Difference between Infantry and Artillery?

Well everyone has pride in their own branch of service, and also because in most cases they don't have the slightest idea what the other branches do.

Somebody should come up with a list that also has AA-forces listed in it. I basically consider myself a "tubef****r" anyway.
 
godofthunder9010 said:
One of the most important functions of any single category of the military is to make fun of all of the others. Not sure why?
Click to expand...

To feel own unit the best and feel proud of to belong that. Purpose is to raise the spirit of the unit stronger.
 
EuroSpike said:
The difference between infantry and artillery is that the infantry's purpose is to be fighting unit holding areas and do the dirty work. Mortar's and Artillery's purpose is to support infantry's job with indirect fire spotted by artillery spotter squads wich are hanging around with infantry.
Click to expand...

you're talking about me, the Forward Observer and my FIST (Fire Support Team) 8)

Basically things go like this. If a weapon's primary roll is direct fire, meaning seeing the enemy before you shoot, then it is not artillery. There are times when tanks have been used as artillery. Sadam use to have his tanks dive up on angled berms to act as artillery against Iran. On the flip side, if a weapon's primary roll is to shoot at a target that cannot be seen, then it is artillery. As an FO, I tell the Artillery where to shoot and adjust the rounds on to the target

DEATH FROM ABOVE!!!!!

sorry for the outburst. artillery can shoot directly at targets. This is called direct lay. If an artillery unit is shooting direct lay, the of :cen: factor is definitely in effect.
 
artillery is a very powerful piecein warafare.. during world war two the soviets called their artiller: god of war...

in the battle for poland, the russians concentgrated 400-500 heavy artillery pieces every mile, giving the soviets a huge punch in which the artillery barage of sommes during WWI pales in comparison

but if ur dealing with teh big league here, the uss iowa and missouri and various other ships of the same class has gun turrets that seriously own in an marine operation... 16 inchers, enough to launch a fatass through
 
And then we have light artillery, heavy artillery, the big and really devistating naval artillery, light mortar fire, medium mortar fire, heavy mortar fire....

Infantry; well, there is light infantry, mechanized infantry and the Norwegian crazy head Storm infantry; read more on http://www.haaland.info/norway/storm/index.html

The list goes on and on and on...

:rambo:
 
Doody said:
EuroSpike said:
The difference between infantry and artillery is that the infantry's purpose is to be fighting unit holding areas and do the dirty work. Mortar's and Artillery's purpose is to support infantry's job with indirect fire spotted by artillery spotter squads wich are hanging around with infantry.
Click to expand...

you're talking about me, the Forward Observer and my FIST (Fire Support Team) 8)

Basically things go like this. If a weapon's primary roll is direct fire, meaning seeing the enemy before you shoot, then it is not artillery. There are times when tanks have been used as artillery. Sadam use to have his tanks dive up on angled berms to act as artillery against Iran. On the flip side, if a weapon's primary roll is to shoot at a target that cannot be seen, then it is artillery. As an FO, I tell the Artillery where to shoot and adjust the rounds on to the target

DEATH FROM ABOVE!!!!!

sorry for the outburst. artillery can shoot directly at targets. This is called direct lay. If an artillery unit is shooting direct lay, the of :cen: factor is definitely in effect.
Click to expand...

Forward observer was the right term in "London language" that i had forgotten! If artillery is in a situation where to shoot direct lay, someone has screwed up very badly :( If wasn't purposed to get artillery to front to support infantry with direct lay fire.
 
No Artillery is best used as an indirect fire weapon and the is how they are deployed. If they have to direct fire then something is very wrong.
 
Actually direct fire artillery isn't that alien of a concept.
The Germans liked to use field guns a lot and I think that idea went over to the Russians as well.
However, the British/French doctrine of field artillery was the use of howitzers. Of the two methods, the indirect, howitzer based artillery organization was more practical later on as technology evolved.

03USMC said:
No Artillery is best used as an indirect fire weapon and the is how they are deployed. If they have to direct fire then something is very wrong.
Click to expand...
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Actually direct fire artillery isn't that alien of a concept.
The Germans liked to use field guns a lot and I think that idea went over to the Russians as well.
However, the British/French doctrine of field artillery was the use of howitzers. Of the two methods, the indirect, howitzer based artillery organization was more practical later on as technology evolved.

03USMC said:
No Artillery is best used as an indirect fire weapon and the is how they are deployed. If they have to direct fire then something is very wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Germans used some in WW2 and i think russians may still use like militias in central Africa. A field gun in direct lay fire use is practically completely immobile, heavy, weak to any enemy fire and it has too high profile what makes it a good target for enemy fire and spotting. Think about why aren't old AT guns still in use?

155mm is a big gun but has low penetration when HE used but can give a good punch for a tank and it's crew inside. Anyway, 155mm howitzer vs. MBT, quess wich one is going to win? Artillery is the most effective used in it's desingned role as a support unit giving indirect fire for the fighting units.
 
If a field artillery unit has direct visual of the enemy, then they have endangered themselves to the possibility of the enemy firing on them and destroying them. What Army wants to put its heavy artillery at risk? Lighter artillery is another matter entirely.
 
But it depends on terrian. Deserts, plains where you can see horizon to horizon with very small or rolling hills it's possible to use Battery Adjustment without risking the unit. Dosen't happen often though.
 
03USMC said:
But it depends on terrian. Deserts, plains where you can see horizon to horizon with very small or rolling hills it's possible to use Battery Adjustment without risking the unit. Dosen't happen often though.
Click to expand...

True that depends on terrain and works bestly in open terrain against an enemy without heavy weapons. Can be easily used in any mudhut country where open terrain and visibility many kilometers to any direction. Try same against an army equipped with airforce, artillery, tanks, other heavy equipments and you will surprise.
 
actually, the chinese 155mm GUn-HOWtizer is both direct fire and indirect, its very capable of kiling a tank if directed and aimed wiht a laser range finder

btw, the chinese has a couple thousand of these toys planned for thenext 5 years[/img]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top