the ancient Near East. The walls were built of mudbricks, stone, wood, or a combination of these materials, depending on local availability. They may also have served the dual purpose of showing potential enemies the might of the kingdom. The great walls surrounding the Sumerian city of Uruk gained a widespread reputation. The walls were 9.5 km (5.9 mi) in length, and up to 12 m (39 ft) in height.
Later, the walls of Babylon, reinforced by towers, moats, and ditches, gained a similar reputation. In Anatolia, the Hittites built massive stone walls around their cities atop hillsides, taking advantage of the terrain. In Shang dynasty China, at the site of Ao, large walls were erected in the 15th century BC that had dimensions of 20 m (66 ft) in width at the base and enclosed an area of some 1,900 m (2,100 yd) squared. The ancient Chinese capital for the State of Zhao, Handan, founded in 386 BC, also had walls that were 20 m (66 ft) wide at the base; they were 15 m (49 ft) tall, with two separate sides of its rectangular enclosure at a length of 1,400 m (1,530 yd).
The cities of the Indus Valley Civilization showed less effort in constructing defences, as did the Minoan civilization on Crete. These civilizations probably relied more on the defence of their outer borders or sea shores. Unlike the ancient Minoan civilization, the Mycenaean Greeks emphasized the need for fortifications alongside natural defences of mountainous terrain, such as the massive Cyclopean walls built at Mycenae and other adjacent Late Bronze Age (c. 1600–1100 BC) centers of central and southern Greece.
Archaeological evidence: Although there are depictions of sieges from the ancient Near East in historical sources and in art, there are very few examples of siege systems that have been found archaeologically. Of the few examples, several are noteworthy:
The late 9th-century BC siege system surrounding Tell es-Safi/Gath, Israel, consists of a 2.5 km (1.6 mi) long siege trench, towers, and other elements, and is the earliest evidence of a circumvallation system known in the world. It was apparently built by Hazael of Aram Damascus, as part of his siege and conquest of Philistine Gath in the late 9th century BC (mentioned in II Kings 12:18).
The late 8th-century BC siege system surrounding the site of Lachish (Tell el-Duweir) in Israel, built by Sennacherib of Assyria in 701 BC, is not only evident in the archaeological remains, but is described in Assyrian and biblical sources and in the reliefs of Sennacherib's palace in Nineveh.
The Siege of Alt-Paphos, Cyprus by the Persian army in the 4th century BC.
Depictions: The earliest representations of siege warfare have been dated to the Protodynastic Period of Egypt, c. 3000 BC. These show the symbolic destruction of city walls by divine animals using hoes.
The first siege equipment is known from Egyptian tomb reliefs of the 24th century BC, showing Egyptian soldiers storming Canaanite town walls on wheeled siege ladders. Later Egyptian temple reliefs of the 13th century BC portray the violent Siege of Dapur, a Syrian city, with soldiers climbing scale ladders supported by archers.
Assyrian palace reliefs of the 9th to 7th centuries BC display sieges of several Near Eastern cities. Though a simple battering ram had come into use in the previous millennium, the Assyrians improved siege warfare and used huge wooden tower-shaped battering rams with archers positioned on top.
In ancient China, sieges of city walls (along with naval battles) were portrayed on bronze 'hu' vessels, like those found in Chengdu, Sichuan in 1965, which have been dated to the Warring States period (5th to 3rd centuries BC).
Tactics:
Offensive: An attacker's first act in a siege might be a surprise attack, attempting to overwhelm the defenders before they were ready or were even aware there was a threat. This was how William de Forz captured Fotheringhay Castle in 1221.
The most common practice of siege warfare was to lay siege and just wait for the surrender of the enemies inside or, quite commonly, to coerce someone inside to betray the fortification. During the medieval period, negotiations would frequently take place during the early part of the siege. An attacker – aware of a prolonged siege's great cost in time, money, and lives – might offer generous terms to a defender who surrendered quickly. The defending troops would be allowed to march away unharmed, often retaining their weapons. However, a garrison commander who was thought to have surrendered too quickly might face execution by his own side for treason.
As a siege progressed, the surrounding army would build earthworks (a line of circumvallation) to completely encircle their target, preventing food, water, and other supplies from reaching the besieged city. If sufficiently desperate as the siege progressed, defenders and civilians might have been reduced to eating anything vaguely edible – horses, family pets, the leather from shoes, and even each other.
The Hittite siege of a rebellious Anatolian vassal in the 14th century BC ended when the queen mother came out of the city and begged for mercy on behalf of her people. The Hittite campaign against the kingdom of Mitanni in the 14th century BC bypassed the fortified city of Carchemish. If the main objective of a campaign was not the conquest of a particular city, it could simply be passed by. When the main objective of the campaign had been fulfilled, the Hittite army returned to Carchemish and the city fell after an eight-day siege.
Disease was another effective siege weapon, although the attackers were often as vulnerable as the defenders. In some instances, catapults or similar weapons were used to fling diseased animals over city walls in an early example of biological warfare. If all else failed, a besieger could claim the booty of his conquest undamaged, and retain his men and equipment intact, for the price of a well-placed bribe to a disgruntled gatekeeper. The Assyrian siege of Jerusalem in the 8th century BC came to an end when the Israelites bought them off with gifts and tribute, according to the Assyrian account, or when the Assyrian camp was struck by mass death, according to the Biblical account. Due to logistics, long-lasting sieges involving a minor force could seldom be maintained. A besieging army, encamped in possibly squalid field conditions and dependent on the countryside and its own supply lines for food, could very well be threatened with the disease and starvation intended for the besieged.
To end a siege more rapidly, various methods were developed in ancient and medieval times to counter fortifications, and a large variety of siege engines was developed for use by besieging armies. Ladders could be used to escalade over the defenses. Battering rams and siege hooks could also be used to force through gates or walls, while catapults, ballistae, trebuchets, mangonels, and onagers could be used to launch projectiles to break down a city's fortifications and kill its defenders. A siege tower, a substantial structure built to equal or greater height than the fortification's walls, could allow the attackers to fire down upon the defenders and also advance troops to the wall with less danger than using ladders.
In addition to launching projectiles at the fortifications or defenders, it was also quite common to attempt to undermine the fortifications, causing them to collapse. This could be accomplished by digging a tunnel beneath the foundations of the walls, and then deliberately collapsing or exploding the tunnel. This process is known as mining. The defenders could dig counter-tunnels to cut into the attackers' works and collapse them prematurely.
Fire was often used as a weapon when dealing with wooden fortifications. The Roman Empire used Greek fire, which contained additives that made it hard to extinguish. Combined with a primitive flamethrower, it proved an effective offensive and defensive weapon. A sallying out might also occur with such weapons, or if the siege was of a location on a coastline, from ships launched from the harbor of the location.
Defensive: The universal method for defending against siege is the use of fortifications, principally walls and ditches, to supplement natural features. A sufficient supply of food and water was also important to defeat the simplest method of siege warfare: starvation. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | This could be accomplished by digging a tunnel beneath the foundations of the walls, and then deliberately collapsing or exploding the tunnel. This process is known as mining. The defenders could dig counter-tunnels to cut into the attackers' works and collapse them prematurely.
Fire was often used as a weapon when dealing with wooden fortifications. The Roman Empire used Greek fire, which contained additives that made it hard to extinguish. Combined with a primitive flamethrower, it proved an effective offensive and defensive weapon. A sallying out might also occur with such weapons, or if the siege was of a location on a coastline, from ships launched from the harbor of the location.
Defensive: The universal method for defending against siege is the use of fortifications, principally walls and ditches, to supplement natural features. A sufficient supply of food and water was also important to defeat the simplest method of siege warfare: starvation. On occasion, the defenders would drive 'surplus' civilians out to reduce the demands on stored food and water.
During the Warring States period in China (481–221 BC), warfare lost its honorable, gentlemen's duty that was found in the previous era of the Spring and Autumn period, and became more practical, competitive, cut-throat, and efficient for gaining victory. The Chinese invention of the hand-held, trigger-mechanism crossbow during this period revolutionized warfare, giving greater emphasis to infantry and cavalry and less to traditional chariot warfare.
The philosophically pacifist Mohists (followers of the philosopher Mozi) of the 5th century BC believed in aiding the defensive warfare of smaller Chinese states against the hostile offensive warfare of larger domineering states. The Mohists were renowned in the smaller states (and the enemies of the larger states) for the inventions of siege machinery to scale or destroy walls. These included traction trebuchet catapults, 8-foot (2.4 m) high ballistas, a wheeled siege ramp with grappling hooks known as the Cloud Bridge (the protractible, folded ramp slinging forward by means of a counterweight with rope and pulley), and wheeled 'hook-carts' used to latch large iron hooks onto the tops of walls to pull them down.
When enemies attempted to dig tunnels under walls for mining or entry into the city, the defenders used large bellows (the type the Chinese commonly used in heating up a blast furnace for smelting cast iron) to pump smoke into the tunnels in order to suffocate the intruders.
Advances in the prosecution of sieges in ancient and medieval times naturally encouraged the development of a variety of defensive countermeasures. In particular, medieval fortifications became progressively stronger—for example, the advent of the concentric castle from the period of the Crusades—and more dangerous to attackers—witness the increasing use of machicolations and murder-holes, as well the preparation of hot or incendiary substances. Arrowslits (also called arrow loops or loopholes), sally ports (airlock-like doors) for sallies and deep water wells were also integral means of resisting siege at this time. Particular attention would be paid to defending entrances, with gates protected by drawbridges, portcullises, and barbicans. Moats and other water defenses, whether natural or augmented, were also vital to defenders.
In the European Middle Ages, virtually all large cities had city walls—Dubrovnik in Dalmatia is a well-preserved example—and more important cities had citadels, forts, or castles. Great effort was expended to ensure a good water supply inside the city in case of siege. In some cases, long tunnels were constructed to carry water into the city. Complex systems of tunnels were used for storage and communications in medieval cities like Tábor in Bohemia, similar to those used much later in Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
Until the invention of gunpowder-based weapons (and the resulting higher-velocity projectiles), the balance of power and logistics definitely favored the defender. With the invention of gunpowder, cannon and mortars and howitzers (in modern times), the traditional methods of defense became less effective against a determined siege.
Siege accounts: Although there are numerous ancient accounts of cities being sacked, few contain any clues to how this was achieved. Some popular tales existed on how the cunning heroes succeeded in their sieges. The best-known is the Trojan Horse of the Trojan War, and a similar story tells how the Canaanite city of Joppa was conquered by the Egyptians in the 15th century BC. The Biblical Book of Joshua contains the story of the miraculous Battle of Jericho.
A more detailed historical account from the 8th century BC, called the Piankhi stela, records how the Nubians laid siege to and conquered several Egyptian cities by using battering rams, archers, and slingers and building causeways across moats.
Classical antiquity: During the Peloponnesian War, one hundred sieges were attempted and fifty-eight ended with the surrender of the besieged area.
Alexander the Great's army successfully besieged many powerful cities during his conquests. Two of his most impressive achievements in siegecraft took place in the Siege of Tyre and the Siege of the Sogdian Rock. His engineers built a causeway that was originally 60 m (200 ft) wide and reached the range of his torsion-powered artillery, while his soldiers pushed siege towers housing stone throwers and light catapults to bombard the city walls.
Most conquerors before him had found Tyre, a Phoenician island-city about 1 km (1,100 yd) from the mainland, impregnable. The Macedonians built a mole, a raised spit of earth across the water, by piling stones up on a natural land bridge that extended underwater to the island, and although the Tyrians rallied by sending a fire ship to destroy the towers, and captured the mole in a swarming frenzy, the city eventually fell to the Macedonians after a seven-month siege. In complete contrast to Tyre, Sogdian Rock was captured by stealthy attack. Alexander used commando-like tactics to scale the cliffs and capture the high ground, and the demoralized defenders surrendered.
The importance of siege warfare in the ancient period should not be underestimated. One of the contributing causes of Hannibal's inability to defeat Rome was his lack of siege engines, thus, while he was able to defeat Roman armies in the field, he was unable to capture Rome itself. The legionary armies of the Roman Republic and Empire are noted as being particularly skilled and determined in siege warfare. An astonishing number and variety of sieges, for example, formed the core of Julius Caesar's mid-1st-century BC conquest of Gaul (modern France).
In his Commentarii de Bello Gallico (Commentaries on the Gallic War), Caesar describes how, at the Battle of Alesia, the Roman legions created two huge fortified walls around the city. The inner circumvallation, 16 km (10 mi), held in Vercingetorix's forces, while the outer contravallation kept relief from reaching them. The Romans held the ground in between the two walls. The besieged Gauls, facing starvation, eventually surrendered after their relief force met defeat against Caesar's auxiliary cavalry.
The Sicarii Zealots who defended Masada in AD 73 were defeated by the Roman legions, who built a ramp 100 metres (330 ft) high up to the fortress's west wall.
During the Roman–Persian Wars, siege warfare was extensively being used by both sides.
Medieval period:
Mongols and Chinese: In the Middle Ages, the Mongol Empire's campaign against China (then comprising the Western Xia dynasty, Jin dynasty, and Southern Song dynasty) by Genghis Khan until Kublai Khan, who eventually established the Yuan dynasty in 1271, was very effective, allowing the Mongols to sweep through large areas. Even if they could not enter some of the more well-fortified cities, they used innovative battle tactics to grab hold of the land and the people:
By concentrating on the field armies, the strongholds had to wait. Of course, smaller fortresses, or ones easily surprised, were taken as they came along. This had two effects. First, it cut off the principal city from communicating with other cities where they might expect aid. Secondly, refugees from these smaller cities would flee to the last stronghold. The reports from these cities and the streaming hordes of refugees not only reduced the morale of the inhabitants and garrison of the principal city, it also strained their resources. Food and water reserves were taxed by the sudden influx of refugees. Soon, what was once a formidable undertaking became easy. The Mongols were then free to lay siege without interference of the field army, as it had been destroyed. At the siege of Aleppo, Hulagu used twenty catapults against the Bab al-Iraq (Gate of Iraq) alone.
In Jûzjânî, there are several episodes in which the Mongols constructed hundreds of siege machines in order to surpass the number which the defending city possessed. While Jûzjânî surely exaggerated, the improbably high numbers which he used for both the Mongols and the defenders do give one a sense of the large numbers of machines used at a single siege.
Another Mongol tactic was to use catapults to launch corpses of plague victims into besieged cities. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Food and water reserves were taxed by the sudden influx of refugees. Soon, what was once a formidable undertaking became easy. The Mongols were then free to lay siege without interference of the field army, as it had been destroyed. At the siege of Aleppo, Hulagu used twenty catapults against the Bab al-Iraq (Gate of Iraq) alone.
In Jûzjânî, there are several episodes in which the Mongols constructed hundreds of siege machines in order to surpass the number which the defending city possessed. While Jûzjânî surely exaggerated, the improbably high numbers which he used for both the Mongols and the defenders do give one a sense of the large numbers of machines used at a single siege.
Another Mongol tactic was to use catapults to launch corpses of plague victims into besieged cities. The disease-carrying fleas from the bodies would then infest the city, and the plague would spread, allowing the city to be easily captured, although this transmission mechanism was not known at the time. In 1346, the bodies of Mongol warriors of the Golden Horde who had died of plague were thrown over the walls of the Crimean city of Kaffa (now Feodosiya) during the Siege of Caffa. It has been speculated that this operation may have been responsible for the advent of the Black Death in Europe. The Black Death is estimated to have killed 30%–60% of Europe's population.
On the first night while laying siege to a city, the leader of the Mongol forces would lead from a white tent: if the city surrendered, all would be spared. On the second day, he would use a red tent: if the city surrendered, the men would all be killed, but the rest would be spared. On the third day, he would use a black tent: no quarter would be given.
However, the Chinese were not completely defenseless, and from AD 1234 until 1279, the Southern Song Chinese held out against the enormous barrage of Mongol attacks. Much of this success in defense lay in the world's first use of gunpowder (i.e. with early flamethrowers, grenades, firearms, cannons, and land mines) to fight back against the Khitans, the Tanguts, the Jurchens, and then the Mongols.
The Chinese of the Song period also discovered the explosive potential of packing hollowed cannonball shells with gunpowder. Written later c. 1350 in the Huo Long Jing, this manuscript of Jiao Yu recorded an earlier Song-era cast-iron cannon known as the 'flying-cloud thunderclap eruptor' (fei yun pi-li pao). The manuscript stated that (Wade–Giles spelling):
The shells (phao) are made of cast iron, as large as a bowl and shaped like a ball. Inside they contain half a pound of 'magic' gunpowder (shen huo). They are sent flying towards the enemy camp from an eruptor (mu phao); and when they get there a sound like a thunder-clap is heard, and flashes of light appear. If ten of these shells are fired successfully into the enemy camp, the whole place will be set ablaze...
During the Ming dynasty (AD 1368–1644), the Chinese were very concerned with city planning in regards to gunpowder warfare. The site for constructing the walls and the thickness of the walls in Beijing's Forbidden City were favoured by the Chinese Yongle Emperor (r. 1402–1424) because they were in pristine position to resist cannon volley and were built thick enough to withstand attacks from cannon fire.
For more, see Technology of the Song dynasty.
Age of gunpowder: The introduction of gunpowder and the use of cannons brought about a new age in siege warfare. Cannons were first used in Song dynasty China during the early 13th century, but did not become significant weapons for another 150 years or so. In early decades, cannons could do little against strong castles and fortresses, providing little more than smoke and fire. By the 16th century, however, they were an essential and regularized part of any campaigning army, or castle's defences.
The greatest advantage of cannons over other siege weapons was the ability to fire a heavier projectile, farther, faster, and more often than previous weapons. They could also fire projectiles in a straight line, so that they could destroy the bases of high walls. Thus, 'old fashioned' walls – that is, high and, relatively, thin – were excellent targets, and, over time, easily demolished. In 1453, the Theodosian Walls of Constantinople, the capital of the Roman Empire, were broken through in just six weeks by the 62 cannons of Mehmed II's army, although in the end the conquest was a long and extremely difficult siege with heavy Ottoman casualties due to the repeated attempts at taking the city by assault.
However, new fortifications, designed to withstand gunpowder weapons, were soon constructed throughout Europe. During the Renaissance and the early modern period, siege warfare continued to dominate the conduct of the European wars.
Once siege guns were developed, the techniques for assaulting a town or fortress became well known and ritualized. The attacking army would surround a town. Then the town would be asked to surrender. If they did not comply, the besieging army would surround the town with temporary fortifications to stop sallies from the stronghold or relief getting in. The attackers would next build a length of trenches parallel to the defenses (these are known as the "first parallel") and just out of range of the defending artillery. They would dig a trench (known as a forward) towards the town in a zigzag pattern so that it could not be enfiladed by defending fire. Once they were within artillery range, they would dig another parallel (the Second Parallel) trench and fortify it with gun emplacements. This technique is commonly called entrenchment.
If necessary, using the first artillery fire for cover, the forces conducting the siege would repeat the process until they placed their guns close enough to be laid (aimed) accurately to make a breach in the fortifications. In order to allow the forlorn hope and support troops to get close enough to exploit the breach, more zigzag trenches could be dug even closer to the walls, with more parallel trenches to protect and conceal the attacking troops. After each step in the process, the besiegers would ask the besieged to surrender. If the forlorn hope stormed the breach successfully, the defenders could expect no mercy.
Emerging theories: The castles that in earlier years had been formidable obstacles were easily breached by the new weapons. For example, in Spain, the newly equipped army of Ferdinand and Isabella was able to conquer Moorish strongholds in Granada in 1482–1492 that had held out for centuries before the invention of cannons.
In the early 15th century, Italian architect Leon Battista Alberti wrote a treatise entitled De Re aedificatoria, which theorized methods of building fortifications capable of withstanding the new guns. He proposed that walls be "built in uneven lines, like the teeth of a saw". He proposed star-shaped fortresses with low, thick walls.
However, few rulers paid any attention to his theories. A few towns in Italy began building in the new style late in the 1480s, but it was only with the French invasion of the Italian peninsula in 1494–1495 that the new fortifications were built on a large scale. Charles VIII invaded Italy with an army of 18,000 men and a horse-drawn siege-train. As a result, he could defeat virtually any city or state, no matter how well defended. In a panic, military strategy was completely rethought throughout the Italian states of the time, with a strong emphasis on the new fortifications that could withstand a modern siege.
New fortresses: The most effective way to protect walls against cannon fire proved to be depth (increasing the width of the defenses) and angles (ensuring that attackers could only fire on walls at an oblique angle, not square on). Initially, walls were lowered and backed, in front and behind, with earth. Towers were reformed into triangular bastions. This design matured into the trace italienne. Star-shaped fortresses surrounding towns and even cities with outlying defenses proved very difficult to capture, even for a well-equipped army. Fortresses built in this style throughout the 16th century did not become fully obsolete until the 19th century, and were still in use throughout World War I (though modified for 20th-century warfare). During World War II, trace italienne fortresses could still present a formidable challenge, for example, in the last days of World War II, during the Battle in Berlin, that saw some of the heaviest urban fighting of the war, the Soviets did not attempt to storm the Spandau Citadel (built between 1559 and 1594), but chose to invest it and negotiate its surrender.
However, the cost of building such vast modern fortifications was incredibly high, and was often too much for individual cities to undertake. Many were bankrupted in the process of building them; others, such as Siena, spent so much money on fortifications that they were unable to maintain their armies properly, and so lost their wars anyway. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Fortresses built in this style throughout the 16th century did not become fully obsolete until the 19th century, and were still in use throughout World War I (though modified for 20th-century warfare). During World War II, trace italienne fortresses could still present a formidable challenge, for example, in the last days of World War II, during the Battle in Berlin, that saw some of the heaviest urban fighting of the war, the Soviets did not attempt to storm the Spandau Citadel (built between 1559 and 1594), but chose to invest it and negotiate its surrender.
However, the cost of building such vast modern fortifications was incredibly high, and was often too much for individual cities to undertake. Many were bankrupted in the process of building them; others, such as Siena, spent so much money on fortifications that they were unable to maintain their armies properly, and so lost their wars anyway. Nonetheless, innumerable large and impressive fortresses were built throughout northern Italy in the first decades of the 16th century to resist repeated French invasions that became known as the Italian Wars. Many stand to this day.
In the 1530s and 1540s, the new style of fortification began to spread out of Italy into the rest of Europe, particularly to France, the Netherlands, and Spain. Italian engineers were in enormous demand throughout Europe, especially in war-torn areas such as the Netherlands, which became dotted by towns encircled in modern fortifications. The densely populated areas of Northern Italy and the United Provinces (the Netherlands) were infamous for their high degree of fortification of cities. It made campaigns in these areas very hard to successfully conduct, considering even minor cities had to be captured by siege within the span of the campaigning season. In the Dutch case, the possibility of flooding large parts of the land provided an additional obstacle to besiegers, for example at the Siege of Leiden. For many years, defensive and offensive tactics were well balanced, leading to protracted and costly wars such as Europe had never known, involving more and more planning and government involvement. The new fortresses ensured that war rarely extended beyond a series of sieges. Because the new fortresses could easily hold 10,000 men, an attacking army could not ignore a powerfully fortified position without serious risk of counterattack. As a result, virtually all towns had to be taken, and that was usually a long, drawn-out affair, potentially lasting from several months to years, while the members of the town were starved to death. Most battles in this period were between besieging armies and relief columns sent to rescue the besieged.
Marshal Vauban and Van Coehoorn: At the end of the 17th century, two influential military engineers, the French Marshal Vauban and the Dutch military engineer Menno van Coehoorn, developed modern fortification to its pinnacle, refining siege warfare without fundamentally altering it: ditches would be dug; walls would be protected by glacis; and bastions would enfilade an attacker. Both engineers developed their ideas independently, but came to similar general rules regarding defensive construction and offensive action against fortifications. Both were skilled in conducting sieges and defenses themselves. Before Vauban and Van Coehoorn, sieges had been somewhat slapdash operations. Vauban and Van Coehoorn refined besieging to a science with a methodical process that, if uninterrupted, would break even the strongest fortifications. Examples of their styles of fortifications are Arras (Vauban) and the no-longer-existent fortress of Bergen op Zoom (Van Coehoorn). The main differences between the two lay in the difference in terrain on which Vauban and Van Coehoorn constructed their defenses: Vauban in the sometimes more hilly and mountainous terrain of France, Van Coehoorn in the flat and floodable lowlands of the Netherlands.
Planning and maintaining a siege is just as difficult as fending one off. A besieging army must be prepared to repel both sorties from the besieged area and also any attack that may try to relieve the defenders. It was thus usual to construct lines of trenches and defenses facing in both directions. The outermost lines, known as the lines of contravallation, would surround the entire besieging army and protect it from attackers.
This would be the first construction effort of a besieging army, built soon after a fortress or city had been invested. A line of circumvallation would also be constructed, facing in towards the besieged area, to protect against sorties by the defenders and to prevent the besieged from escaping. The next line, which Vauban usually placed at about 600 metres (2,000 ft) from the target, would contain the main batteries of heavy cannons so that they could hit the target without being vulnerable themselves. Once this line was established, work crews would move forward, creating another line at 250 metres (1,000 ft). This line contained smaller guns. The final line would be constructed only 30 to 60 metres (100 to 200 ft) from the fortress. This line would contain the mortars and would act as a staging area for attack parties once the walls were breached. Van Coehoorn developed a small and easily movable mortar named the coehorn, variations of which were used in sieges until the 19th century. It would also be from this line that miners working to undermine the fortress would operate.
The trenches connecting the various lines of the besiegers could not be built perpendicular to the walls of the fortress, as the defenders would have a clear line of fire along the whole trench. Thus, these lines (known as saps) needed to be sharply jagged.
Another element of a fortress was the citadel. Usually, a citadel was a "mini fortress" within the larger fortress, sometimes designed as a reduit, but more often as a means of protecting the garrison from potential revolt in the city. The citadel was used in wartime and peacetime to keep the residents of the city in line.
As in ages past, most sieges were decided with very little fighting between the opposing armies. An attacker's army was poorly served, incurring the high casualties that a direct assault on a fortress would entail. Usually, they would wait until supplies inside the fortifications were exhausted or disease had weakened the defenders to the point that they were willing to surrender. At the same time, diseases, especially typhus, were a constant danger to the encamped armies outside the fortress, and often forced a premature retreat. Sieges were often won by the army that lasted the longest.
An important element of strategy for the besieging army was whether or not to allow the encamped city to surrender. Usually, it was preferable to graciously allow a surrender, both to save on casualties, and to set an example for future defending cities. A city that was allowed to surrender with minimal loss of life was much better off than a city that held out for a long time and was brutally butchered at the end. Moreover, if an attacking army had a reputation of killing and pillaging regardless of a surrender, then other cities' defensive efforts would be redoubled. Usually, a city would surrender (with no honour lost) when its inner lines of defense were reached by the attacker. In case of refusal, however, the inner lines would have to be stormed by the attacker and the attacking troops would be seen to be justified in sacking the city.
Siege warfare: Siege warfare dominated in Western Europe for most of the 17th and 18th centuries. An entire campaign, or longer, could be used in a single siege (for example, Ostend in 1601–1604; La Rochelle in 1627–1628). This resulted in extremely prolonged conflicts. The balance was that, while siege warfare was extremely expensive and very slow, it was very successful—or, at least, more so than encounters in the field. Battles arose through clashes between besiegers and relieving armies, but the principle was a slow, grinding victory by the greater economic power. The relatively rare attempts at forcing pitched battles (Gustavus Adolphus in 1630; the French against the Dutch in 1672 or 1688) were almost always expensive failures.
The exception to this rule were the English. During the English Civil War, anything which tended to prolong the struggle, or seemed like want of energy and avoidance of a decision, was bitterly resented by the men of both sides. In France and Germany, the prolongation of a war meant continued employment for the soldiers, but in England, both sides were looking to end the war quickly. Even when in the end the New Model Army—a regular professional army—developed the original decision-compelling spirit permeated the whole organisation, as was seen when pitched against regular professional continental troops the Battle of the Dunes during the Interregnum.
Experienced commanders on both sides in the English Civil War recommended the abandonment of garrisoned fortifications for two primary reasons. The first, as for example proposed by the Royalist Sir Richard Willis to King Charles, was that by abandoning the garrisoning of all but the most strategic locations in one's own territory, far more troops would be available for the field armies, and it was the field armies which would decide the conflict. The other argument was that by slighting potential strong points in one's own territory, an enemy expeditionary force, or local enemy rising, would find it more difficult to consolidate territorial gains against an inevitable counterattack. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Even when in the end the New Model Army—a regular professional army—developed the original decision-compelling spirit permeated the whole organisation, as was seen when pitched against regular professional continental troops the Battle of the Dunes during the Interregnum.
Experienced commanders on both sides in the English Civil War recommended the abandonment of garrisoned fortifications for two primary reasons. The first, as for example proposed by the Royalist Sir Richard Willis to King Charles, was that by abandoning the garrisoning of all but the most strategic locations in one's own territory, far more troops would be available for the field armies, and it was the field armies which would decide the conflict. The other argument was that by slighting potential strong points in one's own territory, an enemy expeditionary force, or local enemy rising, would find it more difficult to consolidate territorial gains against an inevitable counterattack. Sir John Meldrum put forward just such an argument to the Parliamentary Committee of Both Kingdoms, to justify his slighting of Gainsborough in Lincolnshire.
Sixty years later, during the War of the Spanish Succession, the Duke of Marlborough preferred to engage the enemy in pitched battles, rather than engage in siege warfare, although he was very proficient in both types of warfare.
On 15 April 1746, the day before the Battle of Culloden, at Dunrobin Castle, a party of William Sutherland's militia conducted the last siege fought on the mainland of Great Britain against Jacobite members of Clan MacLeod.
Strategic concepts: In the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, new techniques stressed the division of armies into all-arms corps that would march separately and only come together on the battlefield. The less-concentrated army could now live off the country and move more rapidly over a larger number of roads.
Fortresses commanding lines of communication could be bypassed and would no longer stop an invasion. Since armies could not live off the land indefinitely, Napoleon Bonaparte always sought a quick end to any conflict by pitched battle. This military revolution was described and codified by Clausewitz.
Industrial advances: Advances in artillery made previously impregnable defenses useless. For example, the walls of Vienna that had held off the Turks in the mid-17th century were no obstacle to Napoleon in the early 19th.
Where sieges occurred (such as the Siege of Delhi and the Siege of Cawnpore during the Indian Rebellion of 1857), the attackers were usually able to defeat the defenses within a matter of days or weeks, rather than weeks or months as previously. The great Swedish white-elephant fortress of Karlsborg was built in the tradition of Vauban and intended as a reserve capital for Sweden, but it was obsolete before it was completed in 1869.
Railways, when they were introduced, made possible the movement and supply of larger armies than those that fought in the Napoleonic Wars. It also reintroduced siege warfare, as armies seeking to use railway lines in enemy territory were forced to capture fortresses which blocked these lines.
During the Franco-Prussian War, the battlefield front-lines moved rapidly through France. However, the Prussian and other German armies were delayed for months at the Siege of Metz and the Siege of Paris, due to the greatly increased firepower of the defending infantry, and the principle of detached or semi-detached forts with heavy-caliber artillery. This resulted in the later construction of fortress works across Europe, such as the massive fortifications at Verdun. It also led to the introduction of tactics which sought to induce surrender by bombarding the civilian population within a fortress, rather than the defending works themselves.
The Siege of Sevastopol during the Crimean War and the siege of Petersburg (1864–1865) during the American Civil War showed that modern citadels, when improved by improvised defences, could still resist an enemy for many months. The Siege of Plevna during the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878) proved that hastily constructed field defenses could resist attacks prepared without proper resources, and were a portent of the trench warfare of World War I.
Advances in firearms technology without the necessary advances in battlefield communications gradually led to the defense again gaining the ascendancy. An example of siege during this time, prolonged during 337 days due to the isolation of the surrounded troops, was the Siege of Baler, in which a reduced group of Spanish soldiers was besieged in a small church by the Philippine rebels in the course of the Philippine Revolution and the Spanish–American War, until months after the Treaty of Paris, the end of the conflict.
Furthermore, the development of steamships availed greater speed to blockade runners, ships with the purpose of bringing cargo, e.g. food, to cities under blockade, as with Charleston, South Carolina during the American Civil War.
Modern warfare:
World War I: Mainly as a result of the increasing firepower (such as machine guns) available to defensive forces, First World War trench warfare briefly revived a form of siege warfare. Although siege warfare had moved out from an urban setting because city walls had become ineffective against modern weapons, trench warfare was nonetheless able to use many of the techniques of siege warfare in its prosecution (sapping, mining, barrage and, of course, attrition), but on a much larger scale and on a greatly extended front.
More traditional sieges of fortifications took place in addition to trench sieges. The Siege of Tsingtao was one of the first major sieges of the war, but the inability for significant resupply of the German garrison made it a relatively one-sided battle. The Germans and the crew of an Austro-Hungarian protected cruiser put up a hopeless defense and, after holding out for more than a week, surrendered to the Japanese, forcing the German East Asia Squadron to steam towards South America for a new coal source.
The other major siege outside Europe during the First World War was in Mesopotamia, at the Siege of Kut. After a failed attempt to move on Baghdad, stopped by the Ottomans at the bloody Battle of Ctesiphon, the British and their large contingent of Indian sepoy soldiers were forced to retreat to Kut, where the Ottomans under German General Baron Colmar von der Goltz laid siege. The British attempts to resupply the force via the Tigris river failed, and rationing was complicated by the refusal of many Indian troops to eat cattle products. By the time the garrison fell on 29 April 1916, starvation was rampant. Conditions did not improve greatly under Turkish imprisonment. Along with the battles of Tanga, Sandfontein, Gallipoli, and Namacurra, it would be one of Britain's numerous embarrassing colonial defeats of the war.
The largest sieges of the war, however, took place in Europe. The initial German advance into Belgium produced four major sieges: the Battle of Liège, the Siege of Namur, the Siege of Maubeuge, and the Siege of Antwerp. All four would prove crushing German victories, at Liège and Namur against the Belgians, at Maubeuge against the French and at Antwerp against a combined Anglo-Belgian force. The weapon that made these victories possible were the German Big Berthas and the Skoda 305 mm Model 1911 siege mortars, one of the best siege mortars of the war, on loan from Austria-Hungary. These huge guns were the decisive weapon of siege warfare in the 20th century, taking part at Przemyśl, the Belgian sieges, on the Italian Front and Serbian Front, and even being reused in World War II.
At the Siege of Przemyśl, the Austro-Hungarian garrison showed an excellent knowledge of siege warfare, not only waiting for relief, but sending sorties into Russian lines and employing an active defense that resulted in the capture of the Russian General Lavr Kornilov. Despite its excellent performance, the garrison's food supply had been requisitioned for earlier offensives, a relief expedition was stalled by the weather, ethnic rivalries flared up between the defending soldiers, and a breakout attempt failed. When the commander of the garrison Hermann Kusmanek finally surrendered, his troops were eating their horses and the first attempt of large-scale air supply had failed. It was one of the few great victories obtained by either side during the war; 110,000 Austro-Hungarian prisoners were marched back to Russia. Use of aircraft for siege running, bringing supplies to areas under siege, would nevertheless prove useful in many sieges to come.
The largest siege of the war, and arguably the roughest, most gruesome battle in history, was the Battle of Verdun. Whether the battle can be considered true siege warfare is debatable. Under the theories of Erich von Falkenhayn, it is more distinguishable as purely attrition with a coincidental presence of fortifications on the battlefield. When considering the plans of Crown Prince Wilhelm, purely concerned with taking the citadel and not with French casualty figures, it can be considered a true siege. The main fortifications were Fort Douaumont, Fort Vaux, and the fortified city of Verdun itself. The Germans, through the use of huge artillery bombardments, flamethrowers, and infiltration tactics, were able to capture both Vaux and Douaumont, but were never able to take the city, and eventually lost most of their gains. It was a battle that, despite the French ability to fend off the Germans, neither side won. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Whether the battle can be considered true siege warfare is debatable. Under the theories of Erich von Falkenhayn, it is more distinguishable as purely attrition with a coincidental presence of fortifications on the battlefield. When considering the plans of Crown Prince Wilhelm, purely concerned with taking the citadel and not with French casualty figures, it can be considered a true siege. The main fortifications were Fort Douaumont, Fort Vaux, and the fortified city of Verdun itself. The Germans, through the use of huge artillery bombardments, flamethrowers, and infiltration tactics, were able to capture both Vaux and Douaumont, but were never able to take the city, and eventually lost most of their gains. It was a battle that, despite the French ability to fend off the Germans, neither side won. The German losses were not worth the potential capture of the city, and the French casualties were not worth holding the symbol of her defense.
The development of the armored tank and improved infantry tactics at the end of World War I swung the pendulum back in favor of maneuver, and with the advent of Blitzkrieg in 1939, the end of traditional siege warfare was at hand. The Maginot Line would be the prime example of the failure of immobile, post–World War I fortifications. Although sieges would continue, it would be in a totally different style and on a reduced scale.
World War II: The Blitzkrieg of the Second World War truly showed that fixed fortifications are easily defeated by manoeuvre instead of frontal assault or long sieges. The great Maginot Line was bypassed, and battles that would have taken weeks of siege could now be avoided with the careful application of air power (such as the German paratrooper capture of Fort Eben-Emael, Belgium, early in World War II).
The most important siege was the Siege of Leningrad, that lasted over 29 months, about half of the duration of the entire Second World War. The siege of Leningrad resulted in the deaths of some one million of the city's inhabitants. Along with the Battle of Stalingrad, the siege of Leningrad on the Eastern Front was the deadliest siege of a city in history. In the west, apart from the Battle of the Atlantic, the sieges were not on the same scale as those on the European Eastern front; however, there were several notable or critical sieges: the island of Malta, for which the population won the George Cross and Tobruk. In the South-East Asian theatre, there was the siege of Singapore, and in the Burma campaign, sieges of Myitkyina, the Admin Box, Imphal, and Kohima, which was the high-water mark for the Japanese advance into India.
The Siege of Sevastopol saw the use of the heaviest and most powerful individual siege engines ever to be used: the German 800 mm railway gun and the 600 mm siege mortar. Though a single shell could have disastrous local effect, the guns were susceptible to air attack in addition to being slow to move.
Airbridge: Throughout the war both the Western Allies and the Germans tried to supply forces besieged behind enemy lines with ad-hoc airbridges. Sometimes these attempts failed, as happened to the besieged German Sixth Army the Battle of Stalingrad, and sometimes they succeeded as happened during the Battle of the Admin Box (5 – 23 February 1944) and the short Siege of Bastogne (December 1944).
The logistics of strategic airbridge operations were developed by the Americans flying military transport aircraft from India to China over the Hump (1942–1945), to resupply the Chinese war effort of Chiang Kai-shek, and to the USAAF XX Bomber Command (during Operation Matterhorn).
Tactical airbridge methods were developed and, as planned, used extensively for supplying the Chindits during Operation Thursday (February – May 1944). The Chindits, a specially trained division of the British and Indian armies, were flown deep behind Japanese front lines in the South-East Asian theatre to jungle clearings in Burma where they set up fortified airheads from which they sailed out to attack Japanese lines of communications, while defending the bases from Japanese counterattacks. The bases were re-supplied by air with casualties flown out by returning aircraft. When the Japanese attacked in strength the Chindits abandoned the bases and either moved to new bases, or back to Allied lines.
Post-World War II: Several times during the Cold War the western powers had to use their airbridge expertise.
The Berlin Blockade from June 1948 to September 1949, the Western Powers flew over 200,000 flights, providing to West Berlin up to 8,893 tons of necessities each day.
Airbridge was used extensively during the Battle of Dien Bien Phu during the First Indochina War, but failed to prevent its fall to the Việt Minh in 1954.
In the next Vietnam War, airbridge proved crucial during the siege of the American base at Khe Sanh in 1968. The resupply it provided kept the North Vietnamese Army from capturing the base.
In both Vietnamese cases, the Viet Minh and NLF were able to cut off the opposing army by capturing the surrounding rugged terrain. At Dien Bien Phu, the French were unable to use air power to overcome the siege and were defeated. However, at Khe Sanh, a mere 14 years later, advances in air power—and a reduction in Vietnamese anti-aircraft capability—allowed the United States to withstand the siege. The resistance of US forces was assisted by the PAVN and PLAF forces' decision to use the Khe Sanh siege as a strategic distraction to allow their mobile warfare offensive, the first Tet Offensive, to unfold securely.
The Battle of Khe Sanh displays typical features of modern sieges, as the defender has greater capacity to withstand the siege, the attacker's main aim is to bottle operational forces or create a strategic distraction, rather than take the siege to a conclusion.
In neighboring Cambodia, at that time known as the Khmer Republic, the Khmer Rouge used siege tactics to cut off supplies from Phnom Penh to other government-held enclaves in an attempt to break the will of the government to continue fighting.
In 1972, during the Easter offensive, the siege of An Lộc Vietnam occurred. ARVN troops and U.S. advisers and air power successfully defeated communist forces. The Battle of An Lộc pitted some 6,350 ARVN men against a force three times that size. During the peak of the battle, ARVN had access to only one 105 mm howitzer to provide close support, while the enemy attack was backed by an entire artillery division. ARVN had no tanks, the NVA communist forces had two armoured regiments. ARVN prevailed after over two months of continuous fighting. As General Paul Vanuxem, a French veteran of the Indochina War, wrote in 1972 after visiting the liberated city of An Lộc: "An Lộc was the Verdun of Vietnam, where Vietnam received as in baptism the supreme consecration of her will."
During the 1982 Lebanon War, the Israel Defence Forces besieged Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, to quickly realize their goals including the eviction of the Palestine Liberation Organization from the country.
During the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s, Republika Srpska forces besieged Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The siege lasted from 1992 until 1996.
Numerous sieges haven taken place during the Syrian Civil War, such as the Siege of Homs, Siege of Kobanî, Siege of Deir ez-Zor (2014–2017), Siege of Nubl and al-Zahraa, and Siege of al-Fu'ah and Kafriya.
Multiple sieges took place in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, most notably the Siege of Mariupol.
The Israel–Hamas war in 2023-2024 contained multiple sieges, including the Siege of Gaza City and the Siege of Khan Yunis.
Police sieges: Siege tactics continue to be employed in police contexts; such a siege is typically called a standoff or, in law enforcement jargon, a barricade situation. Standoffs may result from crimes and incidents such as robberies, raids, search and arrest warrants, prison riots, or terrorist attacks. Standoffs occur due to a variety of factors, most prominently the safety of police (against whom the besieged may have the upper hand), the besieged suspects (who police generally intend to arrest), bystanders (who may be in the crossfire), and hostages (who may be injured or killed by the suspects).
The optimal result of most standoffs is a peaceful resolution: the safe extraction of hostages and bystanders, and the peaceful surrender and arrest of the hostage-takers. To ensure this, police make use of trained negotiators and psychologists to learn the hostage-takers' demands (and meet said demands if feasible or permissible), gain the hostage-takers' trust, clarify that police do not intend to kill them or will even let them go (regardless of whether such claims are true), and coax the hostage-takers into surrendering or at least releasing hostages. In the event a peaceful resolution is impossible—negotiations fail or do not proceed, hostages are released but the hostage-takers refuse to surrender, the hostage-takers resist violently, or hostages are killed—police may respond in force, generally being able to rely on police tactical units or even military support if possible and required. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | The optimal result of most standoffs is a peaceful resolution: the safe extraction of hostages and bystanders, and the peaceful surrender and arrest of the hostage-takers. To ensure this, police make use of trained negotiators and psychologists to learn the hostage-takers' demands (and meet said demands if feasible or permissible), gain the hostage-takers' trust, clarify that police do not intend to kill them or will even let them go (regardless of whether such claims are true), and coax the hostage-takers into surrendering or at least releasing hostages. In the event a peaceful resolution is impossible—negotiations fail or do not proceed, hostages are released but the hostage-takers refuse to surrender, the hostage-takers resist violently, or hostages are killed—police may respond in force, generally being able to rely on police tactical units or even military support if possible and required.
Most standoffs are much shorter than military sieges, often lasting hours or days at most. Lengthy sieges may still occur, albeit rarely, such as the 51-day-long 1993 Waco siege. Most standoffs end in a peaceful resolution (i.e. 1973 Brooklyn hostage crisis), though some may end in a police or military assault (i.e. 1994 Air France Flight 8969 hijacking, 1980 Iranian Embassy siege) or, in the worst-case scenarios, the deaths of authorities, hostage-takers, or hostages (i.e. 1985 MOVE bombing, 1985 EgyptAir Flight 648 hijacking, 2004 Beslan school siege, 2022 Robb Elementary School shooting). The aforementioned worst-case scenarios often result from poor planning, tactics, or negotiations on the part of the authorities (e.g. accidental killings of hostages by Unit 777 during the EgyptAir Flight 648 hijacking), or from violent acts committed by the hostage-takers (e.g. suicide bombings and executions during the Beslan school siege).
In some jurisdictions, depending on certain circumstances, standoffs that would usually be handled by police may be transferred to the military. For example, in the United Kingdom, standoffs with terrorists may be transferred to military responsibility for a military assault on the besieged. The threat of such an action ended the 1975 Balcombe Street siege, but the 1980 Iranian Embassy siege ended in a military assault and the deaths of all but one of the hostage-takers.
See also: Battleplan (documentary TV series)
Blitzkrieg
Breastwork (fortification)
Infiltration
Last stand
Maneuver warfare
Medieval warfare
Sangar (fortification)
Siege engines
Siege equipment
Tunnel warfare
Lists
List of established military terms
List of sieges
Notes:
References: Alchon, Suzanne Austin (2003). A pest in the land: new world epidemics in a global perspective. University of New Mexico Press. p. 21. ISBN 0-8263-2871-7.
Baldock, Thomas Stanford (1809). Cromwell as a Soldier. K. Paul, Trench, Trübner & Company. pp. 515–520.
Beevor, Antony (2002). Berlin: The Downfall 1945. Viking-Penguin Books. ISBN 0-670-88695-5.
Firth, C. H. (1902). Cromwell's Army: A History of the English Soldier During the Civil Wars, the Commonwealth and the Protectorate. Sussex: Methurn & Company. p. 29.
Ebrey; Walthall; Palais (2006). East Asia: A Cultural, Social, and Political History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Fletcher, Banister; Cruickshank, Dan (1996). Sir Banister Fletcher's A History of Architecture (20th ed.). Architectural Press. p. 20. ISBN 0-7506-2267-9.
Funderburk, Jordan (2021). Siege Operations for 21st Century Warfare. U.S. Army. Archived from the original on 6 May 2022.
Grousset, René (1970). The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia. Rutgers University Press. p. 362. ISBN 0-8135-1304-9.
Hoskin, John; Howland, Carol (2006). Vietnam. New Holland Publishers. p. 105. ISBN 978-1-84537-551-5.
Stewart, William (1998). Dictionary of images and symbols in counselling (1st ed.). Jessica Kingsley. p. 105. ISBN 1-85302-351-5.
Morocco, John (1984). Thunder from Above: Air War, 1941–1968. Boston: Boston Publishing Company.
Needham, Joseph (1986). Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 4. Taipei: Caves Books Ltd.
Needham, Joseph (1986). Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 5. Taiepi: Caves Books Ltd.
Needham, Joseph (1986). Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 5. Taipei: Caves Books Ltd.
Reynolds, Francis Joseph; Churchill, Allen Leon; Miller, Francis Trevelyan (1916). The story of the great war: history of the European War from official sources; complete historical records of events to date. P.F. Collier & Son. p. 406.
Roland, Alex (1992). "Secrecy, Technology, and War: Greek Fire and the Defense of Byzantium, Technology and Culture". Technology and Culture. 33 (4): 655–679. doi:10.2307/3106585. JSTOR 3106585. S2CID 113017993.
Sellman, R. R. (1954). Castles and Fortresses. Methuen.
Stearns, Peter N. (2001). The Encyclopedia of World History: ancient, medieval, and modern (6th ed.). Houghton Mifflin Books. p. 17. ISBN 0-395-65237-5.
Symonds, Richard (1859). Long, Charles Edward (ed.). Diary of the Marches of the Royal Army During the Great Civil War. Works of the Camden Society. Vol. 74. The Camden Society. p. 270.
Townshend, Charles (2000). The Oxford History of Modern War. Oxford University Press. pp. 211, 212. ISBN 0-19-285373-2.
Turnbull, Stephen R. (2002). Siege Weapons of the Far East. Oxford: Osprey Publishing Ltd.
Wheelis, M. (2002). "Biological warfare at the 1346 siege of Caffa". Emerg Infect Dis. 8 (9). Center for Disease Control: 971–975. doi:10.3201/eid0809.010536. PMC 2732530. PMID 12194776.
Windrow, Martin (2005). The Last Valley: Dien Bien Phu and the French defeat in Vietnam. London: Cassell.
Further reading: Duffy, Christopher (1996) [1975]. Fire & Stone: The Science of Fortress Warfare (1660–1860) (2nd ed.). New York: Stackpole Books.
Duffy, Christopher (1996). Siege Warfare: Fortress in the Early Modern World, 1494–1660. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Duffy, Christopher (1985). Siege Warfare, Volume II: The Fortress in the Age of Vauban and Frederick the Great. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Garlan, Yvon (1974). Recherches de poliorcétique grecque (in French). Paris: De Boccard.
Lynn, John A. (1999). The Wars of Louis XIV. Pearson. ISBN 0582056292.
May, Timothy. (2004). "Mongol Arms". Explorations in Empire, Pre-Modern Imperialism Tutorial: the Mongols. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Archived from the original on 18 May 2008.
Ostwald, Jamel (2007). Vauban Under Siege: Engineering Efficiency and Martial Vigor in the War of the Spanish Succession. History of Warfare. Vol. 41 (illustrated ed.). Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-15489-6.
Warner, Philip (1968). Sieges of the Middle Ages. G. Bell & Sons.
Historiography
Bachrach, Bernard S (1994). "Medieval siege warfare: a reconnaissance". Journal of Military History. 58 (1): 119–133. doi:10.2307/2944182. JSTOR 2944182.
External links:
Native American Siege Warfare. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Siege | Explorations in Empire, Pre-Modern Imperialism Tutorial: the Mongols. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Archived from the original on 18 May 2008.
Ostwald, Jamel (2007). Vauban Under Siege: Engineering Efficiency and Martial Vigor in the War of the Spanish Succession. History of Warfare. Vol. 41 (illustrated ed.). Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-15489-6.
Warner, Philip (1968). Sieges of the Middle Ages. G. Bell & Sons.
Historiography
Bachrach, Bernard S (1994). "Medieval siege warfare: a reconnaissance". Journal of Military History. 58 (1): 119–133. doi:10.2307/2944182. JSTOR 2944182.
External links:
Native American Siege Warfare.
Siege Kits
Scenes of Siege Warfare
Three ancient Egyptian Sieges: Megiddo, Dapur, Hermopolis
The Siege Of The City Archived 30 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine Biblical perspectives.
Secrets of Lost Empires: Medieval Siege (PBS) Informative and interactive webpages about medieval siege tactics. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Signal corps | Asia: Rejimen Semboyan Diraja, Malaysian Royal Signals Regiment
Indian Army Corps of Signals, raised in 1911.
Pakistan Army Corps of Signals, raised in 1947.
Singapore Armed Forces Signals Formation
Sri Lanka Signals Corps
Israeli C4I Corps
Korps Perhubungan TNI AD (Indonesian Army Signal Corps)
Armed Forces of the Philippines Signal Corps
Signal Department, Royal Thai Army
Australia: Royal Australian Corps of Signals
Royal New Zealand Corps of Signals
Europe: Arma delle Trasmissioni, corps of Italian Army founded in 1953, see List of units of the Italian Army.
Royal Corps of Signals, founded in the United Kingdom (under the name Telegraph Battalion Royal Engineers) in 1884.
Communications and Information Services Corps (CIS), the signals corps of Ireland's Defence Forces.
Communication and Information Systems Groups (CIS) of the Belgian Armed Forces, before: Transmission Troops
Signal Brigade, a unit of the Serbian Armed Forces.
Telegrafregimentet, Royal Danish Signal Regiment.
Sambandsbataljonen in the Brigade Nord of the Norwegian Army
Regiment Verbindingstroepen, a regiment of the Royal Netherlands Army.
Fernmeldetruppe of Bundeswehr, before: Signal Corps of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS.
Signal Communications Troops of Russia.
Signal Corps (French Army).
Viestirykmentti, Signal Regiment of the Finnish Army.
Swedish Army Signal Troops.
North America: Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, formed in 1903 as the Canadian Signalling Corps
United States Army Signal Corps, founded in 1860 by Major Albert J. Myer
See also: Military communications
Telegraph troops |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Soldier | Etymology: The word soldier derives from the Middle English word soudeour, from Old French soudeer or soudeour, meaning mercenary, from soudee, meaning shilling's worth or wage, from sou or soud, shilling. The word is also related to the Medieval Latin soldarius, meaning soldier (literally, "one having pay"). These words ultimately derive from the Late Latin word solidus, referring to an ancient Roman coin used in the Byzantine Empire.
Occupational and other designations: In most armies, the word "soldier" has a general meaning that refers to all members of any army, distinct from more specialized military occupations that require different areas of knowledge and skill sets. "Soldiers" may be referred to by titles, names, nicknames, or acronyms that reflect an individual's military occupation specialty arm, service, or branch of military employment, their type of unit, or operational employment or technical use such as: trooper, tanker (a member of tank crew), commando, dragoon, infantryman, guardsman, artilleryman, paratrooper, grenadier, ranger, sniper, engineer, sapper, craftsman, signaller, medic, rifleman, or gunner, among other terms. Some of these designations or their etymological origins have existed in the English language for centuries, while others are relatively recent, reflecting changes in technology, increased division of labor, or other factors. In the United States Army, a soldier's military job is designated as a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), which includes a very wide array of MOS Branches and sub-specialties. One example of a nickname for a soldier in a specific occupation is the term "red caps" to refer to military policemen personnel in the British Army because of the colour of their headgear.
Infantry are sometimes called "grunts" in the United States Army (as the well as in the U.S. Marine Corps) or "squaddies" (in the British Army). U.S. Army artillery crews, or "gunners," are sometimes referred to as "redlegs", from the service branch colour for artillery. U.S. soldiers are often called "G.I.s" (short for the term "Government Issue"). Such terms may be associated with particular wars or historical eras. "G.I." came into common use during World War II and after, but prior to and during World War I especially, American soldiers were called "Doughboys," while British infantry troops were often referred to as "Tommies" (short for the archetypal soldier "Tommy Atkins") and French infantry were called "Poilus" ("hairy ones").
Some formal or informal designations may reflect the status or changes in status of soldiers for reasons of gender, race, or other social factors. With certain exceptions, service as a soldier, especially in the infantry, had generally been restricted to males throughout world history. By World War II, women were actively deployed in Allied forces in different ways. Some notable female soldiers in the Soviet Union were honored as "Heroes of the Soviet Union" for their actions in the army or as partisan fighters. In the United Kingdom, women served in the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) and later in the Women's Royal Army Corps (WRAC). Soon after its entry into the war, the U.S. formed the Women's Army Corps, whose female soldiers were often referred to as "WACs." These sex-segregated branches were disbanded in the last decades of the twentieth century and women soldiers were integrated into the standing branches of the military, although their ability to serve in armed combat was often restricted.
Race has historically been an issue restricting the ability of some people to serve in the U.S. Army. Until the American Civil War, Black soldiers fought in integrated and sometimes separate units, but at other times were not allowed to serve, largely due to fears about the possible effects of such service on the institution of legal slavery. Some Black soldiers, both freemen and men who had escaped from slavery, served in Union forces, until 1863, when the Emancipation Proclamation opened the door for the formation of Black units. After the war, Black soldiers continued to serve, but in segregated units, often subjected to physical and verbal racist abuse. The term "Buffalo Soldiers" was applied to some units fighting in the 19th century Indian Wars in the American West. Eventually, the phrase was applied more generally to segregated Black units, who often distinguished themselves in armed conflict and other service. In 1948, President Harry S. Truman issued an executive order for the end of segregation in the United States Armed Forces.
Service:
Conscription: Throughout history, individuals have often been compelled by force or law to serve in armies and other armed forces in times of war or other times. Modern forms of such compulsion are generally referred to as "conscription" or a "draft". Currently, many countries require registration for some form of mandatory service, although that requirement may be selectively enforced or exist only in law and not in practice. Usually the requirement applies to younger male citizens, though it may extend to women and non-citizen residents as well. In times of war, the requirements, such as age, may be broadened when additional troops are thought to be needed.
At different times and places, some individuals have been able to avoid conscription by having another person take their place. Modern draft laws may provide temporary or permanent exemptions from service or allow some other non-combatant service, as in the case of conscientious objectors.
In the United States, males aged 18-25 are required to register with the Selective Service System, which has responsibility for overseeing the draft. However, no draft has occurred since 1973, and the U.S. military has been able to maintain staffing through voluntary enlistment.
Enlistment: Soldiers in war may have various motivations for voluntarily enlisting and remaining in an army or other armed forces branch. In a study of 18th century soldiers' written records about their time in service, historian Ilya Berkovich suggests "three primary 'levers' of motivation ... 'coercive', 'remunerative', and 'normative' incentives." Berkovich argues that historians' assumptions that fear of coercive force kept unwilling conscripts in check and controlled rates of desertion have been overstated and that any pay or other remuneration for service as provided then would have been an insufficient incentive. Instead, "old-regime common soldiers should be viewed primarily as willing participants who saw themselves as engaged in a distinct and honourable activity." In modern times, soldiers have volunteered for armed service, especially in time of war, out of a sense of patriotic duty to their homeland or to advance a social, political, or ideological cause, while improved levels of remuneration or training might be more of an incentive in times of economic hardship. Soldiers might also enlist for personal reasons, such as following family or social expectations, or for the order and discipline provided by military training, as well as for the friendship and connection with their fellow soldiers afforded by close contact in a common enterprise.
In 2018, the RAND Corporation published the results of a study of contemporary American soldiers in Life as a Private: A Study of the Motivations and Experiences of Junior Enlisted Personnel in the U.S. Army. The study found that "soldiers join the Army for family, institutional, and occupational reasons, and many value the opportunity to become a military professional. They value their relationships with other soldiers, enjoy their social lives, and are satisfied with Army life." However, the authors cautioned that the survey sample consisted of only 81 soldiers and that "the findings of this study cannot be generalized to the U.S. Army as a whole or to any rank."
Length of service: The length of time that an individual is required to serve as a soldier has varied with country and historical period, whether that individual has been drafted or has voluntarily enlisted. Such service, depending on the army's need for staffing or the individual's fitness and eligibility, may involve fulfillment of a contractual obligation. That obligation might extend for the duration of an armed conflict or may be limited to a set number of years in active duty and/or inactive duty.
As of 2023, service in the U.S. Army is for a Military Service Obligation of 2 to 6 years of active duty with a remaining term in the Individual Ready Reserve. Individuals may also enlist for part-time duty in the Army Reserve or National Guard. Depending on need or fitness to serve, soldiers usually may reenlist for another term, possibly receiving monetary or other incentives.
In the U.S. Army, career soldiers who have served for at least 20 years are eligible to draw on a retirement pension. The size of the pension as a percentage of the soldier's salary usually increases with the length of time served on active duty.
In media and popular culture: Since the earliest recorded history, soldiers and warfare have been depicted in countless works, including songs, folk tales, stories, memoirs, biographies, novels and other narrative fiction, drama, films, and more recently television and video, comic books, graphic novels, and games. Often these portrayals have emphasized the heroic qualities of soldiers in war, but at times have emphasized war's inherent dangers, confusions, and trauma and their effect on individual soldiers and others. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Soldier | Individuals may also enlist for part-time duty in the Army Reserve or National Guard. Depending on need or fitness to serve, soldiers usually may reenlist for another term, possibly receiving monetary or other incentives.
In the U.S. Army, career soldiers who have served for at least 20 years are eligible to draw on a retirement pension. The size of the pension as a percentage of the soldier's salary usually increases with the length of time served on active duty.
In media and popular culture: Since the earliest recorded history, soldiers and warfare have been depicted in countless works, including songs, folk tales, stories, memoirs, biographies, novels and other narrative fiction, drama, films, and more recently television and video, comic books, graphic novels, and games. Often these portrayals have emphasized the heroic qualities of soldiers in war, but at times have emphasized war's inherent dangers, confusions, and trauma and their effect on individual soldiers and others.
See also: Airman
Combatant
Marine
Mercenary
Military compensation
Military ranks
Paratrooper
Prisoner of war
Sailor
Veteran
Women in the military by country
References:
External links: Media related to Soldier at Wikimedia Commons
Catherine Calloway, "War in Literature and Drama," Oxford Bibliographies: https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780199791279/obo-9780199791279-0004.xml |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | History: Although some animals (dolphins, bats, some shrews, and others) have used sound for communication and object detection for millions of years, use by humans in the water was initially recorded by Leonardo da Vinci in 1490: a tube inserted into the water was said to be used to detect vessels by placing an ear to the tube.
In the late 19th century, an underwater bell was used as an ancillary to lighthouses or lightships to provide warning of hazards.
The use of sound to "echo-locate" underwater in the same way as bats use sound for aerial navigation seems to have been prompted by the Titanic disaster of 1912. The world's first patent for an underwater echo-ranging device was filed at the British Patent Office by English meteorologist Lewis Fry Richardson a month after the sinking of Titanic, and a German physicist Alexander Behm obtained a patent for an echo sounder in 1913.
The Canadian engineer Reginald Fessenden, while working for the Submarine Signal Company in Boston, Massachusetts, built an experimental system beginning in 1912, a system later tested in Boston Harbor, and finally in 1914 from the U.S. Revenue Cutter Miami on the Grand Banks off Newfoundland. In that test, Fessenden demonstrated depth sounding, underwater communications (Morse code) and echo ranging (detecting an iceberg at a 2-mile (3.2 km) range). The "Fessenden oscillator", operated at about 500 Hz frequency, was unable to determine the bearing of the iceberg due to the 3-metre wavelength and the small dimension of the transducer's radiating face (less than 1⁄3 wavelength in diameter). The ten Montreal-built British H-class submarines launched in 1915 were equipped with Fessenden oscillators.
During World War I the need to detect submarines prompted more research into the use of sound. The British made early use of underwater listening devices called hydrophones, while the French physicist Paul Langevin, working with a Russian immigrant electrical engineer Constantin Chilowsky, worked on the development of active sound devices for detecting submarines in 1915. Although piezoelectric and magnetostrictive transducers later superseded the electrostatic transducers they used, this work influenced future designs. Lightweight sound-sensitive plastic film and fibre optics have been used for hydrophones, while Terfenol-D and lead magnesium niobate (PMN) have been developed for projectors.
ASDIC: In 1916, under the British Board of Invention and Research, Canadian physicist Robert William Boyle took on the active sound detection project with A. B. Wood, producing a prototype for testing in mid-1917. This work for the Anti-Submarine Division of the British Naval Staff was undertaken in utmost secrecy, and used quartz piezoelectric crystals to produce the world's first practical underwater active sound detection apparatus. To maintain secrecy, no mention of sound experimentation or quartz was made – the word used to describe the early work ("supersonics") was changed to "ASD"ics, and the quartz material to "ASD"ivite: "ASD" for "Anti-Submarine Division", hence the British acronym ASDIC. In 1939, in response to a question from the Oxford English Dictionary, the Admiralty made up the story that it stood for "Allied Submarine Detection Investigation Committee", and this is still widely believed, though no committee bearing this name has been found in the Admiralty archives.
By 1918, Britain and France had built prototype active systems. The British tested their ASDIC on HMS Antrim in 1920 and started production in 1922. The 6th Destroyer Flotilla had ASDIC-equipped vessels in 1923. An anti-submarine school HMS Osprey and a training flotilla of four vessels were established on Portland in 1924.
By the outbreak of World War II, the Royal Navy had five sets for different surface ship classes, and others for submarines, incorporated into a complete anti-submarine system. The effectiveness of early ASDIC was hampered by the use of the depth charge as an anti-submarine weapon. This required an attacking vessel to pass over a submerged contact before dropping charges over the stern, resulting in a loss of ASDIC contact in the moments leading up to attack. The hunter was effectively firing blind, during which time a submarine commander could take evasive action. This situation was remedied with new tactics and new weapons.
The tactical improvements developed by Frederic John Walker included the creeping attack. Two anti-submarine ships were needed for this (usually sloops or corvettes). The "directing ship" tracked the target submarine on ASDIC from a position about 1500 to 2000 yards behind the submarine. The second ship, with her ASDIC turned off and running at 5 knots, started an attack from a position between the directing ship and the target. This attack was controlled by radio telephone from the directing ship, based on their ASDIC and the range (by rangefinder) and bearing of the attacking ship. As soon as the depth charges had been released, the attacking ship left the immediate area at full speed. The directing ship then entered the target area and also released a pattern of depth charges. The low speed of the approach meant the submarine could not predict when depth charges were going to be released. Any evasive action was detected by the directing ship and steering orders to the attacking ship given accordingly. The low speed of the attack had the advantage that the German acoustic torpedo was not effective against a warship travelling so slowly. A variation of the creeping attack was the "plaster" attack, in which three attacking ships working in a close line abreast were directed over the target by the directing ship.
The new weapons to deal with the ASDIC blind spot were "ahead-throwing weapons", such as Hedgehogs and later Squids, which projected warheads at a target ahead of the attacker and still in ASDIC contact. These allowed a single escort to make better aimed attacks on submarines. Developments during the war resulted in British ASDIC sets that used several different shapes of beam, continuously covering blind spots. Later, acoustic torpedoes were used.
Early in World War II (September 1940), British ASDIC technology was transferred for free to the United States. Research on ASDIC and underwater sound was expanded in the UK and in the US. Many new types of military sound detection were developed. These included sonobuoys, first developed by the British in 1944 under the codename High Tea, dipping/dunking sonar and mine-detection sonar. This work formed the basis for post-war developments related to countering the nuclear submarine.
SONAR: During the 1930s American engineers developed their own underwater sound-detection technology, and important discoveries were made, such as the existence of thermoclines and their effects on sound waves. Americans began to use the term SONAR for their systems, coined by Frederick Hunt to be the equivalent of RADAR.
US Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory: In 1917, the US Navy acquired J. Warren Horton's services for the first time. On leave from Bell Labs, he served the government as a technical expert, first at the experimental station at Nahant, Massachusetts, and later at US Naval Headquarters, in London, England. At Nahant he applied the newly developed vacuum tube, then associated with the formative stages of the field of applied science now known as electronics, to the detection of underwater signals. As a result, the carbon button microphone, which had been used in earlier detection equipment, was replaced by the precursor of the modern hydrophone. Also during this period, he experimented with methods for towing detection. This was due to the increased sensitivity of his device. The principles are still used in modern towed sonar systems.
To meet the defense needs of Great Britain, he was sent to England to install in the Irish Sea bottom-mounted hydrophones connected to a shore listening post by submarine cable. While this equipment was being loaded on the cable-laying vessel, World War I ended and Horton returned home.
During World War II, he continued to develop sonar systems that could detect submarines, mines, and torpedoes. He published Fundamentals of Sonar in 1957 as chief research consultant at the US Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory. He held this position until 1959 when he became technical director, a position he held until mandatory retirement in 1963.
Materials and designs in the US and Japan: There was little progress in US sonar from 1915 to 1940. In 1940, US sonars typically consisted of a magnetostrictive transducer and an array of nickel tubes connected to a 1-foot-diameter steel plate attached back-to-back to a Rochelle salt crystal in a spherical housing. This assembly penetrated the ship hull and was manually rotated to the desired angle. The piezoelectric Rochelle salt crystal had better parameters, but the magnetostrictive unit was much more reliable. High losses to US merchant supply shipping early in World War II led to large scale high priority US research in the field, pursuing both improvements in magnetostrictive transducer parameters and Rochelle salt reliability. Ammonium dihydrogen phosphate (ADP), a superior alternative, was found as a replacement for Rochelle salt; the first application was a replacement of the 24 kHz Rochelle-salt transducers. Within nine months, Rochelle salt was obsolete. The ADP manufacturing facility grew from few dozen personnel in early 1940 to several thousands in 1942. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | This assembly penetrated the ship hull and was manually rotated to the desired angle. The piezoelectric Rochelle salt crystal had better parameters, but the magnetostrictive unit was much more reliable. High losses to US merchant supply shipping early in World War II led to large scale high priority US research in the field, pursuing both improvements in magnetostrictive transducer parameters and Rochelle salt reliability. Ammonium dihydrogen phosphate (ADP), a superior alternative, was found as a replacement for Rochelle salt; the first application was a replacement of the 24 kHz Rochelle-salt transducers. Within nine months, Rochelle salt was obsolete. The ADP manufacturing facility grew from few dozen personnel in early 1940 to several thousands in 1942.
One of the earliest application of ADP crystals were hydrophones for acoustic mines; the crystals were specified for low-frequency cutoff at 5 Hz, withstanding mechanical shock for deployment from aircraft from 3,000 m (10,000 ft), and ability to survive neighbouring mine explosions. One of key features of ADP reliability is its zero aging characteristics; the crystal keeps its parameters even over prolonged storage.
Another application was for acoustic homing torpedoes. Two pairs of directional hydrophones were mounted on the torpedo nose, in the horizontal and vertical plane; the difference signals from the pairs were used to steer the torpedo left-right and up-down. A countermeasure was developed: the targeted submarine discharged an effervescent chemical, and the torpedo went after the noisier fizzy decoy. The counter-countermeasure was a torpedo with active sonar – a transducer was added to the torpedo nose, and the microphones were listening for its reflected periodic tone bursts. The transducers comprised identical rectangular crystal plates arranged to diamond-shaped areas in staggered rows.
Passive sonar arrays for submarines were developed from ADP crystals. Several crystal assemblies were arranged in a steel tube, vacuum-filled with castor oil, and sealed. The tubes then were mounted in parallel arrays.
The standard US Navy scanning sonar at the end of World War II operated at 18 kHz, using an array of ADP crystals. Desired longer range, however, required use of lower frequencies. The required dimensions were too big for ADP crystals, so in the early 1950s magnetostrictive and barium titanate piezoelectric systems were developed, but these had problems achieving uniform impedance characteristics, and the beam pattern suffered. Barium titanate was then replaced with more stable lead zirconate titanate (PZT), and the frequency was lowered to 5 kHz. The US fleet used this material in the AN/SQS-23 sonar for several decades. The SQS-23 sonar first used magnetostrictive nickel transducers, but these weighed several tons, and nickel was expensive and considered a critical material; piezoelectric transducers were therefore substituted. The sonar was a large array of 432 individual transducers. At first, the transducers were unreliable, showing mechanical and electrical failures and deteriorating soon after installation; they were also produced by several vendors, had different designs, and their characteristics were different enough to impair the array's performance. The policy to allow repair of individual transducers was then sacrificed, and "expendable modular design", sealed non-repairable modules, was chosen instead, eliminating the problem with seals and other extraneous mechanical parts.
The Imperial Japanese Navy at the onset of World War II used projectors based on quartz. These were big and heavy, especially if designed for lower frequencies; the one for Type 91 set, operating at 9 kHz, had a diameter of 30 inches (760 mm) and was driven by an oscillator with 5 kW power and 7 kV of output amplitude. The Type 93 projectors consisted of solid sandwiches of quartz, assembled into spherical cast iron bodies. The Type 93 sonars were later replaced with Type 3, which followed German design and used magnetostrictive projectors; the projectors consisted of two rectangular identical independent units in a cast-iron rectangular body about 16 by 9 inches (410 mm × 230 mm). The exposed area was half the wavelength wide and three wavelengths high. The magnetostrictive cores were made from 4 mm stampings of nickel, and later of an iron-aluminium alloy with aluminium content between 12.7% and 12.9%. The power was provided from a 2 kW at 3.8 kV, with polarization from a 20 V, 8 A DC source.
The passive hydrophones of the Imperial Japanese Navy were based on moving-coil design, Rochelle salt piezo transducers, and carbon microphones.
Later developments in transducers: Magnetostrictive transducers were pursued after World War II as an alternative to piezoelectric ones. Nickel scroll-wound ring transducers were used for high-power low-frequency operations, with size up to 13 feet (4.0 m) in diameter, probably the largest individual sonar transducers ever. The advantage of metals is their high tensile strength and low input electrical impedance, but they have electrical losses and lower coupling coefficient than PZT, whose tensile strength can be increased by prestressing. Other materials were also tried; nonmetallic ferrites were promising for their low electrical conductivity resulting in low eddy current losses, Metglas offered high coupling coefficient, but they were inferior to PZT overall. In the 1970s, compounds of rare earths and iron were discovered with superior magnetomechanic properties, namely the Terfenol-D alloy. This made possible new designs, e.g. a hybrid magnetostrictive-piezoelectric transducer. The most recent of these improved magnetostrictive materials is Galfenol.
Other types of transducers include variable-reluctance (or moving-armature, or electromagnetic) transducers, where magnetic force acts on the surfaces of gaps, and moving coil (or electrodynamic) transducers, similar to conventional speakers; the latter are used in underwater sound calibration, due to their very low resonance frequencies and flat broadband characteristics above them.
Active sonar: Active sonar uses a sound transmitter (or projector) and a receiver. When the two are in the same place it is monostatic operation. When the transmitter and receiver are separated it is bistatic operation. When more transmitters (or more receivers) are used, again spatially separated, it is multistatic operation. Most sonars are used monostatically with the same array often being used for transmission and reception. Active sonobuoy fields may be operated multistatically.
Active sonar creates a pulse of sound, often called a "ping", and then listens for reflections (echo) of the pulse. This pulse of sound is generally created electronically using a sonar projector consisting of a signal generator, power amplifier and electro-acoustic transducer/array. A transducer is a device that can transmit and receive acoustic signals ("pings"). A beamformer is usually employed to concentrate the acoustic power into a beam, which may be swept to cover the required search angles. Generally, the electro-acoustic transducers are of the Tonpilz type and their design may be optimised to achieve maximum efficiency over the widest bandwidth, in order to optimise performance of the overall system. Occasionally, the acoustic pulse may be created by other means, e.g. chemically using explosives, airguns or plasma sound sources.
To measure the distance to an object, the time from transmission of a pulse to reception is measured and converted into a range using the known speed of sound. To measure the bearing, several hydrophones are used, and the set measures the relative arrival time to each, or with an array of hydrophones, by measuring the relative amplitude in beams formed through a process called beamforming. Use of an array reduces the spatial response so that to provide wide cover multibeam systems are used. The target signal (if present) together with noise is then passed through various forms of signal processing, which for simple sonars may be just energy measurement. It is then presented to some form of decision device that calls the output either the required signal or noise. This decision device may be an operator with headphones or a display, or in more sophisticated sonars this function may be carried out by software. Further processes may be carried out to classify the target and localise it, as well as measuring its velocity.
The pulse may be at constant frequency or a chirp of changing frequency (to allow pulse compression on reception). Simple sonars generally use the former with a filter wide enough to cover possible Doppler changes due to target movement, while more complex ones generally include the latter technique. Since digital processing became available pulse compression has usually been implemented using digital correlation techniques. Military sonars often have multiple beams to provide all-round cover while simple ones only cover a narrow arc, although the beam may be rotated, relatively slowly, by mechanical scanning.
Particularly when single frequency transmissions are used, the Doppler effect can be used to measure the radial speed of a target. The difference in frequency between the transmitted and received signal is measured and converted into a velocity. Since Doppler shifts can be introduced by either receiver or target motion, allowance has to be made for the radial speed of the searching platform.
One useful small sonar is similar in appearance to a waterproof flashlight. The head is pointed into the water, a button is pressed, and the device displays the distance to the target. Another variant is a "fishfinder" that shows a small display with shoals of fish. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | Since digital processing became available pulse compression has usually been implemented using digital correlation techniques. Military sonars often have multiple beams to provide all-round cover while simple ones only cover a narrow arc, although the beam may be rotated, relatively slowly, by mechanical scanning.
Particularly when single frequency transmissions are used, the Doppler effect can be used to measure the radial speed of a target. The difference in frequency between the transmitted and received signal is measured and converted into a velocity. Since Doppler shifts can be introduced by either receiver or target motion, allowance has to be made for the radial speed of the searching platform.
One useful small sonar is similar in appearance to a waterproof flashlight. The head is pointed into the water, a button is pressed, and the device displays the distance to the target. Another variant is a "fishfinder" that shows a small display with shoals of fish. Some civilian sonars (which are not designed for stealth) approach active military sonars in capability, with three-dimensional displays of the area near the boat.
When active sonar is used to measure the distance from the transducer to the bottom, it is known as echo sounding. Similar methods may be used looking upward for wave measurement.
Active sonar is also used to measure distance through water between two sonar transducers or a combination of a hydrophone (underwater acoustic microphone) and projector (underwater acoustic speaker). When a hydrophone/transducer receives a specific interrogation signal it responds by transmitting a specific reply signal. To measure distance, one transducer/projector transmits an interrogation signal and measures the time between this transmission and the receipt of the other transducer/hydrophone reply. The time difference, scaled by the speed of sound through water and divided by two, is the distance between the two platforms. This technique, when used with multiple transducers/hydrophones/projectors, can calculate the relative positions of static and moving objects in water.
In combat situations, an active pulse can be detected by an enemy and will reveal a submarine's position at twice the maximum distance that the submarine can itself detect a contact and give clues as to the submarine's identity based on the characteristics of the outgoing ping. For these reasons, active sonar is not frequently used by military submarines.
A very directional, but low-efficiency, type of sonar (used by fisheries, military, and for port security) makes use of a complex nonlinear feature of water known as non-linear sonar, the virtual transducer being known as a parametric array.
Project Artemis: Project Artemis was an experimental research and development project in the late 1950s to mid 1960s to examine acoustic propagation and signal processing for a low-frequency active sonar system that might be used for ocean surveillance. A secondary objective was examination of engineering problems of fixed active bottom systems. The receiving array was located on the slope of Plantagnet Bank off Bermuda. The active source array was deployed from the converted World War II tanker USNS Mission Capistrano. Elements of Artemis were used experimentally after the main experiment was terminated.
Transponder: This is an active sonar device that receives a specific stimulus and immediately (or with a delay) retransmits the received signal or a predetermined one. Transponders can be used to remotely activate or recover subsea equipment.
Performance prediction: A sonar target is small relative to the sphere, centred around the emitter, on which it is located. Therefore, the power of the reflected signal is very low, several orders of magnitude less than the original signal. Even if the reflected signal was of the same power, the following example (using hypothetical values) shows the problem: Suppose a sonar system is capable of emitting a 10,000 W/m2 signal at 1 m, and detecting a 0.001 W/m2 signal. At 100 m the signal will be 1 W/m2 (due to the inverse-square law). If the entire signal is reflected from a 10 m2 target, it will be at 0.001 W/m2 when it reaches the emitter, i.e. just detectable. However, the original signal will remain above 0.001 W/m2 until 3000 m. Any 10 m2 target between 100 and 3000 m using a similar or better system would be able to detect the pulse, but would not be detected by the emitter. The detectors must be very sensitive to pick up the echoes. Since the original signal is much more powerful, it can be detected many times further than twice the range of the sonar (as in the example).
Active sonar have two performance limitations: due to noise and reverberation. In general, one or other of these will dominate, so that the two effects can be initially considered separately.
In noise-limited conditions at initial detection:
SL − 2PL + TS − (NL − AG) = DT,
where SL is the source level, PL is the propagation loss (sometimes referred to as transmission loss), TS is the target strength, NL is the noise level, AG is the array gain of the receiving array (sometimes approximated by its directivity index) and DT is the detection threshold.
In reverberation-limited conditions at initial detection (neglecting array gain):
SL − 2PL + TS = RL + DT,
where RL is the reverberation level, and the other factors are as before.
Hand-held sonar for use by a diver: The LIMIS (limpet mine imaging sonar) is a hand-held or ROV-mounted imaging sonar for use by a diver. Its name is because it was designed for patrol divers (combat frogmen or clearance divers) to look for limpet mines in low visibility water.
The LUIS (lensing underwater imaging system) is another imaging sonar for use by a diver.
There is or was a small flashlight-shaped handheld sonar for divers, that merely displays range.
For the INSS (integrated navigation sonar system)
Upward looking sonar: An upward looking sonar (ULS) is a sonar device pointed upwards looking towards the surface of the sea. It is used for similar purposes as downward looking sonar, but has some unique applications such as measuring sea ice thickness, roughness and concentration, or measuring air entrainment from bubble plumes during rough seas. Often it is moored on the bottom of the ocean or floats on a taut line mooring at a constant depth of perhaps 100 m. They may also be used by submarines, AUVs, and floats such as the Argo float.
Passive sonar: Passive sonar listens without transmitting. It is often employed in military settings, although it is also used in science applications, e.g., detecting fish for presence/absence studies in various aquatic environments – see also passive acoustics and passive radar. In the very broadest usage, this term can encompass virtually any analytical technique involving remotely generated sound, though it is usually restricted to techniques applied in an aquatic environment.
Identifying sound sources: Passive sonar has a wide variety of techniques for identifying the source of a detected sound. For example, U.S. vessels usually operate 60 Hertz (Hz) alternating current power systems. If transformers or generators are mounted without proper vibration insulation from the hull or become flooded, the 60 Hz sound from the windings can be emitted from the submarine or ship. This can help to identify its nationality, as all European submarines and nearly every other nation's submarine have 50 Hz power systems. Intermittent sound sources (such as a wrench being dropped), called "transients," may also be detectable to passive sonar. Until fairly recently, an experienced, trained operator identified signals, but now computers may do this.
Passive sonar systems may have large sonic databases, but the sonar operator usually finally classifies the signals manually. A computer system frequently uses these databases to identify classes of ships, actions (i.e. the speed of a ship, or the type of weapon released and the most effective countermeasures to employ), and even particular ships.
Noise limitations: Passive sonar on vehicles is usually severely limited because of noise generated by the vehicle. For this reason, many submarines operate nuclear reactors that can be cooled without pumps, using silent convection, or fuel cells or batteries, which can also run silently. Vehicles' propellers are also designed and precisely machined to emit minimal noise. High-speed propellers often create tiny bubbles in the water, and this cavitation has a distinct sound.
The sonar hydrophones may be towed behind the ship or submarine in order to reduce the effect of noise generated by the watercraft itself. Towed units also combat the thermocline, as the unit may be towed above or below the thermocline.
The display of most passive sonars used to be a two-dimensional waterfall display. The horizontal direction of the display is bearing. The vertical is frequency, or sometimes time. Another display technique is to color-code frequency-time information for bearing. More recent displays are generated by the computers, and mimic radar-type plan position indicator displays.
Performance prediction: Unlike active sonar, only one-way propagation is involved. Because of the different signal processing used, the minimal detectable signal-to-noise ratio will be different. The equation for determining the performance of a passive sonar is
SL − PL = NL − AG + DT,
where SL is the source level, PL is the propagation loss, NL is the noise level, AG is the array gain and DT is the detection threshold. The figure of merit of a passive sonar is
FOM = SL + AG − (NL + DT). |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | The display of most passive sonars used to be a two-dimensional waterfall display. The horizontal direction of the display is bearing. The vertical is frequency, or sometimes time. Another display technique is to color-code frequency-time information for bearing. More recent displays are generated by the computers, and mimic radar-type plan position indicator displays.
Performance prediction: Unlike active sonar, only one-way propagation is involved. Because of the different signal processing used, the minimal detectable signal-to-noise ratio will be different. The equation for determining the performance of a passive sonar is
SL − PL = NL − AG + DT,
where SL is the source level, PL is the propagation loss, NL is the noise level, AG is the array gain and DT is the detection threshold. The figure of merit of a passive sonar is
FOM = SL + AG − (NL + DT).
Performance factors: The detection, classification and localisation performance of a sonar depends on the environment and the receiving equipment, as well as the transmitting equipment in an active sonar or the target radiated noise in a passive sonar.
Sound propagation: Sonar operation is affected by variations in sound speed, particularly in the vertical plane. Sound travels more slowly in fresh water than in sea water, though the difference is small. The speed is determined by the water's bulk modulus and mass density. The bulk modulus is affected by temperature, dissolved impurities (usually salinity), and pressure. The density effect is small. The speed of sound (in feet per second) is approximately:
4388 + (11.25 × temperature (in °F)) + (0.0182 × depth (in feet)) + salinity (in parts-per-thousand ).
This empirically derived approximation equation is reasonably accurate for normal temperatures, concentrations of salinity and the range of most ocean depths. Ocean temperature varies with depth, but at between 30 and 100 meters there is often a marked change, called the thermocline, dividing the warmer surface water from the cold, still waters that make up the rest of the ocean. This can frustrate sonar, because a sound originating on one side of the thermocline tends to be bent, or refracted, through the thermocline. The thermocline may be present in shallower coastal waters. However, wave action will often mix the water column and eliminate the thermocline. Water pressure also affects sound propagation: higher pressure increases the sound speed, which causes the sound waves to refract away from the area of higher sound speed. The mathematical model of refraction is called Snell's law.
If the sound source is deep and the conditions are right, propagation may occur in the 'deep sound channel'. This provides extremely low propagation loss to a receiver in the channel. This is because of sound trapping in the channel with no losses at the boundaries. Similar propagation can occur in the 'surface duct' under suitable conditions. However, in this case there are reflection losses at the surface.
In shallow water propagation is generally by repeated reflection at the surface and bottom, where considerable losses can occur.
Sound propagation is affected by absorption in the water itself as well as at the surface and bottom. This absorption depends upon frequency, with several different mechanisms in sea water. Long-range sonar uses low frequencies to minimise absorption effects.
The sea contains many sources of noise that interfere with the desired target echo or signature. The main noise sources are waves and shipping. The motion of the receiver through the water can also cause speed-dependent low frequency noise.
Scattering: When active sonar is used, scattering occurs from small objects in the sea as well as from the bottom and surface. This can be a major source of interference. This acoustic scattering is analogous to the scattering of the light from a car's headlights in fog: a high-intensity pencil beam will penetrate the fog to some extent, but broader-beam headlights emit much light in unwanted directions, much of which is scattered back to the observer, overwhelming that reflected from the target ("white-out"). For analogous reasons active sonar needs to transmit in a narrow beam to minimize scattering.
The scattering of sonar from objects (mines, pipelines, zooplankton, geological features, fish etc.) is how active sonar detects them, but this ability can be masked by strong scattering from false targets, or 'clutter'. Where they occur (under breaking waves; in ship wakes; in gas emitted from seabed seeps and leaks etc.), gas bubbles are powerful sources of clutter, and can readily hide targets. TWIPS (Twin Inverted Pulse Sonar) is currently the only sonar that can overcome this clutter problem. This is important as many recent conflicts have occurred in coastal waters, and the inability to detect whether mines are present or not present hazards and delays to military vessels, and also to aid convoys and merchant shipping trying to support the region long after the conflict has ceased.
Target characteristics: The sound reflection characteristics of the target of an active sonar, such as a submarine, are known as its target strength. A complication is that echoes are also obtained from other objects in the sea such as whales, wakes, schools of fish and rocks.
Passive sonar detects the target's radiated noise characteristics. The radiated spectrum comprises a continuous spectrum of noise with peaks at certain frequencies which can be used for classification.
Countermeasures: Active (powered) countermeasures may be launched by a vessel under attack to raise the noise level, provide a large false target, and obscure the signature of the vessel itself.
Passive (i.e., non-powered) countermeasures include:
Mounting noise-generating devices on isolating devices.
Sound-absorbent coatings on the hulls of submarines, for example anechoic tiles.
Military applications: Modern naval warfare makes extensive use of both passive and active sonar from water-borne vessels, aircraft and fixed installations. Although active sonar was used by surface craft in World War II, submarines avoided the use of active sonar due to the potential for revealing their presence and position to enemy forces. However, the advent of modern signal-processing enabled the use of passive sonar as a primary means for search and detection operations. In 1987 a division of Japanese company Toshiba reportedly sold machinery to the Soviet Union that allowed their submarine propeller blades to be milled so that they became radically quieter, making the newer generation of submarines more difficult to detect.
The use of active sonar by a submarine to determine bearing is extremely rare and will not necessarily give high quality bearing or range information to the submarines fire control team. However, use of active sonar on surface ships is very common and is used by submarines when the tactical situation dictates that it is more important to determine the position of a hostile submarine than conceal their own position. With surface ships, it might be assumed that the threat is already tracking the ship with satellite data as any vessel around the emitting sonar will detect the emission. Having heard the signal, it is easy to identify the sonar equipment used (usually with its frequency) and its position (with the sound wave's energy). Active sonar is similar to radar in that, while it allows detection of targets at a certain range, it also enables the emitter to be detected at a far greater range, which is undesirable.
Since active sonar reveals the presence and position of the operator, and does not allow exact classification of targets, it is used by fast (planes, helicopters) and by noisy platforms (most surface ships) but rarely by submarines. When active sonar is used by surface ships or submarines, it is typically activated very briefly at intermittent periods to minimize the risk of detection. Consequently, active sonar is normally considered a backup to passive sonar. In aircraft, active sonar is used in the form of disposable sonobuoys that are dropped in the aircraft's patrol area or in the vicinity of possible enemy sonar contacts.
Passive sonar has several advantages, most importantly that it is silent. If the target radiated noise level is high enough, it can have a greater range than active sonar, and allows the target to be identified. Since any motorized object makes some noise, it may in principle be detected, depending on the level of noise emitted and the ambient noise level in the area, as well as the technology used. To simplify, passive sonar "sees" around the ship using it. On a submarine, nose-mounted passive sonar detects in directions of about 270°, centered on the ship's alignment, the hull-mounted array of about 160° on each side, and the towed array of a full 360°. The invisible areas are due to the ship's own interference. Once a signal is detected in a certain direction (which means that something makes sound in that direction, this is called broadband detection) it is possible to zoom in and analyze the signal received (narrowband analysis). This is generally done using a Fourier transform to show the different frequencies making up the sound. Since every engine makes a specific sound, it is straightforward to identify the object. Databases of unique engine sounds are part of what is known as acoustic intelligence or ACINT.
Another use of passive sonar is to determine the target's trajectory. This process is called target motion analysis (TMA), and the resultant "solution" is the target's range, course, and speed. TMA is done by marking from which direction the sound comes at different times, and comparing the motion with that of the operator's own ship. Changes in relative motion are analyzed using standard geometrical techniques along with some assumptions about limiting cases.
Passive sonar is stealthy and very useful. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | This is generally done using a Fourier transform to show the different frequencies making up the sound. Since every engine makes a specific sound, it is straightforward to identify the object. Databases of unique engine sounds are part of what is known as acoustic intelligence or ACINT.
Another use of passive sonar is to determine the target's trajectory. This process is called target motion analysis (TMA), and the resultant "solution" is the target's range, course, and speed. TMA is done by marking from which direction the sound comes at different times, and comparing the motion with that of the operator's own ship. Changes in relative motion are analyzed using standard geometrical techniques along with some assumptions about limiting cases.
Passive sonar is stealthy and very useful. However, it requires high-tech electronic components and is costly. It is generally deployed on expensive ships in the form of arrays to enhance detection. Surface ships use it to good effect; it is even better used by submarines, and it is also used by airplanes and helicopters, mostly to a "surprise effect", since submarines can hide under thermal layers. If a submarine's commander believes he is alone, he may bring his boat closer to the surface and be easier to detect, or go deeper and faster, and thus make more sound.
Examples of sonar applications in military use are given below. Many of the civil uses given in the following section may also be applicable to naval use.
Anti-submarine warfare: Until recently, ship sonars were usually made with hull mounted arrays, either amidships or at the bow. It was soon found after their initial use that a means of reducing flow noise was required. The first were made of canvas on a framework, then steel ones were used. Now domes are usually made of reinforced plastic or pressurized rubber. Such sonars are primarily active in operation. An example of a conventional hull mounted sonar is the SQS-56.
Because of the problems of ship noise, towed sonars are also used. These have the advantage of being able to be placed deeper in the water, but have limitations on their use in shallow water. These are called towed arrays (linear) or variable depth sonars (VDS) with 2/3D arrays. A problem is that the winches required to deploy/recover them are large and expensive. VDS sets are primarily active in operation, while towed arrays are passive.
An example of a modern active-passive ship towed sonar is Sonar 2087 made by Thales Underwater Systems.
Torpedoes: Modern torpedoes are generally fitted with an active/passive sonar. This may be used to home directly on the target, but wake homing torpedoes are also used. An early example of an acoustic homer was the Mark 37 torpedo.
Torpedo countermeasures can be towed or free. An early example was the German Sieglinde device while the Bold was a chemical device. A widely used US device was the towed AN/SLQ-25 Nixie while the mobile submarine simulator (MOSS) was a free device. A modern alternative to the Nixie system is the UK Royal Navy S2170 Surface Ship Torpedo Defence system.
Mines: Mines may be fitted with a sonar to detect, localize and recognize the required target. An example is the CAPTOR mine.
Mine countermeasures: Mine countermeasure (MCM) sonar, sometimes called "mine and obstacle avoidance sonar (MOAS)", is a specialized type of sonar used for detecting small objects. Most MCM sonars are hull mounted but a few types are VDS design. An example of a hull mounted MCM sonar is the Type 2193 while the SQQ-32 mine-hunting sonar and Type 2093 systems are VDS designs.
Submarine navigation: Submarines rely on sonar to a greater extent than surface ships as they cannot use radar in water. The sonar arrays may be hull mounted or towed. Information fitted on typical fits is given in Oyashio-class submarine and Swiftsure-class submarine.
Aircraft: Helicopters can be used for antisubmarine warfare by deploying fields of active-passive sonobuoys or can operate dipping sonar, such as the AQS-13. Fixed wing aircraft can also deploy sonobuoys and have greater endurance and capacity to deploy them. Processing from the sonobuoys or dipping sonar can be on the aircraft or on ship. Dipping sonar has the advantage of being deployable to depths appropriate to daily conditions. Helicopters have also been used for mine countermeasure missions using towed sonars such as the AQS-20A.
Underwater communications: Dedicated sonars can be fitted to ships and submarines for underwater communication.
Ocean surveillance: The United States began a system of passive, fixed ocean surveillance systems in 1950 with the classified name Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) with American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T), with its Bell Laboratories research and Western Electric manufacturing entities being contracted for development and installation. The systems exploited the SOFAR channel, also known as the deep sound channel, where a sound speed minimum creates a waveguide in which low frequency sound travels thousands of miles. Analysis was based on an AT&T sound spectrograph, which converted sound into a visual spectrogram representing a time–frequency analysis of sound that was developed for speech analysis and modified to analyze low-frequency underwater sounds. That process was Low Frequency Analysis and Recording and the equipment was termed the Low Frequency Analyzer and Recorder, both with the acronym LOFAR. LOFAR research was termed Jezebel and led to usage in air and surface systems, particularly sonobuoys using the process and sometimes using "Jezebel" in their name. The proposed system offered such promise of long-range submarine detection that the Navy ordered immediate moves for implementation.
Between installation of a test array followed by a full scale, forty element, prototype operational array in 1951 and 1958 systems were installed in the Atlantic and then the Pacific under the unclassified name Project Caesar. The original systems were terminated at classified shore stations designated Naval Facility (NAVFAC) explained as engaging in "ocean research" to cover their classified mission. The system was upgraded multiple times with more advanced cable allowing the arrays to be installed in ocean basins and upgraded processing. The shore stations were eliminated in a process of consolidation and rerouting the arrays to central processing centers into the 1990s. In 1985, with new mobile arrays and other systems becoming operational the collective system name was changed to Integrated Undersea Surveillance System (IUSS). In 1991 the mission of the system was declassified. The year before IUSS insignia were authorized for wear. Access was granted to some systems for scientific research.
A similar system is believed to have been operated by the Soviet Union.
Underwater security: Sonar can be used to detect frogmen and other scuba divers. This can be applicable around ships or at entrances to ports. Active sonar can also be used as a deterrent and/or disablement mechanism. One such device is the Cerberus system.
Hand-held sonar: Limpet mine imaging sonar (LIMIS) is a hand-held or ROV-mounted imaging sonar designed for patrol divers (combat frogmen or clearance divers) to look for limpet mines in low visibility water.
The LUIS is another imaging sonar for use by a diver.
Integrated navigation sonar system (INSS) is a small flashlight-shaped handheld sonar for divers that displays range.
Intercept sonar: This is a sonar designed to detect and locate the transmissions from hostile active sonars. An example of this is the Type 2082 fitted on the British Vanguard-class submarines.
Civilian applications:
Fisheries: Fishing is an important industry that is seeing growing demand, but world catch tonnage is falling as a result of serious resource problems. The industry faces a future of continuing worldwide consolidation until a point of sustainability can be reached. However, the consolidation of the fishing fleets are driving increased demands for sophisticated fish finding electronics such as sensors, sounders and sonars. Historically, fishermen have used many different techniques to find and harvest fish. However, acoustic technology has been one of the most important driving forces behind the development of the modern commercial fisheries.
Sound waves travel differently through fish than through water because a fish's air-filled swim bladder has a different density than seawater. This density difference allows the detection of schools of fish by using reflected sound. Acoustic technology is especially well suited for underwater applications since sound travels farther and faster underwater than in air. Today, commercial fishing vessels rely almost completely on acoustic sonar and sounders to detect fish. Fishermen also use active sonar and echo sounder technology to determine water depth, bottom contour, and bottom composition.
Companies such as eSonar, Raymarine, Marport Canada, Wesmar, Furuno, Krupp, and Simrad make a variety of sonar and acoustic instruments for the deep sea commercial fishing industry. For example, net sensors take various underwater measurements and transmit the information back to a receiver on board a vessel. Each sensor is equipped with one or more acoustic transducers depending on its specific function. Data is transmitted from the sensors using wireless acoustic telemetry and is received by a hull mounted hydrophone. The analog signals are decoded and converted by a digital acoustic receiver into data which is transmitted to a bridge computer for graphical display on a high resolution monitor. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | Today, commercial fishing vessels rely almost completely on acoustic sonar and sounders to detect fish. Fishermen also use active sonar and echo sounder technology to determine water depth, bottom contour, and bottom composition.
Companies such as eSonar, Raymarine, Marport Canada, Wesmar, Furuno, Krupp, and Simrad make a variety of sonar and acoustic instruments for the deep sea commercial fishing industry. For example, net sensors take various underwater measurements and transmit the information back to a receiver on board a vessel. Each sensor is equipped with one or more acoustic transducers depending on its specific function. Data is transmitted from the sensors using wireless acoustic telemetry and is received by a hull mounted hydrophone. The analog signals are decoded and converted by a digital acoustic receiver into data which is transmitted to a bridge computer for graphical display on a high resolution monitor.
Echo sounding: Echo sounding is a process used to determine the depth of water beneath ships and boats. A type of active sonar, echo sounding is the transmission of an acoustic pulse directly downwards to the seabed, measuring the time between transmission and echo return, after having hit the bottom and bouncing back to its ship of origin. The acoustic pulse is emitted by a transducer which receives the return echo as well. The depth measurement is calculated by multiplying the speed of sound in water (averaging 1,500 meters per second) by the time between emission and echo return.
The value of underwater acoustics to the fishing industry has led to the development of other acoustic instruments that operate in a similar fashion to echo-sounders but, because their function is slightly different from the initial model of the echo-sounder, have been given different terms.
Net location: The net sounder is an echo sounder with a transducer mounted on the headline of the net rather than on the bottom of the vessel. Nevertheless, to accommodate the distance from the transducer to the display unit, which is much greater than in a normal echo-sounder, several refinements have to be made. Two main types are available. The first is the cable type in which the signals are sent along a cable. In this case, there has to be the provision of a cable drum on which to haul, shoot and stow the cable during the different phases of the operation. The second type is the cable-less net-sounder – such as Marport's Trawl Explorer – in which the signals are sent acoustically between the net and hull mounted receiver-hydrophone on the vessel. In this case, no cable drum is required but sophisticated electronics are needed at the transducer and receiver.
The display on a net sounder shows the distance of the net from the bottom (or the surface), rather than the depth of water as with the echo-sounder's hull-mounted transducer. Fixed to the headline of the net, the footrope can usually be seen which gives an indication of the net performance. Any fish passing into the net can also be seen, allowing fine adjustments to be made to catch the most fish possible. In other fisheries, where the amount of fish in the net is important, catch sensor transducers are mounted at various positions on the cod-end of the net. As the cod-end fills up these catch sensor transducers are triggered one by one and this information is transmitted acoustically to display monitors on the bridge of the vessel. The skipper can then decide when to haul the net.
Modern versions of the net sounder, using multiple element transducers, function more like a sonar than an echo sounder and show slices of the area in front of the net and not merely the vertical view that the initial net sounders used.
The sonar is an echo-sounder with a directional capability that can show fish or other objects around the vessel.
ROV and UUV: Small sonars have been fitted to remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) to allow their operation in murky conditions. These sonars are used for looking ahead of the vehicle. The Long-Term Mine Reconnaissance System is a UUV for MCM purposes.
Vehicle location: Sonars which act as beacons are fitted to aircraft to allow their location in the event of a crash in the sea. Short and long baseline sonars may be used for caring out the location, such as LBL.
Prosthesis for the visually impaired: In 2013 an inventor in the United States unveiled a "spider-sense" bodysuit, equipped with ultrasonic sensors and haptic feedback systems, which alerts the wearer of incoming threats; allowing them to respond to attackers even when blindfolded.
Scientific applications:
Biomass estimation: Detection of fish, and other marine and aquatic life, and estimation their individual sizes or total biomass using active sonar techniques. Sound pulses reflect off any object that has a different density than the surrounding medium. This includes fish, or more specifically, the air-filled swim bladder on fish. These echoes provide information on fish size, location, abundance and behavior. This is especially effective for fish swim bladders (e.g. herring, cod, and pollock), and less useful for fish without them (e.g. sharks, mackerel, and flounder). Data from the watercolumn is usually processed differently than seafloor or object detection data, this data type can be processed with specialized software.
Wave measurement: An upward looking echo sounder mounted on the bottom or on a platform may be used to make measurements of wave height and period. From this statistics of the surface conditions at a location can be derived.
Water velocity measurement: Special short range sonars have been developed to allow measurements of water velocity.
Bottom type assessment: Sonars have been developed that can be used to characterise the sea bottom into, for example, mud, sand, and gravel. Relatively simple sonars such as echo sounders can be promoted to seafloor classification systems via add-on modules, converting echo parameters into sediment type. Different algorithms exist, but they are all based on changes in the energy or shape of the reflected sounder pings. Advanced substrate classification analysis can be achieved using calibrated (scientific) echosounders and parametric or fuzzy-logic analysis of the acoustic data.
Bathymetric mapping: Side-scan sonars can be used to derive maps of seafloor topography (bathymetry) by moving the sonar across it just above the bottom. Low frequency sonars such as GLORIA have been used for continental shelf wide surveys while high frequency sonars are used for more detailed surveys of smaller areas.
Hull-mounted multibeam echosounders on large surface vessels produce swathes of bathymetric data in near real time. One example, the General Instrument "Seabeam" system, uses a projector array along the keel to ensonify the bottom with a fan beam. Signals from a hydrophone array mounted athwartships are processed to synthesize multiple virtual fan beams crossing the projector beam at right angles.
Sonar imaging: Creating two and three-dimensional images using sonar data.
Sub-bottom profiling: Powerful low frequency echo-sounders have been developed for providing profiles of the upper layers of the ocean bottom. One of the most recent devices is Innomar's SES-2000 quattro multi-transducer parametric SBP, used for example in the Puck Bay for underwater archaeological purposes
Gas leak detection from the seabed: Gas bubbles can leak from the seabed, or close to it, from multiple sources. These can be detected by both passive and active sonar (shown in schematic figure by yellow and red systems respectively).
Natural seeps of methane and carbon dioxide occur. Gas pipelines can leak, and it is important to be able to detect whether leakage occurs from Carbon Capture and Storage Facilities (CCSFs; e.g. depleted oil wells into which extracted atmospheric carbon is stored). Quantification of the amount of gas leaking is difficult, and although estimates can be made use active and passive sonar, it is important to question their accuracy because of the assumptions inherent in making such estimations from sonar data.
Synthetic aperture sonar: Various synthetic aperture sonars have been built in the laboratory and some have entered use in mine-hunting and search systems. An explanation of their operation is given in synthetic aperture sonar.
Parametric sonar: Parametric sources use the non-linearity of water to generate the difference frequency between two high frequencies. A virtual end-fire array is formed. Such a projector has advantages of broad bandwidth, narrow beamwidth, and when fully developed and carefully measured it has no obvious sidelobes: see Parametric array. Its major disadvantage is very low efficiency of only a few percent. P.J. Westervelt summarizes the trends involved.
Sonar in extraterrestrial contexts: The use of both active and passive sonar has been proposed for various extraterrestrial environments. One example is Titan, where active sonar could be used to determine the depth of its hydrocarbon seas, and passive sonar could be used to detect methanefalls.
Proposals that do not take proper account of the difference between terrestrial and extraterrestrial environments could lead to erroneous measurements.
Ecological impact:
Effect on marine mammals: Research has shown that use of active sonar can lead to mass strandings of marine mammals. Beaked whales, the most common casualty of the strandings, have been shown to be highly sensitive to mid-frequency active sonar. Other marine mammals such as the blue whale also flee from the source of the sonar, while naval activity was suggested to be the most probable cause of a mass stranding of dolphins. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sonar | P.J. Westervelt summarizes the trends involved.
Sonar in extraterrestrial contexts: The use of both active and passive sonar has been proposed for various extraterrestrial environments. One example is Titan, where active sonar could be used to determine the depth of its hydrocarbon seas, and passive sonar could be used to detect methanefalls.
Proposals that do not take proper account of the difference between terrestrial and extraterrestrial environments could lead to erroneous measurements.
Ecological impact:
Effect on marine mammals: Research has shown that use of active sonar can lead to mass strandings of marine mammals. Beaked whales, the most common casualty of the strandings, have been shown to be highly sensitive to mid-frequency active sonar. Other marine mammals such as the blue whale also flee from the source of the sonar, while naval activity was suggested to be the most probable cause of a mass stranding of dolphins. The US Navy, which part-funded some of the studies, said that the findings only showed behavioural responses to sonar, not actual harm, but they "will evaluate the effectiveness of [their] marine mammal protective measures in light of new research findings". A 2008 US Supreme Court ruling on the use of sonar by the US Navy noted that there had been no cases where sonar had been conclusively shown to have harmed or killed a marine mammal.
Some marine animals, such as whales and dolphins, use echolocation systems, sometimes called biosonar to locate predators and prey. Research on the effects of sonar on blue whales in the Southern California Bight shows that mid-frequency sonar use disrupts the whales' feeding behavior. This indicates that sonar-induced disruption of feeding and displacement from high-quality prey patches could have significant and previously undocumented impacts on baleen whale foraging ecology, individual fitness and population health.
A review of evidence on the mass strandings of beaked whale linked to naval exercises where sonar was used was published in 2019. It concluded that the effects of mid-frequency active sonar are strongest on Cuvier's beaked whales but vary among individuals or populations. The review suggested the strength of response of individual animals may depend on whether they had prior exposure to sonar, and that symptoms of decompression sickness have been found in stranded whales that may be a result of such response to sonar. It noted that in the Canary Islands where multiple strandings had been previously reported, no more mass strandings had occurred once naval exercises during which sonar was used were banned in the area, and recommended that the ban be extended to other areas where mass strandings continue to occur.
Effect on fish: Low frequency sonar can create a small temporary shift in the hearing threshold of some fish.
Frequencies and resolutions: The frequencies of sonars range from infrasonic to above a megahertz. Generally, the lower frequencies have longer range, while the higher frequencies offer better resolution, and smaller size for a given directionality.
To achieve reasonable directionality, frequencies below 1 kHz generally require large size, usually achieved as towed arrays.
Low frequency sonars are loosely defined as 1–5 kHz, albeit some navies regard 5–7 kHz also as low frequency. Medium frequency is defined as 5–15 kHz. Another style of division considers low frequency to be under 1 kHz, and medium frequency at between 1–10 kHz.
American World War II era sonars operated at a relatively high frequency of 20–30 kHz, to achieve directionality with reasonably small transducers, with typical maximum operational range of 2500 yd. Postwar sonars used lower frequencies to achieve longer range; e.g. SQS-4 operated at 10 kHz with range up to 5000 yd. SQS-26 and SQS-53 operated at 3 kHz with range up to 20,000 yd; their domes had size of approx. a 60-ft personnel boat, an upper size limit for conventional hull sonars. Achieving larger sizes by conformal sonar array spread over the hull has not been effective so far, for lower frequencies linear or towed arrays are therefore used.
Japanese WW2 sonars operated at a range of frequencies. The Type 91, with 30 inch quartz projector, worked at 9 kHz. The Type 93, with smaller quartz projectors, operated at 17.5 kHz (model 5 at 16 or 19 kHz magnetostrictive) at powers between 1.7 and 2.5 kilowatts, with range of up to 6 km. The later Type 3, with German-design magnetostrictive transducers, operated at 13, 14.5, 16, or 20 kHz (by model), using twin transducers (except model 1 which had three single ones), at 0.2 to 2.5 kilowatts. The simple type used 14.5 kHz magnetostrictive transducers at 0.25 kW, driven by capacitive discharge instead of oscillators, with range up to 2.5 km.
The sonar's resolution is angular; objects further apart are imaged with lower resolutions than nearby ones.
Another source lists ranges and resolutions vs frequencies for sidescan sonars. 30 kHz provides low resolution with range of 1000–6000 m, 100 kHz gives medium resolution at 500–1000 m, 300 kHz gives high resolution at 150–500 m, and 600 kHz gives high resolution at 75–150 m. Longer range sonars are more adversely affected by nonhomogenities of water. Some environments, typically shallow waters near the coasts, have complicated terrain with many features; higher frequencies become necessary there.
See also: Baffles (submarine) – Areas behind a submarine or ship where sonar cannot hear
Gordon Eugene Martin – American physicist (born 1925), sonar physicist
Explanatory notes:
Citations:
General bibliography: Dring, Thomas R. (March 2018). "A Steep Learning Curve: The Impact of Sonar Technology, Training, and Tactics on the Initial Years of U.S. Navy Antisubmarine Warfare in World War II". Warship International. LV (January 2018): 37–57. ISSN 0043-0374.
Hackmann, Willem. Seek & Strike: Sonar, Anti-submarine Warfare and the Royal Navy 1914–54. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1984. ISBN 0-11-290423-8.
Hackmann, Willem D. "Sonar Research and Naval Warfare 1914–1954: A Case Study of a Twentieth-Century Science" (subscription required). Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 16#1 (January 1986) 83–110. doi:10.2307/27757558.
Urick, R. J. (1983). Principles of Underwater Sound (3rd edition). Los Altos: Peninsula Publishing. ISBN 9780932146625. OCLC 1132503817.
Fisheries acoustics references: Fisheries Acoustics Research (FAR) at the University of Washington
NOAA Protocols for Fisheries Acoustics Surveys
Acoustics Unpacked Archived 2017-09-16 at the Wayback Machine—A "how to" great reference for freshwater hydroacoustics for resource assessment
"ACOUSTICS IN FISHERIES AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY"
"Hydroacoustic Protocol – Lakes, Reservoirs and Lowland Rivers" (for fish assessment)
Simmonds, E. John, and D. N. MacLennan. Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice, second edition. Fish and aquatic resources series, 10. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2003. ISBN 978-0-632-05994-2.
Further reading: "Canada: Stable Sonics", Time, October 28, 1946. An interesting account of the 4,800 ASDIC sonar devices secretly manufactured at Casa Loma, Toronto, during World War II. Retrieved 25 Sept. 2009.
"Radar of the Deep - SONAR", Popular Science, November 1945, pp. 84–87, 246, 250: one of the best general public articles on the subject
External links:
FFI Facts: Sonars and the marine environment by the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI)
Remote Sensing for Coastal Management: Single Beam Sonar—Coastal Services Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Space force | History: Emblems of space forces
The first artificial object to cross the Kármán line, the boundary between air and space, was MW 18014, an A-4 rocket launched by the German Heer on 20 June 1944 from the Peenemünde Army Research Center. The A4, more commonly known as the V-2, was the world's first ballistic missile, used by the Wehrmacht to launch long-range attacks on the Allied Forces on the Western Front during the Second World War. The designer of the A4, Wernher von Braun, had aspirations to use them as space launch vehicles. In both the United States and the Soviet Union, military space development began immediately after the Second World War concluded, with Wernher von Braun defecting to the Allies and both superpowers gathering V-2 rockets, research materials, and German scientists to jumpstart their own ballistic missile and space programs.
In the United States, there was a fierce interservice rivalry between the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army over which service would gain responsibility for the military space program, with the Air Force, which had started developing its space program while it was the Army Air Forces in 1945, seeing space operations as an extension of their strategic airpower mission, while the Army argued that ballistic missiles were an extension of artillery. The Navy also developed rockets as well, but primarily for Naval Research Laboratory projects, rather than seeking to actively develop an operational space capability. Ultimately, the Air Force's space rivals in the Army Ballistic Missile Agency, Naval Research Laboratory, and Advanced Research Projects Agency were absorbed by NASA when it was created in 1958, leaving it as the only major military space organization within the U.S. Department of Defense. In 1954, General Bernard Schriever established the Western Development Division within Air Research and Development Command, becoming the U.S. military's first space organization, which continues to exist in the U.S. Space Force as the Space Systems Command, its research and development center.
During the 1960s and 1970s, Air Force space forces were organized within Aerospace Defense Command for missile defense and space surveillance forces, Strategic Air Command for weather reconnaissance satellites, and Air Force Systems Command for satellite communications, space launch, and space development systems. In 1982, U.S. Air Force space forces were centralized in Air Force Space Command, the first direct predecessor to the U.S. Space Force. U.S. space forces were first employed in the Vietnam War, and continued to provide satellite communications, weather, and navigation support during the 1982 Falklands War, 1983 United States invasion of Grenada, 1986 United States bombing of Libya, and 1989 United States invasion of Panama. The first major employment of space forces culminated in the Gulf War, where they proved so critical to the U.S.-led coalition, that it is sometimes referred to as the first space war. The first discussions of creating a military space service in the United States occurred in 1958, with the idea being floated by President Reagan as well in 1982. The 2001 Space Commission argued for the creation of a Space Corps between 2007 and 2011 and a bipartisan proposal in the U.S. Congress would have created a Space Corps in 2017. Then on 20 December 2019, the United States Space Force Act, part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2020, was signed, creating an independent space service by renaming and reorganizing Air Force Space Command into the United States Space Force.
In the Soviet Union, the early space program was led by the OKB-1 design bureau, led by Sergei Korolev. Unlike in the United States, where the U.S. Air Force held preeminence in missile and space development, the Soviet Ground Forces, and specifically the Artillery of the Reserve of the Supreme High Command (RVGK), was responsible for missile and military space programs, with the RVGK responsible for the launch of Sputnik 1, the world's first artificial satellite on 4 October 1957. In 1960, Soviet military space forces were reorganized into the 3rd Department of the Main Missile Directorate of the Ministry of Defence, before in 1964 becoming a part of the new Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces Central Directorate of Space Assets. The Strategic Rocket Forces Central Directorate of Space Assets would be renamed the Main Directorate of Space Assets in 1970, being transferred to directly report to the Soviet Ministry of Defense in 1982, and in 1986 became the Chief Directorate of Space Assets. Established in 1967, the Anti-Ballistic Missile and Anti-Space Defense Forces of the Soviet Air Defense Forces were responsible for space surveillance and defense operations.
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Russian Federation gained its space forces, with the Chief Directorate of Space Assets was reorganized into the Military Space Forces, an independent troops (vid) under the Russian Ministry of Defense, but not a military service (vid). The Soviet Air Defense Forces' Anti-Ballistic Missile and Anti-Space Defense Forces were reorganized into the Russian Air Defense Forces' Rocket and Space Defence Troops. In 1997, the Rocket and Space Defence Troops and Military Space Forces were merged into the Strategic Missile Forces; it subordinated the priorities of the space troops to the missile forces, resulting in the establishment of the Russian Space Forces as independent troops in 2001. In 2011, the Russian Space Forces became the Russian Space Command, part of the Russian Aerospace Defense Forces, which merged Russia's space and air defense forces into one service. In 2015, the Russian Air Force and Russian Aerospace Defense Forces were merged to form the Russian Aerospace Forces, which reestablished the Russian Space Forces as one of its three sub-branches, although it is no longer an independent entity.
In 1998, the Chinese People's Liberation Army began creating its space forces under the General Armaments Department, before being reorganized and renamed as the People's Liberation Army Strategic Support Force Space Systems Department in 2015. The PLASSF itself would eventually dissolve, with the space force element of the SSF becoming the People's Liberation Army Aerospace Force
In 2010, the French Armed Forces created the Joint Space Command, a joint organism under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff. In 2019, the French President Emmanuel Macron announced that the Joint Space Command would become the Space Command and the newest major command of the Air Force, which would be renamed to reflect an "evolution of its mission" into the area of outer space. The Space Command is effective since 2019 and the Air Force was renamed Air and Space Force on 24 July 2020, with its new logo unveiled on 11 September 2020.
The Spanish Government announced in June 2022, that the Spanish Air Force would be renamed as the Spanish Air and Space Force.
Space forces: The following list outlines the independent space forces currently in operation:
United States Space Force (2019–present)
People's Liberation Army Aerospace Force (2024–present)
Russian Space Forces (2015–present) (independent from 1992 to 1997 and 2001 to 2011)
See also: List of space forces, units, and formations
Ranks and insignia of space forces
Militarisation of space
Politics of outer space
Space Force Association
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Space warfare | History:
1950s: During the early Cold War, a survivable reconnaissance asset was considered highly valuable. In a time before satellites, this meant building an aircraft that could fly higher or faster, or both, compared to any interceptor that would try to bring it down. Notably, the United States would introduce the U-2 spy plane in 1956. It was thought, at the time of its introduction, that the plane’s service ceiling of 24,000 metres (80,000 ft) would render it immune to Soviet aircraft, missiles, and radar. That was the case until the 1960 U-2 incident, where a United States U-2 spy plane was shot down by the Soviet Air Defense Forces’ S-75 Dvina (SA-2 Guideline) surface-to-air missile while conducting photographic aerial reconnaissance deep inside Soviet territory.
Three years before the incident, in 1957, a modified R-7 rocket carried the world's first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, into an orbit hundreds of kilometers above sea level, notably beyond the reach of any existing weapons system. While Sputnik 1 held no military value, only transmitting radio signals back to Earth for three weeks, its launch sparked the beginning of the Space Race. This spurred the United States to hasten and re-emphasize its space programs, culminating in the Explorer program, which launched the first American satellite into orbit in 1958. In tandem with the effort to achieve superior spaceflight capability over the other, the United States and the Soviet Union began to develop space warfare capabilities.
1960s: Early efforts to conduct space warfare were directed at space-to-space warfare, as ground-to-space systems were considered to be too slow and too isolated by Earth's atmosphere and gravity to be effective at the time. The history of active space warfare development goes back to the 1960s when the Soviet Union began the Almaz project, a project designed to give them the ability to do on-orbit inspections of satellites and destroy them if needed. Similar planning in the United States took the form of the Blue Gemini project, which consisted of modified Gemini capsules that would be able to deploy weapons and perform surveillance.
One early test of electronic space warfare, the so-called Starfish Prime test, took place in 1962 when the United States exploded a ground-launched nuclear weapon in space to test the effects of an electromagnetic pulse. The result was a deactivation of many then-orbiting satellites, both American and Soviet. The deleterious and unfocused effects of the EMP test led to the banning of nuclear weapons in space in the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. (See high-altitude nuclear explosion.)
In the early 1960s, the U.S. military produced a film called Space and National Security which depicted space warfare.
1970s–1990s: Through the 1970s, the Soviet Union continued their project and test-fired a cannon to test space station defense. This was considered too dangerous to do with a crew on board, however, so the test was conducted after the crew had returned to Earth.
A 1976 Soviet report suggested that the design of the Space Shuttle had been guided by a requirement to deliver a payload- such as a bomb- over Russia and return to land after a single orbit. This may have been a confusion based on requirements 3A and 3B for the shuttle's design, which required the craft to be able to deploy or retrieve an object from a polar orbit in a single pass.
Both the Soviets and the United States developed anti-satellite weaponry designed to shoot down satellites. While early efforts paralleled other space-to-space warfare concepts, the United States was able in the 1980s to develop ground-to-space laser anti-satellite weapons. None of these systems are known to be active today; however, a less powerful civilian version of the ground-to-space laser system is commonly used in the astronomical technique of adaptive optics.
In 1984, the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI) was proposed. It was nicknamed Star Wars after the popular science fiction franchise Star Wars.
In 1985, the United States demonstrated its conventional ASAT capabilities by launching an ASM-135 ASAT from an F-15 to shoot down the Solwind P78-1, an American research satellite, from its 555-kilometre (345 mi) orbit.
Since 2000: The People's Republic of China successfully tested (see 2007 Chinese anti-satellite missile test) a ballistic missile-launched anti-satellite weapon on January 11, 2007. This resulted in harsh criticism from the United States of America, Britain, and Japan.
The U.S. developed an interceptor missile, the SM-3, testing it by hitting ballistic test targets while they were in space. On February 21, 2008, the U.S. used an SM-3 missile to destroy a spy satellite, USA-193, while it was 247 kilometers (133 nautical miles) above the Pacific Ocean.
Japan fields the U.S.-made SM-3 missile, and there have been plans to base the land-based version in Romania and Vietnam.
In March 2019, India shot down a satellite orbiting in a low Earth orbit using an ASAT missile during an operation code named Mission Shakti, thus making its way to the list of space warfare nations, establishing the Defense Space Agency the following month, followed by its first-ever simulated space warfare exercise on July 25 which would inform a joint military space doctrine.
In July 2019, Emmanuel Macron "called for a space high command to protect" France's satellites. This was followed by a plan released by military officials. French Defense Minister, Florence Parly, announced a space weapons program that would move the country's space surveillance strategy towards active protection of its assets in space, e.g., satellites. The projects outlined include: patrolling nano-satellites swarms, ground-based laser systems to blind spying satellites, and machine guns mounted on satellites.
Starlink, SpaceX's large low Earth orbit satellite constellation, was extensively used for warfare following Russia's invasion of Ukraine after the country's previous satcom provider Viasat were cyberattacked in the first few days of the invasion. Starlink was used for defense and attacks on Russian positions, with Starlink terminals being namely strapped on strike drones and sea drones. SpaceX vowed and acted against the use of their Starlink service for active warfare, while Russia launched cyberattacks against Starlink and threatened of striking Starlink satellites directly in retaliation.
On October 31, 2023, as part of the Israel–Hamas War, Israel intercepted a Houthi ballistic missile with its Arrow 2 missile defense system. According to Israeli officials, the interception occurred above Earth's atmosphere above the Negev Desert, making it the first instance of space combat in history.
Theoretical space weaponry:
Ballistic warfare: In the late 1970s and through the 1980s, the Soviet Union and the United States theorized, designed and in some cases tested a variety of weaponry designed for warfare in outer space. Space warfare was seen primarily as an extension of nuclear warfare, and many theoretical systems were based around the destruction or defense of ground and sea-based missiles. Space-based missiles were not attempted due to the Outer Space Treaty, which banned the use, testing or storage of nuclear weapons outside the Earth's atmosphere. When the U.S. gained "interest in utilizing space-based lasers for ballistic missile defense", two facts emerged. One being that the ballistic missiles are fragile and two, chemical lasers project missile killing energy (3,000 kilometers). This meant that lasers could be put into space to intercept a ballistic missile.
Systems proposed ranged from measures as simple as ground and space-based anti-missiles to railguns, space based lasers, orbital mines and similar weaponry. Deployment of these systems was seriously considered in the mid-1980s under the banner of the Strategic Defense Initiative announced by Ronald Reagan in 1983, using the term "evil empire" to describe the Soviets (hence the popular nickname "Star Wars"). If the Cold War had continued, many of these systems could potentially have seen deployment: the United States developed working railguns, and a laser that could destroy missiles at range, though the power requirements, range, and firing cycles of both were impractical. Weapons like the space-based laser was rejected, not just by the government, but by universities, moral thinkers, and religious people because it would have increased the waging of the arms race and questioned the United States' role in the Cold War.
Electronic warfare: With the end of the Cold War and continued development of satellite and electronics technology, attention was focused on space as a supporting theatre for conventional warfare. Currently, military operations in space primarily concern either the vast tactical advantages of satellite-based surveillance, communications, and positioning systems or mechanisms used to deprive an opponent of said tactical advantages.
Accordingly, most space-borne proposals which would traditionally be considered "weapons" (a communications or reconnaissance satellite may be useful in warfare but isn't generally classified as a weapon) are designed to jam, sabotage, and outright destroy enemy satellites, and conversely to protect friendly satellites against such attacks. To this end, the US (and presumably other countries) is researching groups of small, highly mobile satellites called "microsats" (about the size of a refrigerator) and "picosats" (approximately 1 cubic foot (≈27 litres) in volume) nimble enough to maneuver around and interact with other orbiting objects to repair, sabotage, hijack, or simply collide with them. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Space warfare | Currently, military operations in space primarily concern either the vast tactical advantages of satellite-based surveillance, communications, and positioning systems or mechanisms used to deprive an opponent of said tactical advantages.
Accordingly, most space-borne proposals which would traditionally be considered "weapons" (a communications or reconnaissance satellite may be useful in warfare but isn't generally classified as a weapon) are designed to jam, sabotage, and outright destroy enemy satellites, and conversely to protect friendly satellites against such attacks. To this end, the US (and presumably other countries) is researching groups of small, highly mobile satellites called "microsats" (about the size of a refrigerator) and "picosats" (approximately 1 cubic foot (≈27 litres) in volume) nimble enough to maneuver around and interact with other orbiting objects to repair, sabotage, hijack, or simply collide with them.
Kinetic bombardment: Another theorized use involves the extension of conventional weaponry into orbit for deployment against ground targets. Though international treaties ban the deployment of nuclear missiles outside the atmosphere, other categories of weapons are largely unregulated. Traditional ground-based weapons are generally not useful in orbital environments, and few if any would survive re-entry even if they were, but as early as the 1950s, the United States has toyed with kinetic bombardment, i.e. orbiting magazines of non-explosive projectiles to be dropped onto hardened targets from low Earth orbit.Kinetic weapons have always been widespread in conventional warfare—bullets, arrows, swords, clubs, etc.—but the energy a projectile would gain while falling from orbit would make such a weapon rival all but the most powerful explosives. A direct hit would presumably destroy all but the most hardened targets without the need for nuclear weapons.
Such a system would involve a 'spotter' satellite, which would identify targets from orbit with high-power sensors, and a nearby 'magazine' satellite to de-orbit a long, needle-like tungsten dart onto it with a small rocket motor or just dropping a very big rock from orbit (such as an asteroid, cf. Ivan's hammer). This would be more useful against a larger but less hardened target (such as a city). Though a common device in science fiction, there is no publicly available evidence that any such systems have actually been deployed by any nation.
Directed-energy weapons: Weapon systems that fall under this category include lasers, linear particle accelerators or particle-beam based weaponry, microwaves and plasma-based weaponry. Particle beams involve the acceleration of charged or neutral particles in a stream towards a target at extremely high velocities, the impact of which creates a reaction causing immense damage. Most of these weapons are theoretical or impractical to implement currently, aside from lasers which have been used to blind satellites and are starting to be used in terrestrial warfare. That said, directed-energy weapons are more practical and more effective in a vacuum (i.e. space) than in the Earth's atmosphere, as in the atmosphere the particles of air interfere with and disperse the directed energy. Nazi Germany had a project for such a weapon, considered a wunderwaffe, the sun gun, which would have been an orbital concave mirror able to concentrate the sun's energy on a ground target.
In the context of space-based deployment, directed-energy weapons can be distinguished as either “high-powered” or “dazzler.” High-powered satellite-operated lasers are intended to deal irreversible damage to the sensitive parts, mainly optics, on satellites and have the advantage of being difficult to attribute to an actor. Though, it is difficult to confirm the success of an attack. Dazzlers are not intended to deal irreversible damage but rather disable a target satellite. It maintains the same advantages and disadvantages as the high-powered variant. Though such systems not yet functional, the US Defense Intelligence Agency notes that several actors, including the United States, PRC, Russia, and France, are actively pursuing these capabilities.
Practical considerations: Space warfare is likely to be done at far larger distances and speeds than combat on Earth. The vast distances pose big challenges for targeting and tracking, as even light requires a few seconds to cover hundreds of thousands of kilometers. For example, if trying to fire on a target at the distance of the Moon from the Earth, one sees the position of the target slightly more than a second earlier. Thus even a laser would need ~1.28 seconds, meaning a laser-based weapon system would need to lead a target's apparent position by 1.28×2 = 2.56 seconds. A projectile from a railgun recently tested by the US Navy would take over 18 hours to cross that distance, if it travels in a straight line at a constant velocity of 5.8 km/s along its entire trajectory.
Three factors make engaging targets in space very difficult. First, the vast distances mean that an error of even a fraction of a degree in the firing solution can mean a miss by thousands of kilometers. Second, spaceflight involves tremendous speeds by terrestrial standards—a geostationary satellite moves at 3.07 km/s, and objects in low Earth orbit move at ~8 km/s. Third, though distances are huge, targets remain relatively small. The International Space Station, currently the largest artificial object in Earth orbit, measures slightly over 100m at its largest span. Other satellites can be vastly smaller, e.g., Quickbird measures only 3.04m. External ballistics for stationary terrestrial targets is enormously complicated—some of the earliest analog computers were used to calculate firing solutions for naval artillery, as the problems were already beyond manual solutions in any reasonable time—and targeting objects in space is far harder. And, though not a problem for orbital kinetic weapons, any directed energy weapon would need huge amounts of electricity. So far the most practical batteries are lithium, and the most practical means of generating electricity in space is photovoltaic modules, which are currently only up to 30% efficient, and fuel cells, which have limited fuel. Current technology might not be practical for powering effective lasers, particle beams, and railguns in space. In the context of the Strategic Defense Initiative, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the United States worked on a project for expandable space-based x-ray lasers powered by a nuclear explosion, Project Excalibur, a project canceled in 1992 for lack of results. SDI projects included Zenith Star, using the Alpha chemical laser.
General William L. Shelton has said that in order to protect against attacks, Space Situational Awareness is much more important than additional hardening or armoring of satellites. The Air Force Space Command has indicated that their defensive focus will be on "Disaggregated Space Architectures".
Space debris: Anti-satellite attacks, especially ones with kinetic kill vehicles, can form space debris which can stay in orbit for many years and could interfere with future space activity or in a worst case trigger Kessler syndrome. In January 2007 China did a satellite knock out whose detonation alone caused more than 40,000 new chunks of debris with a diameter > 1 cm and a sudden increase in the total amount of debris in orbit. The PRC is reported to be developing "soft-kill" techniques such as jamming and vision kills that do not generate much debris.
Possible warfare over space: Most of the world's communications systems rely heavily on the presence of satellites in orbit around Earth. Protecting these assets might seriously motivate nations dependent upon them to consider deploying more space-based weaponry, especially in conflicts involving advanced countries with access to space.
Since 2017, the United States Air Force has run an annual military exercise called "Space Flag" at Peterson Space Force Base, which involves a red team simulating attacks on U.S. satellites.
Robert Zubrin, aerospace engineer and advocate for human exploration of Mars, stated that anti-satellite weapons capabilities of nations increases, space infrastructures must be able to defend itself using other satellites that can destroy such weapons. Or else, he states, satellite-based navigation, communications and reconnaissance capabilities would be severely limited and easily influenced by adversaries.: 63–66
Direct Ascent: The modern incarnations of the ASM-135 ASAT program are the so-called direct-ascent anti-satellite weapons. These weapons are usually either ballistic or anti-ballistic interceptor missiles, which ascend directly from Earth to intercept their target and have been adapted to the anti-satellite role. To date, four countries have demonstrated their ability to launch these weapons, the USA, the PRC, India, and Russia, but so far none have conducted such an attack on another country’s satellites.
Direct-ascent ASATs leverage existing technologies and launch platforms to neutralize both space-based and ground-based targets. This option tends to be highly destructive and indiscriminate as any attack will produce space debris, which can indiscriminately affect other satellites in similar orbits. While this option comes with the benefit of leveraging existing technologies and a certain element of surprise, as an attack cannot be detected until a missile has exited its silo, there are significant downsides. Firstly, there is the cost disparity of using an ICBM or ABM to kill a small and inexpensive satellite. Additionally, these missiles are not designed to send payloads out to geocentric orbit, as such they can only affect targets in low earth orbit and only in a target area centered around the static location of the missile itself.
Co-Orbital: Co-orbital systems come with a few potential kill mechanisms: in guided kinetic vehicles, like the Multiple Kill Vehicle, or in the form of a satellite that can release a kinetic interceptor or a cloud of debris. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Space warfare | This option tends to be highly destructive and indiscriminate as any attack will produce space debris, which can indiscriminately affect other satellites in similar orbits. While this option comes with the benefit of leveraging existing technologies and a certain element of surprise, as an attack cannot be detected until a missile has exited its silo, there are significant downsides. Firstly, there is the cost disparity of using an ICBM or ABM to kill a small and inexpensive satellite. Additionally, these missiles are not designed to send payloads out to geocentric orbit, as such they can only affect targets in low earth orbit and only in a target area centered around the static location of the missile itself.
Co-Orbital: Co-orbital systems come with a few potential kill mechanisms: in guided kinetic vehicles, like the Multiple Kill Vehicle, or in the form of a satellite that can release a kinetic interceptor or a cloud of debris. The first co-orbital system, Istrebitel Sputnikov, was developed by the Soviet Union in the 1970s and reportedly utilized one of these mechanisms.
There are allegations that Russia continues to test co-orbital ASAT weapons as recently as 2020. In 2020 the U.S. State Department claimed that a Russian satellite, Cosmos-2519, exhibited behavior “inconsistent” with its intended mission. While in orbit, Kosmos-2519 deployed a smaller satellite, which Russian state media claimed: “conducted autonomous flight, a change in orbit, and a satellite inspection before returning to the base station”. Another incident back in 2019 involved two Russian satellites, Kosmos 2542 and 2543, one of which appeared to begin following a U.S. national security satellite. Such “inspector” satellites can be armed with lasers to provide non-destructive interference or deadly kinetic interceptors.
While these co-orbital systems provide more utility when compared to more direct and destructive options, their advantages are contingent on being maneuverable and inconspicuous. Given the increasing paranoia surrounding co-orbital anti-satellite, it is hard to believe that the major players in space will fail to notice the deployment of “research” satellites.
Space warfare in science fiction: Space warfare is a staple of science fiction, where it is shown with a wide range of realism and plausibility. Fictional space warfare includes anticipated future technology and tactics, and fantasy- or history-based scenarios in a scifi setting. Some portray a space military as like an air force; others depict a more naval framework. Still others suggest forces more like space marine: highly mobile forces doing interplanetary and interstellar war but most of the conflict happens in terrestrial environments. The main sub-genres of the Space warfare in science fiction thematic genre are space opera, Military and Space Western. Though sword and planet stories like Finisterre universe by C. J. Cherryh might be considered, they rarely feature such technologies. These three genres often intertwine and have themes that are common to all. Written Space Westerns are often based directly on existing established scifi space opera franchises with expanded universes like Star Wars and Star Trek, including Warhammer 40,000: the most popular space opera military miniature wargame which spawned successful spin-off media: novels, video-games and on-going live adaption based on books by Dan Abnett.
Both kinetic and directed energy weapons are often seen, along with various military space vessels. E. E. Smith's Lensman is an early example, which also inspired the term space opera due to the grandiose scale of the stories. Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game series is a notable example in that it makes a conjecture as to what sort of tactics and training would be needed for war in outer space. Other scifi authors have also delved into the tactics of space combat, such as David Weber in his Honorverse series, and Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle in their Mote in God's Eye series. A more recent example is Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space universe, which explores combat at relativistic speed. Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers is perhaps one of the best-known and earliest explorations of the "space marine" idea.
Space-based vehicular combat is portrayed in many movies and video games, most notably Star Wars, Stargate, Halo, Descent, Gundam, Macross, Babylon 5, and Star Trek. Games such as the Homeworld series have interesting concepts for space warfare, such as 3D battle formations, plasma-based projectors that get their energy from a ship's propulsion system, and automated uncrewed space combat vehicles. Other series, such as Gundam, prominently show vehicular combat in and among many near future concepts, such as O'Neill cylinders.
Fictional galaxies with space warfare are far too many to list, but popular examples include Star Trek (in all of its forms), Star Wars, Halo, Stargate, Warhammer 40,000, Babylon 5, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, Battlestar Galactica, Mass Effect, Freespace and many comic book franchises. Video games often touch the subject; the Wing Commander franchise is a prototypical example. Few games try to simulate realistic distance and speed, though Independence War and Frontier: Elite II both do, as does the board game Attack Vector: Tactical.
Many authors have either used a galaxy-spanning fictional empire as background or written about the growth and/or decline of such an empire. Said empire's capital is often a core world, such as a planet relatively close to a galaxy's supermassive black hole. Characterization can vary wildly from malevolent forces attacking sympathetic victims to apathetic bureaucracies to more reasonable entities focused on social progress, and anywhere in between. Scifi writers generally posit some form of faster-than-light drive in order to facilitate interstellar war. Writers such as Larry Niven have developed plausible interplanetary conflict based on human colonization of the asteroid belt and outer planets via technologies using currently known physics.
See also: Asteroid impact avoidance
Beijing–Washington space hotline
Militarisation of space
Space force
Space weapon
Starlink satellite services in Ukraine, instance of a satellite constellation being used for warfare
Sun outage
Related to specific countries and facilities:
Department of Defense Manned Space Flight Support Office
European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company
Joint Functional Component Command for Space and Global Strike (US Strategic Command)
National Missile Defense
Pine Gap (Australia)
United States Air Force Space Command
United States Army Space and Missile Defense Command
References:
Further reading: Hobbes, D (1986): An Illustrated Guide to Space Warfare Salamander Books Ltd. ISBN 0-86101-204-6.
Macvey, John W.: Space Weapons, Space War. New York: 1979 Stein and Day (written by a professional astronomer). ISBN 978-0812861112.
David Jordan: Air and Space Warfare, pp. 178–223, in:Understanding modern warfare. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge 2008, ISBN 978-0-521-87698-8.
John J. Klein: Space Warfare: Strategy, Principles and Policy. Routledge, Oxford 2006, ISBN 978-0-415-40796-0.
Joan Johnson-Freese: Space Warfare in the 21st Century – Arming the Heavens. Routledge, Oxford 2016, ISBN 978-1-138-69388-3. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Special forces | Capabilities: Special forces capabilities include the following:
Special reconnaissance and surveillance in hostile environments
Foreign internal defense: Training and development of other states' military and security forces
Offensive action
Support to counter-insurgency through population engagement and support
Counter-terrorism operations
Sabotage and demolition
Hostage rescue
Other capabilities can include close personal protection; waterborne operations involving combat diving/combat swimming, maritime boarding and amphibious missions; as well as support of air force operations.
History:
Early period: Special forces have played an important role throughout the history of warfare, whenever the aim was to achieve disruption by "hit and run" and sabotage, rather than more traditional conventional combat. Other significant roles lay in reconnaissance, providing essential intelligence from near or among the enemy and increasingly in combating irregular forces, their infrastructure and activities.
Chinese strategist Jiang Ziya, in his Six Secret Teachings, described recruiting talented and motivated men into specialized elite units with functions such as commanding heights and making rapid long-distance advances. Hamilcar Barca in Sicily (249 BC) had specialized troops trained to launch several offensives per day. In the late Roman or early Byzantine period, Roman fleets used small, fast, camouflaged ships crewed by selected men for scouting and commando missions. In the Middle Ages, special forces trained to conduct special operations were employed in several occasions. An example of this were the special forces of Gerald the Fearless, a Portuguese warrior and folk hero of the Reconquista. Muslim forces also had naval special operations units, including one that used camouflaged ships to gather intelligence and launch raids and another of soldiers who could pass for Crusaders who would use ruses to board enemy ships and then capture and destroy them. In Japan, ninjas were used for reconnaissance, espionage and as assassins, bodyguards or fortress guards, or otherwise fought alongside conventional soldiers. During the Napoleonic wars, rifle regiments and sapper units were formed that held specialised roles in reconnaissance and skirmishing and were not committed to the formal battle lines.
First specialized units: Between the 17th and 18th centuries, there were wars between American colonists and Native American tribes. In Colonial America specialized Rangers formed and first mentioned by Capt. John Smith, in 1622. Learning frontier skills from friendly Native Americans the Rangers helped carry out offensive strikes "frontier combat" against hostile Natives. Thus Ranger companies were formed to provide reconnaissance, intelligence, light infantry, and scouting. Colonel Benjamin Church (c. 1639–1718) was the captain of the first Ranger force in America (1676).
Many Colonial officers would take the philosophies of Benjamin Church's ranging and form their own Ranger units.
Several Ranger companies were established in the American colonies, including Knowlton's Rangers, an elite corps of Rangers who supplied reconnaissance and espionage for George Washington's Continental Army.
Daniel Morgan, was known as leader of The Corps of Rangers for the Continental Army. Rogers' Rangers on Roger's Island, in modern-day Fort Edward, New York, is regarded as the "spiritual home" of the United States Special Operations Forces, specifically the United States Army Rangers. These early American light infantry battalions were trained under Robert Rogers' 28 "Rules of Ranging", which is considered the first known manual of modern asymmetric warfare tactics used in modern special operations.
Various military Ranger units such as the United States Mounted Rangers, United States Rangers, Loudoun Rangers, 43rd Virginia Rangers, and Texas Military Rangers continued throughout the 19th-20th century until the modern formation of the Army Ranger Battalions in WWII.
The British Indian Army deployed two special forces during their border wars: the Corps of Guides formed in 1846 and the Gurkha Scouts (a force that was formed in the 1890s and was first used as a detached unit during the 1897–1898 Tirah Campaign).
During the Second Boer War (1899–1902) the British Army felt the need for more specialised units. Scouting units such as the Lovat Scouts, a Scottish Highland regiment made up of exceptional woodsmen outfitted in ghillie suits and well practised in the arts of marksmanship, field craft, and military tactics filled this role. This unit was formed in 1900 by Lord Lovat and early on reported to an American, Major Frederick Russell Burnham, the Chief of Scouts under Lord Roberts. After the war, Lovat's Scouts went on to formally become the British Army's first sniper unit. Additionally, the Bushveldt Carbineers, formed in 1901, can be seen as an early unconventional warfare unit.
The Luna Sharpshooters, also known as the "Marksmen of Death" (Spanish: Tiradores de la Muerte), was an elite unit formed on 1899 by General Antonio Luna to serve under the Philippine Revolutionary Army. They became famous for fighting fiercer than the regular Filipino army soldiers. Most of the members of this unit came from the old Spanish Army filipino members which fought during the Philippine Revolution.
The sharpshooters became famous for their fierce fighting and proved their worth by being the usual spearheading unit in every major battle in the Philippine–American War. In the Battle of Paye on December 19, 1899, Bonifacio Mariano, a sharpshooter under the command of General Licerio Gerónimo, killed General Henry Ware Lawton of the United States Army, making the latter the highest ranking casualty during the course of the war.
World War I: The German Stormtroopers and the Italian Arditi were the first modern shock troops. They were both elite assault units trained to a much higher level than that of average troops and tasked to carry out daring attacks and bold raids against enemy defenses. Unlike Stormtroopers, Arditi were not units within infantry divisions, but were considered a separate combat arm.
Interwar period:
Chaco war: The Macheteros de Jara was an auxiliary cavalry regiment that was organized since August 15, 1932, before the Battle of Boquerón began. The regiment was recruited from former outlaws from Paraguay who fought against Bolivian officers and soldiers.
The 50th Infantry Regiment (Cuchilleros de la Muerte) was a Bolivian infantry regiment that fought in the Chaco War. Nicknamed the Knives of Death (Spanish: Cuchillos de la Muerte), the regiment relied almost exclusively on the use of blade weapons, particularly bayonets.
World War II:
British:
Commandos: Modern special forces emerged during the Second World War. In 1940, the British Commandos were formed following Winston Churchill's call for "specially trained troops of the hunter class, who can develop a reign of terror down the enemy coast." A staff officer, Lieutenant Colonel Dudley Clarke, had already submitted such a proposal to General Sir John Dill, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff. Dill, aware of Churchill's intentions, approved Clarke's proposal and on 23 June 1940, the first Commando raid took place.
By the autumn of 1940 more than 2,000 men had volunteered and in November 1940 these new units were organised into a Special Service Brigade consisting of four battalions under the command of Brigadier J. C. Haydon. The Special Service Brigade was quickly expanded to 12 units which became known as Commandos. Each Commando had a lieutenant colonel as the commanding officer and numbered around 450 men (divided into 75 man troops that were further divided into 15 man sections).
In December 1940 a Middle East Commando depot was formed with the responsibility of training and supplying reinforcements for the Commando units in that theatre. In February 1942 the Commando training depot at Achnacarry in the Scottish Highlands was established by Brigadier Charles Haydon. Under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Charles Vaughan, the Commando depot was responsible for training complete units and individual replacements. The training regime was for the time innovative and physically demanding, and far in advance of normal British Army training. The depot staff were all hand picked, with the ability to outperform any of the volunteers.
Training and assessment started immediately on arrival, with the volunteers having to complete an 8-mile (13 km) march with all their equipment from the Spean Bridge railway station to the commando depot. Exercises were conducted using live ammunition and explosives to make training as realistic as possible. Physical fitness was a prerequisite, with cross country runs and boxing matches to improve fitness. Speed and endurance marches were conducted up and down the nearby mountain ranges and over assault courses that included a zip-line over Loch Arkaig, all while carrying arms and full equipment. Training continued by day and night with river crossings, mountain climbing, weapons training, unarmed combat, map reading, and small boat operations on the syllabus.
Reaching a wartime strength of over 30 individual units and four assault brigades, the Commandos served in all theatres of war from the Arctic Circle to Europe and from the Mediterranean and Middle East to South-East Asia. Their operations ranged from small groups of men landing from the sea or by parachute to a brigade of assault troops spearheading the Allied invasions of Europe and Asia. The first modern special forces units were established by men who had served with the Commandos, including the Parachute Regiment, Special Air Service, and Special Boat Service. The No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando organised by British of volunteers from occupied Europe led to French Commandos Marine, Dutch Korps Commandotroepen, Belgian Paracommando Brigade. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Special forces | Training continued by day and night with river crossings, mountain climbing, weapons training, unarmed combat, map reading, and small boat operations on the syllabus.
Reaching a wartime strength of over 30 individual units and four assault brigades, the Commandos served in all theatres of war from the Arctic Circle to Europe and from the Mediterranean and Middle East to South-East Asia. Their operations ranged from small groups of men landing from the sea or by parachute to a brigade of assault troops spearheading the Allied invasions of Europe and Asia. The first modern special forces units were established by men who had served with the Commandos, including the Parachute Regiment, Special Air Service, and Special Boat Service. The No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando organised by British of volunteers from occupied Europe led to French Commandos Marine, Dutch Korps Commandotroepen, Belgian Paracommando Brigade.
Special Air Service (SAS): The first modern special forces unit was the Special Air Service (SAS), formed in July 1941 from an unorthodox idea and plan by Lieutenant David Stirling. In June 1940 he volunteered for the No. 8 (Guards) Commando (later named "Layforce"). After Layforce was disbanded, Stirling remained convinced that due to the mechanized nature of war a small team of highly trained soldiers with the advantage of surprise could exact greater damage to the enemy's ability to fight than an entire platoon. His idea was for small teams of parachute trained soldiers to operate behind enemy lines to gain intelligence, destroy enemy aircraft, and attack their supply and reinforcement routes. Following a meeting with the C-in-C Middle East, General Claude Auchinleck, his plan was endorsed by the Army High Command.
The force initially consisted of five officers and 60 other ranks. Following extensive training at Kabrit camp, by the River Nile, L Detachment, SAS Brigade, undertook its first operations in the Western Desert. Stirling's vision was eventually vindicated after a series of successful operations. In 1942, the SAS attacked Bouerat. Transported by the Long Range Desert Group (which carried out deep penetration, covert reconnaissance patrols, intelligence missions and attacks behind the enemy lines from 1940), they caused severe damage to the harbour, petrol tanks and storage facilities. This was followed up in March by a raid on Benghazi harbour with limited success but they did damage to 15 aircraft at Al-Berka. The June 1942 Crete airfield raids at Heraklion, Kasteli, Tympaki and Maleme significant damage was caused, and raids at Fuka and Mersa Matruh airfields destroyed 30 aircraft.
Chindits: In the Burma Campaign, the Chindits, whose long-range penetration groups were trained to operate from bases deep behind Japanese lines, contained commandos (King's Regiment (Liverpool), 142 Commando Company) and Gurkhas. Their jungle expertise, which would play an important part in many British special forces operations post-war, was learned at a great cost in lives in the jungles of Burma fighting the Japanese.
The Company of Chosen Immortals: Immediately after the German occupation of Greece in April–May 1941, the Greek government fled to Egypt and started to form military units in exile. Air Force Lt. Colonel G. Alexandris suggested the creation of an Army unit along the lines of the British SAS. In August 1942 the Company of Chosen Immortals (Greek: Λόχος Επιλέκτων Αθανάτων) was formed under Cavalry Major Antonios Stefanakis in Palestine, with 200 men. In 1942, the unit was renamed Sacred Band. In close cooperation with the commander of the British SAS Regiment, Lt. Colonel David Stirling, the company moved to the SAS base at Qabrit in Egypt to begin its training in its new role. The special forces unit fought alongside the SAS in the Western Desert and the Aegean.
Poland: During the start of World War II “September campaign,” the Polish Government did not sign the capitulation, but moved to Paris and then to London. In an attempt to achieve its aims the government in exile gave orders to the Polish resistance and formed a special military unit in Britain with the soldiers called Cichociemni (“silent and unseen”) paratroopers to be deployed into Poland. The Cichociemni were trained similar to the British Special Forces, with the curricula differing according to each soldier's specialization. Their task, on deployment to Poland, was to sustain the structures of the Polish state, training the members of the Resistance in fighting the German occupant. This included taking part in the Warsaw Uprising.
Australian: Following advice from the British, Australia began raising special forces. The first units to be formed were independent companies, which began training at Wilson's Promontory in Victoria in early 1941 under the tutelage of British instructors. With an establishment of 17 officers and 256 men, the independent companies were trained as "stay behind" forces, a role that they were later employed in against the Japanese in the South West Pacific Area during 1942–43, most notably fighting a guerrilla campaign in Timor, as well as actions in New Guinea. In all, a total of eight independent companies were raised before they were re-organised in mid-1943 into commando squadrons and placed under the command of the divisional cavalry regiments that were re-designated as cavalry commando regiments. As a part of this structure, a total of 11 commando squadrons were raised.
They continued to act independently and were often assigned at brigade level during the later stages of the war, taking part in the fighting in New Guinea, Bougainville and Borneo, where they were employed largely in long-range reconnaissance and flank protection roles. In addition to these units, the Australians also raised the Z Special Unit and M Special Unit. M Special Unit was largely employed in an intelligence-gathering role, while Z Special Force undertook direct action missions. One of its most notable actions came as part of Operation Jaywick, in which several Japanese ships were sunk in Singapore Harbour in 1943. A second raid on Singapore in 1944, known as Operation Rimau, was unsuccessful.
United States:
Office of Strategic Services: The United States formed the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II under the Medal of Honor recipient William J. Donovan. This organization was the predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and was responsible for both intelligence and special forces missions. The CIA's elite Special Activities Division is the direct descendant of the OSS.
Marine Raiders: On February 16, 1942, the U.S. Marine Corps activated a battalion of Marines with the specific purpose of securing beach heads, and other special operations. The battalion became the first modern special operations force of the U.S. The battalion became known as Marine Raiders due to Admiral Chester Nimitz's request for "raiders" in the Pacific front of the war.
United States Army Rangers: The history of the United States Army Rangers specialist soldier dates back to the 17th through 19th century from military units such as United States Mounted Rangers, United States Rangers and Texas Rangers. In WWII mid-1942, Major-General Lucian Truscott of the U.S. Army, a General Staff submitted a proposal to General George Marshall onceived under the guidance of then Army Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall, that selectively trained Ranger soldiers were recruited for the newly established special operations Army Ranger Battalion.
1st Special Service Force: The United States and Canada formed the 1st Special Service Force as a sabotage ski brigade for operations in Norway. Later known as the "Devil's Brigade" (and called "The Black Devils" by mystified German soldiers), the First Special Service Force was dispatched to the occupied Aleutian Islands, Italy and Southern France.
Merrill's Marauders: Merrill's Marauders were modeled on the Chindits and took part in similar operations in Burma. In late November 1943, the Alamo Scouts (Sixth Army Special Reconnaissance Unit) were formed to conduct reconnaissance and raider work in the Southwest Pacific Theater under the personal command of then Lt. General Walter Krueger, Commanding General, Sixth U.S. Army. Krueger envisioned that the Alamo Scouts, consisting of small teams of highly trained volunteers, would operate deep behind enemy lines to provide intelligence-gathering and tactical reconnaissance in advance of Sixth U.S. Army landing operations.
Special Forces Tab: In 1983, nearly 40 years after the end of World War II, the US Army created the Special Forces Tab. It was later decided that personnel with at least 120 days' wartime service prior to 1955 in certain units, including the Devil's Brigade, the Alamo Scouts and the OSS Operational Groups, would receive the Tab for their services in World War II, placing them all in the lineage of today's U.S. and Canadian (via Devil's Brigade) Special Forces.
Axis powers: The Axis powers did not adopt the use of special forces on the same scale as the British.
German: The German army's Brandenburger Regiment was founded as a special forces unit used by the Abwehr for infiltration and long distance reconnaissance in Fall Weiss of 1939 and the Fall Gelb and Barbarossa campaigns of 1940 and 1941. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Special forces | Army landing operations.
Special Forces Tab: In 1983, nearly 40 years after the end of World War II, the US Army created the Special Forces Tab. It was later decided that personnel with at least 120 days' wartime service prior to 1955 in certain units, including the Devil's Brigade, the Alamo Scouts and the OSS Operational Groups, would receive the Tab for their services in World War II, placing them all in the lineage of today's U.S. and Canadian (via Devil's Brigade) Special Forces.
Axis powers: The Axis powers did not adopt the use of special forces on the same scale as the British.
German: The German army's Brandenburger Regiment was founded as a special forces unit used by the Abwehr for infiltration and long distance reconnaissance in Fall Weiss of 1939 and the Fall Gelb and Barbarossa campaigns of 1940 and 1941.
Later during the war the 502nd SS Jäger Battalion, commanded by Otto Skorzeny, sowed disorder behind the Allied lines by mis-directing convoys away from the front lines. A handful of his men were captured by the Americans and spread a rumor that Skorzeny was leading a raid on Paris to kill or capture General Dwight Eisenhower. Although this was untrue, Eisenhower was confined to his headquarters for several days and Skorzeny was labelled "the most dangerous man in Europe".
Italian: In Italy, the Decima Flottiglia MAS was responsible for the sinking and damage of considerable British tonnage in the Mediterranean. Also there were other Italian special forces like A.D.R.A. (Arditi Distruttori Regia Aeronautica). This regiment was used in raids on Allied airbases and railways in North Africa in 1943. In one mission they destroyed 25 B-17 Flying Fortress bombers.
Japanese: The Imperial Japanese Army first deployed army paratroops in combat during the Battle of Palembang, on Sumatra in the Netherlands East Indies, on 14 February 1942. The operation was well-planned, with 425 men of the 1st Parachute Raiding Regiment seizing Palembang airfield, while the paratroopers of the 2nd Parachute Raiding Regiment seized the town and its important oil refinery. Paratroops were subsequently deployed in the Burma campaign. The 1st Glider Tank Troop was formed in 1943, with four Type 95 Ha-Go light tanks. The paratroop brigades were organized into the Teishin Shudan as the first division-level raiding unit, at the main Japanese airborne base, Karasehara Airfield, Kyūshū, Japan.
However, as with similar airborne units created by the Allies and other Axis powers, the Japanese paratroops suffered from a disproportionately high casualty rate, and the loss of men who required such extensive and expensive training limited their operations to only the most critical ones. Two regiments of Teishin Shudan were formed into the 1st Raiding Group, commanded by Major General Rikichi Tsukada under the control of the Southern Expeditionary Army Group, during the Philippines campaign. Although structured as a division, its capabilities were much lower, as its six regiments had manpower equivalent to a standard infantry battalion, and it lacked any form of artillery, and had to rely on other units for logistical support. Its men were no longer parachute-trained, but relied on aircraft for transport.
Some 750 men from the 2nd Raiding Brigade, of this group were assigned to attack American air bases on Luzon and Leyte on the night of 6 December 1944. They were flown in Ki-57 transports, but most of the aircraft were shot down. Some 300 commandos managed to land in the Burauen area on Leyte. The force destroyed some planes and inflicted numerous casualties, before they were annihilated.
Finnish: During World War II, the Finnish Army and Border Guard organized sissi forces into a long-range reconnaissance patrol (kaukopartio) units. These were open only to volunteers and operated far behind enemy lines in small teams. They conducted both intelligence-gathering missions and raids on e.g. enemy supply depots or other strategic targets. They were generally highly effective. For example, during the Battle of Ilomantsi, Soviet supply lines were harassed to the point that the Soviet artillery was unable to exploit its massive numerical advantage over Finnish artillery. Their operations were also classified as secret because of the political sensitivity of such operations. Only authorized military historians could publish on their operations; individual soldiers were required to take the secrets to the grave. A famous LRRP commander was Lauri Törni, who later joined the U.S. Army to train U.S. personnel in special operations.
Bangladesh Liberation War (1971): In June 1971, during the Bangladesh Liberation War, the World Bank sent a mission to observe the situation in East Pakistan. The media cell of Pakistan's government was circulating the news that the situation in East Pakistan was stable and normal. Khaled Mosharraf, a sector commander of Mukti Bahini, planned to deploy a special commando team. The task assigned to the team was to carry out commando operations and to terrorize Dhaka. The major objective of this team was to prove that the situation was not actually normal. Moreover, Pakistan, at that time, was expecting economic aid from World Bank, which was assumed to be spent to buy arms. The plan was to make World Bank Mission understand the true situation of East Pakistan and to stop sanctioning the aid. Khaled, along with A. T. M. Haider, another sector commander, formed the Crack Platoon. Initially, the number of commandos in the platoon was 17, trained in Melaghar Camp. From Melaghar, commandos of Crack Platoon headed for Dhaka on 4 June 1971 and launched a guerrilla operation on 5 June. Later, the number of commandos increased, the platoon split and deployed in different areas surrounding Dhaka city. The basic objectives of the Crack Platoon were to demonstrate the strength of Mukti Bahini, terrorising Pakistan Army and their collaborators. Another major objective was proving to the international community that the situation in East Pakistan was not normal. That commando team also aimed at inspiring the people of Dhaka, who were frequently victims of killing and torture. The Crack Platoon successfully fulfilled these objectives. The World Bank mission, in its report, clearly described the hazardous situation prevailing in East Pakistan and urged ending the military regime in East Pakistan. The Crack Platoon carried out several successful and important operations. The power supply in Dhaka was devastated which caused severe problems for the Pakistan Army and the military administration in Dhaka.
Modern special forces: Admiral William H. McRaven, formerly the ninth commanding officer of the U.S. Special Operations Command (2011–2014), described two approaches to special forces operations in the 2012 posture statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services: "the direct approach is characterized by technologically enabled small-unit precision lethality, focused intelligence, and inter-agency cooperation integrated on a digitally-networked battlefield", whereas the "indirect approach includes empowering host nation forces, providing appropriate assistance to humanitarian agencies, and engaging key populations." Elements of national power must be deployed in concert without over-reliance on a single capability, such as special forces, that leaves the entire force unprepared and hollow across the spectrum of military operations.
Throughout the latter half of the 20th century and into the 21st century, special forces have come to higher prominence, as governments have found objectives can sometimes be better achieved by a small team of anonymous specialists than a larger and much more politically controversial conventional deployment. In both Kosovo and Afghanistan, special forces were used to co-ordinate activities between local guerrilla fighters and air power. Typically, guerrilla fighters would engage enemy soldiers and tanks causing them to move, where they could be seen and attacked from the air.
Special forces have been used in both wartime and peacetime military operations such as the Laotian Civil War, Bangladesh Liberation War-1971, Vietnam War, Portuguese Colonial War, South African Border War, Falklands War, The Troubles in Northern Ireland, the Jaffna University Helidrop, the first and second Gulf Wars, Afghanistan, Croatia, Kosovo, Bosnia, the first and second Chechen Wars, the Iranian Embassy siege (London), the Air France Flight 8969 (Marseille), Operation Defensive Shield, Operation Khukri, the Moscow theater hostage crisis, Operation Orchard, the Japanese Embassy hostage crisis (Lima), in Sri Lanka against the LTTE, the raid on Osama Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan, the 2016 Indian Line of Control strike the 2015 Indian counter-insurgency operation in Myanmar and the Barisha Raid in Syria of 2019.
The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan involved special forces from several coalition nations, who played a major role in removing the Taliban from power in 2001–2002. Special forces have continued to play a role in combating the Taliban in subsequent operations.
As gender restrictions are being removed in parts of the world, females are applying for special forces units selections and in 2014 the Norwegian Special Operation Forces established an all female unit Jegertroppen (English: Hunter Troop).
Tier One units: These are the highest level of military special forces, as in the highest trained and usually the most secretive. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Special forces | The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan involved special forces from several coalition nations, who played a major role in removing the Taliban from power in 2001–2002. Special forces have continued to play a role in combating the Taliban in subsequent operations.
As gender restrictions are being removed in parts of the world, females are applying for special forces units selections and in 2014 the Norwegian Special Operation Forces established an all female unit Jegertroppen (English: Hunter Troop).
Tier One units: These are the highest level of military special forces, as in the highest trained and usually the most secretive. Examples would be the special mission units of the Australian and United States special operations forces.
See also:
Notes:
References:
Bellamy, Chris (2011). The Gurkhas: Special Force. UK: Hachette. p. 115. ISBN 9781848545151.
Breuer, William B. (2001). Daring missions of World War II. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 978-0-471-40419-4.
Clemente Ramos, Julián. 1994. "La Extremadura musulmana (1142–1248): Organización defensiva y sociedad". Anuario de estudios medievales, 24:647–701. Web.
Haskew, Michael E (2007). Encyclopaedia of Elite Forces in the Second World War. Barnsley: Pen and Sword. ISBN 978-1-84415-577-4.
Horner, David (1989). SAS: Phantoms of the Jungle: A History of the Australian Special Air Service (1st ed.). St Leonards: Allen & Unwin. ISBN 1-86373-007-9.
Molinari, Andrea (2007). Desert Raiders: Axis and Allied Special Forces 1940–43. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84603-006-2.
Otway, Lieutenant-Colonel T.B.H. (1990). The Second World War 1939–1945 Army – Airborne Forces. Imperial War Museum. ISBN 0-901627-57-7.
Thomas, David (October 1983). "The Importance of Commando Operations in Modern Warfare 1939–82". Journal of Contemporary History. 18 (4): 689–717. JSTOR 260308. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Staff (military) | Military staff functions:
Information management: One of the key purposes of a military staff is to provide accurate, timely information (which includes the results of contingency planning) on which command decisions are based. A goal is being able to suggest approaches or help produce well-informed decisions that will effectively manage and conserve unit resources.
In addition to generating information, the staff also manages the flow of communication within the unit and around it. While controlled information flow toward the commander is a priority, those useful or contingent in nature are communicated to lower-level units and/or through their respective staffs. If the information is not pertinent to the unit, it is redirected to the command level which can best utilize the condition or information.
Staffs are generally the first to know of issues that affect its group. Issues that require major decisions affecting the unit's operational capability are communicated to the commanding officer. However, not all issues will be handled by the commander. Smaller matters that arise are given to a more appropriate tasker within the unit to be handled and resolved, which would otherwise be an unnecessary distraction for the Commanding Officer who already makes numerous decisions every day.
In addition, a staff aims to carefully craft any useful situations and utilize that information.
Staff structure: In a generic command staff, more seasoned and senior officers oversee staff sections of groups organized by the needs of the unit. Senior Enlisted Personnel task personnel in the maintenance of tactical equipment and vehicles. Senior Analysts are tasked with the finalizing of reports, and their enlisted personnel participate in the acquisition of information from subordinate staffs and units. This hierarchy places decision making and reporting under the auspices of the most experienced personnel and maximizes information flow of pertinent information sent out of the command overall, clarifying matters overall. This frees up the most senior members of the command at each level for decision making and issuing direction for further research or information gathering (perhaps requiring men to put their lives at risk to gather additional intelligence).
Operations staff officers also are tasked with battle planning both for offensive and defensive conditions, and issuing contingency plans for handling situations anticipated during the foreseeable future.
History: Prior to the late 18th century, there was generally no organizational support for staff functions such as military intelligence, logistics, planning or personnel. Unit commanders handled such functions for their units, with informal help from subordinates who were usually not trained for or assigned to a specific task.
Austria: Count Leopold Joseph von Daun, in a letter to Empress Maria Theresa in January 1758, pressed for a more important role for the Generalquartiermeister (Chief of Staff). The failures in the army, especially at the Battle of Leuthen made it clear that Austria had no "great brain" and the command needed to spread the workload to allow the Commander-in-chief the time to consider the strategic picture. The 1757 regulations had created the Grosse Feldgeneralstab and Kleine Generalstab (large and small general staff) and after changes in 1769, a permanent staff of 30 officers was established under the direction of Franz Moritz von Lacy, which would be expanded in wartime with junior officers. The Grosse staff was divided into three: First, the Intrinsecum, which handled internal administration and directing operations; secondly, external activities, including the Pioneers; thirdly, the Inspection Service, which handled the issuing of orders and prisoners of war. Alongside the General Staff was the General Adjutant, who led a group of Adjutant staff selected by the army commanders to handle the details of internal administration and collating intelligence, and answered to the Commander-in-chief. The Chief of Staff became the chief adviser to the Commander-in-chief and, in a fundamental move away from the previous administrative role, the Chief of Staff now undertook operational planning, while delegating the routine work to his senior staff officers. Staff officers were drawn from line units and would later return to them, the intention being that they would prove themselves as leaders during their time with the staff. In a battle or when the army had detached corps, a small number of staff would be allocated to the column commander as a smaller version of headquarters. The senior man, usually a Major, would be the chief of the column staff and his principal task would be to help the commander to understand what was intended.
When Karl Mack von Leiberich became chief of staff of the army under Prince Josias of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld in the Netherlands, he issued the Instruktionspunkte für gesammte Herren Generals, the last of 19 points setting out the roles of staff officers, dealing with offensive and defensive operations, while helping the Commander-in-chief. In 1796, Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen augmented these with his own Observationspunkte, writing of the Chief of Staff: "he is duty bound to consider all possibilities related to operations and not view himself as merely carrying out those instructions".
On 20 March 1801, Feldmarschalleutnant Duka became the world's first peacetime Generalquartiermeister at the head of the staff and the wartime role of the Chief of Staff was now focused on planning and operations to assist the Commander. Archduke Charles, Duke of Teschen himself produced a new Dienstvorschrift on 1 September 1805, which divided the staff into three: 1) Political Correspondence; 2) the Operations Directorate, dealing with planning and intelligence; 3) the Service Directorate, dealing with administration, supply and military justice. The Archduke set out the position of a modern Chief of Staff: "The Chief of Staff stands at the side of the Commander-in-Chief and is completely at his disposal. His sphere of work connects him with no specific unit". "The Commander-in-Chief decides what should happen and how; his chief assistant works out these decisions, so that each subordinate understands his allotted task". With the creation of the Korps in 1809, each had a staff, whose chief was responsible for directing operations and executing the overall headquarters plan. The staff on the outbreak of war in 1809 numbered over 170. Finally in 1811, Joseph Radetzky von Radetz produced his Über die bessere Einrichtung des Generalstabs, which prioritised the Chief of Staff's managerial and supervisory role with the departments (Political Correspondence, Operations and Service) under their own directors, effectively merging the Adjutants and General Staff officers. In this system lay the beginnings of a formal staff corps, whose members could specialise in operations, intelligence and logistics.
France: Despite a short lived permanent staff under St-Cyr (1783–90), the French reverted to the old system in 1790, when the Revolutionary Government abolished the staff corps. When General Louis Alexandre Berthier was appointed Chief of Staff to the French Army of Italy in 1795, his was the old administrative role, accurately described by Jomini and Vachee as "the chief clerk" and "of limited competence". His manual is merely a reporting system as a kind of office manual. Staff officers were rotated out of the line on the Austrian model, but received no training and merely became efficient in the administrative tasks, especially the rapid issuance of orders. It suited Napoleon Bonaparte from the moment he took over the army the following year and he would use Berthier's system throughout his wars. Crucially, Napoleon remained his own intelligence chief and operational planner, a workload which, ultimately, not even he could cope with.
Myanmar: Overall staff system structure is generally similar to the pre 1984 British Army system with G Branch, A Branch and Q Branch with slightly different staff officer position names. Unlike the continental system, 1 is higher ranking than 2 followed by 3. Despite being called GSO, ASO and QSO in English, all of them are translated as either စစ်ဦးစီးမှူး for G (or) ဦးစီးအရာရှိ for A and Q in Burmese. You can check the 2010/2011 military command structure of Myanmar in the photo shown below which still uses the same staff system
G Branch (စစ်ဦးစီး): G Branch, called စစ်ဦးစီး or ဦး for short in Burmese, is responsible for Responsible for intelligence, training and every aspect of operations.
General Staff Officer (Grade 1), informally known as G1: Ranked Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel
General Staff Officer (Grade 2), informally known as G2: Ranked Major
General Staff Officer (Grade 3), informally known as G3: Ranked Captain
A Branch (စစ်ရေး): A Branch, called စစ်ရေး or ရေး for short in Burmese, is responsible for every aspect of personnel management such as medical and military. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Staff (military) | General Staff Officer (Grade 1), informally known as G1: Ranked Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel
General Staff Officer (Grade 2), informally known as G2: Ranked Major
General Staff Officer (Grade 3), informally known as G3: Ranked Captain
A Branch (စစ်ရေး): A Branch, called စစ်ရေး or ရေး for short in Burmese, is responsible for every aspect of personnel management such as medical and military.
Adjutant Staff Officer (Grade 1), informally known as A1: Ranked Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel
Adjutant Staff Officer (Grade 2), informally known as A2: Ranked Major
Adjutant Staff Officer (Grade 3), informally known as A3: Ranked Captain
Q Branch (စစ်ထောက်): Q Branch, called စစ်ထောက် or ထောက် for short in Burmese, is responsible for logistical aspects such as supply and transport as well as ordnance service.
Quartermaster Staff Officer (Grade 1), informally known as Q1: Ranked Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel
Quartermaster Staff Officer (Grade 2), informally known as Q2: Ranked Major
Quartermaster Staff Officer (Grade 3), informally known as Q3: Ranked Captain
Prussia: Prussia adopted Austria's approach in the following years, especially when Gerhard von Scharnhorst, who as a Hanoverian staff officer had worked with the Austrian army in the Austrian Netherlands in the early 1790s, took charge. Initially, the Prussian Army assigned a limited number of technical expert officers to support field commanders. Before 1746, however, reforms had added management of intelligence and contingency planning to the staff's duties. Later, the practice was initiated of rotating officers from command to staff assignments and back to familiarize them with both aspects of military operations, a practice that, with the addition of enlisted personnel, continues to be used. After 1806, Prussia's military academies trained mid-level officers in specialist staff skills. In 1814, Prussia formally established by law a central military command—Prussian General Staff—and a separate staff for each division and corps. Despite some professional and political issues with the Prussian system, especially when viewed through the prism of the 20th century World Wars, their General Staff concept has been adopted by many large armies in existence today.
United Kingdom: Before the Crimean War staff work was looked at "with great disdain" in the British Army; the hardships of that war caused by disorganization led to a change in attitude. The General Staff in Britain was formed in 1905, and reorganized again in 1908. Unlike the Prussian staff system, the British Army was thought too small to support separate staff and command career streams. Officers would typically alternate between staff and command. Beevor, Inside the British Army, says instead that the terrible cleavages between staff and line units caused by the enormous losses during the trench warfare of the World War I meant that senior British officers consequently decided that all officers would rotate between staff and line responsibilities, preventing the development of a separate general staff corps.
United States: The National Security Act of 1947 instead created a Joint Staff populated by military service members who, rather than becoming career staff officers on the German general staff model, rotate into (and back out of) joint staff positions. Following the major revision of Title 10 of the United States Code by the Goldwater–Nichols Act in 1986, the Joint Staff of today works directly for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff rather than the corporate Joint Chiefs of Staff, as they did from 1947 to 1986. Under this scheme, operational command and control of military forces are not the province of the Joint Staff, but that of combatant commanders, who report through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff unless otherwise directed, to the Secretary of Defense.
Continental Staff System: The "Continental Staff System", also known as the "General Staff System" (GSS), is used by most NATO countries in structuring their militaries' staff functions. In this system, which is based on one originally employed by the French Army in the 19th century, each staff position in a headquarters or unit is assigned a letter-prefix corresponding to the formation's element and one or more numbers specifying a role.
The staff numbers are assigned according to custom, not hierarchy, traceable back to French practice; i.e., 1 is not "higher ranking" than 2. This list reflects the SHAPE structure:
1, for manpower or personnel
2, for intelligence and security
3, for operations
4, for logistics
5, for plans
6, for signals (i.e., communications or IT)
7, for military education and training (also the joint engineer)
8, for finance and contracts. Also known as resource management.
9, for Civil-Military Co-operation (CIMIC) or civil affairs.
Since the original continental staff system only covered branches 1 through 6, it is not uncommon to see 7 through 9 omitted or having various meanings. Common variation include merging of 3 and 5 to 3, Operations and Plans; omitting the training branch and utilizing 7 for engineering (as seen in US Military Sealift Command and Multinational Forces-Iraq (MNF-I)) and replacing 9 with a legal branch (making CIMIC a part of another branch, i.e. 2 or 4) as seen with the UK Permanent Joint Headquarters.
Derived from the Prussian Große Generalstab (Great General Staff), traditionally these staff functions were prefixed by the simple G, which is retained in place for modern army usage. But the increasing complexity of modern armies, not to speak of the spread of the staff concept to naval, air and other elements, has demanded the addition of new prefixes. These element prefixes are:
A, for air force headquarters;
C, for combined headquarters (multiple nations) headquarters;
F, for certain forward or deployable headquarters;
G, for army or marine general staff sections within headquarters of organizations commanded by a general officer and having a chief of staff to coordinate the actions of the general staff, such as divisions or equivalent organizations (e.g., USMC Marine Aircraft Wing and Marine Logistics Group) and separate (i.e., non-divisional) brigade level (USMC MEB) and above;
J, for joint (multiple services) headquarters, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff);
N, for navy headquarters;
S, for army or marines executive staff sections within headquarters of organizations commanded by a field grade officer (i.e., major through colonel) and having an executive officer to coordinate the actions of the executive staff (e.g., divisional brigades, regiments, groups, battalions, and squadrons; not used by all countries); S is also used in the Naval Mobile Construction Battalions (SeaBees) and in the Air Force Security Forces Squadron.
U, is used for United Nations military operations mission headquarters.
CG, is unique to the US Coast Guard's Assistant Commandants (Headquarters staff), previously using the G prefix.
On some occasions the letter E can also be observed, though it is not an official term. In that case it is for element and it will be used to identify a small independent element, that is a part of a non-staff organization; i.e., an E3 is an operational element on a logistics site or an E4 is a logistics element on a forward medical support site.
Thus, the personnel officer of a naval headquarters would be referred to as N1. In reality, in large organizations each of these staff functions will require the support of its own large staff, so N1 refers both to the office and the officer in charge of it. The continental staff system can be carried down to the next level: J1.3 (or J13, sometimes the dot-separator is omitted) is thus the operations officer of the personnel office of a joint headquarters, but the exact definition of the roles at this level may vary. Below this, numbers can be attached following a hyphen, but these are usually only positional numbers assigned arbitrarily to identify individuals (G2.3-2 could be the budget officer in the operations section of the intelligence department; A1.1-1-1 might simply be a receptionist).
Manpower or personnel: The manpower or personnel officer supervises personnel and administration systems. This department functions as the essential administrative liaison between the subordinate units and the headquarters, handling personnel actions coming from the bottom up (such as a request for an award to be given to a particular soldier) or from the top down (such as orders being received from the army level directing that a particular soldier be reassigned to a new unit outside the command). In army units, this person is often called the Adjutant. The S-1 also works with the postal mailing office, and deals with awards and ranks as well.
Intelligence, security, and information operations: The intelligence section is responsible for collecting and analyzing intelligence information about the enemy to determine what the enemy is doing or might do, to prevent the accomplishment of the enemy's mission. This office may also control maps and geographical information systems and data. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Staff (military) | Manpower or personnel: The manpower or personnel officer supervises personnel and administration systems. This department functions as the essential administrative liaison between the subordinate units and the headquarters, handling personnel actions coming from the bottom up (such as a request for an award to be given to a particular soldier) or from the top down (such as orders being received from the army level directing that a particular soldier be reassigned to a new unit outside the command). In army units, this person is often called the Adjutant. The S-1 also works with the postal mailing office, and deals with awards and ranks as well.
Intelligence, security, and information operations: The intelligence section is responsible for collecting and analyzing intelligence information about the enemy to determine what the enemy is doing or might do, to prevent the accomplishment of the enemy's mission. This office may also control maps and geographical information systems and data. At the unit level, the S-2 is the unit's security officer, and the S-2 section manages all security clearance issues for the unit's personnel. Other duties of the S-2 often include intelligence oversight and physical security.
Operations: The operations office may include plans and training. The operations office plans and coordinates operations, and all things necessary to enable the formation to operate and accomplish its mission. In most units, the operations office is the largest of the staff sections and considered the most important. All aspects of sustaining the unit's operations, planning future operations, and additionally planning and executing all unit training, fall under the responsibility of operations. The operations office is also tasked with keeping track of the weekly training schedules. In most military units (i.e., battalion, regiment, and brigade), the operations officer carries the same rank as the executive officer (XO), but ranks third in the unit's chain of command while the other staff officers are one rank lower. For example, in a battalion, the S-3 would hold the rank of major (like the battalion XO), while the remaining staff officers are captains or lieutenants.
Logistics: The logistics office is responsible for managing the wide scope of materiel, transport, facilities, services and medical/health support:
Design, development, acquisition, storage, distribution, maintenance, evacuation, and disposition of materiel.
Transport of personnel and materiel.
Acquisition or construction, maintenance, operation, and disposition of facilities.
Acquisition or furnishing of services.
Medical and health service support.
By NATO doctrine, the logistic staff is tasked with overseeing logistic aspects and principles, where the focus is that "logistic support must be focused towards ensuring the success of the operation" and prescriptions of elements such as responsibility and authority. A logistic staff may be divided into sections based on branch or geographic area. Each section may in turn also be divided into tasks and roles. The size of the logistic staff can vary greatly, depending on the environment and complexity of operations. NATO in example work with a "Multinational Joint Logistic Centre", which exists outside of the force commander's staff, but runs as a separate entity/unit, with only a few logistic personnel in the commander's staff who act as liaisons.
Plans and strategy: The plans and strategy office is responsible for civil military operations (CMO) strategy planning. At the unit level, the S-5 is the primary adviser to the commander on the civilian-to-military and military-to-civilian impact of the mission/operation within the host nation's (HN) area of interest (AOI), area of operations (AO), or the target area of interest (TAOI). The G5 serves as the mission support office (MSO) at the division level and HHC for civil military plans and strategy.
Signal (communications and IT): The signal office directs all communications and is the point of contact for the issue of communications instructions and protocol during operations as well as for communications troubleshooting, issue, and preventative maintenance. Communications at this level is paired with digital as well as voice (radio, computer, etc.). At the unit level, S-6 is also usually responsible for all electronic systems within a unit to include computers, faxes, copy machines, and phone systems.
Training: The training branch will organize and coordinate training activity conducted by a Headquarters and also supervise and support subordinate units.
Finance: The finance branch, not to be confused with Administration from which it has split, sets the finance policy for the operation. Operationally, the Administration and Finance may be interlinked, but have separate reporting chains.
CIMIC: Civil-Military Co-operation: Civil-Military Co-operation or civil affairs are the activities that establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relations between the military forces, the government or non-government civilian organizations and authorities, and the civilian populace in a friendly, neutral, or hostile area of operations in order to facilitate military operations and consolidate and achieve mission objectives.
Commonwealth staff system: The "Commonwealth staff system", used by most Commonwealth nations, is largely based on the British military's staff system with nation-specific variations.
By country:
Australia: Following Australia's Federation in 1901, the Australian Commonwealth Military Forces (now the Australian Army) adopted many of the practices of the British Army, including its staff system. While this approach was modified and adapted over the course of the 20th Century, the British three branch system and nomenclature remained a feature of Australian practice until 1997 when it adopted the Common Joint Staff System, based on the NATO or Continental/General Staff System, across all three services. The primary reasons given for this were the ability to standardise staff organisations across the breadth and depth of the services, and; improve interoperability between America, Britain, Canada and Australia, as well as NATO partners that employed this system. At this time the Australian Defence Force also developed its own Joint Military Appreciation Process (JMAP), itself derived from the US Tactical Decision-Making Process and UK Individual Estimate.
Canada: The head of the Royal Canadian Navy, Commander of the Royal Canadian Navy, is also titled as Chief of Naval Staff.
The head of the Royal Canadian Air Force, Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, is also titled as Chief of Air Force Staff.
The head of the Canadian
Army, Commander of the Canadian Army, is also titled as Chief of Army Staff.
United Kingdom:
Army staff: The British Staff System was a product of the Esher Committee Report of 1904, which investigated the conduct of the late Victorian era British Army in the Second Anglo-Boer War and the Haldane Reforms from 1906-1912. This staff system was captured in Field Service Regulations, Part II, Organisation and Administration, released in 1909 and later in the Staff Manual 1912. This system remained in use until 1984, when the United Kingdom began to use the Continental or NATO system. The British Staff System was based on the following:
Three branches:
G branch: The general branch, responsible for operations, intelligence and training.
A branch: The administration branch, responsible for all aspects of personnel management.
Q branch: The quartermaster branch, responsible for logistic and equipment support.
Positions: positions were labelled as follows, may also be styled GSO I, GSO II, GSO III:
GSO1, General Staff Officer (Grade 1): The chief of staff, ranked a lieutenant colonel or colonel. He was in charge of the general staff branch, responsible for training, intelligence, planning operations and directing the battle as it progressed. Most orders from the general officer commanding (GOC) were actually written up and signed by the GSO1.
GSO2, General Staff Officer (Grade 2): Ranked a major.
GSO3, General Staff Officer (Grade 3): Ranked a captain.
In the British system, staff are outranked by command officers. The staff cannot in theory (and largely in practice) say "no" to a subordinate unit; only the commander has that ability. This ensured a clear chain of command, and reinforced the idea that staff do not command, but exercise control on behalf of their commander. By contrast, in the American system, commanders are frequently outranked by staff officers. For example, within a battalion, the S-3 is a major while company commanders are captains. The principal staff officers at any HQ were always outranked by the subordinate commanders:
Lieutenant colonels commanding battalions or units in a brigade outrank the brigade major and the deputy assistant adjutant and quartermaster general
Brigadiers commanding brigades in a division outrank the colonel GS and colonel AQ
Major generals commanding divisions outrank the brigadier GS and assistant adjutant general and assistant quartermaster general at a corps HQ
Brigade level: Branches as brigade were as follows. A and Q branches might be combined under a deputy assistant adjutant and quartermaster general, rank major (DAA&QMG).
G branch (operations) plans and executes operations. The senior staff officer in brigade HQ held the appointment of brigade major (BM) with rank of captain or major, who coordinated the HQ. While the BM was responsible for the entire HQ, he concentrated mainly on "G" operational matters. A deputy BM GSO III generally looked after non-operational matters. Under the BM were several GSO III (rank captain) officers:
Operations (the senior captain)
Intelligence
Liaison. The Liaison section often had several lieutenants attached from the brigade's combat units.
Air
A branch: It handled all personnel matters such as awards, postings, promotions, medical, chaplains, military police and so forth. There were usually one or two GSO III officers in A branch. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Staff (military) | A and Q branches might be combined under a deputy assistant adjutant and quartermaster general, rank major (DAA&QMG).
G branch (operations) plans and executes operations. The senior staff officer in brigade HQ held the appointment of brigade major (BM) with rank of captain or major, who coordinated the HQ. While the BM was responsible for the entire HQ, he concentrated mainly on "G" operational matters. A deputy BM GSO III generally looked after non-operational matters. Under the BM were several GSO III (rank captain) officers:
Operations (the senior captain)
Intelligence
Liaison. The Liaison section often had several lieutenants attached from the brigade's combat units.
Air
A branch: It handled all personnel matters such as awards, postings, promotions, medical, chaplains, military police and so forth. There were usually one or two GSO III officers in A branch.
Q Branch: It handled logistics, supply, transport, clothing, maintenance. There was usually one GSO III officer, with a learner captain or lieutenant, and several advisors, all captains:
Brigade Royal Army Service Corps Officer (BRASCO)
Brigade Ordnance Officer (BOO)
Brigade Electrical and Mechanical Engineer Officer (BEME)
Division level: G branch was under the colonel GS (a lieutenant-colonel).
The combined "A" and "Q" staffs was headed by a colonel AQ, who was assisted by an assistant adjutant and quartermaster general (AA&QMG, rank lieutenant-colonel).
Members of the G staff:
A GSO II, acting as deputy to the GSO I. He was responsible for the preparation of orders and instructions as directed by the GSO I; the general organization and working of the "G" office; detailing of duty officers at the Div HQ; coordinating arrangements for moving the Main HQ; details of movement by road in consultation with the DAAG and DAQMG; and general policy regarding HQ defence and the preparation and promulgation of HQ standing orders. (In an armoured division headquarters, the GSO II was responsible for the division tactical HQ and the above duties were done by the GSO III (Operations).)
The GSO III (Operations) was the understudy to the GSO II; he maintained the situation map; prepared situation reports; supervised the acknowledgement register; maintained the command matrix; prepared orders for the move of the orders group; and prepared orders for the move of the division's main HQ.
The GSO III (Operations)(Chemical Warfare) was responsible for all matters dealing with chemical warfare that affected the division; coordinated courses; was responsible for the camouflage policy; maintained the war diary; prepared and maintained location statements; received and distributed codes, call sign lists and other signals information from the divisional signals; coordinated traffic control and organization of routes in the divisional forward area under the GSO II and APM; was understudy to the GSO III (Operations) on all matters less CW.
The GSO III (Intelligence) coordinated all intelligence training and work in the division; coordinated the collection and collation of information about enemy dispositions, methods and intentions; prepared daily intelligence summaries; coordinated interpretation of air photographs with the Army Photographic Interpretation Section (APIS); effected liaison with the APIS, the field security office and the Intelligence Officer, Royal Artillery (at CRA); and was responsible for briefing and handling of press correspondents.
The GSO III (Liaison) coordinated the work of the liaison officers, was responsible for the division information room and served as an understudy to the GSO III (Operations).
Corps level: G branch was headed by the brigadier general staff (BGS, rank: brigadier). The BGS was usually superior to the AAG and AQMG, despite all three having the same rank.
A branch was headed by the Assistant adjutant general (AAG, rank: brigadier). He was assisted by the deputy assistant adjutant general (DAAG, rank lieutenant-colonel).
Q branch was headed by the assistant quartermaster general (AQMG, rank: brigadier).
The G staff for a corps might appear as below:
Operations and staff duties:
GSO I
GSO II (Ops)
GSO II (Ops)(CW)
GSO II (SD) – Staff Duties
2 × GSO III (SD)
Air:
GSO II (Air)
Intelligence:
GSO II (Int)
2 × GSO III (Int)
Liaison:
GSO II (L)
3 × GSO III (L)
Royal Artillery:
GSO II (RA)
GSO II (AA)
GSO III (RA)
Naval staff: The Admiralty War Staff was a former senior command, operational planning department within the Admiralty during World War I. It was instituted on 8 January 1912 and was in effect a war council whose head reported directly to the First Sea Lord. It existed until 1917. After the war ended, it was replaced by the Admiralty Naval Staff department.
The Admiralty Naval Staff was the senior command, operational planning, policy and strategy department within the British Admiralty. It was established in 1917 and existed until 1964 when the department of the Admiralty was abolished and was replaced by the Naval Staff, Navy Department (Ministry of Defence).
See also: Staff college
References:
Further reading: Bartholomees, J. Boone Buff Facings and Gilt Buttons: Staff and Headquarters Operations in the Army of Northern Virginia, 1861–1865 (University of South Carolina Press, 1998) ISBN 1-57003-220-3.
Crosswell, D.K.R. The Chief of Staff: The Military Career of General Walter Bedell Smith (Greenwood Press, 1991) ISBN 0-313-27480-0.
Fremont-Barnes, G. (editor) Armies of the Napoleonic Wars (2011)
Goerlitz, Walter History of the German General Staff 1657–1945 (Praeger 1954).
Hittle, James Donald The Military Staff: Its History and Development (Military Service Publishing, 1944)
Jones, R. Steven J The Right Hand of Command: Use and Disuse of Personal Staffs in the American Civil War (Stackpole Books, 2000) ISBN 0-8117-1451-9.
Koch, Oscar W. G-2: Intelligence for Patton: Intelligence for Patton (Schiffer Aviation History, 1999) ISBN 0-7643-0800-9.
Purdy, Leo and Purdy, Tony. 'Primus inter pares vel primos? The Development of the Military Staff in the Australian Army', Australian Army Journal, Vol. 19, No.1, (2023), https://researchcentre.army.gov.au/library/australian-army-journal-aaj/volume-19-number-1
Pigman, Robyn. "All Systems Green: A Concise History of Chicken Bak Bak and the S-6 Offensive" (Nelson Ltd) ISBN 978-9948150510.
Regele, O.: Generalstabschefs aus vier Jahrhunderten (Vienna 1966)
Watson, S.J. By Command of the Emperor: A Life of Marshal Berthier (Ken Trotman Ltd) ISBN 0-946879-46-X.
Irvine, D.D. The French and Prussian Staff Systems Before 1870 in The Journal of the American Military Foundation Vol. 2, No. 4 (Winter, 1938), pp. 192–203 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/3038792?seq=1#fndtn-page_scan_tab_contents)
External links:
Changes needed in the "General Staff" system, research paper.
History of "General Staff" system |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Standing army | History:
Ancient history:
Mesopotamia: Sargon of Akkad, the founder of the Akkadian Empire, is believed to have formed the first standing professional army. Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria (ruled 745–727 BC) created Assyria's first standing army. Tiglath-Pileser III disbanded militias and instead paid professional soldiers for their services. His army was composed largely of Assyrian soldiers but was supplemented with foreign mercenaries and vassal states. The standing army he created was the most sophisticated administrative and economic institution of its time, and was the engine of Assyrian economy which capitalized on warfare.
Ancient Persia
Cyrus the Great formed the first professional army of Persia. The composition of the army varied and developed in the course of time. The empire's great armies were, like the empire itself, very diverse. Its standing army was composed of Persians (the bravest people of empire according to Herodotus) and Medes. This standing army, which may have been reviewed every year by the king or his representative, is called kāra in the inscriptions. At the heart of this army was its elite guard, The 10,000 Immortals. Herodotus describes that if any of these guardsmen drops out owing to death or disease, a substitute is immediately supplied and the number again filled. Thousands of these 10,000 guardsmen composed the royal bodyguards in the palace, their insignia were golden apples or pomegranates at the butts of their spears (accordingly they are named “apple-bearers” by Heraclides Cumaeus).
Ancient Greece: In ancient Greece, the city-states' (poleis) armies were essentially drafted citizen militias. The exception was in ancient Sparta, which had a standing army that trained year-round (and not only in summertime). Through the 5th century, they comprised the only professional soldiers in ancient Greece, aside from hired mercenaries. However, the Spartan army commonly consisted of helots (serfs), who considerably outnumbered the Spartiates, as well as numerous allies of Sparta.
Philip II of Macedon instituted the first true professional Hellenic army, with soldiers and cavalrymen paid for their service year-round, rather than a militia of men who mostly farmed the land for subsistence and occasionally mustered for campaigns.
Ancient China: The Western Zhou maintained a standing army, enabling them to effectively control other city states and spread their influence. Unlike the Western Zhou, the Eastern Zhou initially did not have a standing army. Instead they drafted militias from around 150 city states. While the Eastern Zhao did not initially maintain a standing army, the state of Jin became the first to do so in 678 BCE. The first professional army in China was established by the Qin dynasty in 221 BCE, which ushered Imperial China. Under the Qin dynasty, wars were fought by trained vocational soldiers instead of relying on temporary soldiers.
Ancient India: In Ancient India, warfare was first attested during the Vedic period. However, warfare was primarily waged between various clans and kingdoms solely by the kshatriya class during times of conflict. True standing armies in India developed under the Mahajanapadas, which relied on paid professional soldiers year round. The most prominent of the Mahajanapadas was the Kingdom of Magadha. It is accepted that the first standing army of India was created in Maghada by the ruler Bimbisara.
Ancient Rome: Under the reign of Augustus, the first Roman emperor, a standing professional army of the Roman Empire was gradually instituted, with regularized pay. This professional force of legionaries was expensive to maintain, but supported the authority of the empire, not only as combat troops but also as provincial police forces, engineers, and guards. Legionaries were citizen volunteers entitled to a discharge bounty upon 25 years of honorable service; supplementing the legions were the auxilia, auxiliary forces composed of non-citizens in the provinces who typically earned citizenship as a reward for service.
Post-classical history:
Ottoman Empire: The first modern standing armies on European soil during the Middle Ages were the Janissaries of the Ottoman Empire, which were formed in the 14th century under Sultan Murad I.
France: The first Christian standing army since the fall of the Western Roman Empire to be paid with regular wages, instead of feudal levies, was established by King Charles VII of France in the 1430s while the Hundred Years' War was still raging. As he realized that France needed professional reliable troops for ongoing and future conflicts, units were raised by issuing "ordonnances" to govern their length of service, composition and payment. These compagnies d'ordonnance formed the core of the French gendarmes that dominated European battlefields in the late 15th and early 16th centuries. They were stationed throughout France and summoned into larger armies when needed. Provisions were also made for franc-archers and foot soldiers raised from the non-noble classes, but those units were disbanded at the end of the Hundred Years' War.
The bulk of the infantry for warfare was still provided by urban or provincial militias, raised from an area or city to fight locally and named for their recruiting grounds. Gradually these units became more permanent, and in the 1480s, Swiss instructors were recruited and some of the 'bandes' (militia) were combined to form temporary 'legions' of up to 9,000 men. The men would be paid and contracted and would receive training.
Henry II further regularised the French army by forming standing infantry regiments to replace the militia structure. The first, the Régiments de Picardie, Piémont, Navarre and Champagne, were called Les Vieux Corps (The Old Corps). It was normal policy to disband regiments after a war was over to save costs. The Vieux Corps and the king's own household troops (the Maison militaire du roi de France) were the only survivors.
Hungary: The Black Army, established in 1462 by Hungarian king, Matthias Hunyadi was the first Central/Eastern European standing army. However, while the Black Army was certainly the first standing field army in that part of Europe, Hungary in fact had maintained a permanent army in the form of garrisons of border fortresses since the 1420s.
Matthias recognized the importance and key role of early firearms in the infantry, which greatly contributed to his victories.
Every fourth soldier in the Black Army had an arquebus, which was an unusual ratio at the time. The high price of medieval gunpowder prevented them from raising it any further. The main troops of the army were the infantry, artillery and light and heavy cavalry. The function of the heavy cavalry was to protect the light armoured infantry and artillery, while the other corps delivered sporadic, surprise assaults on the enemy.
Songhai Empire: In West Africa, the Songhai Empire under the Askia Mohammad I (1493–1528) possessed a full-time corps of 40,000 professional warriors. Al-Sa'di, the chronicler who wrote the Tarikh al-Sudan, compared Askia Mohammad I's army to that of his predecessor; "he distinguished between the civilian and the army unlike Sunni Ali [1464–92] when everyone was a soldier." Askia Mohammad I is said to have possessed cynical attitudes towards kingdoms that lacked professional armies like his, notably in reference to the neighboring kingdoms in the land of Borgu.
Majapahit Empire: The Majapahit thalassocracy was recorded by a Chinese observer as having 30,000 full-time professional troops, whose soldiers and commanders were paid in gold. This shows the existence of a standing army, an achievement that only a handful of Southeast Asian empires could hope to achieve.: 185 : 467 In addition to these professional soldiers, Majapahit was strengthened by troops from subordinate countries and regional leaders.: 277 As was common in Southeast Asia, Majapahit also used a levy system, in fact, the majority of the Majapahit troops were a levy.: 111–113
Spain: The Spanish Empire tercios were the first Spanish standing units composed of professional soldiers. Their pike and shot composition assured predominance in the European battlefields from the 16th century to the first half of the 17th century. Although other powers adopted the tercio formation, their armies fell short of the fearsome reputation of the Spanish, whose core of professional soldiers gave them an edge that was hard for other states to match.
England and Great Britain: Prior to the influence of Oliver Cromwell, England lacked a standing army, instead relying on militia organized by local officials, private forces mobilized by the nobility and hired mercenaries from Europe. This changed during the English Civil War, when Cromwell formed his New Model Army of 50,000 men. This professional body of soldiers proved more effective than untrained militia, and enabled him to exert control over the country. The army was disbanded by Parliament following the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660, and the Cromwellian model was initially considered a failure due to various logistical and political problems with the force.
The Militia Act 1661 prohibited local authorities from assembling militia without the approval of the king, to prevent such a force being used to oppress local opponents. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Standing army | England and Great Britain: Prior to the influence of Oliver Cromwell, England lacked a standing army, instead relying on militia organized by local officials, private forces mobilized by the nobility and hired mercenaries from Europe. This changed during the English Civil War, when Cromwell formed his New Model Army of 50,000 men. This professional body of soldiers proved more effective than untrained militia, and enabled him to exert control over the country. The army was disbanded by Parliament following the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660, and the Cromwellian model was initially considered a failure due to various logistical and political problems with the force.
The Militia Act 1661 prohibited local authorities from assembling militia without the approval of the king, to prevent such a force being used to oppress local opponents. This weakened the incentive for local officials to draw up their own fighting forces, and King Charles II subsequently assembled four regiments of infantry and cavalry, calling them his guards, at a cost of £122,000 paid out of his regular budget. This became the foundation of the permanent British Army. By 1685 it had grown to 7,500 soldiers in marching regiments, and 1,400 men permanently stationed in garrisons. The Monmouth Rebellion in 1685 provided James II with a pretext to increase the size of the force to 20,000 men, and there were 37,000 in 1688, when England played a role in the closing stage of the Franco-Dutch War. In 1689, William III expanded the army to 74,000, and then to 94,000 in 1694.
Nervous at the power such a large force afforded the king whilst under his personal command, Parliament reduced the cadre to 7,000 in 1697. Scotland and Ireland had theoretically separate military establishments, but they were de facto merged with the English force. The Bill of Rights 1689 officially reserved authority over a standing army to Parliament, not the king.
In his influential work The Wealth of Nations (1776), economist Adam Smith comments that standing armies are a sign of modernizing society, as modern warfare requires the increased skill and discipline of regularly trained standing armies.
United States: In the British Thirteen Colonies in America, there was a strong distrust of a standing army not under civilian control. The U.S. Constitution in (Article 1, Section 8) limits federal appropriations to two years, and reserves financial control to Congress, instead of to the President. The President, however, retains command of the armed forces when they are raised, as commander-in-chief. The Framers' suspicion of a standing army is reflected in the constitutional requirement that the appointment and promotion of high-ranking military officers (like civil officers) be confirmed by the Senate. At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Elbridge Gerry argued against a large standing army, comparing it, mischievously, to a standing penis: "An excellent assurance of domestic tranquility, but a dangerous temptation to foreign adventure." After the Battle of Bladensburg in 1814, during the War of 1812, in which the Maryland and Virginia militias were soundly defeated by the British Army, President James Madison commented, "I could never have believed so great a difference existed between regular troops and a militia force, if I not witnessed the scenes of this day."
See also: Regular army
List of militaries by country
List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel
List of armies by country
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic defence | See also: Defence in depth
Strategic depth
Notes:
Sources: Dupuy, Trevor N., Understanding War: Military History And The Theory Of Combat, Leo Cooper, New York, 1986
Thompson, Julian, Lifeblood of war: logistics in armed conflict, Brassey's Classics, London, 1991
Recommended reading: The Adelphi Papers, Volume 359, Number 1, August 1, 2003 Stephen J. Lukasik; S.E. Goodman; D.W. Longhurst, Chapter 2: Strategic Defence Options, pp. 15–24(10) |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic depth | Concept: The key precepts any military commander must consider when dealing with strategic depth are how vulnerable these assets are to a quick, preemptive attack or to a methodical offensive and whether a country can withdraw into its own territory, absorb an initial thrust, and allow the subsequent offensive to culminate short of its goal and far from its source of power.
Commanders must be able to plan for both eventualities, and have measures and resources in place on both tactical and strategic levels to counter any and all stages of a minor or major enemy attack. The measures do not need to be limited to purely-military assets since the ability to reinforce civilian infrastructure or make it flexible enough to withstand or evade assault is very useful in times of war. The issue was the tradeoff between space and time as witnessed by Germany’s failure to defeat the Soviet Union in 1942. In the face of a German invasion, the Soviet military retreated from occupied Poland in June 1941 to the outskirts of Moscow in December 1941, which allowed the Soviet Union to move its industrial base to the east of the Ural Mountains. Thus, the industries that had been moved were able to produce the resources that were needed for the Soviet counterattack.
In reference to Pakistan: In Pakistan, the idea of strategic depth was perceived in 1980s by the National Defence University, Pakistan, professor General Mirza Aslam Beg (later Chief of Army Staff working under Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in 1980s). Since then, the Pakistan military establishment has been repeatedly accused of forming a policy that seeks to control Afghanistan, a policy often referred to by the media as "strategic depth", which is used as the reason for Pakistan's support of certain factions of the Taliban in Afghanistan. In the years 2014–2015, with Pakistan's domestic operation against militants in full swing, Pakistani military leaders said that they adhered to no such policy.
Accusations against the Pakistan military: The term "strategic depth" has been used in reference to Pakistan's utilization and contact with Afghanistan following the neighboring country's Soviet intervention, to prevent encirclement from a hostile India and a USSR-supported Afghanistan. Some sources state that the policy to control Afghanistan was formulated by NDU professor, General Mirza Aslam Beg, and an Indian source claims this was continued as an active policy by the Pakistan Armed Forces until the policy was "de jure abolished in 1998 and de facto abolished in 2001", period when General Pervez Musharraf was the Chairman joint chiefs.
According to Richard Olson, U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, Pakistan military's doctrine of "strategic depth" is a concept in which Pakistan uses Afghanistan as an instrument of strategic security in ongoing tensions with India by attempting to control Afghanistan as a pawn for its own political purposes.
It has been speculated that the Pakistan military's "strategic depth" policy is either military or non-military in nature. The military version would state that the Pakistan military wishes to use Afghan territory as a "strategic rallying point" where they can, in the event of a successful Indian attack, retreat to and re-group for a counter-attack. The non-military version would be based on the idea that Pakistan can improve relations with other Islamic countries and former Soviet states such as Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, developing improved economic and cultural ties with them and thus making them into strong allies against India.
View of the Pakistan military: The former chief of army staff General Ashfaq Kayani and previously the director-general of the ISI, has repeatedly stated to the media that the Pakistan armed force's "strategic depth" policy with regards to Afghanistan is not to "control" Afghanistan but to ensure a "peaceful, friendly and stable" relationship with Afghanistan. This policy therefore aims to ensure that Pakistan will not be threatened with long-term security problems on its Western border with Afghanistan. According to Kayani, a 'talibanised' Afghanistan is not in Pakistan's interests.
According to Ejaz Haider, a Pakistani military journalist, there is a confusion in the media regarding the policy on using Afghan territory to as a fallback area for Pakistan military assets. Haider blames General Mirza Aslam Beg for proposing this when he was the chief of army staff of the Pakistan Army under Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, stating that this concept "was unpopular even when he was the chief and it has never been entertained by serious military planners. No one thinks of placing military and other assets in Afghanistan and thus acquiring strategic depth." Haider states that such a concept has always been impossible "for a host of reasons" and strategic depth is better used to describe achieving security through improving relationships with the governments of neighbouring countries such as Afghanistan and India.
Lieutenant-General Asad Durrani of ISI, has rubbished claims in the media regarding Pakistan intending to use Afghan territory as "strategic depth". He also denies accusations that the Pakistan military has tried to "install a friendly government in Kabul" in order to "secure this depth". He gives the Soviet Union as an example, stating that "after the Saur Revolution, the Soviets executed an installed president every three months in pursuit of that objective" and these policies later resulted in the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan. He argues that the notion of Pakistan using Afghan territory for its own purposes is a "distortion of a concept or of history" and is being used to vilify Pakistan.
In Israel: Israel is a narrow country, and its internationally recognized borders leave it just 85 miles (137 km) across at its widest point and 9 miles (14 km) at its narrowest (between Tulkarm and Tel Aviv). A number of Israeli leaders (originally Abba Eban) have referred to Israel's internationally recognized borders (those the country had from 1948 to 1967) as the "Auschwitz borders" because of the perceived danger of annihilation by regional foes. Since 1967, Israel has occupied the West Bank, somewhat widening the area under the military's effective control.
To compensate for the lack of strategic depth, Israel approaches all wars as "must-win." This puts a great importance on deterrence (partially by threat of nuclear weapons), superior firepower, and the use of pre-emptive war to prevent threats from encroaching on Israeli territory. Yitzhak Rabin said about the Six-Day War (considered a classic example of pre-emption):
The basic philosophy of Israel was not to initiate war, unless an active war was carried out against us. We then lived within the lines prior to the Six-Day War, lines that gave no depth to Israel—and therefore, Israel was in a need, whenever there would be a war, to go immediately on the offensive—to carry the war to the enemy's land.
Israeli leaders consider the issue of strategic depth to be important in negotiating its final borders as part of the Israeli–Palestinian peace process. Issues of contention include the West Bank settlements and potential Israeli control of the Jordan Valley after the creation of a Palestinian state.
See also: Culminating point
Defence in depth
Loss of Strength Gradient
Military strategy
Soviet deep battle
Strategic defence
References:
External links: article on Pakistan's perceived views on 'strategic depth' in Afghanistan. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic geography | See also: Geostrategy
Further reading: Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York: Basic Books, 1997.
Daclon, Corrado Maria. Geopolitics of Environment, A Wider Approach to the Global Challenges. Italy: Comunità Internazionale, SIOI, 2007.
Faringdon, Hugh. Strategic Geography: NATO, the Warsaw Pact, and the Superpowers. Routledge (1989). ISBN 0-415-00980-4.
Gray, Colin S. and Geoffrey Sloan. Geopolitics, Geography and Strategy. Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 1999.
Kemp G., Harkavy R. Strategic Geography and the changing Middle East. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in cooperation with Brookings Institution Press, 1997.
Mackinder, Halford J. Democratic Ideals and Reality. Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 1996.
Stürmer, Michael. Strategische Geografie. Leitartikel, Die Welt Online, 10. February 2004.
External links: European Geostrategy |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic goal (military) | Description: It is the highest level of organisational achievement in a military organisation, and is usually defined by the national defence policy. In terms of goal assignment it corresponds to operations performed by a front or a fleet on a theatre scale, and by an Army group or, during the World War II, by a Red Army Front.
A strategic goal is achieved by reaching specific strategic objectives that represent intermediary and incremental advances within the overall strategic plan. This is necessary because "high-level" strategic goals are often abstract, and therefore difficult to assess in terms of achievement without referring to some specific, often physical objectives. However, aside from the obstacles used by the enemy to prevent achievement of the strategic goal, inappropriate technological capabilities and operational weakness in combat may prevent fulfilment of the strategic plan. As an example, these are illustrated by the failure of the Royal Air Force's Bomber Command during the winter of 1943-44:
A critical product of the analysis which leads to the strategic decision to use military force is determination of the national goal to be achieved by that application of force.
However, analysis of military history abounds with examples of the two factors that plague goal setting in military strategies, their change during the campaign or war due to changes in economic, political or social changes within the state, or in a change of how achievement of the existing goal is being assessed, and the criteria of its achievement. For example:
The complex and varied nature of the Vietnam War made it especially difficult to translate abstract, strategic goals into specific missions for individual organizations.
This occurred because of the economic change that saw the cost of the war escalate beyond the original predictions and the changing political leadership, which was no longer willing to commit to the conduct of the war, but also due to the radical change which United States society experienced during the war, and more importantly because:
The American strategic goal was not the destruction of an organized military machine armed with tanks, planes, helicopters, and war ships, for which the United States had prepared, but the preservation of a fragile regime from the lightly armed attacks of both its own people and the North Vietnamese.
The United States did not intend to conquer North Vietnam for fear of a Chinese or Soviet military reaction. Likewise, the United States strategically assumed that the full extent of its power was not merited in the Vietnam War.
See also: U.S. Army Strategist
References:
Sources: Aron, Raymond, (ed.), Peace & War: A Theory of International Relations, Transaction Publishers, 2003. ISBN 978-0-7658-0504-1
Millett, Allan R. & Murray, Williamson, (eds.), Military Effectiveness: The First World War, Volume I., Mershon Center series on International Security and Foreign Policy, Routledge, 1988
Newell, Clayton R., Framework of Operational War, Routledge, 1991
Gartner, Scott Sigmund, Strategic Assessment in War, Yale University Press, 1999
Anderson, David L. Columbia's Guide to the Vietnam War, New York: Columbia UP, 2002. ISBN 978-0-231114936 |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic offensive | Theatre offensive: A theatre offensive can be a war and a dominant feature of a national security policy, or one of several components of war if a country is involved in several theatres such as the United Kingdom in 1941. In general theatre, offensives require over 250,000 troops to be committed to combat operations, including combined planning for different arms and services of the armed forces, such as air defence troops integrated into the overall plan for ground operations.
Strategic offensive: A strategic offensive is often a campaign and would involve the use of over 100,000 troops as part of a general strategy of the conflict in a given theatre. For example, the Operation Barbarossa was a theatre offensive composed of three distinct and inter-related campaigns in the Southern, Central and Northern parts of USSR territory. Soviet strategic offensive operations during World War II often involved multi-front coordinated operations. Along with the Wehrmacht operations on the Eastern Front of World War II, these were the largest military operations of the twentieth century. Strategic operations of the Red Army in World War II provides a listing of large-scale Soviet operations.
A strategic offensive is the aggressive expression of war planning and the use of strategic forces as a whole, combining all resources available for achieving defined and definitive goals that would fundamentally alter the balance of power between belligerents. However, the planning and execution of strategic offensives are always based on theoretical considerations because it is impractical, uneconomic and difficult to hide a full-scale rehearsal of large-scale operations.
A strategic offensive consists of simultaneous, tandem or phased operational offensives that seek to achieve specific operational objectives that eventually lead to the achievement of a strategic goal, usually a complete defeat of the opposition, but also destruction of a significant enemy force or occupation of strategically significant territory, such as the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation.
Any given strategic offensive is a derivative of a combination of factors such as national military doctrine, past military experience, and analysis of socio-political, economic and military circumstances.
See also: The best defense is a good offense
Military operation
Charge (warfare)
References:
Sources: Glantz, David M., Soviet military operational art: in pursuit of deep battle, Frank Cass, London, 1991 ISBN 0-7146-4077-8
Glantz, David M., The Soviet strategic offensive in Manchuria, 1945: August storm, Frank Cass, London, 2003
Fulton, William B., Major General, VIETNAM STUDIES RIVERINE OPERATIONS 1966-1969, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, U.S. Government Printing Office, WASHINGTON, D. C., 1985
Longmate, Norman. The Bombers. Hutchins & Co, 1983. ISBN 0-09-151580-7.
Isby, David C., Weapons and tactics of the Soviet Army, Jane's Publishing Company Limited, London, 1981
External links: Tactical Reasons to Advance |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Strategic studies | Higher education: The subject is taught in Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Europe.
In Nigeria, Institute for Peace and Strategic Studies, Nigerian Defence Academy, University of Ibadan, Covenant University and in the Conflict, Peace and Strategic Studies at Afe Babalola University Nigeria and Nassarawa State University Keffi offers Security and Strategic Studies at Masters and Ph.D. Level. In South Africa, the Faculty of Military Science at the University of Stellenbosch provides a number of courses in strategic studies from the undergraduate to PhD level. The Faculty of Military Science, co-located at the South African Military Academy in Saldanha, is also involved in the teaching of the discipline at the South African Defence and War Colleges.
In Europe, the subject is taught at the University of St Andrews, the University of Reading, Aberystwyth University, the University of Aberdeen, the University of Exeter, the University of Hull, King's College London, and the University of Leeds (all in the United Kingdom), University of Rome III, Università degli Studi di Milano, University of Turin (all of the three in Italy), the University of Granada (in Spain), the National Defence University (in Finland), the Charles University in Prague, Netherlands Defence College Breda (the Netherlands), and the Université Paris 13 Nord SciencesPo (in France), University College Cork (Ireland), University of Warsaw (Poland).
In the Americas, it is taught in Chile, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, United States.
In Brazil, it is taught at the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, and Universidade Federal Fluminense. In Canada, it is taught in University of Calgary and the Royal Military College in Canada.
In Chile, it is taught in the National Academy of Political and Strategic Studies, Ministry of Defense.
In the U.S., the subject is taught in many state, private, and military universities, including the University of Missouri, United States Military Academy, United States Air Force Academy, Georgetown University, Johns Hopkins University, Missouri State University, the University of Texas at El Paso, Norwich University, Temple University, the U.S. Army War College, Air University's Air War College, U.S. Naval War College, Marine Corps War College, and the National Defense University.
In Asia and the Pacific, it is also taught in several countries. In Bangladesh, it is taught at the national universities, Bangladesh University of Professionals, the National Defense University, and the military academies.
In Australia, it is taught in the Australian National University. In New Zealand, it is taught at Victoria University of Wellington. In Singapore, the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore. In Malaysia, University of Malaya.
In India, Deen Dyal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Savitribai Phule Pune University, University of Allahabad, National Defence Academy, School of International Relations and Strategic Studies SIRSS, University of Mumbai, Rashtriya Raksha university.
In Pakistan, the subject is taught in several universities, but predominantly in Quaid-I-Azam University (QAU), National Defence University (NDU), University of Punjab, and Fatima Jinnah Women's University. Islamabad|National Defence University]], and Islamia college university Peshawar in Pakistan. Turkish War Academy has also Strategic Research Institute (SAREN) in which the subject is taught at both masters and doctoral levels.
See also: U.S. Army Strategist
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | History:
Etymology: The word submarine means 'underwater' or 'under-sea' (as in submarine canyon, submarine pipeline) though as a noun it generally refers to a vessel that can travel underwater. The term is a contraction of submarine boat. and occurs as such in several languages, e.g. French (sous-marin), and Spanish (submarino), although others retain the original term, such as Dutch (Onderzeeboot), German (Unterseeboot), Swedish (Undervattensbåt), and Russian (подводная лодка: podvodnaya lodka), all of which mean 'submarine boat'. By naval tradition, submarines are usually referred to as boats rather than as ships, regardless of their size. Although referred to informally as boats, U.S. submarines employ the designation USS (United States Ship) at the beginning of their names, such as USS Alabama. In the Royal Navy, the designation HMS can refer to "His Majesty's Ship" or "His Majesty's Submarine", though the latter is sometimes rendered "HMS/m" and submarines are generally referred to as boats rather than ships.
Early human-powered submersibles:
16th and 17th centuries: According to a report in Opusculum Taisnieri published in 1562:
Two Greeks submerged and surfaced in the river Tagus near the City of Toledo several times in the presence of The Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, without getting wet and with the flame they carried in their hands still alight.
In 1578, the English mathematician William Bourne recorded in his book Inventions or Devises one of the first plans for an underwater navigation vehicle. A few years later the Scottish mathematician and theologian John Napier wrote in his Secret Inventions (1596) that "These inventions besides devises of sayling under water with divers, other devises and strategems for harming of the enemyes by the Grace of God and worke of expert Craftsmen I hope to perform." It is unclear whether he carried out his idea.
Jerónimo de Ayanz y Beaumont (1553–1613) created detailed designs for two types of air-renovated submersible vehicles. They were equipped with oars, autonomous floating snorkels worked by inner pumps, portholes and gloves used for the crew to manipulate underwater objects. Ayanaz planned to use them for warfare, using them to approach enemy ships undetected and set up timed gunpowder charges on their hulls.
The first submersible of whose construction there exists reliable information was designed and built in 1620 by Cornelis Drebbel, a Dutchman in the service of James I of England. It was propelled by means of oars.
18th century: By the mid-18th century, over a dozen patents for submarines/submersible boats had been granted in England. In 1747, Nathaniel Symons patented and built the first known working example of the use of a ballast tank for submersion. His design used leather bags that could fill with water to submerge the craft. A mechanism was used to twist the water out of the bags and cause the boat to resurface. In 1749, the Gentlemen's Magazine reported that a similar design had initially been proposed by Giovanni Borelli in 1680. Further design improvement stagnated for over a century, until application of new technologies for propulsion and stability.
The first military submersible was Turtle (1775), a hand-powered acorn-shaped device designed by the American David Bushnell to accommodate a single person. It was the first verified submarine capable of independent underwater operation and movement, and the first to use screws for propulsion.
19th century: In 1800, France built Nautilus, a human-powered submarine designed by American Robert Fulton. They gave up on the experiment in 1804, as did the British, when they reconsidered Fulton's submarine design.
In 1850, Wilhelm Bauer's Brandtaucher was built in Germany. It remains the oldest known surviving submarine in the world.
In 1864, late in the American Civil War, the Confederate navy's H. L. Hunley became the first military submarine to sink an enemy vessel, the Union sloop-of-war USS Housatonic, using a gun-powder-filled keg on a spar as a torpedo charge. The Hunley also sank. The explosion's shock waves may have killed its crew instantly, preventing them from pumping the bilge or propelling the submarine.
In 1866, Sub Marine Explorer was the first submarine to successfully dive, cruise underwater, and resurface under the crew's control. The design by German American Julius H. Kroehl (in German, Kröhl) incorporated elements that are still used in modern submarines.
In 1866, Flach was built at the Chilean government's request by Karl Flach, a German engineer and immigrant. It was the fifth submarine built in the world and, along with a second submarine, was intended to defend the port of Valparaiso against attack by the Spanish Navy during the Chincha Islands War.
Mechanically powered submarines: Submarines could not be put into widespread or routine service use by navies until suitable engines were developed. The era from 1863 to 1904 marked a pivotal time in submarine development, and several important technologies appeared. A number of nations built and used submarines. Diesel electric propulsion became the dominant power system and equipment such as the periscope became standardized. Countries conducted many experiments on effective tactics and weapons for submarines, which led to their large impact in World War I.
1863–1904: The first submarine not relying on human power for propulsion was the French Plongeur (Diver), launched in 1863, which used compressed air at 1,200 kPa (180 psi). Narcís Monturiol designed the first air-independent and combustion-powered submarine, Ictíneo II, which was launched in Barcelona, Spain in 1864.
The submarine became feasible as potential weapon with the development of the Whitehead torpedo, designed in 1866 by British engineer Robert Whitehead, the first practical self-propelled or "locomotive" torpedo. The spar torpedo that had been developed earlier by the Confederate States Navy was considered to be impracticable, as it was believed to have sunk both its intended target, and H. L. Hunley, the submarine that deployed it.
The Irish inventor John Philip Holland built a model submarine in 1876 and in 1878 demonstrated the Holland I prototype. This was followed by a number of unsuccessful designs. In 1896, he designed the Holland Type VI submarine, which used internal combustion engine power on the surface and electric battery power underwater. Launched on 17 May 1897 at Navy Lt. Lewis Nixon's Crescent Shipyard in Elizabeth, New Jersey, Holland VI was purchased by the United States Navy on 11 April 1900, becoming the Navy's first commissioned submarine, christened USS Holland.
Discussions between the English clergyman and inventor George Garrett and the Swedish industrialist Thorsten Nordenfelt led to the first practical steam-powered submarines, armed with torpedoes and ready for military use. The first was Nordenfelt I, a 56-tonne, 19.5-metre (64 ft) vessel similar to Garrett's ill-fated Resurgam (1879), with a range of 240 kilometres (130 nmi; 150 mi), armed with a single torpedo, in 1885.
A reliable means of propulsion for the submerged vessel was only made possible in the 1880s with the advent of the necessary electric battery technology. The first electrically powered boats were built by Isaac Peral y Caballero in Spain (who built Peral), Dupuy de Lôme (who built Gymnote) and Gustave Zédé (who built Sirène) in France, and James Franklin Waddington (who built Porpoise) in England. Peral's design featured torpedoes and other systems that later became standard in submarines.
Commissioned in June 1900, the French steam and electric Narval employed the now typical double-hull design, with a pressure hull inside the outer shell. These 200-ton ships had a range of over 160 km (100 mi) underwater. The French submarine Aigrette in 1904 further improved the concept by using a diesel rather than a gasoline engine for surface power. Large numbers of these submarines were built, with seventy-six completed before 1914.
The Royal Navy commissioned five Holland-class submarines from Vickers, Barrow-in-Furness, under licence from the Holland Torpedo Boat Company from 1901 to 1903. Construction of the boats took longer than anticipated, with the first only ready for a diving trial at sea on 6 April 1902. Although the design had been purchased entirely from the US company, the actual design used was an untested improvement to the original Holland design using a new 180 horsepower (130 kW) petrol engine.
These types of submarines were first used during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05. Due to the blockade at Port Arthur, the Russians sent their submarines to Vladivostok, where by 1 January 1905 there were seven boats, enough to create the world's first "operational submarine fleet". The new submarine fleet began patrols on 14 February, usually lasting for about 24 hours each. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | The Royal Navy commissioned five Holland-class submarines from Vickers, Barrow-in-Furness, under licence from the Holland Torpedo Boat Company from 1901 to 1903. Construction of the boats took longer than anticipated, with the first only ready for a diving trial at sea on 6 April 1902. Although the design had been purchased entirely from the US company, the actual design used was an untested improvement to the original Holland design using a new 180 horsepower (130 kW) petrol engine.
These types of submarines were first used during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05. Due to the blockade at Port Arthur, the Russians sent their submarines to Vladivostok, where by 1 January 1905 there were seven boats, enough to create the world's first "operational submarine fleet". The new submarine fleet began patrols on 14 February, usually lasting for about 24 hours each. The first confrontation with Japanese warships occurred on 29 April 1905 when the Russian submarine Som was fired upon by Japanese torpedo boats, but then withdrew.
World War I: Military submarines first made a significant impact in World War I. Forces such as the U-boats of Germany saw action in the First Battle of the Atlantic, and were responsible for sinking RMS Lusitania, which was sunk as a result of unrestricted submarine warfare and is often cited among the reasons for the entry of the United States into the war.
At the outbreak of the war, Germany had only twenty submarines available for combat, although these included vessels of the diesel-engined U-19 class, which had a sufficient range of 5,000 miles (8,000 km) and speed of 8 knots (15 km/h) to allow them to operate effectively around the entire British coast., By contrast, the Royal Navy had a total of 74 submarines, though of mixed effectiveness. In August 1914, a flotilla of ten U-boats sailed from their base in Heligoland to attack Royal Navy warships in the North Sea in the first submarine war patrol in history.
The U-boats' ability to function as practical war machines relied on new tactics, their numbers, and submarine technologies such as combination diesel–electric power system developed in the preceding years. More submersibles than true submarines, U-boats operated primarily on the surface using regular engines, submerging occasionally to attack under battery power. They were roughly triangular in cross-section, with a distinct keel to control rolling while surfaced, and a distinct bow. During World War I more than 5,000 Allied ships were sunk by U-boats.
The British responded to the German developments in submarine technology with the creation of the K-class submarines. However, these submarines were notoriously dangerous to operate due to their various design flaws and poor maneuverability.
World War II: During World War II, Germany used submarines to devastating effect in the Battle of the Atlantic, where it attempted to cut Britain's supply routes by sinking more merchant ships than Britain could replace. These merchant ships were vital to supply Britain's population with food, industry with raw material, and armed forces with fuel and armaments. Although the U-boats had been updated in the interwar years, the major innovation was improved communications, encrypted using the Enigma cipher machine. This allowed for mass-attack naval tactics (Rudeltaktik, commonly known as "wolfpack"), which ultimately ceased to be effective when the U-boat's Enigma was cracked. By the end of the war, almost 3,000 Allied ships (175 warships, 2,825 merchantmen) had been sunk by U-boats. Although successful early in the war, Germany's U-boat fleet suffered heavy casualties, losing 793 U-boats and about 28,000 submariners out of 41,000, a casualty rate of about 70%.
The Imperial Japanese Navy operated the most varied fleet of submarines of any navy, including Kaiten crewed torpedoes, midget submarines (Type A Ko-hyoteki and Kairyu classes), medium-range submarines, purpose-built supply submarines and long-range fleet submarines. They also had submarines with the highest submerged speeds during World War II (I-201-class submarines) and submarines that could carry multiple aircraft (I-400-class submarines). They were also equipped with one of the most advanced torpedoes of the conflict, the oxygen-propelled Type 95. Nevertheless, despite their technical prowess, Japan chose to use its submarines for fleet warfare, and consequently were relatively unsuccessful, as warships were fast, maneuverable and well-defended compared to merchant ships.
The submarine force was the most effective anti-ship weapon in the American arsenal. Submarines, though only about 2 percent of the U.S. Navy, destroyed over 30 percent of the Japanese Navy, including 8 aircraft carriers, 1 battleship and 11 cruisers. US submarines also destroyed over 60 percent of the Japanese merchant fleet, crippling Japan's ability to supply its military forces and industrial war effort. Allied submarines in the Pacific War destroyed more Japanese shipping than all other weapons combined. This feat was considerably aided by the Imperial Japanese Navy's failure to provide adequate escort forces for the nation's merchant fleet.
During World War II, 314 submarines served in the US Navy, of which nearly 260 were deployed to the Pacific. When the Japanese attacked Hawaii in December 1941, 111 boats were in commission; 203 submarines from the Gato, Balao, and Tench classes were commissioned during the war. During the war, 52 US submarines were lost to all causes, with 48 directly due to hostilities. US submarines sank 1,560 enemy vessels, a total tonnage of 5.3 million tons (55% of the total sunk).
The Royal Navy Submarine Service was used primarily in the classic Axis blockade. Its major operating areas were around Norway, in the Mediterranean (against the Axis supply routes to North Africa), and in the Far East. In that war, British submarines sank 2 million tons of enemy shipping and 57 major warships, the latter including 35 submarines. Among these is the only documented instance of a submarine sinking another submarine while both were submerged. This occurred when HMS Venturer engaged U-864; the Venturer crew manually computed a successful firing solution against a three-dimensionally maneuvering target using techniques which became the basis of modern torpedo computer targeting systems. Seventy-four British submarines were lost, the majority, forty-two, in the Mediterranean.
Cold-War military models: The first launch of a cruise missile (SSM-N-8 Regulus) from a submarine occurred in July 1953, from the deck of USS Tunny, a World War II fleet boat modified to carry the missile with a nuclear warhead. Tunny and its sister boat, Barbero, were the United States' first nuclear deterrent patrol submarines. In the 1950s, nuclear power partially replaced diesel–electric propulsion. Equipment was also developed to extract oxygen from sea water. These two innovations gave submarines the ability to remain submerged for weeks or months. Most of the naval submarines built since that time in the US, the Soviet Union (now Russia), the UK, and France have been powered by a nuclear reactor.
In 1959–1960, the first ballistic missile submarines were put into service by both the United States (George Washington class) and the Soviet Union (Golf class) as part of the Cold War nuclear deterrent strategy.
During the Cold War, the US and the Soviet Union maintained large submarine fleets that engaged in cat-and-mouse games. The Soviet Union lost at least four submarines during this period: K-129 was lost in 1968 (a part of which the CIA retrieved from the ocean floor with the Howard Hughes-designed ship Glomar Explorer), K-8 in 1970, K-219 in 1986, and Komsomolets in 1989 (which held a depth record among military submarines—1,000 m (3,300 ft)). Many other Soviet subs, such as K-19 (the first Soviet nuclear submarine, and the first Soviet sub to reach the North Pole) were badly damaged by fire or radiation leaks. The US lost two nuclear submarines during this time: USS Thresher due to equipment failure during a test dive while at its operational limit, and USS Scorpion due to unknown causes.
During the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, the Pakistan Navy's Hangor sank the Indian frigate INS Khukri. This was the first sinking by a submarine since World War II. During the same war, Ghazi, a Tench-class submarine on loan to Pakistan from the US, was sunk by the Indian Navy. It was the first submarine combat loss since World War II. In 1982 during the Falklands War, the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano was sunk by the British submarine HMS Conqueror, the first sinking by a nuclear-powered submarine in war. Some weeks later, on 16 June, during the Lebanon War, an unnamed Israeli submarine torpedoed and sank the Lebanese coaster Transit, which was carrying 56 Palestinian refugees to Cyprus, in the belief that the vessel was evacuating anti-Israeli militias. The ship was hit by two torpedoes, managed to run aground but eventually sank. There were 25 dead, including her captain. The Israeli Navy disclosed the incident in November 2018.
Usage:
Military: Before and during World War II, the primary role of the submarine was anti-surface ship warfare. Submarines would attack either on the surface using deck guns, or submerged using torpedoes. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | It was the first submarine combat loss since World War II. In 1982 during the Falklands War, the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano was sunk by the British submarine HMS Conqueror, the first sinking by a nuclear-powered submarine in war. Some weeks later, on 16 June, during the Lebanon War, an unnamed Israeli submarine torpedoed and sank the Lebanese coaster Transit, which was carrying 56 Palestinian refugees to Cyprus, in the belief that the vessel was evacuating anti-Israeli militias. The ship was hit by two torpedoes, managed to run aground but eventually sank. There were 25 dead, including her captain. The Israeli Navy disclosed the incident in November 2018.
Usage:
Military: Before and during World War II, the primary role of the submarine was anti-surface ship warfare. Submarines would attack either on the surface using deck guns, or submerged using torpedoes. They were particularly effective in sinking Allied transatlantic shipping in both World Wars, and in disrupting Japanese supply routes and naval operations in the Pacific in World War II.
Mine-laying submarines were developed in the early part of the 20th century. The facility was used in both World Wars. Submarines were also used for inserting and removing covert agents and military forces in special operations, for intelligence gathering, and to rescue aircrew during air attacks on islands, where the airmen would be told of safe places to crash-land so the submarines could rescue them. Submarines could carry cargo through hostile waters or act as supply vessels for other submarines.
Submarines could usually locate and attack other submarines only on the surface, although HMS Venturer managed to sink U-864 with a four torpedo spread while both were submerged. The British developed a specialized anti-submarine submarine in WWI, the R class. After WWII, with the development of the homing torpedo, better sonar systems, and nuclear propulsion, submarines also became able to hunt each other effectively.
The development of submarine-launched ballistic missile and submarine-launched cruise missiles gave submarines a substantial and long-ranged ability to attack both land and sea targets with a variety of weapons ranging from cluster bombs to nuclear weapons.
The primary defense of a submarine lies in its ability to remain concealed in the depths of the ocean. Early submarines could be detected by the sound they made. Water is an excellent conductor of sound (much better than air), and submarines can detect and track comparatively noisy surface ships from long distances. Modern submarines are built with an emphasis on stealth. Advanced propeller designs, extensive sound-reducing insulation, and special machinery help a submarine remain as quiet as ambient ocean noise, making them difficult to detect. It takes specialized technology to find and attack modern submarines.
Active sonar uses the reflection of sound emitted from the search equipment to detect submarines. It has been used since WWII by surface ships, submarines and aircraft (via dropped buoys and helicopter "dipping" arrays), but it reveals the emitter's position, and is susceptible to counter-measures.
A concealed military submarine is a real threat, and because of its stealth, can force an enemy navy to waste resources searching large areas of ocean and protecting ships against attack. This advantage was vividly demonstrated in the 1982 Falklands War when the British nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror sank the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano. After the sinking the Argentine Navy recognized that they had no effective defense against submarine attack, and the Argentine surface fleet withdrew to port for the remainder of the war. An Argentine submarine remained at sea, however.
Civilian: Although the majority of the world's submarines are military, there are some civilian submarines, which are used for tourism, exploration, oil and gas platform inspections, and pipeline surveys. Some are also used in illegal activities.
The Submarine Voyage ride opened at Disneyland in 1959, but although it ran under water it was not a true submarine, as it ran on tracks and was open to the atmosphere. The first tourist submarine was Auguste Piccard, which went into service in 1964 at Expo64. By 1997, there were 45 tourist submarines operating around the world. Submarines with a crush depth in the range of 400–500 feet (120–150 m) are operated in several areas worldwide, typically with bottom depths around 100 to 120 feet (30 to 37 m), with a carrying capacity of 50 to 100 passengers.
In a typical operation a surface vessel carries passengers to an offshore operating area and loads them into the submarine. The submarine then visits underwater points of interest such as natural or artificial reef structures. To surface safely without danger of collision the location of the submarine is marked with an air release and movement to the surface is coordinated by an observer in a support craft.
A recent development is the deployment of so-called narco-submarines by South American drug smugglers to evade law enforcement detection. Although they occasionally deploy true submarines, most are self-propelled semi-submersibles, where a portion of the craft remains above water at all times. In September 2011, Colombian authorities seized a 16-meter-long submersible that could hold a crew of 5, costing about $2 million. The vessel belonged to FARC rebels and had the capacity to carry at least 7 tonnes of drugs.
Civilian submarines
Polar operations: 1903 – Simon Lake submarine Protector surfaced through ice off Newport, Rhode Island.
1930 – USS O-12 operated under ice near Spitsbergen.
1937 – Soviet submarine Krasnogvardeyets operated under ice in the Denmark Strait.
1941–45 – German U-boats operated under ice from the Barents Sea to the Laptev Sea.
1946 – USS Atule used upward-beamed fathometer in Operation Nanook in the Davis Strait.
1946–47 – USS Sennet used under-ice sonar in Operation High Jump in the Antarctic.
1947 – USS Boarfish used upward-beamed echo sounder under pack ice in the Chukchi Sea.
1948 – USS Carp developed techniques for making vertical ascents and descents through polynyas in the Chukchi Sea.
1952 – USS Redfish used an expanded upward-beamed sounder array in the Beaufort Sea.
1957 – USS Nautilus reached 87 degrees north near Spitsbergen.
3 August 1958 – Nautilus used an inertial navigation system to reach the North Pole.
17 March 1959 – USS Skate surfaced through the ice at the north pole.
1960 – USS Sargo transited 900 miles (1,400 km) under ice over the shallow (125 to 180 feet or 38 to 55 metres deep) Bering-Chukchi shelf.
1960 – USS Seadragon transited the Northwest Passage under ice.
1962 – Soviet November-class submarine K-3 Leninsky Komsomol reached the north pole.
1970 – USS Queenfish carried out an extensive undersea mapping survey of the Siberian continental shelf.
1971 – HMS Dreadnought reached the North Pole.
USS Gurnard conducted three Polar Exercises: 1976 (with US actor Charlton Heston aboard); 1984 joint operations with USS Pintado; and 1990 joint exercises with USS Seahorse.
6 May 1986 – USS Ray, USS Archerfish and USS Hawkbill meet and surface together at the Geographic North Pole. First three-submarine surfacing at the Pole.
19 May 1987 – HMS Superb joined USS Billfish and USS Sea Devil at the North Pole.
March 2007 – USS Alexandria participated in the Joint US Navy/Royal Navy Ice Exercise 2007 (ICEX-2007) in the Arctic Ocean with the Trafalgar-class submarine HMS Tireless.
March 2009 – USS Annapolis took part in Ice Exercise 2009 to test submarine operability and war-fighting capability in Arctic conditions.
Technology:
Buoyancy and trim: All surface ships, as well as surfaced submarines, are in a positively buoyant condition, weighing less than the volume of water they would displace if fully submerged. To submerge hydrostatically, a ship must have negative buoyancy, either by increasing its own weight or decreasing its displacement of water. To control their displacement and weight, submarines have ballast tanks, which can hold varying amounts of water and air.
For general submersion or surfacing, submarines use the main ballast tanks (MBTs), which are ambient pressure tanks, filled with water to submerge or with air to surface. While submerged, MBTs generally remain flooded, which simplifies their design, and on many submarines, these tanks are a section of the space between the light hull and the pressure hull. For more precise control of depth, submarines use smaller depth control tanks (DCTs)—also called hard tanks (due to their ability to withstand higher pressure) or trim tanks. These are variable buoyancy pressure vessels, a type of buoyancy control device. The amount of water in depth control tanks can be adjusted to hydrostatically change depth or to maintain a constant depth as outside conditions (mainly water density) change. Depth control tanks may be located either near the submarine's center of gravity, to minimise the effect on trim, or separated along the length of the hull so they can also be used to adjust static trim by transfer of water between them. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | While submerged, MBTs generally remain flooded, which simplifies their design, and on many submarines, these tanks are a section of the space between the light hull and the pressure hull. For more precise control of depth, submarines use smaller depth control tanks (DCTs)—also called hard tanks (due to their ability to withstand higher pressure) or trim tanks. These are variable buoyancy pressure vessels, a type of buoyancy control device. The amount of water in depth control tanks can be adjusted to hydrostatically change depth or to maintain a constant depth as outside conditions (mainly water density) change. Depth control tanks may be located either near the submarine's center of gravity, to minimise the effect on trim, or separated along the length of the hull so they can also be used to adjust static trim by transfer of water between them.
When submerged, the water pressure on a submarine's hull can reach 4 MPa (580 psi) for steel submarines and up to 10 MPa (1,500 psi) for titanium submarines like K-278 Komsomolets, while interior pressure remains relatively unchanged. This difference results in hull compression, which decreases displacement. Water density also marginally increases with depth, as the salinity and pressure are higher. This change in density incompletely compensates for hull compression, so buoyancy decreases as depth increases. A submerged submarine is in an unstable equilibrium, having a tendency to either sink or float to the surface. Keeping a constant depth requires continual operation of either the depth control tanks or control surfaces.
Submarines in a neutral buoyancy condition are not intrinsically trim-stable. To maintain desired longitudinal trim, submarines use forward and aft trim tanks. Pumps move water between the tanks, changing weight distribution and pitching the sub up or down. A similar system may be used to maintain transverse trim.
Control surfaces: The hydrostatic effect of variable ballast tanks is not the only way to control the submarine underwater. Hydrodynamic maneuvering is done by several control surfaces, collectively known as diving planes or hydroplanes, which can be moved to create hydrodynamic forces when a submarine moves longitudinally at sufficient speed. In the classic cruciform stern configuration, the horizontal stern planes serve the same purpose as the trim tanks, controlling the trim. Most submarines additionally have forward horizontal planes, normally placed on the bow until the 1960s but often on the sail on later designs, where they are closer to the center of gravity and can control depth with less effect on the trim.
An obvious way to configure the control surfaces at the stern of a submarine is to use vertical planes to control yaw and horizontal planes to control pitch, which gives them the shape of a cross when seen from astern of the vessel. In this configuration, which long remained the dominant one, the horizontal planes are used to control the trim and depth and the vertical planes to control sideways maneuvers, like the rudder of a surface ship.
Alternatively, the rear control surfaces can be combined into what has become known as an x-stern or an x-rudder. Although less intuitive, such a configuration has turned out to have several advantages over the traditional cruciform arrangement. First, it improves maneuverability, horizontally as well as vertically. Second, the control surfaces are less likely to get damaged when landing on, or departing from, the seabed as well as when mooring and unmooring alongside. Finally, it is safer in that one of the two diagonal lines can counteract the other with respect to vertical as well as horizontal motion if one of them accidentally gets stuck.
The x-stern was first tried in practice in the early 1960s on the USS Albacore, an experimental submarine of the US Navy. While the arrangement was found to be advantageous, it was nevertheless not used on US production submarines that followed due to the fact that it requires the use of a computer to manipulate the control surfaces to the desired effect. Instead, the first to use an x-stern in standard operations was the Swedish Navy with its Sjöormen class, the lead submarine of which was launched in 1967, before the Albacore had even finished her test runs. Since it turned out to work very well in practice, all subsequent classes of Swedish submarines (Näcken, Västergötland, Gotland, and Blekinge class) have or will come with an x-rudder.
The Kockums shipyard responsible for the design of the x-stern on Swedish submarines eventually exported it to Australia with the Collins class as well as to Japan with the Sōryū class. With the introduction of the type 212, the German and Italian Navies came to feature it as well. The US Navy with its Columbia class, the British Navy with its Dreadnought class, and the French Navy with its Barracuda class are all about to join the x-stern family. Hence, as judged by the situation in the early 2020s, the x-stern is about to become the dominant technology.
When a submarine performs an emergency surfacing, all depth and trim control methods are used simultaneously, together with propelling the boat upwards. Such surfacing is very quick, so the vessel may even partially jump out of the water, potentially damaging submarine systems.
Hull:
Overview: Modern submarines are cigar-shaped. This design, also used in very early submarines, is sometimes called a "teardrop hull". It reduces hydrodynamic drag when the sub is submerged, but decreases the sea-keeping capabilities and increases drag while surfaced. Since the limitations of the propulsion systems of early submarines forced them to operate surfaced most of the time, their hull designs were a compromise. Because of the slow submerged speeds of those subs, usually, well below 10 kt (18 km/h), the increased drag for underwater travel was acceptable. Late in World War II, when technology allowed faster and longer submerged operation and increased aircraft surveillance forced submarines to stay submerged, hull designs became teardrop shaped again to reduce drag and noise. USS Albacore (AGSS-569) was a unique research submarine that pioneered the American version of the teardrop hull form (sometimes referred to as an "Albacore hull") of modern submarines. On modern military submarines the outer hull is covered with a layer of sound-absorbing rubber, or anechoic plating, to reduce detection.
The occupied pressure hulls of deep-diving submarines such as DSV Alvin are spherical instead of cylindrical. This allows a more even distribution of stress and efficient use of materials to withstand external pressure as it gives the most internal volume for structural weight and is the most efficient shape to avoid buckling instability in compression. A frame is usually affixed to the outside of the pressure hull, providing attachment for ballast and trim systems, scientific instrumentation, battery packs, syntactic flotation foam, and lighting.
A raised tower on top of a standard submarine accommodates the periscope and electronics masts, which can include radio, radar, electronic warfare, and other systems. It might also include a snorkel mast. In many early classes of submarines (see history), the control room, or "conn", was located inside this tower, which was known as the "conning tower". Since then, the conn has been located within the hull of the submarine, and the tower is now called the "sail" or "fin". The conn is distinct from the "bridge", a small open platform in the top of the sail, used for observation during surface operation.
"Bathtubs" are related to conning towers but are used on smaller submarines. The bathtub is a metal cylinder surrounding the hatch that prevents waves from breaking directly into the cabin. It is needed because surfaced submarines have limited freeboard, that is, they lie low in the water. Bathtubs help prevent swamping the vessel.
Single and double hulls: Modern submarines and submersibles usually have, as did the earliest models, a single hull. Large submarines generally have an additional hull or hull sections outside. This external hull, which actually forms the shape of submarine, is called the outer hull (casing in the Royal Navy) or light hull, as it does not have to withstand a pressure difference. Inside the outer hull there is a strong hull, or pressure hull, which withstands sea pressure and has normal atmospheric pressure inside.
As early as World War I, it was realized that the optimal shape for withstanding pressure conflicted with the optimal shape for seakeeping and minimal drag at the surface, and construction difficulties further complicated the problem. This was solved either by a compromise shape, or by using two layered hulls: the internal strength hull for withstanding pressure, and an external fairing for hydrodynamic shape. Until the end of World War II, most submarines had an additional partial casing on the top, bow and stern, built of thinner metal, which was flooded when submerged. Germany went further with the Type XXI, a general predecessor of modern submarines, in which the pressure hull was fully enclosed inside the light hull, but optimized for submerged navigation, unlike earlier designs that were optimized for surface operation.
After World War II, approaches split. The Soviet Union changed its designs, basing them on German developments. All post-World War II heavy Soviet and Russian submarines are built with a double hull structure. American and most other Western submarines switched to a primarily single-hull approach. They still have light hull sections in the bow and stern, which house main ballast tanks and provide a hydrodynamically optimized shape, but the main cylindrical hull section has only a single plating layer. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | Until the end of World War II, most submarines had an additional partial casing on the top, bow and stern, built of thinner metal, which was flooded when submerged. Germany went further with the Type XXI, a general predecessor of modern submarines, in which the pressure hull was fully enclosed inside the light hull, but optimized for submerged navigation, unlike earlier designs that were optimized for surface operation.
After World War II, approaches split. The Soviet Union changed its designs, basing them on German developments. All post-World War II heavy Soviet and Russian submarines are built with a double hull structure. American and most other Western submarines switched to a primarily single-hull approach. They still have light hull sections in the bow and stern, which house main ballast tanks and provide a hydrodynamically optimized shape, but the main cylindrical hull section has only a single plating layer. Double hulls are being considered for future submarines in the United States to improve payload capacity, stealth and range.
Pressure hull: The pressure hull is generally constructed of thick high-strength steel with a complex structure and high strength reserve, and is separated by watertight bulkheads into several compartments. There are also examples of more than two hulls in a submarine, like the Typhoon class, which has two main pressure hulls and three smaller ones for control room, torpedoes and steering gear, with the missile launch system between the main hulls, all surrounded and supported by the outer light hydrodynamic hull. When submerged the pressure hull provides most of the buoyancy for the whole vessel.
The dive depth cannot be increased easily. Simply making the hull thicker increases the structural weight and requires reduction of onboard equipment weight, and increasing the diameter requires a proportional increase in thickness for the same material and architecture, ultimately resulting in a pressure hull that does not have sufficient buoyancy to support its own weight, as in a bathyscaphe. This is acceptable for civilian research submersibles, but not military submarines, which need to carry a large equipment, crew, and weapons load to fulfill their function. Construction materials with greater specific strength and specific modulus are needed.
WWI submarines had hulls of carbon steel, with a 100-metre (330 ft) maximum depth. During WWII, high-strength alloyed steel was introduced, allowing 200-metre (660 ft) depths. High-strength alloy steel remains the primary material for submarines today, with 250–400-metre (820–1,310 ft) depths, which cannot be exceeded on a military submarine without design compromises. To exceed that limit, a few submarines were built with titanium hulls. Titanium alloys can be stronger than steel, lighter, and most importantly, have higher immersed specific strength and specific modulus. Titanium is also not ferromagnetic, important for stealth. Titanium submarines were built by the Soviet Union, which developed specialized high-strength alloys. It has produced several types of titanium submarines. Titanium alloys allow a major increase in depth, but other systems must be redesigned to cope, so test depth was limited to 1,000 metres (3,300 ft) for the Soviet submarine K-278 Komsomolets, the deepest-diving combat submarine. An Alfa-class submarine may have successfully operated at 1,300 metres (4,300 ft), though continuous operation at such depths would produce excessive stress on many submarine systems. Titanium does not flex as readily as steel, and may become brittle after many dive cycles. Despite its benefits, the high cost of titanium construction led to the abandonment of titanium submarine construction as the Cold War ended. Deep-diving civilian submarines have used thick acrylic pressure hulls. Although the specific strength and specific modulus of acrylic are not very high, the density is only 1.18g/cm3, so it is only very slightly denser than water, and the buoyancy penalty of increased thickness is correspondingly low.
The deepest deep-submergence vehicle (DSV) to date is Trieste. On 5 October 1959, Trieste departed San Diego for Guam aboard the freighter Santa Maria to participate in Project Nekton, a series of very deep dives in the Mariana Trench. On 23 January 1960, Trieste reached the ocean floor in the Challenger Deep (the deepest southern part of the Mariana Trench), carrying Jacques Piccard (son of Auguste) and Lieutenant Don Walsh, USN. This was the first time a vessel, crewed or uncrewed, had reached the deepest point in the Earth's oceans. The onboard systems indicated a depth of 11,521 metres (37,799 ft), although this was later revised to 10,916 metres (35,814 ft) and more accurate measurements made in 1995 have found the Challenger Deep slightly shallower, at 10,911 metres (35,797 ft).
Building a pressure hull is difficult, as it must withstand pressures at its required diving depth. When the hull is perfectly round in cross-section, the pressure is evenly distributed, and causes only hull compression. If the shape is not perfect, the hull deflects more in some places and buckling instability is the usual failure mode. Inevitable minor deviations are resisted by stiffener rings, but even a one-inch (25 mm) deviation from roundness results in over 30 percent decrease of maximal hydrostatic load and consequently dive depth. The hull must therefore be constructed with high precision. All hull parts must be welded without defects, and all joints are checked multiple times with different methods, contributing to the high cost of modern submarines. (For example, each Virginia-class attack submarine costs US$2.6 billion, over US$200,000 per ton of displacement.)
Propulsion: The first submarines were propelled by humans. The first mechanically driven submarine was the 1863 French Plongeur, which used compressed air for propulsion. Anaerobic propulsion was first employed by the Spanish Ictineo II in 1864, which used a solution of zinc, manganese dioxide, and potassium chlorate to generate sufficient heat to power a steam engine, while also providing oxygen for the crew. A similar system was not employed again until 1940 when the German Navy tested a hydrogen peroxide-based system, the Walter turbine, on the experimental V-80 submarine and later on the naval U-791 and type XVII submarines; the system was further developed for the British Explorer-class, completed in 1958.
Until the advent of nuclear marine propulsion, most 20th-century submarines used electric motors and batteries for running underwater and combustion engines on the surface, and for battery recharging. Early submarines used gasoline (petrol) engines but this quickly gave way to kerosene (paraffin) and then diesel engines because of reduced flammability and, with diesel, improved fuel-efficiency and thus also greater range. A combination of diesel and electric propulsion became the norm.
Initially, the combustion engine and the electric motor were in most cases connected to the same shaft so that both could directly drive the propeller. The combustion engine was placed at the front end of the stern section with the electric motor behind it followed by the propeller shaft. The engine was connected to the motor by a clutch and the motor in turn connected to the propeller shaft by another clutch.
With only the rear clutch engaged, the electric motor could drive the propeller, as required for fully submerged operation. With both clutches engaged, the combustion engine could drive the propeller, as was possible when operating on the surface or, at a later stage, when snorkeling. The electric motor would in this case serve as a generator to charge the batteries or, if no charging was needed, be allowed to rotate freely. With only the front clutch engaged, the combustion engine could drive the electric motor as a generator for charging the batteries without simultaneously forcing the propeller to move.
The motor could have multiple armatures on the shaft, which could be electrically coupled in series for slow speed and in parallel for high speed (these connections were called "group down" and "group up", respectively).
Diesel–electric transmission: While most early submarines used a direct mechanical connection between the combustion engine and the propeller, an alternative solution was considered as well as implemented at a very early stage. That solution consists in first converting the work of the combustion engine into electric energy via a dedicated generator. This energy is then used to drive the propeller via the electric motor and, to the extent required, for charging the batteries. In this configuration, the electric motor is thus responsible for driving the propeller at all times, regardless of whether air is available so that the combustion engine can also be used or not.
Among the pioneers of this alternative solution was the very first submarine of the Swedish Navy, HSwMS Hajen (later renamed Ub no 1), launched in 1904. While its design was generally inspired by the first submarine commissioned by the US Navy, USS Holland, it deviated from the latter in at least three significant ways: by adding a periscope, by replacing the gasoline engine by a semidiesel engine (a hot-bulb engine primarily meant to be fueled by kerosene, later replaced by a true diesel engine) and by severing the mechanical link between the combustion engine and the propeller by instead letting the former drive a dedicated generator. By so doing, it took three significant steps toward what was eventually to become the dominant technology for conventional (i.e., non-nuclear) submarines. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | Among the pioneers of this alternative solution was the very first submarine of the Swedish Navy, HSwMS Hajen (later renamed Ub no 1), launched in 1904. While its design was generally inspired by the first submarine commissioned by the US Navy, USS Holland, it deviated from the latter in at least three significant ways: by adding a periscope, by replacing the gasoline engine by a semidiesel engine (a hot-bulb engine primarily meant to be fueled by kerosene, later replaced by a true diesel engine) and by severing the mechanical link between the combustion engine and the propeller by instead letting the former drive a dedicated generator. By so doing, it took three significant steps toward what was eventually to become the dominant technology for conventional (i.e., non-nuclear) submarines.
In the following years, the Swedish Navy added another seven submarines in three different classes (2nd class, Laxen class, and Braxen class) using the same propulsion technology but fitted with true diesel engines rather than semidiesels from the outset. Since by that time, the technology was usually based on the diesel engine rather than some other type of combustion engine, it eventually came to be known as diesel–electric transmission.
Like many other early submarines, those initially designed in Sweden were quite small (less than 200 tonnes) and thus confined to littoral operation. When the Swedish Navy wanted to add larger vessels, capable of operating further from the shore, their designs were purchased from companies abroad that already had the required experience: first Italian (Fiat-Laurenti) and later German (A.G. Weser and IvS). As a side-effect, the diesel–electric transmission was temporarily abandoned.
However, diesel–electric transmission was immediately reintroduced when Sweden began designing its own submarines again in the mid-1930s. From that point onwards, it has been consistently used for all new classes of Swedish submarines, albeit supplemented by air-independent propulsion (AIP) as provided by Stirling engines beginning with HMS Näcken in 1988.
Another early adopter of diesel–electric transmission was the US Navy, whose Bureau of Engineering proposed its use in 1928. It was subsequently tried in the S-class submarines S-3, S-6, and S-7 before being put into production with the Porpoise class of the 1930s. From that point onwards, it continued to be used on most US conventional submarines.
Apart from the British U-class and some submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy that used separate diesel generators for low speed running, few navies other than those of Sweden and the US made much use of diesel–electric transmission before 1945. After World War II, by contrast, it gradually became the dominant mode of propulsion for conventional submarines. However, its adoption was not always swift. Notably, the Soviet Navy did not introduce diesel–electric transmission on its conventional submarines until 1980 with its Paltus class.
If diesel–electric transmission had only brought advantages and no disadvantages in comparison with a system that mechanically connects the diesel engine to the propeller, it would undoubtedly have become dominant much earlier. The disadvantages include the following:
It entails a loss of fuel-efficiency as well as power by converting the output of the diesel engine into electricity. While both generators and electric motors are known to be very efficient, their efficiency nevertheless falls short of 100 percent.
It requires an additional component in the form of a dedicated generator. Since the electric motor is always used to drive the propeller it can no longer step in to take on generator service as well.
It does not allow the diesel engine and the electrical motor to join forces by simultaneously driving the propeller mechanically for maximum speed when the submarine is surfaced or snorkeling. This may, however, be of little practical importance inasmuch as the option it prevents is one that would leave the submarine at a risk of having to dive with its batteries at least partly depleted.
The reason why diesel–electric transmission has become the dominant alternative in spite of these disadvantages is of course that it also comes with many advantages and that, on balance, these have eventually been found to be more important. The advantages include the following:
It reduces external noise by severing the direct and rigid mechanical link between the relatively noisy diesel engine(s) on the one hand and the propeller shaft(s) and hull on the other. With stealth being of paramount importance to submarines, this is a very significant advantage.
It increases the readiness to dive, which is of course of vital importance for a submarine. The only thing required from a propulsion point of view is to shut down the diesel(s).
It makes the speed of the diesel engine(s) temporarily independent of the speed of the submarine. This in turn often makes it possible to run the diesel(s) at close to optimal speed from a fuel-efficiency as well as durability point of view. It also makes it possible to reduce the time spent surfaced or snorkeling by running the diesel(s) at maximum speed without affecting the speed of the submarine itself.
It eliminates the clutches otherwise required to connect the diesel engine, the electric motor, and the propeller shaft. This in turn saves space, increases reliability and reduces maintenance costs.
It increases flexibility with regard to how the driveline components are configured, positioned, and maintained. For example, the diesel no longer has to be aligned with the electric motor and propeller shaft, two diesels can be used to power a single propeller (or vice versa), and one diesel can be turned off for maintenance as long as a second is available to provide the required amount of electricity.
It facilitates the integration of additional primary sources of energy, beside the diesel engine(s), such as various kinds of air-independent power (AIP) systems. With one or more electric motors always driving the propeller(s), such systems can easily be introduced as yet another source of electric energy in addition to the diesel engine(s) and the batteries.
Snorkel: During World War II the Germans experimented with the idea of the schnorchel (snorkel) from captured Dutch submarines but did not see the need for them until rather late in the war. The schnorchel is a retractable pipe that supplies air to the diesel engines while submerged at periscope depth, allowing the boat to cruise and recharge its batteries while maintaining a degree of stealth.
Especially as first implemented however, it turned out to be far from a perfect solution. There were problems with the device's valve sticking shut or closing as it dunked in rough weather. Since the system used the entire pressure hull as a buffer, the diesels would instantaneously suck huge volumes of air from the boat's compartments, and the crew often suffered painful ear injuries. Speed was limited to 8 knots (15 km/h), lest the device snap from stress. The schnorchel also created noise that made the boat easier to detect with sonar, yet more difficult for the on-board sonar to detect signals from other vessels. Finally, allied radar eventually became sufficiently advanced that the schnorchel mast could be detected beyond visual range.
While the snorkel renders a submarine far less detectable, it is thus not perfect. In clear weather, diesel exhausts can be seen on the surface to a distance of about three miles, while "periscope feather" (the wave created by the snorkel or periscope moving through the water) is visible from far off in calm sea conditions. Modern radar is also capable of detecting a snorkel in calm sea conditions.
The problem of the diesels causing a vacuum in the submarine when the head valve is submerged still exists in later model diesel submarines but is mitigated by high-vacuum cut-off sensors that shut down the engines when the vacuum in the ship reaches a pre-set point. Modern snorkel induction masts have a fail-safe design using compressed air, controlled by a simple electrical circuit, to hold the "head valve" open against the pull of a powerful spring. Seawater washing over the mast shorts out exposed electrodes on top, breaking the control, and shutting the "head valve" while it is submerged. US submarines did not adopt the use of snorkels until after WWII.
Air-independent propulsion: During World War II, German Type XXI submarines (also known as "Elektroboote") were the first submarines designed to operate submerged for extended periods. Initially they were to carry hydrogen peroxide for long-term, fast air-independent propulsion, but were ultimately built with very large batteries instead. At the end of the War, the British and Soviets experimented with hydrogen peroxide/kerosene (paraffin) engines that could run surfaced and submerged. The results were not encouraging. Though the Soviet Union deployed a class of submarines with this engine type (codenamed Quebec by NATO), they were considered unsuccessful.
The United States also used hydrogen peroxide in an experimental midget submarine, X-1. It was originally powered by a hydrogen peroxide/diesel engine and battery system until an explosion of her hydrogen peroxide supply on 20 May 1957. X-1 was later converted to use diesel–electric drive.
Today several navies use air-independent propulsion. Notably Sweden uses Stirling technology on the Gotland-class and Södermanland-class submarines. The Stirling engine is heated by burning diesel fuel with liquid oxygen from cryogenic tanks. A newer development in air-independent propulsion is hydrogen fuel cells, first used on the German Type 212 submarine, with nine 34 kW or two 120 kW cells. Fuel cells are also used in the new Spanish S-80-class submarines although with the fuel stored as ethanol and then converted into hydrogen before use. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | The United States also used hydrogen peroxide in an experimental midget submarine, X-1. It was originally powered by a hydrogen peroxide/diesel engine and battery system until an explosion of her hydrogen peroxide supply on 20 May 1957. X-1 was later converted to use diesel–electric drive.
Today several navies use air-independent propulsion. Notably Sweden uses Stirling technology on the Gotland-class and Södermanland-class submarines. The Stirling engine is heated by burning diesel fuel with liquid oxygen from cryogenic tanks. A newer development in air-independent propulsion is hydrogen fuel cells, first used on the German Type 212 submarine, with nine 34 kW or two 120 kW cells. Fuel cells are also used in the new Spanish S-80-class submarines although with the fuel stored as ethanol and then converted into hydrogen before use.
One new technology that is being introduced starting with the Japanese Navy's eleventh Sōryū-class submarine (JS Ōryū) is a more modern battery, the lithium-ion battery. These batteries have about double the electric storage of traditional batteries, and by changing out the lead-acid batteries in their normal storage areas plus filling up the large hull space normally devoted to AIP engine and fuel tanks with many tons of lithium-ion batteries, modern submarines can actually return to a "pure" diesel–electric configuration yet have the added underwater range and power normally associated with AIP equipped submarines.
Nuclear power: Steam power was resurrected in the 1950s with a nuclear-powered steam turbine driving a generator. By eliminating the need for atmospheric oxygen, the time that a submarine could remain submerged was limited only by its food stores, as breathing air was recycled and fresh water distilled from seawater. More importantly, a nuclear submarine has unlimited range at top speed. This allows it to travel from its operating base to the combat zone in a much shorter time and makes it a far more difficult target for most anti-submarine weapons. Nuclear-powered submarines have a relatively small battery and diesel engine/generator powerplant for emergency use if the reactors must be shut down.
Nuclear power is now used in all large submarines, but due to the high cost and large size of nuclear reactors, smaller submarines still use diesel–electric propulsion. The ratio of larger to smaller submarines depends on strategic needs. The US Navy, French Navy, and the British Royal Navy operate only nuclear submarines, which is explained by the need for distant operations. Other major operators rely on a mix of nuclear submarines for strategic purposes and diesel–electric submarines for defense. Most fleets have no nuclear submarines, due to the limited availability of nuclear power and submarine technology.
Diesel–electric submarines have a stealth advantage over their nuclear counterparts. Nuclear submarines generate noise from coolant pumps and turbo-machinery needed to operate the reactor, even at low power levels. Some nuclear submarines such as the American Ohio class can operate with their reactor coolant pumps secured, making them quieter than electric subs. A conventional submarine operating on batteries is almost completely silent, the only noise coming from the shaft bearings, propeller, and flow noise around the hull, all of which stops when the sub hovers in mid-water to listen, leaving only the noise from crew activity. Commercial submarines usually rely only on batteries, since they operate in conjunction with a mother ship.
Several serious nuclear and radiation accidents have involved nuclear submarine mishaps. The Soviet submarine K-19 reactor accident in 1961 resulted in 8 deaths and more than 30 other people were over-exposed to radiation. The Soviet submarine K-27 reactor accident in 1968 resulted in 9 fatalities and 83 other injuries. The Soviet submarine K-431 accident in 1985 resulted in 10 fatalities and 49 other radiation injuries.
Alternative: Oil-fired steam turbines powered the British K-class submarines, built during World War I and later, to give them the surface speed to keep up with the battle fleet. The K-class subs were not very successful, however.
Toward the end of the 20th century, some submarines—such as the British Vanguard class—began to be fitted with pump-jet propulsors instead of propellers. Though these are heavier, more expensive, and less efficient than a propeller, they are significantly quieter, providing an important tactical advantage.
Armament: The success of the submarine is inextricably linked to the development of the torpedo, invented by Robert Whitehead in 1866. His invention (essentially the same now as it was 140 years ago), allowed the submarine make the leap from novelty to a weapon of war. Prior to the development and miniaturization of sonar sensitive enough to track a submerged submarine, attacks were exclusively restricted to ships and submarines operating near or at the surface. Targeting of unguided torpedoes was initially done by eye, but by World War II analog targeting computers began to proliferate, being able to calculate basic firing solutions. Nonetheless, multiple "straight-running" torpedoes could be required to ensure a target was hit. With at most 20 to 25 torpedoes stored on board, the number of attacks a submarine could make was limited. To increase combat endurance starting in World War I submarines also functioned as submersible gunboats, using their deck guns against unarmed targets, and diving to escape and engage enemy warships. The initial importance of these deck guns encouraged the development of the unsuccessful Submarine Cruiser such as the French Surcouf and the Royal Navy's X1 and M-class submarines. With the arrival of anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft, guns became more for defense than attack. A more practical method of increasing combat endurance was the external torpedo tube, loaded only in port.
The ability of submarines to approach enemy harbours covertly led to their use as minelayers. Minelaying submarines of World War I and World War II were specially built for that purpose. Modern submarine-laid mines, such as the British Mark 5 Stonefish and Mark 6 Sea Urchin, can be deployed from a submarine's torpedo tubes.
After World War II, both the US and the USSR experimented with submarine-launched cruise missiles such as the SSM-N-8 Regulus and P-5 Pyatyorka. Such missiles required the submarine to surface to fire its missiles. They were the forerunners of modern submarine-launched cruise missiles, which can be fired from the torpedo tubes of submerged submarines, for example, the US BGM-109 Tomahawk and Russian RPK-2 Viyuga and versions of surface-to-surface anti-ship missiles such as the Exocet and Harpoon, encapsulated for submarine launch. Ballistic missiles can also be fired from a submarine's torpedo tubes, for example, missiles such as the anti-submarine SUBROC. With internal volume as limited as ever and the desire to carry heavier warloads, the idea of the external launch tube was revived, usually for encapsulated missiles, with such tubes being placed between the internal pressure and outer streamlined hulls. Guided torpedoes also proliferated extensively during and after World War II, even further increasing the combat endurance and lethality of submarines and allowing them to engage other submarines at depth (with the latter now being one of the primary missions of the modern attack submarine).
The strategic mission of the SSM-N-8 and the P-5 was taken up by submarine-launched ballistic missile beginning with the US Navy's Polaris missile, and subsequently the Poseidon and Trident missiles.
Germany is working on the torpedo tube-launched short-range IDAS missile, which can be used against ASW helicopters, as well as surface ships and coastal targets.
Sensors: A submarine can have a variety of sensors, depending on its missions. Modern military submarines rely almost entirely on a suite of passive and active sonars to locate targets. Active sonar relies on an audible "ping" to generate echoes to reveal objects around the submarine. Active systems are rarely used, as doing so reveals the sub's presence. Passive sonar is a set of sensitive hydrophones set into the hull or trailed in a towed array, normally trailing several hundred feet behind the sub. The towed array is the mainstay of NATO submarine detection systems, as it reduces the flow noise heard by operators. Hull mounted sonar is employed in addition to the towed array, as the towed array can not work in shallow depth and during maneuvering. In addition, sonar has a blind spot "through" the submarine, so a system on both the front and back works to eliminate that problem. As the towed array trails behind and below the submarine, it also allows the submarine to have a system both above and below the thermocline at the proper depth; sound passing through the thermocline is distorted resulting in a lower detection range.
Submarines also carry radar equipment to detect surface ships and aircraft. Submarine captains are more likely to use radar detection gear than active radar to detect targets, as radar can be detected far beyond its own return range, revealing the submarine. Periscopes are rarely used, except for position fixes and to verify a contact's identity.
Civilian submarines, such as the DSV Alvin or the Russian Mir submersibles, rely on small active sonar sets and viewing ports to navigate. The human eye cannot detect sunlight below about 300 feet (91 m) underwater, so high intensity lights are used to illuminate the viewing area.
Navigation: Early submarines had few navigation aids, but modern subs have a variety of navigation systems. Modern military submarines use an inertial guidance system for navigation while submerged, but drift error unavoidably builds over time. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | Submarines also carry radar equipment to detect surface ships and aircraft. Submarine captains are more likely to use radar detection gear than active radar to detect targets, as radar can be detected far beyond its own return range, revealing the submarine. Periscopes are rarely used, except for position fixes and to verify a contact's identity.
Civilian submarines, such as the DSV Alvin or the Russian Mir submersibles, rely on small active sonar sets and viewing ports to navigate. The human eye cannot detect sunlight below about 300 feet (91 m) underwater, so high intensity lights are used to illuminate the viewing area.
Navigation: Early submarines had few navigation aids, but modern subs have a variety of navigation systems. Modern military submarines use an inertial guidance system for navigation while submerged, but drift error unavoidably builds over time. To counter this, the crew occasionally uses the Global Positioning System to obtain an accurate position. The periscope—a retractable tube with a prism system that provides a view of the surface—is only used occasionally in modern submarines, since the visibility range is short. The Virginia-class and Astute-class submarines use photonics masts rather than hull-penetrating optical periscopes. These masts must still be deployed above the surface, and use electronic sensors for visible light, infrared, laser range-finding, and electromagnetic surveillance. One benefit to hoisting the mast above the surface is that while the mast is above the water the entire sub is still below the water and is much harder to detect visually or by radar.
Communication: Military submarines use several systems to communicate with distant command centers or other ships. One is VLF (very low frequency) radio, which can reach a submarine either on the surface or submerged to a fairly shallow depth, usually less than 250 feet (76 m). ELF (extremely low frequency) can reach a submarine at greater depths, but has a very low bandwidth and is generally used to call a submerged sub to a shallower depth where VLF signals can reach. A submarine also has the option of floating a long, buoyant wire antenna to a shallower depth, allowing VLF transmissions by a deeply submerged boat.
By extending a radio mast, a submarine can also use a "burst transmission" technique. A burst transmission takes only a fraction of a second, minimizing a submarine's risk of detection.
To communicate with other submarines, a system known as Gertrude is used. Gertrude is basically a sonar telephone. Voice communication from one submarine is transmitted by low power speakers into the water, where it is detected by passive sonars on the receiving submarine. The range of this system is probably very short, and using it radiates sound into the water, which can be heard by the enemy.
Civilian submarines can use similar, albeit less powerful systems to communicate with support ships or other submersibles in the area.
Life support systems: With nuclear power or air-independent propulsion, submarines can remain submerged for months at a time. Conventional diesel submarines must periodically resurface or run on snorkel to recharge their batteries. Most modern military submarines generate breathing oxygen by electrolysis of fresh water (using a device called an "Electrolytic Oxygen Generator"). Emergency oxygen can be produced by burning sodium chlorate candles. Atmosphere control equipment includes a Carbon dioxide scrubber, which uses a spray of monoethanolamine (MEA) absorbent to remove the gas from the air, after which the MEA is heated in a boiler to release the CO2 which is then pumped overboard. Emergency scrubbing can also be done with lithium hydroxide, which is consumable. A machine that uses a catalyst to convert carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide (removed by the CO2 scrubber) and bonds hydrogen produced from the ship's storage battery with oxygen in the atmosphere to produce water, is also used. An atmosphere monitoring system samples the air from different areas of the ship for nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, R-12 and R-114 refrigerants, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other gases. Poisonous gases are removed, and oxygen is replenished by use of an oxygen bank located in a main ballast tank. Some heavier submarines have two oxygen bleed stations (forward and aft). The oxygen in the air is sometimes kept a few percent less than atmospheric concentration to reduce fire risk.
Fresh water is produced by either an evaporator or a reverse osmosis unit. The primary use for fresh water is to provide feedwater for the reactor and steam propulsion plants. It is also available for showers, sinks, cooking and cleaning once propulsion plant needs have been met. Seawater is used to flush toilets, and the resulting "blackwater" is stored in a sanitary tank until it is blown overboard using pressurized air or pumped overboard by using a special sanitary pump. The blackwater-discharge system requires skill to operate, and isolation valves must be closed before discharge. The German Type VIIC boat U-1206 was lost with casualties because of human error while using this system. Water from showers and sinks is stored separately in "grey water" tanks and discharged overboard using drain pumps.
Trash on modern large submarines is usually disposed of using a tube called a Trash Disposal Unit (TDU), where it is compacted into a galvanized steel can. At the bottom of the TDU is a large ball valve. An ice plug is set on top of the ball valve to protect it, the cans atop the ice plug. The top breech door is shut, and the TDU is flooded and equalized with sea pressure, the ball valve is opened and the cans fall out assisted by scrap iron weights in the cans. The TDU is also flushed with seawater to ensure it is completely empty and the ball valve is clear before closing the valve.
Crew: A typical nuclear submarine has a crew of over 80; conventional boats typically have fewer than 40. The conditions on a submarine can be difficult because crew members must work in isolation for long periods of time, without family contact, and in cramped conditions. Submarines normally maintain radio silence to avoid detection. Operating a submarine is dangerous, even in peacetime, and many submarines have been lost in accidents.
Women: Most navies prohibited women from serving on submarines, even after they had been permitted to serve on surface warships. The Royal Norwegian Navy became the first navy to allow women on its submarine crews in 1985. The Royal Danish Navy allowed female submariners in 1988. Others followed suit including the Swedish Navy (1989), the Royal Australian Navy (1998), the Spanish Navy (1999), the German Navy (2001) and the Canadian Navy (2002). In 1995, Solveig Krey of the Royal Norwegian Navy became the first female officer to assume command on a military submarine, HNoMS Kobben.
On 8 December 2011, British Defence Secretary Philip Hammond announced that the UK's ban on women in submarines was to be lifted from 2013. Previously there were fears that women were more at risk from a build-up of carbon dioxide in the submarine. But a study showed no medical reason to exclude women, though pregnant women would still be excluded. Similar dangers to the pregnant woman and her fetus barred women from submarine service in Sweden in 1983, when all other positions were made available for them in the Swedish Navy. Today, pregnant women are still not allowed to serve on submarines in Sweden. However, the policymakers thought that it was discriminatory with a general ban and demanded that women should be tried on their individual merits and have their suitability evaluated and compared to other candidates. Further, they noted that a woman complying with such high demands is unlikely to become pregnant. In May 2014, three women became the RN's first female submariners.
Women have served on US Navy surface ships since 1993, and as of 2011–2012, began serving on submarines for the first time. Until presently, the Navy allowed only three exceptions to women being on board military submarines: female civilian technicians for a few days at most, women midshipmen on an overnight during summer training for Navy ROTC and Naval Academy, and family members for one-day dependent cruises. In 2009, senior officials, including then-Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, Joint Chief of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen, and Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gary Roughead, began the process of finding a way to implement women on submarines. The US Navy rescinded its "no women on subs" policy in 2010.
Both the US and British navies operate nuclear-powered submarines that deploy for periods of six months or longer. Other navies that permit women to serve on submarines operate conventionally powered submarines, which deploy for much shorter periods—usually only for a few months. Prior to the change by the US, no nation using nuclear submarines permitted women to serve on board.
In 2011, the first class of female submarine officers graduated from Naval Submarine School's Submarine Officer Basic Course (SOBC) at the Naval Submarine Base New London. Additionally, more senior ranking and experienced female supply officers from the surface warfare specialty attended SOBC as well, proceeding to fleet Ballistic Missile (SSBN) and Guided Missile (SSGN) submarines along with the new female submarine line officers beginning in late 2011. By late 2011, several women were assigned to the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Wyoming. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Submarine | Both the US and British navies operate nuclear-powered submarines that deploy for periods of six months or longer. Other navies that permit women to serve on submarines operate conventionally powered submarines, which deploy for much shorter periods—usually only for a few months. Prior to the change by the US, no nation using nuclear submarines permitted women to serve on board.
In 2011, the first class of female submarine officers graduated from Naval Submarine School's Submarine Officer Basic Course (SOBC) at the Naval Submarine Base New London. Additionally, more senior ranking and experienced female supply officers from the surface warfare specialty attended SOBC as well, proceeding to fleet Ballistic Missile (SSBN) and Guided Missile (SSGN) submarines along with the new female submarine line officers beginning in late 2011. By late 2011, several women were assigned to the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Wyoming. On 15 October 2013, the US Navy announced that two of the smaller Virginia-class attack submarines, USS Virginia and USS Minnesota, would have female crew-members by January 2015.
In 2020, Japan's national naval submarine academy accepted its first female candidate.
Abandoning the vessel: In an emergency, submarines can contact other ships to assist in rescue, and pick up the crew when they abandon ship. The crew can use escape sets such as the Submarine Escape Immersion Equipment to abandon the submarine via an escape trunk, which is a small airlock compartment that provides a route for crew to escape from a downed submarine at ambient pressure in small groups, while minimising the amount of water admitted to the submarine. The crew can avoid lung injury from over-expansion of air in the lungs due to the pressure change known as pulmonary barotrauma by maintaining an open airway and exhaling during the ascent. Following escape from a pressurized submarine, in which the air pressure is higher than atmospheric due to water ingress or other reasons, the crew is at risk of developing decompression sickness on return to surface pressure.
An alternative escape means is via a deep-submergence rescue vehicle that can dock onto the disabled submarine, establish a seal around the escape hatch, and transfer personnel at the same pressure as the interior of the submarine. If the submarine has been pressurised the survivors can lock into a decompression chamber on the submarine rescue ship and transfer under pressure for safe surface decompression.
See also:
By country: List of submarine operators
Australia – Collins-class submarine
Bangladesh- Submarines of the Bangladesh Navy
Britain – List of submarines of the Royal Navy, List of submarine classes of the Royal Navy
China – Submarines of the People's Liberation Army Navy
France – Submarines in the French Navy, List of submarines of the French Navy, List of French submarine classes and types
Germany – List of U-boats of Germany
India – Submarines of the Indian Navy
Israel – Dolphin-class submarine
Japan – Imperial Japanese Navy submarines, List of combatant ship classes of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force § SS : Submarine
The Netherlands – List of submarines of the Netherlands
Pakistan – List of active Pakistan Navy ships § Submarines
Romania – Romanian submarines of World War II
Russia – List of Soviet and Russian submarine classes, Future Russian submarines
Soviet Union – List of ships of the Soviet Navy § Submarines
Spain – List of submarines of the Spanish Navy
Singapore – Republic of Singapore Navy § Submarines
Turkey – List of submarines of the Turkish Navy
United States – Submarines in the US Navy, List of submarines of the US Navy, List of US submarine classes, Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory
Notes:
References:
Bibliography:
External links:
U.S. patent 708,553 – Submarine boat
The Submarine: Part II: Construction (1955) is available for free viewing and download at the Internet Archive
The Fleet Type Submarine Online US Navy submarine training manuals, 1944–1946
American Society of Safety Engineers. Journal of Professional Safety. Submarine Accidents: A 60-Year Statistical Assessment. C. Tingle. September 2009. pp. 31–39. Ordering full article; or Reproduction without graphics/tables |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Subterranean warfare | History: Subterranean warfare was occasionally carried out during World War II. Examples are the defense of the Adzhimushkay quarry, or the use of the Odessa Catacombs during guerilla warfare by Soviet partisans.
In 21st century the issue of readiness to subterranean warfare was raised before the U.S. military in view of Palestinian tunnel warfare in the Gaza Strip. A December 11, 2013 request for information entitled "Technologies to enhance warfighter capabilities in subterranean environments" states in part:
In an effort to defeat United States (US) intelligence and weapons technologies and to gain tactical and operational advantages both Military and irregular threats have begun relocating, and redeploying functions into subterranean operational environments (SbT OE). The growing use of tunnels and underground facilities (UGF) by military and irregular forces to gain a tactical advantage is becoming more sophisticated and increasingly effective, making the likelihood of US Forces encountering military-purposed subterranean structures on future battlefields high. The Middle East is full of ancient and modern underground systems that can be used as assets for the enemy forces. In the US, both the northern and southern borders of the nation have had tunnels discovered connecting the US to Canada and Mexico being used by criminal elements for human smuggling, drug running, and other illegal activities.
Director Robert Ashley of the Defense Intelligence Agency stated in 2018 that the United States Department of Defense is considering making "underground" a new domain, in anticipation of a future increase in urban warfare.
2023 Israel–Hamas war: Yehuda Kfir, who formerly led the underground warfare group in the Israel Defense Forces’ Technological and Logistics Directorate, described Israel's main strategy to destroy Hamas' extensive tunnel and underground facility network as "destroying infrastructure and buildings above ground in order to get to what’s underneath." Israel's techniques for destroying and/or sealing underground infrastructure included the use of sponge bombs, air strikes including the use of bunker buster munitions, and flooding them with seawater.
Daphne Richemond-Barak, the author of “Underground Warfare,” wrote in Foreign Policy magazine: “Never in the history of tunnel warfare has a defender been able to spend months in such confined spaces. The digging itself, the innovative ways Hamas has made use of the tunnels and the group’s survival underground for this long have been unprecedented.” A 2024 Royal United Services Institute report notes that Hamas utilizes two distinct types of tunnels: deep, sophisticated ones for senior leaders and shallower variants for lower-level operatives. The IDF initially focused on securing territory before undertaking tunnel inspections, a strategy that inadvertently allowed Hamas to stage underground ambushes. Based on interviews with Israeli commanders, the report concluded that effective counter-tunnel operations require integrated surface and subterranean combat strategies while mitigating the risk of friendly fire.
See also: Military engineering
Trench warfare
Tunnel warfare
Underground construction
== References == |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sun Tzu | Life: The oldest available sources disagree as to where Sun Tzu was born. The Spring and Autumn Annals and Sima Qian's later Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji) state that Sun Tzu was born in Qi. Both sources also agree that Sun Tzu was born in the late Spring and Autumn period and that he was active as a general and strategist, serving King Helü of Wu in the sixth century BC, beginning around 512 BC. Sun Tzu's victories then inspired him to write The Art of War. The Art of War was one of the most widely read military treatises in the subsequent Warring States period, a time of constant war among seven ancient Chinese states—Zhao, Qi, Qin, Chu, Han, Wei, and Yan—who fought to control the vast expanse of fertile territory in Eastern China.
One of the better-known stories about Sun Tzu, taken from Sima Qian, illustrates Sun Tzu's temperament as follows: Before hiring Sun Tzu, the King of Wu tested Sun Tzu's skills by commanding him to train a harem of 180 concubines into soldiers. Sun Tzu divided them into two companies, appointing the two concubines most favored by the king as the company commanders. When Sun Tzu first ordered the concubines to face right, they giggled. In response, Sun Tzu said that the general, in this case himself, was responsible for ensuring that soldiers understood the commands given to them. Then, he reiterated the command, and again the concubines giggled. Sun Tzu then ordered the execution of the king's two favored concubines, to the king's protests. He explained that if the general's soldiers understood their commands but did not obey, it was the fault of the officers. Sun Tzu also said that, once a general was appointed, it was his duty to carry out his mission, even if the king protested. After both concubines were killed, new officers were chosen to replace them. Afterward, both companies, now well aware of the costs of further frivolity, performed their maneuvers flawlessly.
Sima Qian claimed that Sun Tzu later proved on the battlefield that his theories were effective (for example, at the Battle of Boju), that he had a successful military career, and that he wrote The Art of War based on his tested expertise. However, the Zuozhuan, a historical text written centuries earlier than the Shiji, provides a much more detailed account of the Battle of Boju, but does not mention Sun Tzu at all.
Historicity: Around the 12th century AD, some Chinese scholars began to doubt the historical existence of Sun Tzu, primarily on the grounds that he is not mentioned in the historical classic Zuo Zhuan, which mentions most of the notable figures from the Spring and Autumn period. The name "Sun Wu" (孫武) does not appear in any text prior to the Records of the Grand Historian, and may have been a made-up descriptive cognomen meaning "the fugitive warrior" – the surname "Sun" can be glossed as the related term "fugitive" (xùn 遜), while "Wu" is the ancient Chinese virtue of "martial, valiant" (wǔ 武), which corresponds to Sun Tzu's role as the hero's doppelgänger in the story of Wu Zixu. The only historical battle attributed to Sun Tzu, the Battle of Boju, has no record of him fighting in that battle.
Skeptics cite possible historical inaccuracies and anachronisms in the text, and that the book was actually a compilation from different authors and military strategists. Attribution of the authorship of The Art of War varies among scholars and has included people and movements including Sun; Chu scholar Wu Zixu; an anonymous author; a school of theorists in Qi or Wu; Sun Bin; and others. Sun Bin appears to have been an actual person who was a genuine authority on military matters, and may have been the inspiration for the creation of the historical figure "Sun Tzu" through a form of euhemerism. The name Sun Wu does appear in later sources such as the Shiji and the Wu Yue Chunqiu, but were written centuries after Sun Tzu's era.
The use of the strips in other works, however, such as The Methods of the Sima is considered proof of Sun Tzu's historical priority. According to Ralph Sawyer, it is very likely Sun Tzu did exist and not only served as a general, but also wrote the core of the book that bears his name. It is argued that there is a disparity between the large-scale wars and sophisticated techniques detailed in the text and the more primitive small-scale battles that many believe predominated in China during the 6th century BC. Against this, Sawyer argues that the teachings of Sun Wu were probably taught to succeeding generations in his family or a small school of disciples, which eventually included Sun Bin. These descendants or students may have revised or expanded upon certain points in the original text.
Skeptics who identify issues with the traditionalist view point to possible anachronisms in The Art of War including terms, technology (such as anachronistic crossbows), philosophical ideas, events, and military techniques that should not have been available to Sun Wu. Additionally, there are no records of professional generals during the Spring and Autumn period; these are only extant from the Warring States period, so there is doubt as to Sun Tzu's rank and generalship. This caused much confusion as to when The Art of War was actually written. The first traditional view is that it was written in 512 BC by the historical Sun Wu, active in the last years of the Spring and Autumn period (c. 722–481 BC). A second view, held by scholars such as Samuel Griffith, places The Art of War during the middle to late Warring States period (c. 481–221 BC). Finally, a third school claims that the slips were published in the last half of the 5th century BC; this is based on how its adherents interpret the bamboo slips discovered at Yinque Shan in 1972.
The Art of War: The Art of War is traditionally ascribed to Sun Tzu. It presents a philosophy of war for managing conflicts and winning battles. It is accepted as a masterpiece on strategy and has been frequently cited and referred to by generals and theorists since it was first published, translated, and distributed internationally.
There are numerous theories concerning when the text was completed and concerning the identity of the author or authors, but archeological recoveries show The Art of War had taken roughly its current form by at least the early Han period. Because it is impossible to prove definitively when the Art of War was completed before this date, the differing theories concerning the work's author or authors and date of completion are unlikely to be completely resolved. Some modern scholars believe that it contains not only the thoughts of its original author but also commentary and clarifications from later military theorists, such as Li Quan and Du Mu.
Of the military texts written before the unification of China and Shi Huangdi's subsequent book burning in the second century BC, six major works have survived. During the much later Song dynasty, these six works were combined with a Tang text into a collection called the Seven Military Classics. As a central part of that compilation, The Art of War formed the foundations of orthodox military theory in early modern China. Illustrating this point, the book was required reading to pass the tests for imperial appointment to military positions.
Sun Tzu's The Art of War uses language that may be unusual in a Western text on warfare and strategy. For example, the eleventh chapter states that a leader must be "serene and inscrutable" and capable of comprehending "unfathomable plans". The text contains many similar remarks that have long confused Western readers lacking an awareness of the East Asian context. The meanings of such statements are clearer when interpreted in the context of Taoist thought and practice.
Despite its title, The Art of War addresses strategy in a broad fashion, touching upon public administration and planning. The text outlines theories of battle, but also advocates diplomacy and the cultivation of relationships with other nations as essential to the health of a state. As such, the book has also become popular among political leaders and those in business management. For example, in the 1987 film Wall Street, the protagonist Gordon Gekko frequently cites passages from The Art of War as guiding principles for his aggressive trading techniques.
On 10 April 1972, the Yinqueshan Han Tombs were accidentally unearthed by construction workers in Shandong.
Scholars uncovered a collection of ancient texts written on unusually well-preserved bamboo slips. Among them were The Art of War and Sun Bin's Military Methods. Although Han dynasty bibliographies noted the latter publication as extant and written by a descendant of Sun, it had previously been lost. The rediscovery of Sun Bin's work is regarded as extremely important by scholars, both because of Sun Bin's relationship to Sun Tzu and because of the work's addition to the body of military thought in Chinese late antiquity.
The discovery as a whole significantly expanded the body of surviving Warring States military theory. Sun Bin's treatise is the only known military text surviving from the Warring States period discovered in the twentieth century and bears the closest similarity to The Art of War of all surviving texts.
Legacy: Sun Tzu's Art of War has influenced many notable figures. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Sun Tzu | Scholars uncovered a collection of ancient texts written on unusually well-preserved bamboo slips. Among them were The Art of War and Sun Bin's Military Methods. Although Han dynasty bibliographies noted the latter publication as extant and written by a descendant of Sun, it had previously been lost. The rediscovery of Sun Bin's work is regarded as extremely important by scholars, both because of Sun Bin's relationship to Sun Tzu and because of the work's addition to the body of military thought in Chinese late antiquity.
The discovery as a whole significantly expanded the body of surviving Warring States military theory. Sun Bin's treatise is the only known military text surviving from the Warring States period discovered in the twentieth century and bears the closest similarity to The Art of War of all surviving texts.
Legacy: Sun Tzu's Art of War has influenced many notable figures. The Han dynasty historian Sima Qian recounted that China's first historical emperor, Qin's Shi Huangdi, considered the book invaluable in ending the time of the Warring States. In the 20th century, the Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong partially credited his 1949 victory over Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang to The Art of War. The work strongly influenced Mao's writings about guerrilla warfare, which further influenced communist insurgencies around the world.
The Art of War was introduced into Nara Japan in c. AD 760 and the book quickly became popular among Japanese military generals. Through its later influence on the Sengoku period "Great Unifiers" of Japan, Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Tokugawa Ieyasu, it significantly affected the unification of Japan in the early modern era. The mastery of its teachings was honored among the samurai and its teachings were both exhorted and exemplified by influential daimyōs and shōguns. After the Meiji Restoration, it remained popular among the Imperial Japanese armed forces. The Admiral of the Fleet Tōgō Heihachirō, who led Japan's forces to victory in the Russo-Japanese War, was an avid reader of Sun Tzu.
Ho Chi Minh translated the work for his Vietnamese officers to study. His general Võ Nguyên Giáp, the strategist behind victories over the French, and wearing down American forces in Vietnam, was likewise an avid student and practitioner of Sun Tzu's ideas.
America's conflicts in East and Southeast Asia against Philippine, Imperial China, Japan, North Korea, and North Vietnam brought Sun Tzu to the attention of American military leaders. The Department of the Army in the United States, through its Command and General Staff College, has directed all units to maintain libraries within their respective headquarters for the continuing education of personnel in the art of war. The Art of War is mentioned as an example of works to be maintained at each facility, and staff duty officers are obliged to prepare short papers for presentation to other officers on their readings. Similarly, Sun Tzu's Art of War is listed on the Marine Corps Professional Reading Program. During the Gulf War in the 1990s, both Generals Norman Schwarzkopf Jr. and Colin Powell employed principles from Sun Tzu related to deception, speed, and striking one's enemy's weak points. However, the United States and other Western countries have been criticized for not truly understanding Sun Tzu's work and not appreciating The Art of War within the wider context of Chinese society.
Daoist rhetoric is a component incorporated in the Art of War. According to Steven C. Combs in "Sun-zi and the Art of War: The Rhetoric of Parsimony", warfare is "used as a metaphor for rhetoric, and that both are philosophically based arts." Combs writes: "Warfare is analogous to persuasion, as a battle for hearts and minds." The application of The Art of War strategies throughout history is attributed to its philosophical rhetoric. Daoism is the central principle in the Art of War. Combs compares ancient Daoist Chinese to traditional Aristotelian rhetoric, notably for the differences in persuasion. Daoist rhetoric in The Art of War warfare strategies is described as "peaceful and passive, favoring silence over speech". This form of communication is parsimonious. Parsimonious behavior, which is highly emphasized in The Art of War as avoiding confrontation and being spiritual in nature, shapes basic principles in Daoism.
Mark McNeilly writes in Sun Tzu and the Art of Modern Warfare that a modern interpretation of Sun and his importance throughout Chinese history is critical in understanding China's push to become a superpower in the twenty-first century. Modern Chinese scholars explicitly rely on historical strategic lessons and The Art of War in developing their theories, seeing a direct relationship between their modern struggles and those of China in Sun Tzu's time. There is a great perceived value in Sun Tzu's teachings and other traditional Chinese writers, which are used regularly in developing the strategies of the Chinese state and its leaders.
In 2008, the Chinese television producer Zhang Jizhong adapted Sun Tzu's life story into a 40-episode historical drama television series entitled Bing Sheng, starring Zhu Yawen as Sun Tzu.
The 2019 video game Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition contains challenge missions based on Sun Tzu's The Art of War, which explain its military tactics and strategies.
See also: Sun Bin
Sun Jian
The Art of War
Confucius
Li Shizhen
References:
Citations:
Sources:
External links:
Translations
Works by Sun Tzu in eBook form at Standard Ebooks
Works by Sun Tzu at Project Gutenberg
Works by or about Sun Tzu at the Internet Archive
Works by Sun Tzu at LibriVox (public domain audiobooks)
Sun Tzu and Information Warfare at the Institute for National Strategic Studies of National Defense University
Sun Tzu's Art of War Resource Original translation, reviews of Art of War versions, interviews with translators |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Surface warfare | Description: Modern surface warfare dates from the mid-20th century, when surface, air, and submarine warfare components were blended together as a tactical unit to achieve strategic objectives. In United States Navy doctrine, the two most important strategic objectives are interdiction and sea control.
Interdiction is the process of intercepting an enemy transiting through a location. For example, German naval objectives against Britain during World War II's Battle of the Atlantic were primarily focused on preventing ships from arriving intact with their cargoes.
Sea control is the dominance of force over a given area that prevents other naval forces from operating successfully. For example, the mission of the Allied navies in the Atlantic during World War II was to maintain sea control and prevent Axis naval forces from operating. The Anti-access/area denial is an opposition to enemy's sea control without itself being an attempt to gain sea control.
Surface warfare (SuW) is conducted by a surface ship to eliminate a threat, which may include Anti-surface warfare (ASuW), anti-air warfare (AAW), anti-submarine warfare (ASW), naval gunfire support (NGFS), riverine operations, mine warfare, and electronic warfare.
In the second half of the 20th century, the importance of naval surface power was reduced as air and submarine warfare platforms demonstrated their capabilities, as in the Battle of Taranto, the Battle of Pearl Harbor, and the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse.
Following World War II, guided anti-ship missiles required new tactics and doctrines. Small, fast, relatively cheap missile boats became a threat for large ships, much more serious than previous torpedo boats, as in the War of Attrition, when Egyptian missile boats struck and sank the Israeli destroyer Eilat on 20 October 1967.
Ships: Surface combatant ships include battleships, aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and others. Surface combatants also include mine warfare ships, amphibious command ships, coastal defense ships, amphibious assault ships, and many others. An important facet of naval warfare are however the support ships (that is, non-combat ships): freighters, oilers, hospital ships, tugs, troop transports, and other auxiliary ships. In the U.S. Navy model, now widespread in the world, various types of ships would be primarily organized into the carrier battle group.
See also: Naval warfare
Naval tactics |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Swarming (military) | Swarming in history: Enthusiasts of swarming sometimes apply it to situations that have superficial similarities, but really do not qualify as swarms. While swarms do converge on a target, not every military action, where multiple units attacked from all sides of a target, constitute swarming. Other conflicts, especially historical ones, fit a swarming paradigm, but the commanders involved did not use the concept. Nevertheless, historical examples help illustrate what modern analysts do and do not consider swarming.
Some historical examples with at least some aspect of swarming include:
Siege of Samarkand: At the siege of Samarkand, Spitamenes used Bactrian horse archers in effective swarming attacks against a relief column sent by Alexander the Great. Bactrian horse archers surrounded various Macedonian phalanxes, staying out of range of their melee weapons, and shot arrows until they had no more. The archers would then withdraw to a supply point, but another swarm of horse archers would sometimes replace them, and sometimes attack elsewhere. The Bactrians eventually caused the phalanx to break formation, and destroyed it. Alexander recognized his forces could not directly combat horse archers, but that the horse archers needed resupply of provisions, horses, and arrows. Alexander split his forces into five columns and began building fortifications in the areas where the Bactrians had resupplied. Eventually, his anti-swarm tactics worked: cut off from resupply, the Bactrians had to meet the Macedonian phalanx, which were vastly superior in melee. Alexander made it priority to engage guerillas or other light mobile forces. Spitamenes was effective as long as his force were mobile, and he had adequate communications with mounted couriers. Once he was forced into direct battle with heavy forces, he lost the advantages of his forces and was defeated quickly. At the Battle of the Jaxartes River, Alexander once again faced swarming tactics from an army of Scythian horse archers. Alexander sent a unit of heavy cavalry ahead of his main line. As expected, the Scythian horsemen surrounded the detached cavalry. At the right moment, Alexander's cavalry reversed direction and pushed half of the Scythians straight into the main phalanx of Alexander's army, where they were slaughtered. Upon seeing this, the remaining half of the Scythian army retreated from the battle.
Mongols Horde: Mongols under Genghis Khan practiced an equivalent of swarming, partially because their communications, which used flags, horns, and couriers, were advanced for the time. Also one of the standard tactics of Mongol military was the commonly practiced feigned retreat to break enemy formations and to lure small enemy groups away from larger groups and defended positions for ambush and counterattack. Genghis Khan used the Yam system, which established a rear line of points for supplies and for remounts of fast-moving couriers. The remount system allowed horsemen to move much faster than the couriers of opponents without them. These couriers kept the Mongol senior and subordinate commanders informed, such that they could make fast decisions based on current information. In modern terms, the courier system provided the means of getting inside the opponent's OODA loop. With fast communications, the Mongols could make decisions not just on what they could see locally, but with that information oriented within the overall situation. They could then decide and act while the enemy were still waiting for information. Outnumbered Mongols could beat larger forces by faster communications, which allowed units to withdraw and regroup while other groups continually stung the enemy, withdrew in turn, while the earlier group again hit the enemy.
The evolution of modern swarming: Swarming was present in the operations of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan, but were generally replaced by melee and mass in the pre-industrial era. More synchronized manoeuvre was paced by the availability of mobile communications. Blitzkrieg was certainly a use of manoeuvre, but it was less flexible than later operations in which every tank and aircraft had radios, and far less flexible than forces that have effective networked information systems. They define swarming, in a military context, as "...seemingly amorphous, but it is a deliberately structured, coordinated, strategic way to strike from all directions, by means of a sustainable pulsing of force and/or fire, close-in as well as from stand-off positions."
One aspect of swarming is that it moves away from the traditional model of a rigid chain of command. This paper suggests abandoning the term command and control in favor of
agility: "... the critical capability that organizations need to meet the challenges of complexity and uncertainty"
focus: "provides the context and defines the purposes of the endeavor"
convergence. "convergence is the goal-seeking process that guides actions and effects."
Agility is a characteristic of an organization or unit capable of swarming. Focus can be designation of a goal by a higher-level commander, by a peer unit detecting a target, or by intelligence systems that feed information to the swarming units. Convergence is the key feature, which, while it can be distributed, causes swarming units to coordinate their actions, apply force, and know when to stop applying force.
Edwards holds that several axioms of military doctrine change with the use of swarming:
Osgood points out that swarming is not new, although the means of coordination and synchronization are going through significant changes.
Howard Rheingold cites mobile communications technology as a key enabler: The bees sense each other's buzzing and instinctually move in concert in real time. Text messaging on mobile devices and instantaneous file sharing off the internet via PDAs allows groups of people to receive their instructions, move in unison, nearly instantaneously, without prior planning or forethought. And, the technology allows groups to do so without a central leader. One modern example is the protesters at the World Trade Organization meetings in Seattle, in 1999, who were able to orchestrate their movement effectively in this way.
Modern military swarming: Current military applications of swarming combine the use of swarms: large numbers of relatively small agents or weapons, with synchronized actions, such that the swarm reacts faster than its opponent and defeats it. This section deals with general principles, but also high-intensity combat.
Swarming does not require good military intelligence alone, but intelligent soldiers who can manage multiple information streams and keep situational awareness. It is not advisable to have a soldier so engrossed in displays that an enemy can sneak up and hit him over the head with a rock. One of the challenges of designing modern networked systems is not to overwhelm the users with information. Those users will also need extensive training, with their sensing and synchronization information, to use them properly under combat stress.
Swarming requires autonomous or semi-autonomous operating agents, with strong synchronization and communications among them. Senior commanders release resources to the swarm, but do not control them once released. If the agents are semi-autonomous, there will be an on-scene commander giving general direction to the swarming agents.
A 1987 proposal: In the 1980s, the Soviets developed an 'Operational Maneuver Group' (OMG) for a fast armored thrust deep into NATO defences east of the Rhine River. An OMG was expected to exploit strategic surprise with a force equal or greater than an armored division, featuring up to 700 tanks, 500 IFVs, and a substantial number of helicopters. As a countermeasure, NATO considered neutron bombs but their use was politically controversial. NATO instead devised a plan to slow the thrust with a swarming counterattack, called Dynamic Density, which used single-seat Small Military Aircraft (SMAs) operating autonomously in pairs with infantry ATGWs such as Milan, their pilots being infantry. One aircraft would carry the Milan post and four missiles, the other the night-vision sight and four missiles (two of which might be anti-helicopter), and the tactics would be shoot and scoot. The SMA, known as the Dragoon, was evaluated and highly praised by the MoD's test pilots at Boscombe Down, its STOL performance and ease of handling making it ideal for this role. Large numbers would be needed and 5,000 was suggested as sufficient to ensure that swarming would be successful against a force as large as an OMG. Once it was recognized that success could be claimed with a significant deceleration, other novelties were introduced, among which was Synthetic Density which required the SMAs to distribute pneumatic models (fitted with radar reflectors) of tanks and artillery along the OMG's MLA, these requiring the room to be put down and time to be lost before progress could be resumed.
The proposal was published in the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution and a couple of years later a shorter article suggested that if the Soviets themselves had used SMAs in swarms in Afghanistan their COIN operations against the Mujaheddin would have been far more successful. Contemporary Western armies in Afghanistan can readily accept that swarming at the tactical and operational levels is appropriate, but the physical structure of the country rules out the currently available fighting vehicles. However, networked and swarming SMAs, again 5,000 in number, all armed with laser designators for the second echelon of conventional ground attack aircraft, would constitute force multipliers with a substantial impact. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Swarming (military) | The proposal was published in the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution and a couple of years later a shorter article suggested that if the Soviets themselves had used SMAs in swarms in Afghanistan their COIN operations against the Mujaheddin would have been far more successful. Contemporary Western armies in Afghanistan can readily accept that swarming at the tactical and operational levels is appropriate, but the physical structure of the country rules out the currently available fighting vehicles. However, networked and swarming SMAs, again 5,000 in number, all armed with laser designators for the second echelon of conventional ground attack aircraft, would constitute force multipliers with a substantial impact.
Improved decision-making as a force multiplier: Swarming ties in well with the theories of the military strategist John Boyd, the "high-low mix" in which a large number of less expensive aircraft, coupled with a small number of extremely capable "silver bullet" aircraft, had the effect of a much larger force. Boyd's concept of quick action is based on the repeated application of the Boyd loop, consisting of the steps
Observe: make use of the best sensors and other intelligence available
Orient: put the new observations into a context with the old
Decide: select the next action based on the combined observation and local knowledge
Act: carry out the selected action, ideally while the opponent is still observing your last action.
Boyd's concept is also known as the OODA Loop, and is applicable to all military operations, as well as to civilian competition from sports to business.
These are a realization of Boyd's theories. A swarming case is any historical example in which the scheme of manoeuvre involves the convergent attack of five (or more) semiautonomous (or autonomous) units on a targeted force in some particular place. "Convergent" implies an attack from most of the points on the compass."
Saturation of air defenses: Due to the vulnerability of sophisticated air defense systems such as S-300 and S-400 to mass attacks from low flying cruise missiles, it is thought that swarm tactics are well suited for Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) missions using swarms of networked miniature spoofing decoy drones accompanying large numbers of JASSM-ER cruise missiles launched from mass fire platforms such as Rapid Dragon.
Swarming avoids fratricide: Prevention of fratricide, as well as the ability to make ad hoc swarming attacks on targets of opportunity, is one of the major goals of combat data networking among units down to the level of individual tanks and soldiers. Blue Force Tracker is an early vehicle-level synchronization system, also operating in helicopters. These systems are still new and undergoing considerable improvement. One fratricide incident in Afghanistan came from the users not understanding that their target designation device reinitialized, after battery replacement, to the position of their designator, not of the target. If the bomber had a beacon that gave the crew the precise location of the friendly troops, that would have been another way of avoiding attacking one's own troops.
Modern militaries and lower-intensity conflict: Alternatively, the US and other major powers may go to a more cooperative model, as in the foreign internal defense mission of special forces. In that model, which needs extensive lead time, the major power uses nonmilitary and military means to increase the capability of the host nation to resist insurgency.
Foreign internal defense includes the economic stabilization of host countries. In Thomas Barnett's paradigm,
the world is divided into a "connected core" of nations enjoying a high level of communications among their organizations and individuals, and those nations that are disconnected internally and externally. In a reasonably peaceful situation, he describes a "system administrator" force, often multinational, which does what some call "nation-building", but, most importantly, connects the nation to the core and empowers the natives to communicate—that communication can be likened to swarm coordination.
Swarming is not a panacea for conflict at all levels. If there is a significant military force preventing the system administrator from working on developing connections, the other part of the paradigm comes into play: the leviathan, a first-world military force that takes down the opposition regular forces. Leviathan is not constituted to fight local insurgencies, but major forces. Leviathan may use extensive swarming at the tactical level, but its dispatch is a strategic decision that may be made unilaterally, or by an established core group such as NATO, ASEAN, or the United Nations.
It is the job of the system administrator force to deal with low-level conflict, and there must be both resources and a smooth transition plan from Leviathan to System Administrator responsibility, of which a classic successful example were the Operation Rankin plans that covered several ways in which Nazi power might end which is more a mission for police, which certainly can include a militarized force like the Constabulary in the post-WWII occupation of Germany.
Swarming would allow major powers to rapidly respond to guerilla forces, but, given the appropriate synchronization and communications, the less powerful forces can use swarming themselves. Modern communications allows military units to stay widely dispersed. The front, rear and flanks are disappearing from military conflict. Swarming allows the military to fight everywhere.
Swarming and Third World nations: Swarming is advantageous to less powerful countries and groups, because it allows them to balance their disadvantage in firepower and numbers. Despite being less technically advanced, Communist forces made good use of swarming in Asia during the Cold War. The Chinese were able to make up for their lack of firepower by attacking from all sides and then quickly advancing to the rear. The Vietcong were famous from attacking from all directions out of nowhere and then quickly disappearing. When they did come into close contact, they used a technique called "hugging the belt", which meant they were too close for the US to employ air and artillery support. If the attackers "hugged" at several points, "pulsing" their attacks, they both neutralized external fire support, but also made it difficult for the US commander to know where to commit reserves.
Swarming principles in terrorism: Cordesman observes that swarming is a viable terrorist tactic against targets of opportunity.
Al-Qaeda, for example, uses a different form of swarming than those of advanced militaries, in which the general objectives of operational cells are agreed in a manner coordinated, but not continuously controlled by the core organization. Once the decision has been made on the general targets, the operational cells cut positive control links from the core, although they may still receive financial and other support. A signature of al-Qaeda operations has been multiple, near-simultaneous attacks, such as the several hijacked airliners in the 9/11 attacks, the closely spaced bombings aimed at US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and attacks on buses and trains in London. The attacks on trains in Spain had an additional dimension: not all the swarms were associated with al-Qaeda.
While John Arquilla, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, cites the ability to plan separate and widely dispersed attacks, coordinated by mobile communications that might originate from a cave on the Afghan-Pakistan border, he does not emphasize the apparent al-Qaeda technique of releasing operational units to local control, once the policy is set. See Clandestine HUMINT operational techniques.
The apparent al-Qaeda methodology of letting operational cells decide on their final dates and means of attack exhibit an operational pattern, but not a periodicity that could easily be used for an indications checklist appropriate for a warning center. Such lists depend on seeing a local pattern to give a specific warning.
Semiautonomous swarming, in which the actors occasionally interfere with one another, is seen in attacks on computer networks by loose confederations of malicious hackers. On occasion, especially when the attack uses a botnet, some of the units may try to overpower and control one another, as well as the target. One of the observations of the Center on Terrorism and Irregular Warfare was that unfocused mass disruption was not a useful terrorist, and by extension general military, tactic. The 9/11 attacks had symbolism. A cyberattack on a stock market would have symbolism. For the political purposes of the swarm, there has to be a symbol to which observers need to connect the purpose of the attack.
See also: C4ISTAR
Defeat in detail
Battle of annihilation
Three-Dimensional (3D) Tactics Analysis
Cabbage tactics
References:
External links: Shannon, William D.; Tsypkin, Mikhail; Arguill, John. (June 2008). "Swarm Tactics and the Doctrinal Void: Lessons from the Chechen Wars". Naval Postgraduate School. Monterey, California (Thesis) |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Systems approach | History:
Ptolemaic system versus the Copernican system: The term system is polysemic: Robert Hooke (1674) used it in multiple senses, in his System of the World,: p.24 but also in the sense of the Ptolemaic system versus the Copernican system: 450 of the relation of the planets to the fixed stars which are cataloged in Hipparchus' and Ptolemy's Star catalog. Hooke's claim was answered in magisterial detail by Newton's (1687) Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Book three, The System of the World: Book three (that is, the system of the world is a physical system).
Newton's approach, using dynamical systems continues to this day. In brief, Newton's equations (a system of equations) have methods for their solution.
Feedback control systems: By 1824 the Carnot cycle presented an engineering challenge, which was how to maintain the operating temperatures of the hot and cold working fluids of the physical plant. In 1868 James Clerk Maxwell presented a framework for, and a limited solution to the problem of controlling the rotational speed of a physical plant. Maxwell's solution echoed James Watt's (1784) centrifugal moderator (denoted as element Q) for maintaining (but not enforcing) the constant speed of a physical plant (that is, Q represents a moderator, but not a governor, by Maxwell's definition).
Maxwell's approach, which linearized the equations of motion of the system, produced a tractable method of solution.: 428–429 Norbert Wiener identified this approach as an influence on his studies of cybernetics during World War II and Wiener even proposed treating some subsystems under investigation as black boxes.: 242 Methods for solutions of the systems of equations then become the subject of study, as in feedback control systems, in stability theory, in constraint satisfaction problems, the unification algorithm, type inference, and so forth.
Applications: "So, how do we change the structure of systems to produce more of what we want and less of that which is undesirable? ... MIT’s Jay Forrester likes to say that the average manager can ... guess with great accuracy where to look for leverage points—places in the system where a small change could lead to a large shift in behavior".: 146 — Donella Meadows, (2008) Thinking In Systems: A Primer p.145
Characteristics: ...What is a system? A system is a set of things ... interconnected in such a way that they produce their own pattern of behavior over time. ... But the system’s response to these forces is characteristic of itself, and that response is seldom simple in the real world
[a system] is "an integrated whole even though composed of diverse, interacting, specialized structures and subjunctions"
Subsystems serve as part of a larger system, but each comprises a system in its own right. Each frequently can be described reductively, with properties obeying its own laws, such as Newton's System of the World, in which entire planets, stars, and their satellites can be treated, sometimes in a scientific way as dynamical systems, entirely mathematically, as demonstrated by Johannes Kepler's equation (1619) for the orbit of Mars before Newton's Principia appeared in 1687.
Black boxes are subsystems whose operation can be characterized by their inputs and outputs, without regard to further detail.: 87–88
Particular systems: Political systems were recognized as early as the millennia before the common era.
Biological systems were recognized in Aristotle's lagoon ca. 350 BCE.
Economic systems were recognized by 1776.
Social systems were recognized by the 19th and 20th centuries of the common era.
Radar systems were developed in World War II in subsystem fashion; they were made up of transmitter, receiver, power supply, and signal processing subsystems, to defend against airborne attacks.
Dynamical systems of ordinary differential equations were shown to exhibit stable behavior given a suitable Lyapunov control function by Aleksandr Lyapunov in 1892.
Thermodynamic systems were treated as early as the eighteenth century, in which it was discovered that heat could be created without limit, but that for closed systems, laws of thermodynamics could be formulated. Ilya Prigogine (1980) has identified situations in which systems far from equilibrium can exhibit stable behavior; once a Lyapunov function has been identified, future and past can be distinguished, and scientific activity can begin.: 212–213
Systems far from equilibrium: Living systems are resilient, and are far from equilibrium.: Ch.3 Homeostasis is the analog to equilibrium, for a living system; the concept was described in 1849, and the term was coined in 1926.
Resilient systems are self-organizing;: Ch.3
The scope of functional controls is hierarchical, in a resilient system.: Ch.3
Frameworks and methodologies: Frameworks and methodologies for systems thinking include:
Critical systems heuristics: in particular, there can be twelve boundary categories for the systems when organizing one's thinking and actions.
Critical systems thinking, including the E P I C approach.
Ontology engineering of representation, formal naming and definition of categories, and the properties and the relations between concepts, data, and entities.
Soft systems methodology, including the CATWOE approach and rich pictures.
Systemic design, for example using the double diamond approach.
System dynamics of stocks, flows, and internal feedback loops.
Viable system model: uses 5 subsystems.
See also: Conceptual systems – System composed of non-physical objects, i.e. ideas or conceptsPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
Management cybernetics – Application of cybernetics to management and organizations
Operations research – Discipline concerning the application of advanced analytical methods
Systems engineering – Interdisciplinary field of engineering
Notes:
References:
Sources: Russell L. Ackoff (1968) "General Systems Theory and Systems Research Contrasting Conceptions of Systems Science." in: Views on a General Systems Theory: Proceedings from the Second System Symposium, Mihajlo D. Mesarovic (ed.).
A.C. Ehresmann, J.-P. Vanbremeersch (1987) Hierarchical evolutive systems: A mathematical model for complex systems" Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Volume 49, Issue 1, Pages 13–50
NJTA Kramer & J de Smit (1977) Systems thinking: Concepts and Notions, Springer. 148 pages
A. H. Louie (November 1983) "Categorical system theory" Bulletin of Mathematical Biology volume 45, pages 1047–1072
DonellaMeadows.org Systems Thinking Resources
Gerald Midgley (ed.) (2002) Systems Thinking, SAGE Publications. 4 volume set: 1,492 pages List of chapter titles
Robert Rosen. (1958) “The Representation of Biological Systems from the Standpoint of the Theory of Categories". Bull. math. Biophys. 20, 317–342.
Peter Senge, (1990) The Fifth Discipline |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Tactical formation | See also: Close order formation
Division (military)
Laager
Military organization
Night attack formation
References:
Sources: Journal of the Polynesian Society, Vols. 1-19, 1892–1910
"FM 3-21.71 Chapter 3". Retrieved 2022-12-08. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Tactical objective | null |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template talk:Military strategy | null |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template talk:War | Footnote template: I think that this template should be redesigned as a footplate template. I think it is now too large and dominates the pages it is on as a header template. Most people who go to a specific type of warfare are not looking for other types of warfare and on many war pages a picture in the top right hand corner is preferable to his template (eg total war). What do others think? --Philip Baird Shearer 21:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Time to upgrade!: How's this for a start? (Have no intention of making edits until people were consulted) Palm_Dogg 03:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Nice idea, but the color scheme looks slightly garish to me. How about something more in line with our other templates? —Kirill Lokshin 22:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
LOL. Yeah, it is pretty butt-ugly. Yours is nice. What do you think about widening the template, like Template:Israelis, so it's less of a list? Of course in that case, we have to figure out what we would put... Palm_Dogg 23:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. We could save a lot of space by omitting "warfare" from every term (see the topic list on Portal:War, for example). —Kirill Lokshin 23:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
True. Here's my rough draft (We could save a lot of space doing that...). Palm_Dogg 00:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Too wide, maybe? Here's another version, with short forms and a slightly lighter background.
On another note, it might be nice to put a similarly-proportioned ancient warfare picture (a chariot, maybe?) next to the M1-Abrams. —Kirill Lokshin 00:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Also, there are lots of other links we should probably add. —Kirill Lokshin 00:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
We can always add that stuff later. The important thing is to get the format set up now. Palm_Dogg 00:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I think I fixed most of the formatting issues; there's still some space after the pictures that I can't figure out how to remove. —Kirill Lokshin 01:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
AWESOME! It looks perfect the way it is. I'm going to switch templates. Palm_Dogg 02:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Looks good! Now we need to add back some of the other links. —Kirill Lokshin 02:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Compared to the original, this is a masterpiece! Good job guys. --Loopy e 02:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I've added back most of the links that were in the original template. If there are any that shouldn't be linked from this (due to not being important enough, basically), feel free to take them out. —Kirill Lokshin 02:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Nice job. Major kudos to a speedy and efficient project. Palm_Dogg 03:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Uh, Land warfare simply redirect to War. Should we remove the link from the template?--KrossTalk 08:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Done. —Kirill Lokshin 11:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I still say that this template should be turned into a #Footnote template --Philip Baird Shearer 18:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Cavalry?: Would it be possible to squeeze cavalry tactics into the template? I'd do it myself, but I'm afraid of messing with the code and touching something not mine. Thanks. LordAmeth 14:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Done. Kirill Lokshin 15:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Supply line: Supply line is no longer used by the military the correct term to use now is Military Supply Chain Management. What123 00:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
We needn't follow whatever the current terminology fad is exactly. The predominant term in English usage—particularly in the context of history—remains "supply line". Kirill Lokshin 00:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello, with respect, it is not a fad it is a fact that "supply line" is no longer used by militaries [1]. It has been replaced with Supply Chain Management [2] to differentiate between civilian and military SCM I created MSCM. Supply line has been #redirected to MSCM. I think the template should be updated accordingly. In addition, some of the links you have added to logistics are being redirected and don't really fit into this template. Thanks What123 01:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but we don't need to use formal military terminology exclusively. "Supply line" is still standard both in common parlance and in historical works (Napoleon had supply lines, not SCM, for example). I'm not convinced that the term is prevalent enough that we should adopt it over something which would be more recognizable to the average reader.
As far as the other terms, we can figure those out once the redirects have all been sorted. (In any case, I think some of the redirects may be unnecessarily limiting the scope of the topics; but that's a separate issue.) Kirill Lokshin 01:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Change Box to Horizontal: I think it is time to move the template to the bottom of articles in a horizontal format, it is to long now and will only grow longer vertically. LindaWarheads 10:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
That would force us to move it to a much less prominent position within each article, though. Kirill Lokshin 12:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with your assertion, but it is getting to long and all the issues that go along with that length. If it was horizontal at the bottom we would be able to add more links as the articles are written. At what point would you consider the horizontal box ? LindaWarheads 09:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
At the point where this box were to be substantially larger than a normal infobox, probably. I'm not sure how much potential to expand it still has, though; there really aren't many links that could be added at this point. Kirill Lokshin 15:25, 3 September 2006(UTC)
Combined arms/Joint warfare: These have been major doctrines in modern warfare, from WW II-era blitzkrieg to US operations today... shouldn't they be mentioned somewhere on this template? 61.7.120.59 01:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Good idea. I've added a link to joint warfare under the "Tactics" heading; if anybody knows a better place for it, please feel free to move it there. Kirill Lokshin 02:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Hogging all that space: This is a terribly bloated template that is spoiling an ever-increasing amount of articles. It's a textbook example of what one would not want in a good article. Consider making it horizontal or splitting it up into several smaller ones. The acceptable size was passed already back in early 2006. By now it's even worse than the gargantuan Template:Jews and Judaism sidebar.
Peter Isotalo 23:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I tried to make a reduction. If someone feels like auto-reverting everything, please note that there are a few pointless duplicate links in there, like mechanized warfare. But let's at least try to discuss the merits of this many links in a such a basic topic template
Peter Isotalo 06:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
This may become a moot point shortly; see WT:MILHIST#Standardizing navigation templates. Presumably the number of links wouldn't be a (major) concern in an auto-collapsing template? Kirill 12:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
A massive amount of linkage is still overwhelming, even when it's not placed at the very top of the article. We don't generally tolerate excessive amounts of links in See also-section, so why is so much different?
Peter Isotalo 21:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
This should really be several templates; at least two (a general "War" one and a more specific "Types of warfare" one) are fairly obvious. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template talk:War | But let's at least try to discuss the merits of this many links in a such a basic topic template
Peter Isotalo 06:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
This may become a moot point shortly; see WT:MILHIST#Standardizing navigation templates. Presumably the number of links wouldn't be a (major) concern in an auto-collapsing template? Kirill 12:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
A massive amount of linkage is still overwhelming, even when it's not placed at the very top of the article. We don't generally tolerate excessive amounts of links in See also-section, so why is so much different?
Peter Isotalo 21:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
This should really be several templates; at least two (a general "War" one and a more specific "Types of warfare" one) are fairly obvious. We've sort of been tied to a one-template approach in the past for layout reasons, but the collapsible floating box design being developed would allow this to be neatly split up into multiple smaller templates, any subset of which could conveniently be included in each article. Kirill 21:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
New Template: Hello, I have created a new collapsible Template based on the Template {{{{Nazism}}}} that solves the problem about hogging space, but still allows the Template to remain on the top-right of articles. I was hoping for some input from other users to build a consensus, thank you. Chessy999 15:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Mmm, I think it's overly convoluted; too many collapsing sections are as bad as too few ones. I'd suggest going with something based on {{military navigation}} (which is the new standard base template for us); for example:
Or, alternately, a full-size version for the standard bottom-of-article position, which can then be expanded further:
Both of these have the added advantage of not needing the rather fragile collapsing-block code in the template itself. Kirill 17:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm a fan of the bottom-page template. To me, the top-right position should be reserved for infoboxes and possibly a topic-specific navigation box of limited scope. Navigation should come at the end of the article, IMHO. It's the natural position for a reader, having finished reading the article, to move onto the next one in the series of events or locations. JKBrooks85 18:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm with JKBrooks. Where there is a relevant infobox or the like, this sort of navbox should probably go at the bottom. Though, if we were to go with a top-right box, my vote would be for Kirill's semi-collapsed version, as he makes a good point about too many collapsed sections being potentially a bad thing. LordAmeth 23:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up Chessy999. As I said above I think better at the bottom. --Philip Baird Shearer 10:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I agree that it should go at the bottom of the article. On a side note I just wrote the article Enemy (military), which has been +tagged for deletion, if you care to participate. Please note this is not an advertisement or solicitation as to, which way to vote. Chessy999 12:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Do we have a computer program that can change the templates automatically or do we have to make the changes manually ?? Chessy999 (talk) 10:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Template is broken: This template is broken on, it would seem, every page which uses is. It does not float properly, and using the show/hide links does not actually work. I know precious little about formatting these floating boxes or I'd look in to it myself, but this need to be fixed! Cheers. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 04:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Organization of the content of the 'Battlespace' and 'Weapons' sections: In both the 'Battlespace' and the 'Weapons' sections of this template, the information is organized alphabetically. In the 'Eras' section, it is arranged chronologically. In the other sections of this template, it doesn't matter, but I think the 'Battlespace' and 'Weapons' sections, the contents should be reorganized so similar things are grouped together. I think that the contents of the 'Battlespace' section should be reorganized like this; Land (the most basic place that we war; we live on land), sea (centuries ago, humans began making ships that went to sea and warred), air (real, practical air warfare began only in 20th century), space (so far, we are only beginning to use space as a battlefield, and even then, almost exclusively for reconnaissance) and information (which has been around a while, but is not even a physical battlefield).
In the weapons section, I think that Biological, Chemical and Nuclear weaponry should be grouped together (as they are all weapons of mass destruction, and might should be indicated as such in the template), infantry and cavalry should be grouped together (because they are both classified by the type of soldier that generally carries it), electronic and artillery should be grouped (as they are not weapons of mass destruction and are not named after the type of soldiers that use them)
and armor and psychological should remain ungrouped (as they do not belong with anything else on the list).
Look above for the current organization.--Star Trek enthusiast (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
I think they should be classified by role rather than by user. Chariots, Cavalry, and Armoured warfare fulfill essentially the same role in land warfare with differences in era so they should be grouped together with ships and aircraft as weapons platform. I think traps should be added like naval and land mines as well as other static automated defenses because of their unique roles. Countakeshi (talk) 12:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Tactics and strategy have been mixed up: It would seem practically everything under the, current live, template heading of "tactics" and "strategy" is wrong, and should be moved around. Key examples include: attritional warfare, which is an overall policy of grinding down the opposing military force. It is a strategy employed, which results in how tactics are employed; Total War is the complete mobilization of a nations resources to fight a war, which is not a tactical decision taken on the battlefield or in a foxhole; A Proxy War, is not a battlefield tactic employed but rather a full-scale war.
The template needs a complete overhaul. Thus I have made the below proposed change (for the tactics and strategy sections only), and have also included more links. A few of the links, since i am not familiar enough with them, I have grouped in the "other" section along with the likes of Proxy War, which does not fit the current template nor the below expanded and restructured categories.
I make no allusion to being completely accurate on every movement choice I have, or have not made, however I do feel what I have come up with is far more accurate than the current live template.
Edit: I have now inserted the rest of the current live template, and moved around and added several more links.Tempaccount040812 (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Restructure proposals::
Edit request on 4 January 2013 - Mispelling: Please change the spelling of "materiel"... it should be "material"
72.55.246.150 (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Not done: "Materiel" is the correct usage in this context. WikiPuppies bark dig 20:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
General comment, this template is great: Just wanted to say, this is a really interesting and useful template and I wish there were more like this. LT90001 (talk) 07:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Please add...: ...Network-centric warfare to the "Other" section. --173.51.29.188 (talk) 07:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
done: I have added the above requested link.Tempaccount040812 (talk) 05:23, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2015: Add to Weapons Economic, remove economic warfare from grand strategy.
--munir
178.135.87.140 (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Sam Sing! 21:44, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Move Economic warfare from grand strategy to weapons:
Bar would be better than sidebox: Hi, I just saw this for the very first time with its new appearance on War film. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template talk:War | --173.51.29.188 (talk) 07:37, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
done: I have added the above requested link.Tempaccount040812 (talk) 05:23, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2015: Add to Weapons Economic, remove economic warfare from grand strategy.
--munir
178.135.87.140 (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Sam Sing! 21:44, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Move Economic warfare from grand strategy to weapons:
Bar would be better than sidebox: Hi, I just saw this for the very first time with its new appearance on War film. I agree the topic is "Related" but do not think that a sizeable box right at the top of (every) article, especially perhaps where the topic is only "related" to the matter of the box, is a good idea. For a start, many articles I edit have 2, 3 or more navigation sets (I choose a neutral word). These membership sets would (and once did) take up excessive screen space ("real estate" in user interface design jargon), all the more problematic when half our readers already view Wikipedia on small screens (smartphones upwards). A solution is to use horizontal navigation boxes placed at the ends of articles, rather than vertical ones placed near the top on the right. Horizontal navboxes can (and best should) be made to collapse to a simple one-line bar with a title, so they are "quiet" (barely intrusive) but readily available. An example is the {{Mathematical art}} navbox - see Mathematics and art for how it works when there is a second navbox also present. I think you'll agree that it's a tried and tested solution, and one that offers plenty of room for the designer. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2015: 105.149.66.219 (talk) 13:24, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
ءí
Cavalry article: Could the "War" template be repositioned at the bottom of the Cavalry article? This way it would continue to serve a useful purpose without breaking up and distorting what is already a lengthy article. As a random example of better practice the National Gendarmerie article places its template at the foot of the main text, thereby presenting a tidy and well organised appearance without large gaps. Thanks.(Buistr (talk) 00:18, 9 May 2016 (UTC)).
هعبد
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2017: Shock and awe 50.64.119.38 (talk) 22:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Sorry. I noticed Blitzkrieg in mentioned under the operational category, however that tactic is a more specific strategy that should fall under the Shock and awe doctrine. I guess you could say I feel this should be added. 50.64.119.38 (talk) 05:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Music is a "weapon"?: If you look under "Weapons" heading in this infobox template, Music is listed...
...
...
Music is a weapon? *ponders on my chin*
--Legion (talk) 05:05, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
So, with regard to reduction...?: I have heard that you guys are trying to reduce the size of the template. Are you guys making progress? I would be happy to help a bit.
I primarily work in the Cantonese wikipedia and have been thinking about translating certain military-related templates. However, this template is so enormous that it feels a bit intimidating, i.e., either (1) I do the extraordinarily grueling task of making stub articles on Cantonese wiki, for all the links in this template, or (2) I get a sidebar template with a sea of red links.
Personally, I would be happy to start sub-sidebar/navbox templates about military tactics and military strategy (the military topics that interest me the most) - for both Cantonese and English versions of Wikipedia. Should I go ahead and make:
Template:Military tactics for the Cantonese wiki
Template:Military tactics for the English wiki
Template:Military strategy for the Cantonese wiki
Template:Military strategy for the English wiki
I will start working as soon as I get the greenlight.
Edited: I am also willing to create the remaining English subnavbox templates for Template:War, e.g., Template:Battlespace, Template:Weapons, etc.
Dr. Greywolf (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Oh well, I will start working on it anyway: Template
Military tactics
Template
Military strategy
Dr. Greywolf (talk) 05:49, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Someone else has already made the navbox for history...
Template
Battlespace
Template
Weapons |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template:Military strategy | null |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Template:War | null |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | The Art of War | History:
Text and commentaries: The Art of War is traditionally attributed to an ancient Chinese military general known as Sun Tzu meaning "Master Sun". Sun Tzu is usually linked with existing in the 6th century BC; the earliest sections of The Art of War, however, most likely date to at least 100 years after him.
Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian, the first of China's 24 dynastic histories, records an early Chinese tradition that a text on military matters was written by one "Sun Wu" (孫武) from the State of Qi, and that this text had been read and studied by King Helü of Wu (r. 514 BC – 495 BC). This text was traditionally identified with the received Master Sun's Art of War. The conventional view was that Sun Wu was a military theorist from the end of the Spring and Autumn period (776–471 BC) who fled his home state of Qi to the southeastern Kingdom of Wu, where he is said to have impressed the king with his ability to quickly train even court women in military discipline and to have made Wu's armies powerful enough to challenge their western rivals in the state of Chu. This view is still widely held in China.
The strategist, poet, and warlord Cao Cao in the early 3rd century AD authored the earliest known commentary to the Art of War. Cao's preface makes clear that he edited the text and removed certain passages, but the extent of his changes were unclear historically. The Art of War appears throughout the bibliographical catalogs of the Chinese dynastic histories, but listings of its divisions and size varied widely.
Authorship: Beginning around the 12th century, Sun Tzu's historical existence began to be questioned by Chinese scholars, primarily on the grounds that he is not mentioned in the historical classic The Commentary of Zuo (Zuo Zhuan), which mentions most of the notable figures from the Spring and Autumn period. The name "Sun Wu" (孫武) does not appear in any text prior to the Records of the Grand Historian, and has been suspected to be a made-up descriptive cognomen meaning "the fugitive warrior", glossing the surname "Sun" as the related term "fugitive" (xùn 遜), while "Wu" (wǔ 武) is (1) the ancient Chinese virtue of "martial, valiant" and (2) a Jianghuai dialectal synonym of 士; shì "knight", which corresponds to Sunzi's role as the hero's doppelgänger in the story of Wu Zixu. In the early 20th century, the Chinese writer and reformer Liang Qichao theorized that the text was actually written in the 4th century BC by Sun Tzu's purported descendant Sun Bin, as a number of historical sources mention a military treatise he wrote. Unlike Sun Wu, Sun Bin appears to have been an actual person who was a genuine authority on military matters, and may have been the inspiration for the creation of the historical figure "Sun Tzu" through a form of euhemerism.
In 1972, the Yinqueshan Han slips were discovered in two Han dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD) tombs near the city of Linyi in Shandong Province. Among the many bamboo slip writings contained in the tombs, which had been sealed between 134 and 118 BC, respectively were two separate texts, one attributed to "Sun Tzu", corresponding to the received text, and another attributed to Sun Bin, which explains and expands upon the earlier The Art of War by Sunzi. The Sun Bin text's material overlaps with much of the "Sun Tzu" text, and the two may be "a single, continuously developing intellectual tradition united under the Sun name". This discovery showed that much of the historical confusion was due to the fact that there were two texts that could have been referred to as "Master Sun's Art of War", not one. The content of the earlier text is about one-third of the chapters of the modern The Art of War, and their text matches very closely. It is now generally accepted that the earlier The Art of War was completed sometime between 500 and 430 BC.
The 13 chapters: The Art of War is divided into 13 chapters (or piān); the collection is referred to as being one zhuàn ("whole" or alternatively "chronicle").
Cultural influence:
Military and intelligence applications: Across East Asia, The Art of War was part of the syllabus for potential candidates of military service examinations.
During the Sengoku period (c. 1467–1568), the Japanese daimyō Takeda Shingen (1521–1573) is said to have become almost invincible in all battles without relying on guns, because he studied The Art of War. The book even gave him the inspiration for his famous battle standard "Fūrinkazan" (Wind, Forest, Fire and Mountain), meaning fast as the wind, silent as a forest, ferocious as fire and immovable as a mountain.
The translator Samuel B. Griffith offers a chapter on "Sun Tzu and Mao Tse-Tung" where The Art of War is cited as influencing Mao's On Guerrilla Warfare, On the Protracted War and Strategic Problems of China's Revolutionary War, and includes Mao's quote: "We must not belittle the saying in the book of Sun Wu Tzu, the great military expert of ancient China, 'Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a thousand battles without disaster.'"
During the Vietnam War, some Viet Cong officers extensively studied The Art of War and reportedly could recite entire passages from memory. General Võ Nguyên Giáp successfully implemented tactics described in The Art of War during the Battle of Dien Bien Phu ending major French involvement in Indochina and leading to the accords which partitioned Vietnam into North and South. General Giáp, later the main PVA military commander in the Vietnam War, was an avid student and practitioner of Sun Tzu's ideas.
Outside East Asia: The United States' defeat in the Vietnam War, more than any other event, brought Sun Tzu to the attention of leaders of U.S. military theory. The Department of the Army in the United States, through its Command and General Staff College, lists The Art of War as one example of a book that may be kept at a military unit's library. The Art of War is listed on the US Marine Corps Professional Reading Program (formerly known as the Commandant's Reading List). It is recommended reading for all United States Military Intelligence personnel. The Art of War is also used as instructional material at the United States Military Academy (commonly known as West Point), in the course Military Strategy (470). It is also recommended reading for Officer cadets at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. Some notable military leaders have stated the following about Sun Tzu and The Art of War:
"I always kept a copy of The Art of War on my desk." – General Douglas MacArthur, 5 Star General and Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.
"I have read The Art of War by Sun Tzu. He continues to influence both soldiers & politicians." – General Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, National Security Advisor, and Secretary of State.
According to some authors, the strategy of deception from The Art of War was studied and widely used by the KGB: "I will force the enemy to take our strength for weakness, and our weakness for strength, and thus will turn his strength into weakness".
Application outside the military: The Art of War has been applied to many fields outside of the military. Much of the text is about how to outsmart one's opponent without actually having to engage in physical battle. As such, it has found application as a training guide for many competitive endeavors that do not involve actual combat.
The Art of War is mentioned as an influence in the earliest known Chinese collection of stories about fraud (mostly in the realm of commerce), Zhang Yingyu's The Book of Swindles (Du pian xin shu, 杜騙新書, c. 1617), which dates to the late Ming dynasty.
Many business books have applied the lessons taken from the book to office politics and corporate business strategy. Many Japanese companies make the book required reading for their key executives. The book is also popular among Western business circles citing its utilitarian values regarding management practices. Many entrepreneurs and corporate executives have turned to it for inspiration and advice on how to succeed in competitive business situations. The book has also been applied to the field of education.
The Art of War has been the subject of legal books and legal articles on the trial process, including negotiation tactics and trial strategy.
The book The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene employs philosophies covered in The Art of War.
The Art of War has also been applied in sports. National Football League coach Bill Belichick, record holder of the most Super Bowl wins in history, has stated on multiple occasions his admiration for The Art of War. Brazilian association football coach Luiz Felipe Scolari actively used The Art of War for Brazil's successful 2002 World Cup campaign. During the tournament Scolari put passages of The Art of War underneath his players' doors at night.
Playing To Win by David Sirlin analyses applications of the ideas from The Art of War in modern esports. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | The Art of War | Many entrepreneurs and corporate executives have turned to it for inspiration and advice on how to succeed in competitive business situations. The book has also been applied to the field of education.
The Art of War has been the subject of legal books and legal articles on the trial process, including negotiation tactics and trial strategy.
The book The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene employs philosophies covered in The Art of War.
The Art of War has also been applied in sports. National Football League coach Bill Belichick, record holder of the most Super Bowl wins in history, has stated on multiple occasions his admiration for The Art of War. Brazilian association football coach Luiz Felipe Scolari actively used The Art of War for Brazil's successful 2002 World Cup campaign. During the tournament Scolari put passages of The Art of War underneath his players' doors at night.
Playing To Win by David Sirlin analyses applications of the ideas from The Art of War in modern esports. The Art of War was released in 2014 as an e-book companion alongside the Art of War DLC for Europa Universalis IV, a PC strategy game by Paradox Development Studios, with a foreword by Thomas Johansson.
Film and television: The Art of War and Sun Tzu have been referenced and quoted in many movies and television shows, including in the 1987 movie Wall Street, in which Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas) frequently references it. The 20th James Bond film, Die Another Day (2002) also references The Art of War as the spiritual guide shared by Colonel Moon and his father. In The Sopranos, season 3, episode 8 ("He Is Risen"), Dr. Melfi suggests to Tony Soprano that he read the book.
In the Star Trek: The Next Generation first-season episode "The Last Outpost", first officer William Riker quotes The Art of War: "Fear is the true enemy, the only enemy". Captain Picard expressed pleasure that Sun Tzu was still taught at Starfleet Academy. Later in the episode, a survivor from a long-dead nonhuman empire noted common aspects between his own people's wisdom and The Art of War with regard to knowing when and when not to fight.
The Art of War is a 2000 action spy film directed by Christian Duguay and starring Wesley Snipes, Michael Biehn, Anne Archer and Donald Sutherland.
Notable translations: Sun Tzu on the Art of War. Translated by Lionel Giles. London: Luzac and Company. 1910.
The Art of War. Translated by Samuel B. Griffith. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1963. ISBN 978-0-19-501476-1. Part of the UNESCO Collection of Representative Works.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War. Translated by Thomas Cleary. Boston: Shambhala Dragon Editions. 1988. ISBN 978-0877734529.
The Art of Warfare. Translated by Roger Ames. Random House. 1993. ISBN 978-0-345-36239-1.
The Art of War. Translated by John Minford. New York: Viking. 2002. ISBN 978-0-670-03156-6.
The Art of War: Sunzi's Military Methods. Translated by Victor H. Mair. New York: Columbia University Press. 2007. ISBN 978-0-231-13382-1.
See also:
Books: Achtung – Panzer! by Heinz Guderian
Arthashastra
Bansenshukai
Commentarii de Bello Gallico (Commentaries on the Gallic War) by Julius Caesar
Dream Pool Essays by Shen Kuo
Epitoma rei militaris by Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus
Guerrilla Warfare by Che Guevara
Hagakure by Yamamoto Tsunetomo
History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides
Huolongjing by Liu Bowen
Infanterie Greift An by Erwin Rommel
On Protracted War by Mao Zedong
On War by Carl von Clausewitz
Records of the Grand Historian
Seven Military Classics
Seven Pillars of Wisdom by T. E. Lawrence
The 33 Strategies of War
The Art of War by Niccolò Machiavelli
The Book of Five Rings (Miyamoto Musashi)
The Influence of Sea Power upon History by Alfred Thayer Mahan
The Jewish War by Josephus
The Science of Military Strategy
The Strategikon by Emperor Maurice
The Utility of Force by Rupert Smith
Thirty-Six Stratagems
Concepts: Military treatise
Philosophy of war
References:
Citations:
Sources:
External links:
The Art of War at Standard Ebooks
The Art of War Chinese-English bilingual edition, Chinese Text Project
The Art of War at Project Gutenberg translated by Lionel Giles (1910)
The Art of War at Project Gutenberg translated (with Chinese text) by Lionel Giles (1910)
The Book of War at Project Gutenberg translated by E.F. Calthrop (1908)
The Art of War public domain audiobook at LibriVox (English and Chinese original available)
Sun Tzu's Art of War at Sonshi
Sun Tzu and Information Warfare at the Institute for National Strategic Studies of National Defense University
11 The Nine Situations | The Art of War by Sun Tzu (Animated)
The Art of War illustrated version Archived 24 February 2021 at the Wayback Machine, on Theoriq.com
The Art of War on Modern World, by Edward Rico M. Tj, on r2plan.com |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Theater (warfare) | Theater of war: In his book On War, Carl von Clausewitz defines the term Kriegstheater (translating the older, 17th-century Latin term theatrum belli) as one that:
Denotes properly such a portion of the space over which war prevails as has its boundaries protected, and thus possesses a kind of independence. This protection may consist of fortresses, or important natural obstacles presented by the country, or even in its being separated by a considerable distance from the rest of the space embraced in the war. Such a portion is not a mere piece of the whole, but a small whole complete in itself; and consequently it is more or less in such a condition that changes which take place at other points in the seat of war have only an indirect and no direct influence upon it. To give an adequate idea of this, we may suppose that on this portion an advance is made, whilst in another quarter a retreat is taking place, or that upon the one an army is acting defensively, whilst an offensive is being carried on upon the other. Such a clearly defined idea as this is not capable of universal application; it is here used merely to indicate the line of distinction.
Theater of operations: Theater of operations (TO) is a sub-area within a theater of war. The boundary of a TO is defined by the commander who is orchestrating or providing support for specific combat operations within the TO.
Theater of operations is divided into strategic directions or military regions depending on whether it is a war or peacetime. Unified combatant commands of the Department of Defense (United States) have responsibility for military activities (combat and non-combat) within their area of responsibility.
Soviet and Russian Armed Forces: The Soviet and Russian Armed Forces classify a large geographic subdivision—such as continental geographic territories with their bordering maritime areas, islands, adjacent coasts
and airspace—as a theater. The Russian-language term for a military "theater" is театр военных действий, teatr voennykh deistvii (literally: "theater of military operations"), abbreviated ТВД, TVD.
This geographical division aids strategic and operational planning, allowing military operations of fronts. Fronts were originally named in accordance with their theater of operations; for example the Southwestern Front (Russian Empire) (1914–1918), the 1st Ukrainian Front (1943–1945, which fought in Ukraine, Poland, Germany, and Czechoslovakia), and the Northern Front (Soviet Union) (June to August 1941). In peacetime, lacking the urgencies of a strategic direction, fronts were transformed into military regions (districts) responsible for an assigned section of operations.
In 1986 the U.S. Department of Defense's Soviet Military Power identified ten continental and four oceanic TVDs, however, most being merely geographical areas without forces or headquarters: North American, South American, African, Australian, Antarctic, Arctic Ocean, Atlantic, Indian Ocean, and Pacific. Four others - the Far Eastern, Western, South-Western, and Southern, had identified headquarters established in 1979 and 1984. Plans appear to have existed to form a Northwestern TVD headquarters on the basis of the Staff of the Leningrad Military District.
In their most modern form, High Commands for the TVDs were first reestablished in February 1979 for the Far East. Harrison wrote in the 2020s that the new command encompassed the Far East Military District and the Transbaikal Military District. An official military encyclopedia published after the Fall of the Soviet Union stated, said Harrison, that the Soviet Pacific Fleet, an air army, and an air defence corps were also operationally subordinated to the new formation; and that the high command "coordinated" with the armies of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Mongolia. The headquarters was set up at Ulan-Ude, near Lake Baikal. The RAND Corporation said in 1984 that the Soviet air and ground forces in Mongolia [subordinate to the Transbaikal Military District] and elements of the Mongolian Ground Forces and Mongolian Air Force were also at its disposal. In September 1984 three more High Commands were established: the Western (HQ Legnica), South-Western (HQ Kishinev), and Southern (HQ Baku)
United States: The term theater of operations was defined in the American field manuals as the land and sea areas to be invaded or defended, including areas necessary for administrative activities incident to the military operations (chart 12). In accordance with the experience of World War I, it was usually conceived of as a large land mass over which continuous operations would take place and was divided into two chief areas—the combat zone, or the area of active fighting, and the communications zone, or area required for administration of the theater. As the armies advanced, both these zones and the areas into which they were divided would shift forward to new geographic areas of control.
See also: Battlespace
China Burma India Theater
European Theater of Operations
European theatre of World War II
AfPak
Locus of control
Unified Combatant Command
Western Theater of the American Civil War
Formations of the Soviet Army
Theater commands of the People's Liberation Army
References:
Sources: Harrison, Richard W. (July 2022). The Soviet Army's High Commands in War and Peace, 1941–1992. Casemate Academic. ISBN 9781952715112.
Holm, Michael (2015). "High Commands (Theatre Commands)".
Odom, William E. (1998). The Collapse of the Soviet Military. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Warner, Edward; Bonan; Packman (April 1984). Key Personnel and Organisations of the Soviet Military High Command (PDF). RAND Notes. RAND Corporation. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2014-05-31. Retrieved 8 October 2022. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Thirty-Six Stratagems | Origin: The name of the collection comes from the Book of Qi's seventh biographical volume, Biography of Wang Jingze (王敬則傳). Wáng was a general who had served Southern Qi since the first Emperor Gao of the dynasty. When Emperor Ming came to power and executed many members of the court and royal family for fear that they would threaten his reign, Wang believed that he would be targeted next and rebelled. As Wang received news that Xiao Baojuan, son and crown prince of Emperor Ming, had escaped in haste after learning of the rebellion, he commented that "of the thirty-six stratagems of Lord Tán, retreat was his best, you father and son should run for sure." "Lord Tán" refers to general Tan Daoji of the Liu Song dynasty, who was forced to retreat after his failed attack on Northern Wei, and Wang mentioned his name in contempt as an example of cowardice.
The number thirty-six was used by Wang as a figure of speech in this context, and is meant to denote "numerous stratagems" instead of any specific number. Wang's choice of this term came from the I Ching, where six is the number of yin that shared many characteristics with the dark schemes involved in military strategy. As thirty-six is the square of six, it therefore acted as a metaphor for "numerous strategies". Since Wang did not refer to any thirty-six specific stratagems, the thirty-six proverbs and their connection to military strategies and tactics are likely to have been created after the fact, with only the collection's name being attributed to Wang.
The prevailing view is that contents of the Thirty-Six Stratagems originated in both written and oral history. Some stratagems reference occurrences in the time of Sun Bin, approximately 150 years after Sun Tzu's death. The original hand-copied paperback was believed to have been discovered in China's Shaanxi province, of an unknown date and author, and put into print by a local publisher in 1941. The Thirty-Six Stratagems came to the public's attention after a review of it was published in the Chinese Communist Party's Guangming Daily newspaper on September 16, 1961. It was subsequently reprinted and distributed with growing popularity.
The Thirty-Six Stratagems are divided into a preface, six chapters containing six stratagems each, and an incomplete afterword that was missing text. The first three chapters generally describe tactics for use in advantageous situations, while the last three chapters contain stratagems that are more suitable for disadvantageous situations. The original text of the Thirty-Six Stratagems has a laconic style that is common to Classical Chinese. Each proverb is accompanied by a short comment, no longer than a sentence or two, that explains how said proverb is applicable to military tactics. These 36 Chinese proverbs are related to 36 battle scenarios in Chinese history and folklore, predominantly of the Warring States period and the Three Kingdoms period.
Content: The Thirty-Six Stratagems consists of six chapters, with each chapter consisting of six stratagems.
Chapter 1: Winning Stratagems (勝戰計, Shèng zhàn jì):
Deceive the heavens to cross the sea (瞞天過海, Mán tiān guò hǎi): Mask one's real goals from those in authority who lack vision by not alerting them to one's movements or any part of one's plan.
Besiege Wèi to rescue Zhào (圍魏救趙, Wéi Wèi jiù Zhào): When the enemy is too strong to be attacked directly, attack something they cherish. The idea is to avoid a head-on battle with a strong enemy, and instead strike at their weakness elsewhere. This will force the strong enemy to retreat in order to support their weakness. Battling against a tired and dispirited enemy will give a much higher chance of success.
Kill with a borrowed knife (借刀殺人, Jiè dāo shā rén): Attack using the strength of another when in a situation where using one's own strength is not favourable. For example, trick an ally into attacking them or use the enemy's own strength against them. The idea is to cause damage to the enemy via a third party.
Wait at leisure while the enemy labors (以逸待勞, Yǐ yì dài láo): It is advantageous to choose the time and place for battle while the enemy does not. Encourage the enemy to expend their energy in futile quests while one conserves their strength. When the enemy is exhausted and confused, attack with energy and purpose.
Loot a burning house (趁火打劫, Chèn huǒ dǎ jié): When a country is beset by internal problems, such as disease, famine, corruption, and crime, it is poorly-equipped to deal with an outside threat. Keep gathering internal information about an enemy. If the enemy is in its weakest state, attack them without mercy and annihilate them to prevent future troubles.
Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west (聲東擊西, Shēng dōng jī xī): In any battle the element of surprise can provide an overwhelming advantage. Even when face-to-face with an enemy, surprise can still be employed by attacking where they least expect it. Create an expectation in the enemy's mind through the use of a feint. Manipulate the enemy to focus their resources somewhere before attacking elsewhere that is poorly defended. Tactically, this is known as an "open feint".
Chapter 2: Enemy Dealing Stratagems (敵戰計, Dí zhàn jì):
Create something from nothing (无中生有, Wú zhōng shēng yǒu): A plain lie. Make somebody believe there was something when there is in fact nothing or vice versa.
Openly repair the gallery roads, but sneak through the passage of Chencang (明修棧道，暗渡陳倉, Míng xiū zhàn dào, àn dù Chéncāng): Deceive the enemy with an obvious approach that will take a very long time, while ambushing them with another approach. It is an extension of the "Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west" tactic, but instead of merely spreading misinformation to draw the enemy's attention, physical decoys are used to further misdirect the enemy. The decoys must be easily seen by the enemy to draw their attention while acting as if they are meant to do what they are falsely doing to avoid suspicion.
Today, "sneaking through the passage of Chencang" also has the meaning of having an affair or doing something that is illegal.
Watch the fires burning across the river (隔岸觀火, Gé àn guān huǒ): Delay entering the field of battle until all other parties become exhausted by fighting amongst each other. Go in at full strength and finish them off.
Hide a knife behind a smile (笑裏藏刀, Xiào lǐ cáng dāo): Charm and ingratiate oneself with the enemy. When their trust is gained, move against them in secret.
Sacrifice the plum tree to preserve the peach tree (李代桃僵, Lǐ dài táo jiāng): There are circumstances where short-term objectives must be sacrificed in order to gain the long-term goal. This is the scapegoat strategy where someone suffers the consequences so that the rest do not.
Take the opportunity to pilfer a goat (順手牽羊, Shùn shǒu qiān yáng): While carrying out one's plans, be flexible enough to take advantage of any opportunity that presents itself, however small, and avail oneself of any profit, however slight.
Chapter 3: Offensive Stratagems (攻戰計, Gōng zhàn jì):
Stomp the grass to scare the snake (打草驚蛇, Dǎ cǎo jīng shé): Do something unaimed, but spectacular ("hitting the grass") to provoke a response from the enemy ("startle the snake") to have them give away their plans or position. Do something unusual, strange, and unexpected to arouse the enemy's suspicion and disrupt their thinking. It is more widely used as a warning: "[Do not] startle the snake by hitting the grass". An imprudent act will give one's position or intentions away to the enemy.
Borrow a corpse to resurrect the soul (借屍還魂, Jiè shī huán hún): Take an institution, a technology, a method, or even an ideology that has been forgotten or discarded and appropriate it for one's own purposes.
Lure the tiger down the mountain (调虎離山, Diào hǔ lí shān): Never directly attack an opponent whose advantage is derived from their position. Instead, lure them away from their position to separate them from their source of strength.
In order to capture, one must let loose (欲擒故縱, Yù qín gù zòng): Cornered prey will often mount a final desperate attack. |
mil_tactics_continued_pretraining.csv | Thirty-Six Stratagems | It is more widely used as a warning: "[Do not] startle the snake by hitting the grass". An imprudent act will give one's position or intentions away to the enemy.
Borrow a corpse to resurrect the soul (借屍還魂, Jiè shī huán hún): Take an institution, a technology, a method, or even an ideology that has been forgotten or discarded and appropriate it for one's own purposes.
Lure the tiger down the mountain (调虎離山, Diào hǔ lí shān): Never directly attack an opponent whose advantage is derived from their position. Instead, lure them away from their position to separate them from their source of strength.
In order to capture, one must let loose (欲擒故縱, Yù qín gù zòng): Cornered prey will often mount a final desperate attack. To prevent this, let the enemy believe they still have a chance for freedom. Their will to fight is hampered by their desire to escape. The enemy's morale will be depleted and they will surrender without a fight when the illusion of escape is revealed.
Tossing out a brick to lure a jade gem (拋磚引玉, Pāo zhuān yǐn yù): Bait someone by making them believe they gain something or to just make them react to it; "toss out a brick" to obtain something valuable from them in return ("get a jade gem").
Defeat the enemy by capturing their chief (擒賊擒王, Qín zéi qín wáng): If the enemy's army is strong but is allied to the commander only by money, superstition, or threats, target the leader. If the commander falls, the rest of the army will disperse or join one's side. If they are allied to the leader through loyalty, beware, as the army can continue to fight on after their death out of vengeance.
Chapter 4: Mixed Warfare Stratagems (混戰計, Hùnzhàn jì):
Remove the firewood from under the pot (釜底抽薪, Fǔ dǐ chōu xīn): Take out the leading argument or asset of someone; "steal someone's thunder". This is the essence of the indirect approach: instead of attacking enemy's fighting forces, direct attacks against their ability to wage war. Literally, take the fuel out of the fire.
Disturb the water and catch a fish (渾水摸魚／混水摸魚, Hùn shuǐ mō yú): Create confusion and exploit it to further one's own goals.
Slough off the cicada's golden shell (金蟬脱殼, Jīn chán tuō qiào): Mask oneself. Either leave one's distinctive traits behind and become inconspicuous or masquerade as something or someone else. This strategy is mainly used to escape from a stronger enemy.
Shut the door to catch the thief (關門捉賊, Guān mén zhuō zéi): To capture one's enemy, or more generally in fighting wars, to deliver the final blow to the enemy, plan prudently for success; do not rush into action. Before "moving in for the kill", first cut off the enemy's escape routes and any routes from external aid.
Befriend a distant state and strike a neighbouring one (遠交近攻, Yuǎn jiāo jìn gōng): Invading nations close to oneself carries a higher chance of success. The battlefields are close to one's domain and as such is easier for one's troops to receive supplies and defend the conquered land. Make allies with nations far away from oneself, as it is unwise to invade them.
Obtain safe passage to conquer the State of Guo (假途伐虢, Jiǎ tú fá Guó): Borrow the resources of an ally to attack a common enemy. Once the enemy is defeated, use those resources to turn on the ally that lent them in the first place.
Chapter 5: Combined Stratagems (並戰計, Bìng zhàn jì):
Replace the beams with rotten timbers (偷梁換柱, Tōu liáng huàn zhù): Disrupt the enemy's formations, interfere with their methods of operations, and change the rules that they are used to following. In this way the supporting pillar, the common link that makes a group of men an effective fighting force, is removed.
Point at the mulberry tree while cursing the locust tree (指桑罵槐, Zhǐ sāng mà huái): To discipline, control, or warn others whose status or position excludes them from direct confrontation; use analogy and innuendo. Without directly naming names, those accused cannot retaliate without revealing their complicity.
Feign madness but keep your balance (假痴不癲, Jiǎ chī bù diān): Pretend to be incompetent to create confusion about one's intentions and motivations. Lure the opponent into underestimating one's ability until they drop their guard.
Remove the ladder when the enemy has ascended to the roof (上屋抽梯, Shàng wū chōu tī): With baits and deceptions, lure the enemy into treacherous terrain and cut off their lines of communication and escape routes. To save themselves, they must fight both one's own forces and the elements of nature.
Decorate the tree with false blossoms (樹上開花, Shù shàng kāi huā): Tying silk blossoms on a dead tree gives the illusion that the tree is healthy. Using artifice and disguise, make something worthless appear valuable and vice versa.
Make the host and the guest exchange roles (反客為主, Fǎn kè wéi zhǔ): Usurp leadership in a situation where one is normally subordinate. Infiltrate one's target. Initially, pretend to be a guest to be accepted, but develop from inside and become the owner later.
Chapter 6: Defeat Stratagems (敗戰計, Bài zhàn jì):
The beauty trap (Honeypot) (美人計, Měi rén jì): Send the enemy beautiful women to cause discord within his camp. This strategy can work on three levels. First, the ruler becomes so enamoured with the beauty that he neglects his duties and allows his vigilance to wane. Second, the group of men will begin to have issues if the desired women court another man, thus creating conflict and aggressive behavior. Third, other females at court, motivated by jealousy and envy, begin to plot subversions that further exacerbate the situation.
The empty fort strategy (空城計, Kōng chéng jì): When the enemy has stronger forces and one expects to be overrun at any moment, act calmly and taunt the enemy, so that the enemy thinks they are walking into an ambush. This stratagem is only successful if in most cases one has a powerful hidden force and the stratagem is seldom used.
Let the enemy's own spy sow discord in the enemy camp (反間計, Fǎn jiàn jì): Undermine the enemy's ability to fight by secretly causing discord between them and their friends, allies, advisors, family, commanders, soldiers, and population. While they are preoccupied with settling internal disputes, their ability to attack or defend is compromised.
Inflict injury on oneself to win the enemy's trust (苦肉計, Kǔ ròu jì): Pretending to be injured has two advantages: first, the enemy is lulled into lowering their guard since they no longer consider one to be an immediate threat. Second, ingratiating oneself with the enemy by pretending the injury was caused by a mutual enemy conserves one's strength while one's enemies fight each other.
Chain stratagems (連環計, Lián huán jì): In important matters, one should use several stratagems applied simultaneously after another as in a chain of stratagems. Keep different plans operating in an overall scheme; if any one strategy fails, apply the next strategy.
If all else fails, retreat (走為上策, Zǒu wéi shàng cè): If it becomes obvious that one's current course of action will lead to defeat, retreat and regroup. When one's side is losing, three choices remain: surrender, compromise, or escape. Surrender is complete defeat, compromise is half defeat, but escape is not defeat. As long as one is not defeated, there is still a chance. This is the most famous of the stratagems and is immortalized in the form of a Chinese idiom: "Of the Thirty-Six Stratagems, fleeing is best" (三十六計，走為上計, Sānshíliù jì, zǒu wéi shàng jì). |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.