Comments on: Sergeant Milton Humphreys' Concept of Indirect Fire http://www.historynet.com/sergeant-milton-humphreys-concept-of-indirect-fire.htm?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=sergeant-milton-humphreys-concept-of-indirect-fire From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:36:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Nigel evans http://www.historynet.com/sergeant-milton-humphreys-concept-of-indirect-fire.htm#comment-15135 Nigel evans Sun, 26 Oct 2008 07:46:54 +0000 #comment-15135 Sorry to have to give you the bad news but the claim of 'inventing indirect fire' is nonsense, although Humphreys may have been the first to use the term, which is not the same thing at all. Before explaining a bit more I'd also note that the statement "Once the shell expended its momentum, it would drop to earth" is utter balderdash, it's scientific and mathamatical nonsense. A projectile follows an elliptic trajectory, it has forward momentum until it hits the ground. Furthermore the elevation angle cannot be deduced by trigonometry, not least because the relationship between range and elevation angle is not linear. As the elevation angle increases the effect of a change in elevation angle (eg of 1 degree) becomes an ever smaller distance on the ground at the target. Hence the elliptic trajectory. A little bit of research would reveal that Gunners had simple tables that related elevation angle to range for a given amount of powder for a very long time. Various authorites have referred to engaging targets out of sight of the guns going back several centuries. One of the reasons for the invention of howitzers in the 17th century or thereabouts was to deliver plunging fire on targets behind cover. One example is the Russian use of indirect fire. Contemporary maps of the battle of Paltsig in Poland in 1759 show the Russian guns firing over trees. Sorry to have to give you the bad news but the claim
of 'inventing indirect fire' is nonsense, although Humphreys may
have been the first to use the term, which is not the same thing at
all.

Before explaining a bit more I'd also note that the statement "Once
the shell expended its momentum, it would drop to earth" is utter
balderdash, it's scientific and mathamatical nonsense. A
projectile follows an elliptic trajectory, it has forward momentum
until it hits the ground. Furthermore the elevation angle cannot
be deduced by trigonometry, not least because the relationship
between range and elevation angle is not linear. As the elevation
angle increases the effect of a change in elevation angle (eg of 1
degree) becomes an ever smaller distance on the ground at the
target. Hence the elliptic trajectory.

A little bit of research would reveal that Gunners had simple
tables that related elevation angle to range for a given amount of
powder for a very long time. Various authorites have referred to
engaging targets out of sight of the guns going back several
centuries. One of the reasons for the invention of howitzers in the
17th century or thereabouts was to deliver plunging fire on
targets behind cover.

One example is the Russian use of indirect fire. Contemporary
maps of the battle of Paltsig in Poland in 1759 show the Russian
guns firing over trees.

]]>