TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

Footnote anchors are denoted by [number], and the footnotes have been placed at the end of the book.

Basic fractions are displayed as ½ ⅓ ¼ etc; other fractions are shown in the form a/b, for example ¹/₂₅.

All changes noted in the [ERRATA] on page vii have been applied to the etext. Each change is indicated by a dashed blue underline.

The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

Some minor changes to the text are noted at the [end of the book.] These are indicated by a dotted gray underline.

MACHINE-GUN TACTICS

BY

CAPTAIN R. V. K. APPLIN, D.S.O.

14th (King’s) Hussars

LONDON

HUGH REES, LTD., 119 PALL MALL, S.W.

1910

PRINTED BY
HAZELL, WATSON AND VINEY, LD.,
LONDON AND AYLESBURY.

PREFACE

This book, which was begun five years ago, is now published because I feel that, with all its faults, it may bring into greater prominence the latent possibilities of the machine gun, and the vital necessity for the most complete organisation and tactical training of the detachments.

I desire to express my great indebtedness to Captain C. O. Place, D.S.O., Royal Engineers, who undertook the work of editing and preparing the book for the press at a moment’s notice on my sailing for India.

R. V. K. Applin.

R.I.M.S. “Northbrook,”
December 1st, 1909.

CONTENTS

LIST OF PLATES AND DIAGRAMS

ERRATA

MACHINE-GUN TACTICS

CHAPTER I
DESCRIPTION AND ORGANISATION

The modern machine gun is essentially an automatic weapon of small-arm calibre, capable of firing from 100 to 600 shots a minute from a light mounting of extreme mobility, and should fulfil the following qualifications:

1. It should be able to deliver about 400 shots a minute without loss of accuracy, even with prolonged “continuous” firing.

2. It should be capable of accompanying cavalry and infantry wherever these arms can go; it should occupy the smallest space, and be able to come into action quickly at rifle range.

3. It should have a firm mounting, upon which the gun is steady, and from which it can be aimed rapidly and fired while kneeling, sitting, or lying.

4. The gun and its mounting must present a small target, and be light enough for each, and if possible, both, to be carried by one man for a considerable distance, and should admit of being dragged by a man crawling or crouching for short distances.

5. It should be in constant readiness for action, and able when limbered up to open fire in less than thirty seconds.

6. It should be simple, strong, and durable. Mobility and constant readiness for action are indispensable with cavalry, while lightness and smallness of target are essential factors.

There are eight main types of machine guns at present in use in the armies of the world, viz.:

The principal differences between these guns are: (a) The automatic mechanism. (b) Method of loading.

(a) may be divided into two classes: 1. Recoil action—the Maxim, Perino, and the Madsen. 2. Gas-pressure action—the Schwarzlose, Hotchkiss, Skoda, and Colt.

(b) consists of three classes: 1. Belt loaders—the Maxim, Schwarzlose, and Colt. 2. Metal clip loaders—Hotchkiss, Madsen, Perino, and Puteaux. 3. Hopper loaders—the Skoda.

Several of the above countries—notably Russia, Japan, France, and Austria—have more than one pattern of gun in their service, and it is difficult to say which they intend finally to adopt; but Russia, since the war, has ordered several thousand Madsen guns, and Japan is said to be trying this gun, one of which during the war fired 25,000 shots in a single day.

The Rexar gun has been purposely omitted; it only weighs 17½ lb., but is fired from the shoulder, and is therefore more of the nature of an automatic rifle than a machine gun. It would take too long to deal with each of these weapons separately, therefore the Maxim has been selected as the type with which to discuss the question of tactics.

In order thoroughly to understand the methods that should govern the tactical employment of machine guns, and their place in the battlefield, it is first necessary clearly to realise their nature and potentialities, and for this purpose we will examine their principal characteristics. Guns of this class are capable of firing service small-arm ammunition at the rate of 800 shots in one minute, but this very high rate of fire is obviously undesirable for several reasons—the principal, from a military point of view, being that, however skilfully the gun is handled, a great waste of ammunition must ensue, and hundreds of shots be wasted in space, however accurate the fire. These guns are, therefore, regulated to fire at a maximum rate of from 400 to 500 rounds a minute, or seven to eight shots a second, but even this is greater than is necessary to obtain the maximum fire effect; at ordinary targets 100 to 250 rounds a minute, according to the nature of the target, has been found to give the best results in practice. The “rate of fire” of a gun must not be confused with the number of rounds that can be fired from it effectively in one minute; the necessity for frequent pauses to observe the effect, to correct the elevation and direction of the fire, prevent a greater number than from 150 to 250 shots being fired effectively in one minute from a gun whose rate of fire is 450 shots a minute. Colonel Mayne, in his book The Infantry Weapon and its Use in War, says: “The machine gun now in use can fire about 600 rounds a minute, or ten a second. This is a far greater rapidity of fire than is really necessary, for it means that a man or horse is struck several times before falling. It is a good thing to be able to fire 600 rounds a minute on occasions (such as for range finding), but a far slower rate of fire (say 100 rounds or even less a minute) is ample for all ordinary tactical purposes against living beings and animals, whilst causing an enormous saving of ammunition.”

The extreme range of this type of gun is for all practical purposes the same as the infantry rifle—about 3,500 yards—though it is more effective at the longer ranges than an equal volume of rifle fire, owing to the ease with which the firer can elevate and aim the gun on its mountings and the stability of this mounting, which causes it to have a beaten zone of only half the depth and nearly half the width of that of infantry firing the same number of rounds. This has been proved again by actual experiment at the schools of musketry in England, India, and South Africa, while very elaborate experiments and trials carried out in Germany with the Maxim gun on the carriage adopted for that service proved that the beaten zone was only one-sixth of that obtained by infantry, probably because of the greater stability of their mounting.

Diagram I
TO SHOW THE ZONE BEATEN BY 50 PER CENT. OF BULLETS

In order that “fire” may be “effective,” it is necessary to bring the enemy within the zone beaten by 75 per cent. of shots, and it has been found by experiment that 25 per cent. of shots fall immediately in front and behind the target, then 12½ per cent., 7½ per cent., and, finally, 5 per cent. scattered far in front and behind.

Diagram II
TO SHOW THE DISPERSION OF BULLETS

Infantry usually fire at the rate of three rounds a minute “slow,” and fifteen rounds a minute “rapid”; “slow” fire is the ordinary rate, and “rapid” fire can only be effectually maintained for about four minutes; but this is when the firer is fresh, and has not been subjected to several hours’ marching and fighting as would be the case in battle, and it is doubtful if “rapid” fire can be kept up on service for more than one-and-a-half to two minutes without becoming wild and consequently ineffective. On the other hand, “rapid” fire is less tiring to the machine gunner than “deliberate” fire; the gun is held for him by the mounting, it loads and fires itself, while elevation and direction are maintained without the least exertion on his part by the elevating and traversing gears.

In comparing the volume of fire of the machine gun with that of a body of infantry, it is obvious that “rapid” cannot be taken as the normal rate of infantry fire, as it can only be used for the shortest periods, and even then it reduces the users to a state of inefficiency as regards accuracy in two or three minutes. On the other hand, “rapid” fire can only be used by the machine gunner on special occasions, for tactical reasons which will be explained later, so that it will be necessary to compare “slow” infantry fire with “deliberate” fire from the machine gun, in order to arrive at the mean fire volume of each. Seventy shots a minute can easily be fired “deliberately” from a machine gun, and this could be increased to 120 by highly trained gunners, but, taking the lower figure, deliberate fire equals in volume the fire of twenty-four men using rifles. But it must be always remembered that the object of the fire fight is to bring a concentrated and overwhelming fire to bear at the right moment on certain positions of the enemy, and when the moment arrives machine guns can and will use the most rapid rate of fire possible, which will be from 250 to 300 rounds a minute or equal to that of 50 or 100 riflemen. Mere volume of fire, however, is useless without control, accuracy, and concentration, and it is here that the machine gun is so vastly superior to the rifle; for amongst 50 men using their rifles there can only be a small percentage of good shots, while even among the good shots unforeseen factors, such as fatigue, bad fire positions, excitement, wrong sighting, failure to see the target, etc., cause a large percentage of the shots to go astray, and make it very difficult to concentrate the fire on any particular position of the enemy.

An object-lesson to illustrate this superiority of the machine gun has been carried out during each course at the South African school of musketry under circumstances most favourable to the rifles. The record of one such test, carried out on September 21st, 1904, between a Maxim gun mounted on Mark III. tripod and 42 rifles (Lee Enfield), was published. The machine gun was worked by two sergeant-instructors, while the 42 rifles were fired by students who were all, at least, 1st Class shots before joining the school, and who for five weeks had been receiving daily instruction in musketry, and had just completed a course of firing both on the ranges (Table B) and in field-firing, and had gone through a course of judging distance. The range was unknown—the number of rounds unlimited, and the rate of fire “rapid.” The time was limited to one minute, and the firers were allowed to charge their magazines before starting. The targets were figures representing infantry in line extended to two paces. The following was the result:

The small number of rounds fired by the Maxim was due to the necessity of picking up the range by firing small groups of five or ten shots and observing the strike of the bullets. What is most interesting is that although the rifles fired nearly twice as many shots as the machine gun, the latter made actually more hits, while the percentage of loss inflicted was 10 per cent. greater. The actual range was 1,000 yards. A similar experiment was carried out during the annual training for 1908 in the U.S.A. between 42 “sharpshooters” and a Maxim at the regulation “L” target. The ranges were 600, 800, 1,000 yards; the sharpshooters fired an average of 750 rounds at the three distances and made an average of 429 hits, which gave a collective figure of merit of 59·09. The machine gun also fired 750 rounds, made 601 hits, giving a collective figure of merit of 79·54, being 22·45 in favour of the machine gun. The troops were armed with new rifles, and fired the new “S” bullet, while the machine gun used the old pattern ammunition and a barrel that had fired at least 7,000 shots. The gun squad had no previous practice at this target, and the gun was fired by different men at the several ranges. The collective fire of the troop was “slow aimed,” while the fire of the machine gun was “rapid continuous” for the number of rounds at each range. The machine gun took 30 seconds to fire 250 shots at each range, or a quarter that of the troop.[1]

The two experiments are particularly interesting, as showing how closely the results agree, although the conditions are dissimilar in one respect: viz. that in the first case the number of rounds was unlimited and the result had to be obtained within one minute; while in the second case time was unlimited, but the number of rounds fired by each was the same. The result of the two experiments show that both in accuracy and rapidity a machine gun is much superior to 42 picked shots, whether firing the same number of rounds at known ranges or firing an unlimited number of shots in a given time at an unknown range. We shall not be wrong, then, if we say that a machine gun is at least equal to 50 rifles in fire value,[2] but there are other factors to be considered as well as fire effect in determining its tactical value, and it is in these other factors that machine guns are so far superior to riflemen as to make a reliable estimate of their relative value almost impossible; these factors are: (1) Mobility; (2) Visibility; (3) Vulnerability.

Mobility.—The mobility of the infantry soldier is limited to the rate at which he can march, which on the battlefield is about 100 yards a minute or less than three-and-a-half miles an hour. Doubling may be left out of the question, as it quickly reduces fire efficiency to a minimum. An experiment made in the Austrian Army showed that the percentage of hits which was 76·5 per cent. after an advance in quick time, fell to 51 per cent. after doubling.[3] The mobility of the machine gun will depend almost entirely on the way it is carried, and must not be judged by any particular carriage which may happen to be in use for the time being in our own service. A short description of these mountings and their method of transport will be found in Chapter IX., but none of them are entirely satisfactory.

The infantry carriages are heavy, clumsy, and conspicuous, and are the least mobile of all; they can hardly be moved out of a walk without risk, and Marks III. and IV. cannot come into action without first unharnessing the mule or horse, and they then have to be dragged into position by the whole detachment—thus presenting a most conspicuous and vulnerable target at the moment when least desired and when concealment and invisibility are essential to tactical success.[4] In the German Official Account of the late Boer War, issued by the General Staff, is the following criticism of this carriage:

“Both sides have machine guns, but the rather clumsy mountings of those used by the British offered too high a target, and so prevented their being advanced from position to position during the attack.”

The tripod mounting, which is light and inconspicuous, is carried with the gun on a limbered wagon; but the advantages of its lightness and portability are almost neutralised by being carried on a wagon, thus reducing its mobility by confining it to ground suitable for wheeled vehicles.

If used on a pack-saddle the difficulty of managing a led animal on foot in the stress of battle may become insuperable, and moving the gun in and out of action is entirely dependent on the docility of the pack-animal. The gun weighs anything from 40 to 60 lb., while the mountings need not weigh more than 34 lb. The combined weight of a gun and mounting should never exceed 120 lb. and can be as little as 74 lb.

In whatever way it is decided to carry the gun, it is a sine quâ non that it must be at least as mobile as horse artillery. There is no reason why it should not be as mobile as cavalry, and the choice remains between a pack-horse with a mounted detachment or a galloping carriage; and the former is in every way preferable, principally because it can carry the gun and ammunition across any country, and can come into action in less than 30 seconds on an adjustable tripod, which can be carried by hand into any position and presents a very small, inconspicuous target.

The majority of foreign countries have adopted pack transport for their machine guns. It is desirable with infantry and absolutely essential with cavalry. A suitable saddle is, of course, indispensable, and strong spiral springs to the hooks which hold the gun and tripod on either side will entirely prevent horses from straining their backs when galloping across country or jumping obstacles with the guns. These hooks must be leather-covered and made to fit the gun exactly, and, in order to do away with the present cumbersome straps and buckles, they should have a hinged attachment to close over the gun and lock automatically in such a way as to admit of its being opened by a single movement when it is required to dismount the gun. The Swiss and the Americans have permanently adopted pack transport for the machine guns with their cavalry, which are able to accompany them over any country without detriment to either horses or guns; and in the American army the average time for a well-trained cavalry machine-gun detachment to go into action front, from mounted formation, unpack, and set up the guns, load, aim, and open fire, is 25 seconds; while at the departmental meeting for 1908 the machine guns of the 10th Cavalry, from the halt in line, moved forward in section column at a gallop for 200 yards and went into action and fired a blank shot in 31 seconds.[5]

This brings us to the second factor—Visibility. It is absolutely necessary for the successful tactical employment of machine guns that they should be as inconspicuous as possible when in action; the gun itself is a very small object when close to the ground, and its visibility will depend almost entirely on the nature of mounting and its adaptability for use behind cover of varying heights. All our infantry carriages are so conspicuous as to be quite unconcealable except in defence, the wheels being 4 ft. 8 in. in diameter and the gun axis 3 ft. 6 in. above the ground. The Mark IV. tripod is the handiest and least conspicuous of the mountings at present in use in our service, and although it weighs 48 lb. it can be carried into almost any position and easily concealed. It can be adjusted to fire at any desired height between 14½ and 30 in. above the ground level, and consequently can be used from behind any suitable cover.

Vulnerability.—The question of vulnerability would appear at first to depend entirely on visibility; or, in other words, on the target presented to the enemy’s fire, but this is only true to a certain extent. To obtain the minimum vulnerability it is of course necessary to have the gun as low and inconspicuous as possible, because the less it can be seen and the better cover it can obtain, the more difficult it will be to locate and hit. But the true vulnerability of the gun in comparison with infantry lies in the amount of front they occupy respectively; or in other words, the breadth of the target exposed to the enemy and the percentage of loss they can each sustain without their fire effect being reduced. Infantry will never again fight in two ranks in civilised warfare, and the closest formation possible for a firing line is one pace per man; 50 men will therefore occupy a front of, roughly, 50 yards; in other words, the target presented to the enemy is 50 yards in breadth, and, provided the elevation is correct, shots striking anywhere within this 50 yards will be effective. The machine gun, however, only occupies a front of from 4 ft. to 5 ft. 2 in., or ¹/₂₅th the front offered by infantry having equal fire effect. It is on this point that the wonderful tactical possibilities of the machine gun rests: the maximum of rifle fire from the minimum of front. It is obvious that 10 per cent. of casualties in the infantry firing line reduce the fire effect by just that amount, while from 30 to 40 per cent. will probably silence its fire altogether or render it ineffective. The machine gun, on the other hand, is unaffected by even 50 per cent. of loss, while it can suffer 80 per cent. of loss without diminishing its fire effect, though such a loss would of course cause it to lose its mobility and seriously affect the morale of the gunners. A machine-gun detachment consists of from 16 to 24 men, but only two of them actually work the gun, and one man alone can fire the gun once it is in action, the second man merely assisting him with the ammunition, etc., but he is not absolutely necessary to the firing of the gun. Thus we see that the killing of the gunner only causes a momentary cessation of fire until another man takes his place, when the fire is resumed without loss of intensity, accuracy, or concentration.

We are now in a position to form an accurate estimate of the potentialities of the machine gun and its true tactical value as compared with infantry, and we find:

Before discussing their place in battle and tactical use it will be necessary to say a few words on the best methods of grouping the guns and organising their detachments and the training of the personnel in peace for the duties they will have to perform in war. In our service two machine guns are issued to each regiment of cavalry and battalion of infantry, and the detachment consists of:

This section of two guns is therefore the smallest tactical unit, and the officer in command is solely responsible for the training and efficiency of his section. It is therefore absolutely essential that the machine-gun section commander should be a subaltern of not less than three years’ service, specially selected for his keenness, efficiency, and self-reliance, who has passed the examination “C” for promotion, and who holds the special machine-gun certificate from a School of Musketry. A “destroyer” in the Royal Navy is commanded by a very junior officer, but he is most carefully selected for similar qualities to those mentioned, and is in addition required to possess the necessary professional qualifications—consequently it is a command much sought after, and competition enables the authorities to appoint the pick of the service and thus obtain the maximum efficiency where efficiency is the essence of successful employment in war. The best and nothing but the best is necessary to the successful employment of machine guns, and the importance of obtaining the very best officers as section commanders is so great that there is reason to doubt the utility of having machine guns at all if they are not commanded and handled by those who are in every way expert in their use.

In order to enable machine-gun sections to be trained in tactics and to co-operate with larger units in war, it is essential that they should be trained under a senior officer during peace. The late Colonel Henderson said of the Volunteers in Mexico: “The ideal of the battle is a combined effort directed by a well-trained leader: as individuals they fought well; as organised bodies capable of manœuvring under fire and of combined effort, they proved to be comparatively worthless.” This is precisely the case of regimental machine guns. It is easy enough to use a section or even a single gun apart from its battery should occasion require, but it is impossible to improvise a battery from a number of separate sections. It is therefore essential before attempting the tactical training of machine guns, much less their tactical use, to organise them in batteries during peace. For this purpose it is suggested that when a battalion is brigaded with others, either for administration or training, the six or eight guns should be formed into one or two batteries, under a selected field officer, who would be solely responsible for their peace training and tactical efficiency, and who would command them on manœuvres and on service. There would be little or no innovation in this, as our regimental signallers are at present trained and commanded on similar lines under the divisional signalling officer. A cavalry brigade under the present organisation (1909) would have one battery of six guns, and an infantry brigade two batteries of four guns each. The batteries of a Division would be commanded by the divisional machine-gun commander. While such organisation would in no way prevent the regimental machine-gun section being used with its own unit as at present, it would ensure a very high standard of tactical training, and enable the Divisional General to have a splendid reserve in his own hands for use at the critical moment of the fight as mobile as cavalry, in fire action more powerful than infantry, occupying the smallest possible front, yet capable of delivering a storm of some 10,000 bullets a minute with the maximum of accuracy and concentration.

The tactics in this book are based on the understanding that the machine guns are trained on this system, and that they are mounted on light, adjustable tripods and carried on trained pack-horses with the entire detachment mounted.

The failure of machine guns is due to two principal causes: (1) Insufficient training in working the guns. (2) Improper tactical employment.

It will be obvious that unless the gun can be depended upon to open fire with certainty and accuracy, and maintain it continuously without jamming or mechanical failure, it is useless to consider its tactical employment. The mechanism of the Maxim is somewhat complicated and delicate, and depends for its proper working upon the exact adjustment of each part; but no more so than any other piece of modern machinery—it is far less complicated and certainly far less delicate than the modern motor-car. Indeed, the comparison is analogous in several respects, as both require highly trained operators to ensure their smooth and continuous working, and each individual machine, whether gun or motor, has its own peculiarities and requires special study to obtain the best results. Both are capable of hard and constant employment for long periods, without breakdown or failure, in the hands of an expert.

No one would think for one moment of engaging a chauffeur for a high-class motor-car who had less than six months’ training and experience, and who was not capable of stripping and adjusting the motors and effecting minor repairs. It would be difficult to find a machine-gun detachment with a single man who possessed even these minimum qualifications. Apart from the mechanical knowledge it must be remembered that the man who fires the gun, known as No. I. in our service, has in his own hands the fire from 50 rifles, and on his own judgment and skill as a shot will entirely depend the effectiveness or otherwise of this fire; it stands to reason therefore that he should be chosen primarily for his good shooting, but, in addition to his skill in aiming, he must be a good judge of distance and possess considerable intelligence, initiative, and self-reliance; for although he will usually receive orders as to target, range, rate of fire, and the moment for opening or ceasing fire, it will often happen that he has to use his own judgment in these very important matters.

As the gun is generally required to move and come into action independently of other troops, it must find its own scouts, who not only have to safeguard it from surprise when moving, but must be trained to select good positions whence it can come into action. For this reason the men of the detachment must be trained scouts.

To summarise:

(1) Only marksmen should be chosen.

(2) Trained scouts should be given the preference.

(3) The whole detachment must be trained as range-finders and scouts.

(4) The whole detachment must be proficient in judging distance.

(5) Only strong men should be selected.

The strength of a machine-gun detachment is given in Chapter IX. With the tripod mountings and pack transport the best working strength for a machine-gun section will be found to be the following:—

1 officer, 1 sergeant, 2 corporals, and 20 privates—that is, 1 N.C.O. and 10 men to each gun. It is almost superfluous to say that the whole detachment must be trained to work and fire the gun, and should have a very thorough knowledge of its parts and mechanism, and be experts at remedying failures and effecting minor repairs. Until the whole detachment are so trained and can detect the cause of any failure instantly and remedy the same in the minimum time required, it is useless to attempt tactical training in the field. The preliminary training will take from three to six months, according to the ability of the instructor and the time available daily for work.

It will be found that certain men of the detachment are far more skilful in laying and firing the gun than others, and it is undoubtedly sound to specially train these men as gun-layers and to permanently allot to the two best layers the duties of Nos. 1 and 2 (i.e. the firer and his assistant). This should be the post of honour and coveted accordingly, and the two best gun-layers should be awarded a distinguishing badge. As no badge is authorised by our regulations, a lance stripe might be given to the best No. 1 of each gun.

In training the men of the section in the preliminary details of working the guns, the following points may be found of use. First frame a course of instruction for each day which will give systematic and progressive individual instruction in the following points: mechanism, name and use of every part, the working of the mechanism, care of gun, stripping and fitting, loading and firing; spare-part box, the name of each of its contents and recognition of every part when out of the box; failures, their recognition and remedy; gun-laying and firing, co-operation between layer, loader, and observer. This course should last at least three months, provided not less than two hours a day are available. Drills may be combined with preliminary instruction at the end of the first month, and must aim at extreme quickness in dismounting the gun and opening aimed fire and remounting the gun again. The chief points in the preliminary training are that all the detachment are equally instructed. Training on the 20-yard range in barracks should take place during the third month, and special targets should be used to teach laying the gun, slow use of elevating gear and combined sights, traversing fire, fire control, rapid change of target, indirect fire. During this short-range practice the failures should be practically demonstrated, and firing on the range should never take place without making a few artificial failures to test the efficiency of the detachment. These failures should be introduced by the officer himself without the knowledge of the detachment, and should be so arranged as to occur naturally while firing. They should be timed by him in each case, and the record time for the remedy of each failure posted up in the barrack-room with the man’s name. Artificial failures can easily be made by filing round the base of a cartridge so that it is torn off when fired; by loosening a bullet in a cartridge, by slightly flattening a cartridge so as to cause it to jam in the chamber, by wedging a cartridge in the belt, by introducing a blank cartridge, and by repacking the asbestos with dry packing. It will be found that by making two or three such jams every time the gun is taken out to fire the detachment will soon become expert in recognising and remedying failures.

The men should be taught that failures may be divided into two classes, viz. avoidable and unavoidable. The occurrence of an avoidable failure should be looked upon as a disgrace to the firer. The unavoidable failures so seldom occur that they are negligible.

The avoidable failures are those due to (1) Fuzee spring adjustment. (2) Want of oil. (3) Dirt. (4) Want of water. (5) Bad packing. (6) Damaged ammunition. (7) Faults in feed due to badly filled, new, or damaged belts. Each machine gun will be found to work best with a certain weight of fuzee spring which can only be found by trial, and this weight will change from time to time as the gun wears. The machine gunner cannot be considered fit for further training until he has become so familiar with his gun that he can instantly tell by the sound if it is working at its best; just as a chauffeur knows at once if his engines are running perfectly, and can instantly detect the slightest defect and make the necessary adjustment of the spark, petrol, or oil to ensure smooth running. The unavoidable failures are so few and rare that they will seldom be met with, and can be quickly remedied, except the breaking of an important part. Failures due to defective ammunition are extremely rare provided ordinary precautions are taken to avoid placing damaged cartridges in the belt. A breakage in any part of the lock can be remedied in a few seconds by substituting the spare lock which should always be on the gun in action. The breaking of any other part of the gun will be an accident of rare occurrence and, provided the gun is properly inspected before use, may be more properly classified under accidents than failures. A modern machine gun in the hands of experts should never jam, while failure of automatic fire will be rare and momentary. Until this standard has been reached a machine-gun detachment cannot be considered fit to begin tactical training. The Japanese in the late war were obliged to improvise the detachments for their hastily acquired machine guns; and Captain Matsuda, who commanded the machine guns with Prince Kanin’s Cavalry Brigade, says: “Whereas at the battle of Peu-si-lau on October 12th we had some trouble after firing 1,800 rounds, on March 3rd the guns of one section after firing 11,000 rounds continued to work perfectly. The gunners were absolutely familiar with their weapons.” Lieut.-General Sir C. J. Burnett, K.C.B., remarked: “Like a good chauffeur, the Japanese machine gunner knows all the peculiarities of the weapon he fires and can tell almost by instinct when anything is going wrong.” It is almost superfluous to say that the men of the machine-gun detachment must never be changed or taken for any other work. Nothing has been said of the necessity for training the detachment in the all-important duties of scouting, range-taking, and horsemastership during this period, but of course they are vital to ultimate success and must not be neglected.

Range practices will follow, and the peculiarities of the gun and its fire effect must be carefully taught during this period. The use of traversing and sweeping fire, combined sights, and observation of fire and the use of deliberate fire in imitation of rifle fire should be perfected during range practice, so that they may be carried out under service conditions during the field practices which follow.

The tactical training should commence as soon as the field practices have been completed. The course for this should be carefully mapped out beforehand and should be based upon the principles given in Chapter II. and in the chapter dealing with the arm to which the section belongs, and should culminate in divisional manœuvres. This course might follow the following headings:

(1) Drill over rough country.

(2) Selecting a position.

(3) Selecting alternate positions.

(4) Taking up a position.

(5) Screening guns.

(6) Making artificial cover.

(7) Mutual support (movement and fire).

(8) Indirect fire.

(9) A battery working on a wide front in mutual support.

No drill for a battery has been authorised yet (1909), but the simple formations of a troop as laid down in Cavalry Training will be found admirably suited for a battery of machine guns on pack-horses with mounted detachment.

The writer is fully aware of the condition under which machine guns are officered and manned at present, and that a great error has been made in estimating the time required to train the detachments. The Germans, who have studied the question of machine guns with a thoroughness far greater than that of any other nation, have made them a separate arm of their service, under trained and permanent gunners, and they evidently consider that only specialists can attain the necessary efficiency.

However this may be, it is certain that the officer, whether commanding a section or the batteries of a Division, must be a specialist and a highly trained one.

An officer commanding a company of Russian machine guns in the Russo-Japanese War, writing his experiences to the Nouskin Invalid, says:

“I have spent three years in studying machine guns, and consider myself proficient in their use, but I have always been convinced that the requisite skill and knowledge cannot be acquired in a shorter time.”

The commanding officer who at present looks upon his machine guns in much the same light as he regards any other portion of his first-line transport—a necessary encumbrance taking away an officer and several men from their proper duties, and a source of anxiety when the regiment goes into action—would regard them with very different feelings if assured of their efficiency and relieved of the responsibility for their tactics and safety. That this is possible without altering the present organisation has been shown; that it is absolutely essential for their efficient use in war it is hoped to demonstrate in the chapters that follow.

CHAPTER II
GENERAL PRINCIPLES

“Each arm has its special characteristics and functions, and is dependent on the assistance of others; the full power of an army can be exerted only when all its parts act in close combination, and this is not possible unless the members of each arm understand the characteristics of the other arms.”

The above paragraph from Field Service Regulations, Part I., 1909, aptly illustrates a principle which should be impressed upon every serious machine-gun student, for the principles of machine-gun tactics are based upon those of the arm with which they are co-operating.

The machine gun cannot yet be regarded as a separate “arm” in our service, nevertheless it possesses a power peculiar to itself; and until this power is studied and thoroughly understood, the principles that should govern its employment in the field cannot be grasped, and consequently its effective use is dependent on chance or accident, and for every success scored a dozen failures will occur, any one of which may be fatal. The preceding chapter has dealt with the peculiarities and power of the machine gun, and it will be seen that it possesses the fire effect of the infantry arm while it has several of the characteristics peculiar to artillery; for instance, it is fired from a mounting by one man, and is moved from position to position by draught or pack animals.

We have seen that the chief characteristic of the machine gun is its power of delivering the “maximum fire from the minimum front”; this fire is of great volume and is highly concentrated, while it can also be made to sweep a wide lateral surface of ground. The gun’s narrow frontage in action renders it easy to conceal, and when discovered it presents a very small and difficult target to the enemy’s riflemen; on the other hand, when once discovered if it cannot be moved unseen to another position it is liable to suffer a prolonged and concentrated fire from the widely scattered riflemen of the enemy, to which it cannot effectively reply, and which must in time cause loss. Again, its range being limited, it is powerless against artillery except under special circumstances at effective rifle range.

The general principles governing its tactical employment depend upon three factors, viz. (1) the target, (2) the range, (3) the position.

The volume and concentration of its fire necessitate a large and vulnerable target, or ammunition will be expended without adequate results. The first essential is therefore to obtain this description of target and to avoid firing on others which may present themselves.

A large and deep target might justify fire being opened at long range, but such targets rarely present themselves on the modern battlefield, and its vulnerability will partly depend on the closeness of the range and partly on its formation. To obtain a suitable target of this description surprise is essential, and to effect a surprise it will be necessary to conceal the gun and its detachment in a well-chosen position.

Thus we see the three cardinal points for tactical success are—suitable target at close range from a concealed position.

FIRE EFFECT

Napoleon’s maxim, that “fire is everything—the rest is of small account,” is only applicable to the machine gun when the fire is effective. Nothing is so useless and wasteful as ineffective machine-gun fire, and the careful study of fire effect and how to obtain the best results is imperative with this weapon. The principles so ably stated in Colonel Mayne’s excellent book, The Infantry Weapon and its Use in War, apply almost equally to machine guns, and should be carefully studied by machine gunners, particularly those chapters dealing with the employment of fire in the field.

We have already seen that the range of the machine gun is practically the same as that of the infantry rifle, but that the beaten zone is only half the depth and about half the width of the collective fire of infantry, partly owing to the rigidity of the mounting, and partly to the fact that the human error is greatly reduced by being concentrated in the person of a single individual, instead of being spread over some 50 men of varying temperament, nerves, and aiming powers.

In addition to these factors, the fire from machine guns is always “collective” and “concentrated” unless deliberately dispersed by the firer, while infantry fire is always “individual” and “dispersed” unless controlled by fire discipline under a leader. Fire discipline and fire control are in the hands of one man—there is no need to point out the target to a scattered firing line, and there is no delay in passing orders down the line, or in the setting of 50 different sights for the correct elevation. Thus fire can be opened far more rapidly and accurately than with rifles, and can be at once directed on a fresh target without ceasing fire, while the effect can be seen by the firer, who can instantly change the rate or cease fire altogether.

The beaten zone is perhaps the most important factor in obtaining effective fire, and the following table, compiled from Musketry Regulations, 1909, gives the zone beaten by 75 per cent. at four ranges.

RANGES

It will be seen that the 75 per cent., or effective zone, is deepest at 500 yards, and gradually decreases as the range increases up to 2,000 yards; beyond this distance it increases again in about the same ratio up to 3,000 yards.

The following formula will give the effective zone (75 per cent. of shots) approximately for all ranges up to 1,500 yards inclusive: 50,000 Range + 20. Example for 1,000 yards: 50,000 1,000 + 20 = 70 yards, which is the depth of the area swept by 75 per cent. of shots, or the “effective” beaten zone. For ranges beyond 1,500 yards this formula is useless, and after 2,000 the beaten zone increases in depth, while the angle of descent of the bullets becomes so steep that the “dangerous space” is reduced to a minimum; and consequently the zone beaten by 75 per cent. of shots is no longer the “effective zone,” and it will be necessary to get the target within the zone beaten by the nucleus, or 50 per cent. of the shots. This zone at 2,500 yards range is about 50 yards in depth, so an error in estimating the range of more than 25 yards over or under the correct distance will render the fire “ineffective.” Even at 1,500 yards the “effective zone” (75 per cent.) is but 60 yards deep, which only allows an error of 30 yards over or under the correct range—a very small margin, even when using a range-finding instrument, but without an instrument it is obviously impossible to “estimate” or “judge” the distance with sufficient accuracy to ensure bringing the “effective zone” on the target.

For ranges over 500 yards it is absolutely necessary to know the range accurately or to find some other method of bringing the “effective zone” on to the target.

The machine gunner may be likened to the fireman with his hose-pipe, whose object is to bring the base of his jet of water to play on a certain spot some distance away from the nozzle of his pipe. He does not trouble about the distance, he does not require to know the range; but pointing the nozzle in the direction of the spot he desires to strike, he elevates or depresses it until he observes the base of the cone of water falling on the right spot, and then he holds his pipe so that it continues to fall where he desires; he does not trouble about the smaller streams and drops of water that fall short or go beyond, but devotes his whole attention to keeping the nucleus of the stream—the 75 per cent. or 50 per cent. zone—falling on his “target.” In precisely the same way the machine gunner must look upon his stream of bullets as a stream of water from a hose-pipe, and his object must be to cause the centre of that stream to play on the target, or, in other words, to bring the effective cone of fire on the target so that it is the centre of the beaten zone. This can be done by “observing” the strike of the nucleus of the shots and altering the elevation accordingly. On favourable ground fire can be observed by No. 1 up to 800 yards, but No. 2 with the aid of good glasses can observe fire on favourable ground up to 1,500. This observation of fire is the best method of obtaining the correct elevation at “effective” ranges (i.e. 1,400 to 600), if the ground is suitable. The procedure should be as follows: The range should be “estimated” by No. 1, who should then adjust his sight for 100 or 200 yards less elevation than the supposed distance, and fire “groups” of 8 or 10 shots; No. 2 observing the strike of the bullets and saying “short” or “over,” as the case may be, while No. 1 alters the elevation between each group until No. 2 says “on,” when fire may be continued, still observed by No. 2, until the desired effect has been attained. No. 1 must be careful to fire his first group of shots short of the target, as they are much easier to locate than shots which fall “over.”

If the target is only visible for a short time, the groups may be “rapid,” but as a rule “deliberate” fire at the quickest rate should be used, and “rapid” only used when the range has been found. If the ground is not favourable for the observation of fire, or the range is too great, this method cannot be used, and it will be necessary to obtain the range by instruments; but it will not always be possible to do so, and it is necessary to find some other reliable way of ensuring that the target is within the “effective” zone.

Supposing the range to be estimated at 1,400 yards, the effective zone is about 60 yards in depth—therefore an error of only 30 yards in estimating the range can be permitted. There is but one way to overcome the difficulty, and that is by increasing the effective zone; and this can be done by using “combined sights,” thus making two or more beaten zones which touch each other and overlap where the effective 75 per cent. of shots of both ends.

There are two ways of using combined sights:

(a) The “single gun” method.

(b) The “battery” method.

In (a), with an estimated range of 1,400 yards, the sights will be set for 1,300 and aim taken; then the sights will be again set for 1,500 yards, but without altering the original aim, and then “rapid” fire opened and the elevating wheel slowly turned to elevate the gun until the 1,500 yards sighting is aligned on the target. The result of this operation is to sweep the whole ground from 1,270 to 1,530 yards with effective fire; and if an error of 125 yards over or under the correct range has been made, the target is nevertheless brought within the effective zone by the combined elevations used. This is the best method for sections or single guns, and a section can vary this by one gun using 1,250 yards elevation and working up to 1,400, while the other gun begins at 1,350 and works up to 1,550. The choice of the amount over and under the estimated range must depend upon the ability of the person estimating the range and circumstances of the case, but less than 100 yards over or under should never be used.

The second method (b) is only used where at least four guns are available, and requires six guns to obtain the best results. The range is estimated as before, and then each gun uses an elevation differing by 25 yards from the next: thus, taking 1,400 yards again as an example of the estimated distance, No. 1 gun will use 1,300; No. 2, 1,325; No. 3, 1,350, and so on, No. 6 using 1,425 yards.

In this way the effective zone of No. 1 gun, which is 60 yards in depth, will just overlap the effective zone of No. 2 gun, and so on right up to No. 6 gun. Thus instead of one small zone of 60 yards of effective fire, we have six guns joining to make one big effective zone 185 yards deep.

Care must be taken not to use more than 25 yards between sights at ranges over 1,400 yards, otherwise there will be gaps between each effective zone, and the fire would be ineffective should the target happen to be at a spot between any two zones.

The methods of firing the gun are laid down in the official Handbook, but it may be added that in using “deliberate” fire the double button should be pressed irregularly so as to imitate rifle fire, and with a little practice a rate of 120 shots a minute can easily be attained.

This kind of fire, although it should seldom be used, will occasionally be serviceable in ranging for observation when it is desired to do away with the peculiar sound of the machine gun and thus not disclose its presence prematurely. In covering a retirement it may also be found useful to deceive the enemy into believing they are only opposed by riflemen, while reserving its full fire power until a good target presents itself at close range.

“Continuous” fire should be used in “gusts” or bursts of from 15 to 30 shots, a momentary pause being made to observe the effect, and, if necessary, to correct the aim. The great expenditure of ammunition caused by “continuous” fire renders its use only justified when the effect obtained is commensurate, and it should seldom be adopted until the circumstances justify it. But when a really good target is found at close range, the ammunition need no longer be considered until there is nothing left alive to fire at. Annihilation should always be the final aim of machine-gun fire.

TAKING UP A POSITION

Except under special circumstances, such as for covering fire or a demonstration, the battery will not move as such into position, but each section will be given its approximate place and move there independently, keeping touch, however, by signal or connecting files with the battery commander and acting in close co-operation with the other sections.

Positions are of two kinds, viz. (1) positions of observation, (2) positions of readiness.

The position of observation will usually precede the position of readiness, and the principal points are the concealment of the guns and detachments, the facilities for observing the enemy and for movement in any direction.

The position of readiness will be in the immediate vicinity of the fire positions, and the guns may be actually in position awaiting the target.

When moving alone on the march, scouts working in pairs must be pushed well out ahead and on the exposed flank or flanks, and they should be trained to use a system of signals to indicate the following: (1) “All clear”; (2) “Enemy in sight”; (3) “A good target in sight”; (4) “Cavalry” (prepare for); (5) “Artillery within range”; (6) “A good gun position.”

Six simple and unmistakable signals can easily be arranged and learned during peace training, which might prove invaluable in war, for “opportunity” is everything to the machine gunner, and is usually so fleeting as to demand instant action in order to obtain success. On moving to occupy a position as a battery, the guns will usually be in line at from 10 to 100 yards interval, with the section commanders leading their sections and the scouts well ahead; the flank guns must arrange for the protection of the flanks by scouts in the same manner.

Diagram III
TO SHOW FORMATION WHEN COMING INTO POSITION

aaa. The Position. B. Ground Scouts. C. Battery Commander. D. Connecting files.
E. Section Commanders. ee. Flankers. F. Guns & Detachments.

The Germans consider that ground scouts should never go into the proposed position, as they are likely to expose themselves to the enemy, and thus “give the position away,” and, as already pointed out, “surprise” is the essence of success. They say that the commander of the battery or section, whichever the unit may be, should alone examine the position and select the place for his battery or section to come into action—and this is the right method as a general principle; but in broken or hilly country, where cover is abundant, and where the position is extensive, a battery commander can do no more than indicate generally the positions to be occupied by the sections, and it will then be advisable for the section commanders to personally select the positions for their guns. If the cover is good, the range-finders may next occupy the gun positions and proceed to take ranges. They must be most careful not to show themselves in the least and should work from cover to cover, some distance from the gun positions and not on the same alignment. The ranges must be noted on proper range cards, and when complete sent to the section commanders. In open country, where there is no good cover in the position, the scouts will only approach it sufficiently to ensure that it is not occupied by the enemy, and will then halt and find a good position for the guns to be dismounted; the commander, passing through the scouts, will then reconnoitre the position himself, and select the place for coming into action. There are two methods of taking up a position, which depend for their choice upon the proximity of the enemy and the time at which fire is to be opened. The first is the “deliberate” method, when the guns are brought up and the range taken before the target appears. In this case cover is essential to success, and the guns must be most carefully concealed, the whole object being to surprise the enemy when the moment arrives, and thus concealment is of the first importance. The second method is used when the enemy is in the immediate vicinity, when the country is open and the position without cover, or when the position is within artillery range of the enemy. The guns unlimber and prepare for action immediately in rear of the gun positions, and as close to them as possible and completely out of sight of the enemy. The commander alone goes into the position, and having selected approximately where each gun is to go, he stations them immediately in rear of their intended places out of sight and then creeps into the position himself and watches for the opportune moment; when this arrives, a blast on his whistle brings the guns up with a rush, no concealment is attempted, but, fully exposed, each gun opens fire on the nearest target. If the moment has been rightly judged and the range properly estimated, 60 to 90 seconds is sufficient time to obtain the desired effect, and before the enemy’s artillery can get the range a second signal from the commander sends the guns out of action again as rapidly as they appeared. This is one of the most successful methods of employing machine guns: there is no risk of being seen before the target appears, there is no “giving away the position” by careless scouts, and there is no chance that a powerful pair of glasses will discover the guns in position before they open fire and turn the tables by surprising them instead. On the other hand, it requires very highly trained detachments and a vast amount of peace practice to ensure its success in war.

Alternative positions are always necessary when the deliberate method is used, and must be carefully practised in peace—the principal points to be observed being: (1) That the second position is suitable for bringing effective fire to bear on the enemy, and (2) that the gun is able to gain the position without exposure.

Scouts so often forget that they can work with ease where it is impossible to carry a gun; and unless the above conditions are fulfilled, the alternative position will be useless.

The place for dismounting the guns must always be as close to the fire position as possible without exposing the teams to fire or view; the reserve ammunition must be brought up to this spot, and precautions must be taken to prevent the teams being surprised from the flanks or rear if exposed. Machine guns should never be advanced for a short distance. If it is desired to obtain a closer range, nothing is gained by moving two or three hundred yards, while the guns are exposed to considerable risk. The guns are just as effective at 1,000 yards as at 800, and when a closer range is necessary they must await the opportunity for moving up to close range, i.e., 300 or 400 yards, where their fire may be decisive.

COVER

Cover may be of two kinds:

(1) Cover from fire.

(2) Cover from view.

Cover from fire must be proof against the projectiles likely to be used against it—that is, against rifle fire and shrapnel. “Cover from fire” should also be “cover from view” if possible; it must be inconspicuous, and should be of the same colour and material as the background and locality. It must be as low as is compatible with command, and must never be on the skyline. The following points in the order given constitute good “cover from fire”:

(1) Bullet proof.

(2) Good field of fire.

(3) Invisibility.

(4) Protection from enfilade fire.

(5) Good line of retreat (under cover).

“Cover from view” is often not cover from fire, and must be used with great caution; it is the principal means by which guns are brought up to the fire position without the enemy’s knowledge, thus effecting a surprise. Cover may be either (1) natural, (2) artificial, (3) a combination of both.

“Cover from fire” will generally be artificial or a combination of natural and artificial cover, because natural cover will seldom be found that is suitable for machine guns, although partial cover from fire may often be found behind a bank, a rock, or in a ditch.

“Cover from view” will generally be natural cover, and will be used to conceal the guns while approaching a position to occupy it and, when in position, to effect a surprise. When used in position to effect a surprise, it must be remembered that the moment the guns open “rapid” fire the cover is no longer any protection—indeed, it may be a source of great danger should it be isolated or conspicuous, such as a patch of scrub in a plain, or a clump of bushes on a hillside, as it will form a mark to aim at for every gun and rifle within range. “Cover from view” may be also “cover from fire,” as when folds in the ground or a ravine are used to conceal the guns. It may also be artificial cover, such as screens of boughs and brushwood as used by the Japanese at Liao-yang to conceal their march, or to hide guns in position. Hurdles covered with grass, reeds, bush, or branches of trees to closely imitate the surrounding growth, and placed as screens to hide the guns until the moment arrives for opening fire, will often prove a most valuable method of concealing guns in position, and under favourable circumstances the guns may even open fire from behind the screens without being discovered. This method requires constant practice in peace to attain success on service—indeed, the necessity for the most thorough peace training and constant practice in all the details of bringing guns into action, making cover, taking up alternative positions, retiring under mutual support, etc., cannot be too strongly urged on section commanders. Little ammunition is available for practice in our own service, it is true, but there is nothing to prevent constant practice in this vital duty of the machine gunner; and by getting a few men to represent the enemy, with an intelligent officer and a pair of good glasses, most valuable help can be given by criticising the manner the guns are handled, and the amount of exposure or concealment of the gun and detachment in taking up a position or making cover.

Artificial cover may be either excavated or built up, or a combination of both. Excavated cover will usually take the form of a pit of sufficient size to hold the tripod, ammunition, and three men, and deep enough to conceal the gun and men not only from view, but from fire at “effective” range. This form of cover is particularly good on a level plain, the muzzle of the gun being just above the surface of the ground. The rear side of the pit may require to be enlarged to take the long leg of the tripod where time is limited and the pit has not been made large enough to take the tripod in any position, but it is advisable to make the pit of sufficient area to allow the gun to be worked in any direction. With an adjustable tripod, the pit should be so deep that the gun is completely concealed below the surface of the ground, and it is only raised when it is intended to open fire.

Other forms of cover consist of epaulements, trenches, sangars, etc., which will not differ essentially from those given in the manual of Military Engineering. In all types of “cover from fire” care must be taken that the cover is high enough to protect No. 1 from bullets fired at ranges up to 1,400 yards, taking into consideration the angle of descent of the bullets at that range and the distance of No. 1 from the cover.

Cover can seldom, if ever, combine all the points enumerated here, and it will lie with the section commander to discriminate between them and decide what points he will sacrifice in favour of others more important: thus it may be necessary, where concealment is the chief object, to forgo “cover from fire” at the longer ranges in favour of a low parapet or even none at all. It is only possible to indicate in outline the principles that should be followed; practice in training and the experience thus gained alone will make the reader an expert.

Shields will be found of great value in the final stages of the battle, when machine guns are pushed up to close range to assist in the final assault. They are too heavy to carry on the guns, and should be with the ammunition in the first-line transport, where they are easily obtained if required.

COVERING FIRE

Machine guns will often be used to cover the advance of infantry from “long” to “effective” range when the artillery is still occupied in the artillery duel and the infantry first come under effective rifle fire from the enemy. The ease with which they can instantly open and cease fire, concentrate on a particular spot, or sweep a line of trenches, renders them particularly suited for this purpose, and the Japanese constantly used them to keep down the enemy’s rifle fire in this manner during the late war.

The narrow beaten zone enables them to fire safely over the heads of advancing infantry from all ranges beyond 800 yards, provided the infantry are at least 200 yards from the enemy fired at. A study of the table of trajectory in the Appendix to Manual of Military Training will enable the machine gunner to decide the circumstances under which the fire is safe in each case.

Positions on the flanks and if possible to the front of the advancing infantry will render covering fire most effective, but these positions will rarely be possible. The first consideration is the concealment of the gun from the enemy’s artillery, which can easily silence them if exposed. It is also necessary that the positions selected should be sufficiently commanding to enable the battery commander to see the attacking infantry during the whole advance, so as to fire only when they are moving, while at the same time he must be able to see the position of the enemy’s trenches and thus direct the fire on any part desired.

INDIRECT FIRE

The best method of using covering fire in the early stages of the attack is by indirect fire from the reverse slopes of a hill or from behind a ridge or other feature. This is not difficult to carry out and in no way lessens the accuracy of the fire or endangers the troops in front, as the following experiment will prove.

EXPERIMENT IN INDIRECT FIRE

The following is an extract from an article by First Lieutenant A. E. Phillips of the 10th Cavalry, from the Journal of the United States Cavalry Association for July 1909:

“To determine how many, if any, of the bullets from the machine gun would strike troops in front of an assumed ‘hill’ over which the gun was to fire, canvas frames were used to represent such objects, the targets being concealed from view.

“The target consisted of a strip of target cloth 6 ft. high and 15 yards wide, along the bottom edge of which is pasted a row of kneeling figures with an interval of a yard from centre to centre. Across the target and parallel to its top edge was drawn a narrow black line tangent to the tops of the heads of the figures. Value of hits on any figure = 5; value of hits on the cloth below the line = 3; value of hits on the cloth above the line = 1. Canvas frame, 8 ft. high, placed 200 yards in front of the gun. Rapid fire:

First Experiment

Range 800 yards

Second Experiment

Range 1,000 yards

Third Experiment

Range 1,200 yards

“It will be noticed no 1’s were made. Assuming the height above the ground of the average mounted soldier as 8 ft., had a troop of cavalry mounted been 200 yards in front of the machine guns in the third experiment, the line of sight would have struck about the backs of their horses, and all bullets would have gone over the riders with at least 4 feet to spare, as proved by the experiment.... The troop mounted could have moved forward to within 100 yards of the target and would not have been struck by the bullets.”

The methods of carrying out indirect covering fire will vary according to the nature of the position selected and the way the guns are to be laid. This is one of the few occasions when a battery or two may have all their guns in line close together. If the slope is a steep one, they may be pushed up close to the crest, but on a gentle slope they must be placed sufficiently far back to avoid the forward effect of shrapnel bursting on the crest line.

The battery commander will select the position for the guns and will then give each gun or section a section of front to fire on. The method of marking off this section is as follows: two iron rods about 3 ft. long for each gun are painted white, and are then “laid off” from the gun to the target, in an exact line, the first being on the reverse slope a few yards short of the crest; the next on or just behind the crest line. By aligning the gun on the rods, fire is brought on the centre of the target; should traversing fire be required, the limits may be marked by similar sticks on either side.

There are two methods of laying the gun. (1) By observation of fire. (2) By quadrant elevation. The first method has been already described, and the second must be done by using the following table in conjunction with an instrument for elevating the gun at the required angle; but it must be remembered that each gun will require adjusting to its own angle of elevation to suit its known error at each range. Thus a gun which is known to require sighting at 900 yards when firing at 1,000 should receive 1° 10½ and not 1° 25½. When proper instruments are not obtainable, very fair results may be obtained by using an ordinary clinometer. The necessary allowance for the height the gun is above the target must be made, or, in other words, the angle of sight as shown by the clinometer must be deducted from the quadrant elevation given on the gun.

Diagram IV
TO SHOW METHOD OF LAYING BY AIMING POSTS

aa. Aiming Posts (about 15^x apart and some distance in front of gun.)

ttt. Targets.

TABLE OF ELEVATION FOR MAXIM ·303 USING AMMUNITION GIVING 2,000 F.S.

What is required is the angle of quadrant elevation to be put on the gun in order that the shots may strike the target at a known range. From range table obtain angle of tangent elevation; now if the target is below the guns we must subtract the angle of sight (m), if the target is above the guns we must add the angle of sight (m) to obtain correct angle of quadrant elevation.

To obtain angle of sight m

(1) When target is visible from the immediate vicinity of guns the angle may be measured by pocket clinometer or other mechanical means; or, if heights can be obtained from a contoured map, from the formula:

m = h × 1146 R

where h = difference in feet of height between guns and target; R = range in yards.

(2) When target is not visible from immediate vicinity of guns, m may be found from the following formula:

Diagram V

Where a₁ is the angle of sight from O to G; a₂ is the angle of sight from O to T.

Angles of elevation are read plus, angles of depression minus; T being the target, G the gun, and O the observer.

Before firing it is necessary to ascertain that the trajectory will clear the intervening crest—i.e. see that the angle of slope to the top of crest is less than the angle of Q.E. at which the gun is likely to be fired. If there is an obstacle some distance in front of the guns, to ascertain if the trajectory will clear it make a liberal estimate of the range to the obstacle and ascertain if the quadrant elevation to be fired at is greater than that which would be required to hit the obstacle.

If it is possible to place a mark to aim at near the crest with a given elevation which will ensure the fire striking the target, this will much simplify indirect fire, but the combination of circumstances required to enable this to be done will not often be found.

When all is ready to open fire the battery commander will take up a position from which to direct it, and will give the orders to open and cease fire and name the guns or sections to fire. The section commanders will watch the fire effect of their guns and give the orders necessary for correcting elevation or direction. The battery captain will assist the commanding officer by noting the fire effect.

It will be seen from the foregoing that considerable practice is required to enable indirect fire to be efficiently carried out; but the results obtained in covering the advance of infantry and thus enabling them to push up quickly to close range, without the delay and exhaustion caused by a prolonged fire fight, will more than repay the time spent in perfecting machine-gun detachments in this duty.

SUMMARY OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES

With Cavalry.—To enable it to retain its mobility and do away with the necessity of dismounting whole squadrons for fire action. To give it greater power both in attack and defence, and enable small detachments to hold important strategical or tactical points. To act as escort to artillery and to assist in the pursuit.

With Infantry.—To cover the first advance with fire. In attack they should be held back until the last reserve has been thrown in, when they must be used to bring an overwhelming fire to bear on the point selected for assault. Owing to their narrow beaten zone and great accuracy, they can safely fire over the heads of prone infantry within 100 yards of the position. A Japanese officer who commanded a machine-gun battery at the battle of Mukden said on one occasion he “continued this fire until their attacking infantry were within 30 metres of the enemy’s position.”[6]

They may also be used to reinforce threatened points, when their mobility will enable them to arrive at a distant part of the battlefield with the rapidity of cavalry. They should rarely be used in the firing line, where their fire, being dispersed, is less effective than an equal volume of rifle fire, and where they are at once the target for every rifle. Machine guns can never engage artillery, and should avoid engaging other machine guns or firing on a line of skirmishers.

They are particularly useful at night with the outposts, and can be trained by day on roads, defiles, or bridges, and thus can be used in the dark to sweep the approaches with accurate fire.

The Golden Rule for Machine Gun Tactics may be thus expressed:

“Conceal your guns, utilise cover, and operate by surprise—for surprise is the essence of tactical success.”

CHAPTER III
EMPLOYMENT IN THE FIELD WITH THE INDEPENDENT CAVALRY

The Germans have resolutely adopted the plan of attaching machine guns to cavalry, and they seem thus to understand the modern combination of fire and shock tactics. To the machine gun the fire action, to the horseman the morale action—so much the more easy and productive of results, as the machine gun is the more powerful.—Chief of 2nd Bureau, French General Staff.

Since this was written it has been generally recognised by the leading military authorities of the world that the machine gun is essentially a cavalry weapon; and Colonel Zaleski in a recent article on the lessons of the Russo-Japanese War goes so far as to say, “Even their addition to squadrons cannot be carried out too rapidly, and this weapon would now appear to be indispensable to cavalry.”

The truth of this statement is obvious to the student of modern tactics who is also acquainted with the machine gun as organised and equipped on the Continent and in the United States, where it is as mobile as the cavalryman himself and as quick in coming into action.[7] When its true rôle is understood and its tremendous fire power made full use of, it will go far to render cavalry independent of the rifle, and to restore to them that dash and independence of action which made them the terror of the battlefields of the past.

The following extract from an article in The Times newspaper of August 23rd, 1905, by their special correspondent with the Japanese Army in Manchuria, shows the necessity for machine guns by emphasising the danger of training cavalry to fight as infantry.

“The prime value of cavalry lies in its mobility. As an actual fighting unit in battle a body of cavalry is much inferior to an equal body of infantry. The discrepancy is less marked if the cavalryman carries a rifle, but there is always the encumbrance of the horses, which require the attention of one man in every four when the rifle is employed. It being postulated that tactics evolve themselves into the effort to obtain a superiority of rifle fire, it is evident that the necessity of dispensing with one quarter of a body of mounted riflemen before their weapons can be brought to bear greatly lessens the value of that body. On the other hand, the mobility of the mounted rifleman compensates for his comparative ineffectiveness to such a degree, it is believed in the British Army, that elaborate arrangements have been made for the provision and training of what is known as mounted infantry. Granted the value of mounted and mobile men as an auxiliary to infantry, the question arises, What is the weapon with which they shall be armed, and what the nature of the training to which they shall be subjected? These things depend upon whether the mobility of a mounted man is regarded as secondary to his function as a rifleman, or whether his weapon be merely adapted to his mobility. In other words, are mounted men wanted for their riding or their shooting? The arming of our cavalry with rifles, and certain modifications in its training, together with the formation of corps of mounted infantry, show that those who held the ear of the Secretary of State for War a few years ago pinned their faith to the superior value of shooting, and regarded mobility in a mounted man only as a means to an end. If we turn to the conflict now proceeding in Manchuria, it is found that in one respect it differs considerably from other great wars, particularly those which have been fought on level ground. Cavalry has been conspicuous not by its absence, but by its utter and astonishing ineffectiveness. From Liao-yang northwards both armies have occupied part of the level plain traversed by the Liao River. The right of the Russian Army and the left of the Japanese have faced each other for nearly twelve months, in country as flat as a billiard-table and as suitable for cavalry evolutions as any of the low countries in which the famous leaders of last century made their reputations. Here have been conditions ideal for the employment of shock tactics; a veritable jousting-ground where the vaunted Russian cavalry might have run a-tilt at the sword-worshipping Japanese. Yet no single instance has been recorded of combat between mounted men, and to the best of my belief none has occurred.

“Is it, then, that those who advocate the substitution of mounted infantry for cavalry are in the right; that the lancer, hussar, and dragoon of picturesque memory have become obsolete in these days of the breechloading rifle? Almost it would seem so. But for two important considerations, the case for mounted infantry might well be deemed as proved. These considerations, however, are of such a nature as to lead the observer to directly opposite conclusions: to conclude actually that cavalry pure and simple is as useful to the army of to-day as it was to the army of Napoleon’s day; and that it is totally erroneous to suppose that mounted infantry can be an efficient substitute for cavalry. The cause of the effectiveness of Japanese cavalry is not far to seek. The men are the most intelligent of Japanese soldiers, and their many fine patrol performances are evidence of the sound methods in which they have been trained. Their weakness lies in the poor quality of the horses, and the fact that the Russian cavalry outnumbers them by six to one. Marked inferiority of force, in all forms of rivalry, is a fatal disadvantage, and it is for this reason that the Japanese have failed to shine in the rôle which experience has assigned to cavalry. The Russian cavalry, on the other hand, is estimated to number 30,000 sabres, a force of mounted men which, in the circumstances, ought to have made the lives of the Japanese commanders on the flank of the army a burden to them. Instead of which, life in the rear of the Japanese front has been a sinecure, a positive dolce far niente, undisturbed even by the distant flash of any of these sabres. Is this a proof that, if the sabres had been rifles, something could have been accomplished? Very far from it. It is because the Russian cavalry, armed as it is with rifle and—shade of Seydlitz!—bayonet, is trained to fight only on foot, thereby throwing away its most valuable weapon, mobility, that it has proved no more effective in the field than a flock of sheep. That the microscopic force of Japanese cavalry has held the Russian throughout the campaign—an exceedingly remarkable performance when it is remembered how indifferently the Japanese are mounted—testifies clearly enough that there must be something futile about the arming and training of the Russians.... They failed as cavalry and they failed as riflemen, and the reason of the failure was that they are neither fish, flesh, fowl, nor good red herring. They are organised as cavalry, but have been trained to dismount on service. In peace they are armed with lance and sword, and in war they are asked to fight with rifle and bayonet. Truly an absurdity, worthy of one of those nebulous units evolved by our own Parliamentary reformers. Last month Mishchenko, marching forty-five miles in four long summer days, again descended on the Japanese flank, accounted for a couple of companies and a field hospital, frightened a number of Chinese carters, and stopped before a thin line of infantry guarding the approaches to Hsin-minting, where Japanese supplies are stored sky-high. Had he known it, he was within an ace of picking up a number of distinguished British officers, besides newspaper correspondents, and a famous general whom the Emperor William has specially delighted to honour. But an inferior number of riflemen checked the advance, and no use was made of the mobility of the column, except to retire by a circuitous route.... So far as my information goes, the Russian cavalry west of Mukden never once took the offensive during the battle. Strapped up with rifle and bayonet, they are incapable of wielding the sword; their lances, except in the case of a small proportion of the Cossacks, have been left in Russia. So it was useless to contemplate old-fashioned cavalry work. But the Japanese communications were an easy mark, and it is one of the most singular features of Russian tactics that they did not avail themselves of so glaring an opportunity. Even as mounted infantry they should have been able to destroy Nogi’s communications. Yet they never made a single attempt at interference.

“The deduction is obvious: either the training or arming must be at fault. When a mounted man dismounts he sacrifices his mobility to become a weak infantryman. The Russian cavalry has been trained to fight dismounted, and the result is that the Russians have divested themselves of the one arm which, many keen observers believe, might have availed to turn the tide in their favour. The battle of Mukden was a great defeat, though not an overwhelming disaster. At one period the result hung in the balance, and it is no wild statement to say that if the Russian cavalry had been trained and armed in orthodox cavalry fashion, and handled in a manner consistent with cavalry tradition, Mukden would have proved a drawn battle. It is my firm belief—a belief shared with many others more competent to judge—that if French, with 10,000 British cavalry, had been given a free hand early in the war on the Russian side, there would have been no necessity for Kuropatkin to retire from his strong position at Liao-yang, and I have no less hesitation in saying that if the same able commander, with such a cavalry force as I have mentioned, had been attached to the Japanese side at Liao-yang or at Mukden, there would be no Russian army in Manchuria to-day. En passant it may be remarked that if the Japanese cavalry had been capable of pursuit at Mukden, it would have proved a terrible thorn in the already bleeding Russian side. As it was, the Japanese were out-numbered and hence completely ineffective.”

If the writer of this article is correct in his deduction of the lesson to be learned by cavalry from this war—and his opinion has since been confirmed by military opinion generally,—it would appear that the machine gun is just the one thing needed to give cavalry the fire power of infantry, while retaining mobility and their proper rôle in all the circumstances of the modern battlefield. It will therefore be instructive to study the possibilities of machine guns with cavalry in the various situations which may arise in the course of a campaign.

The use of machine guns in certain stages of an action is similar whatever the scale of the operations may be; and to avoid unnecessary repetition, such phases as the Pursuit, the Retreat, etc., have only been dealt with once. The tactics of the various bodies of cavalry are based on the principles laid down in the Training Manuals, the Independent cavalry being treated in this chapter, the Divisional and Protective in the next.

While the opposing armies are still at a considerable distance apart, the Independent Cavalry will gain touch with the enemy and endeavour to find out such information as may clear up the strategical situation and afford the main army strategical freedom of action; they may also carry out special missions such as cutting the enemy’s communications, carrying out raids, or seizing important strategical points. This can usually only be accomplished when the enemy’s cavalry has been defeated. It will therefore be the first duty of the Independent Cavalry to seek out and defeat the cavalry of the enemy in order to be free to carry out its mission.[8]

This Independent Cavalry will never be less than a Division, while it may consist of two or three Divisions in the case of a war between any of the Great Powers. The nation that is weak in cavalry will therefore do well to make up for this deficiency by the employment of great numbers of machine guns so organised and equipped that they will be able not only to accompany their cavalry anywhere, but, in addition, to operate and manœuvre as self-contained units. They will thus free the cavalry from the necessity of dismounted action when met by superior numbers, and from being compelled to detach squadrons to secure tactical positions to check the enemy, or strategical points of importance which it may be vital to possess. In addition to this, detached machine guns may be used in the place of mounted escorts to the Horse Artillery, and to enable single troops to be used in the place of contact squadrons without detracting from their offensive or defensive strength.

The Divisional General of Cavalry will have 24 machine guns under the present organisation, viz. two guns with each regiment; and it must be assumed that they have been organised and trained to work together, as suggested in Chapter I., in order to enable them to be used as fire units in co-operation with their brigades or the Division. It will depend upon the nature of the country, the tactical situation and the strength and morale of the opposing cavalry, whether the G.O.C. retains all four batteries in his own hands or gives one or more to the brigade commanders. Every situation requires its own special treatment, and the following is only given as one of many possible methods of using machine guns in the preliminary stages of the cavalry combat. We will assume that a Cavalry Division is acting as Independent Cavalry and is operating against an unknown but superior force of cavalry as yet unlocated, in country such as will be met with in a European campaign.

The formation for the march towards the enemy will of course depend on the roads available and the general nature of the country, but an advanced guard of one brigade would be sent out with orders to push forward tactical reconnoitring patrols supported by contact troops or squadrons. This brigade might be given two batteries of machine guns, while the G.O.C. retained two batteries with the main body, which would probably move as concentrated as possible in two wings with flank guards, and a battery of machine guns on each flank. The advanced guard commander would use one battery of machine guns to give each “contact squadron” a section of two guns and thus enable it to retain its mobility if held up by rifle fire. He would keep one battery intact to use in the manner to be indicated later with his main guard.

We will follow one of these “contact squadrons” and see how the machine guns may be employed to assist it. In the first place the squadron now possesses the fire power of an extra hundred rifles and can therefore afford to send out stronger patrols and give them more support. The contact squadron, having sent out its patrols and any detachments necessary for special services, will sooner or later be called upon to afford active support to one of its patrols when the latter come in touch with the enemy. Upon the information furnished by this patrol, as to the strength of the enemy and the nature of the country, will depend the action to be taken.

The necessity for brushing aside all opposition and pushing forward will probably cause the commander of the contact squadron to attack with vigour, and such a course will compel the enemy to accept the engagement mounted, or if inferior in strength or morale, to take up a position for dismounted action and hold the squadron by rifle fire.

In the first case the squadron with scouts in front will move in column of troops ready to wheel into line for the attack. The machine guns should move in line immediately in rear of the rear troop and as close as possible, so as not to be seen from the front. The subsequent action of the machine guns must of course depend on the method of attack of the squadron and the nature of the country; but the objects in view will be (1) to support the attack by fire up to the moment of the collision, and then to bring fire to bear upon the retreating enemy and prevent their rallying; (2) to take up a position to cover the retirement of the squadron and enable it to re-form if worsted in the encounter. It is likely that if the first object is successfully attained and the fire of the section brought to bear on the enemy’s squadron, from any range under 800 yards, for only 30 seconds, the effect on the closed body of horsemen, whether in column or line, would be such as to throw them into considerable confusion at the moment of the charge, while any attempt to charge the guns, even by a second squadron, must be abortive and result in disaster. The squadron leader should have arranged beforehand with his machine-gun commander to manœuvre with a view to this co-operation, and will give the signal a few moments before wheeling into line to attack, when the machine guns will gallop out to the most suitable flank, and come into action as rapidly as possible so as to enfilade the enemy’s advance. The moment the charging squadrons mask the fire of the guns, they must remount and gallop to a fresh position in anticipation of the pursuit, in order to bring fire to bear on the retreating enemy and prevent a rally; or to cover the retirement of the squadron and enable it to rally and reform. The effect of his fire and the success or otherwise of the first collision will enable the section commander to decide instantly which of these two actions will be necessary. It will be seldom that the country is so flat that some feature cannot be found giving a good field of fire or commanding a road, or bridge, or other defile by which the enemy must retreat, or which they must pass in pursuit, and the use of such features will greatly assist the action of machine guns. Although both guns will fire together before the collision, their subsequent action must be made in mutual support, one gun firing while the other races to a new position from which it can overtake and flank the retiring enemy, so that, if possible, one gun is always firing at effective range while the other is moving. In the same way, if covering the retreat of their own squadron, one gun will fire while the other retires to a second position and in turn covers the retirement of the first. The guns must not hesitate to separate widely in order to obtain unseen the best possible positions from which to fire, but must always be able to support each other. If the country is much broken, opportunities will be found for concealing the gun in a position from which to enfilade the pursuing cavalry at short range, or for bringing a cross fire to bear from both guns on a defile. Such an opportunity skilfully utilised, when the range has been accurately taken, and fire reserved until the main body is within close range (600 yards or less), should be so decisive in its result as to check the pursuit altogether and possibly turn defeat into victory, if the retiring squadron has had time to re-form and is in a position to launch a counter-attack at this moment.

To make full use of machine guns with a squadron, it is necessary for the squadron leader thoroughly to understand their power and capabilities, and to anticipate their action and the result likely to ensue; otherwise he will be unable to do more than passively accept their support, and will fail to reap the advantage of their principal characteristic—their ability to surprise and their power suddenly to overwhelm with fire a superior body of troops.

Should the enemy’s squadron be reinforced or be so superior in numbers that an attack appears inadvisable, it may be possible with the assistance of machine guns to equalise matters by concealing the guns in a donga or behind a ridge, a clump of trees, or group of rocks, and then manœuvring the squadron so as to draw the enemy across the front of the guns at close range. The best method of doing this is to lead the squadron, formed in column of troops, past the cover selected at a sharp pace, the guns being concealed on the outer flank or behind the rear troop as circumstances may require. As the squadron passes the selected spot, the machine guns will be dropped; and the squadron at the same moment wheeling into line towards the enemy, will hide the guns from view until they are concealed by the cover.

The gun horses and the rest of the detachment not actually required to fire the guns should move on with the squadron, so that no indication is given the enemy that the guns are not still with the squadron. If this manœuvre is successfully accomplished, it will not be difficult to draw the enemy across the guns at close range. It is a manœuvre well worth practice in peace, but an opposing squadron should always be used to try to detect the guns and thus ensure that the concealment is properly carried out.

We will now suppose a case where the enemy takes up a defensive position and the contact squadron has to force its way through. The squadron leader’s method of attack must entirely depend on the strength of the position, the force holding it, and the natural features of the country in the immediate vicinity; and on his plan of attack must depend the details of the action of the machine guns. The general principles governing their employment will remain the same, however much they may vary in the method of carrying out: the first is to supplement the rifle fire of the squadron so as to enable as many men as possible to remain mounted, while holding the enemy to his position; and the second is to gain superiority of fire for the squadron at the time and place selected by the squadron leader. We will suppose the position to be strong and the enemy to possess machine guns, and that the squadron leader’s plan is to hold the enemy to his position by a vigorous frontal attack, while he turns the weaker flank. To do this he may decide to use his guns for the containing attack supported by a troop, or to use his squadron for the containing attack and his guns to turn the flank. Having machine guns in position against him, it might be advisable to choose the latter course, because machine guns are less effective against a skirmishing line of attackers, while his own machine guns are more effective if they can gain the flank or rear of the enemy’s position and thus enfilade them, and any movement of mounted troops to repulse the turning movement, or take their attackers in flank, will afford the machine guns an opportunity for decisive fire action. Should the machine guns or one of them succeed in stalking the led horses of the enemy, their action will probably be decisive, as nothing affords a machine gun such an easy and effective target as the horses of a dismounted squadron, while the effect of fire on them is to render the squadron immobile and to place them out of action as cavalry altogether.

The method of attack will probably be as follows. Scouts (dismounted) having been sent forward to reconnoitre and draw fire to disclose the extent of the position, two troops dismounted and widely extended will advance to the attack and open a heavy fire and push the attack as hotly as possible; at the same moment one troop (mounted) will move slowly round the flank which it is not intended to attack, keeping wide of the position and closed up, and in signalling communication with the squadron leader. This will probably draw attention to this flank, and the troop should report by signal any movement made by the enemy to check them. Rapid fire should now be ordered all along the line, and the troop on the flank should wheel and open out towards the enemy, but not approach within range if it can be avoided. Under cover of this demonstration, the machine guns with the remaining troop will work round the flank selected for attack, the guns being concealed on the outer flank of the troop and using every bit of cover possible to prevent being seen. Scouts must precede them, and the troop should screen their movements and engage the enemy with fire if opposed. Engagement with the enemy should be avoided as far as possible until the place selected for attack is reached, and the position turned. Even now the machine guns must avoid opening fire with the troop, and must endeavour to find a position from which an enfilading fire can be brought to bear at close range. Under cover of the surprise caused by the sudden burst of machine-gun fire, the second gun must push farther round to the rear, and try to fire on the led horses or catch the enemy’s guns on the move, for they will certainly be moved to meet this fresh attack. If the horses cannot be reached, the second gun must seek the best position to bring a reverse fire in support of the first gun; and unless a really good target is obtained, fire should be reserved until the first gun is discovered and attacked, when its intention to retire must be the signal for a burst of heavy fire which must be kept up until the first gun is in a fresh position and ready to open fire to cover the retirement of the second.

This action will enable the squadron leader to use the troop feinting on the other flank, which he will have recalled on the first sign of firing by the flank attack, in order to reinforce the point where the attack can be pressed home.

The machine guns must avoid engaging those of the enemy, while always endeavouring to catch them limbered up, i.e. when changing position or while coming into or going out of action, for then they are most vulnerable. The situation at the moment of the flank attack is this: The front of the position is attacked by a strong but widely extended firing line which overlaps the flanks and compels a strong defensive firing line to check its advance. If the defender decides to put his machine guns into position here and to reserve half the squadron for defence of the flanks, the great extension of the attack renders their fire of little effect as long as the attack utilises cover and advances by rushes from the right or left of sections; on the other hand, if he decides to put the squadron into the firing line and to use his machine guns to protect his flanks, he has either to divide his guns or wait till he can see which flank is threatened, and he cannot ignore the troop which is moving against one. Consequently, he must either be weaker than the flank attack—in which case it is likely to succeed; or he must withdraw troops from his position to strengthen the threatened flank—in which case there should be no difficulty in pushing home the front attack with the aid of the extra troop; while the position of the machine guns on the flank and rear should render his retirement from the position very costly. In all probability the threat of turning a flank either by mounted troops or by machine guns will compel the enemy to abandon the position in the case of a minor engagement between squadrons—especially where a counter-attack is rendered impossible by the strength of the frontal attack.

When touch has been gained by the contact squadrons and the enemy found in force, they will either be compelled by superior numbers to fall back or they must be at once supported; in either case the advanced guard will now become engaged and will endeavour to break through the advanced guard of the enemy, or, if in touch with the main body of the enemy’s cavalry, will endeavour to prevent him breaking through till their own Cavalry Division comes up.

If it is decided to attack, the action will follow much the same lines as that of the contact squadrons, but on a larger scale and with the addition of artillery; and the machine guns will be used in much the same way to support the mounted attack up to the moment of the charge, for which purpose the machine guns working in pairs on the opposite flank to the artillery must be pushed forward to occupy positions from which to bring fire to bear on the hostile squadrons while manœuvring prior to the attack. The whole battery may be used for this purpose if the ground favours their action; or a single section only, while the remainder are held back as a reserve to complete a successful charge or to cover the retirement of the brigade in the event of failure.

The officer commanding the machine-gun battery will remain with the brigadier and must be perfectly acquainted with his plans, and will receive from him direct orders as to the way the guns are to be employed to support the attack. The details for carrying out these orders should be left to the battery commander, who will issue his own instructions to the section commanders, who should also be told the brigadier’s plans. The section commanders must be given a free hand in selecting fire positions and in all details relating to coming into action and opening and ceasing fire—the battery commander’s orders only indicating the flank and extent of the positions of observation for each section, the method of action and the object to be attained. Under special circumstances he may order certain specific action such as reservation of fire, simultaneous fire on a given signal, or concentration of fire of a certain target; but it must be remembered that definite orders of this nature tie the hands of section commanders, and tend to paralyse their action and destroy initiative, and can be justified on rare occasions only. Should the enemy take up a defensive position, the machine guns will be used to economise dismounted men and to bring a sudden and intense fire to bear on the defenders when they attempt to retire from the position. Cavalry will not “assault” a position, but rather try to compel the defender to retire from it by turning a flank and threatening his led horses or his line of retreat, while he is held to his ground by fire. Some guns should also be held in reserve to meet a counter-attack or to be launched in pursuit when the enemy attempts to retire. The machine guns with the contact squadrons will be available, as these squadrons become merged in the main guard, and they must now be used to hold tactical positions of importance and to hinder the march of the main body of the enemy by seizing all rising ground in front or to a flank of the approaching cavalry.

The Division will now have concentrated and joined the advanced guard, and will be manœuvring in anticipation of the cavalry combat. All the machine guns, except those holding positions in front, will now be concentrated under the Divisional General. They will be used at this stage in conjunction with the artillery—but not in their vicinity—to support the deployment of the Division by their fire, and they must necessarily be concentrated and employed as batteries in order not to hinder the deployment and free manœuvre of their own cavalry. The flank opposite to that of the artillery must be used, and “positions of observation” must be maintained where the guns are concealed from view and if possible from artillery fire.

The officer commanding the machine guns of the Division should remain with the G.O.C., and must be perfectly acquainted with his plans and intentions. As a rule fire will not be opened in the first instance except by his order. Officers commanding batteries must be where they can best direct their fire and at the same time be in signalling communication with their Chief. Ranges will be taken from the “position of observation,” but should the guns have to gallop to a fresh position and fire at once, the opportunity for using combined sights by the battery if the range be unknown and the time limited should not be neglected. Rising ground is very important at this stage, for it enables fire to be maintained until just before the collision.

Should the ground permit of the machine-gun batteries approaching the enemy unseen, and enable them to reserve their fire from a concealed position until the closed bodies of the enemy’s squadrons come within effective range, the result should be so decisive as to render the attack of the Division successful, even against greatly superior numbers. The machine guns should render the envelopment of a flank by a superior force impossible, and their great mobility will enable them to meet easily any movement of this kind.

They should avoid the enemy’s artillery, which alone can put them out of action, but they must boldly engage it within effective ranges should it open fire on the cavalry.

The defeat of the independent cavalry alone will be of little value, and it will be necessary to ensure their complete destruction to enable the exact situation of the enemy’s forces to be discovered. A close and relentless pursuit is therefore imperative, and it must be remembered that machine guns with cavalry are far more effective in the pursuit than cavalry alone, because they move with the same speed; but whereas cavalry can only use the sword or lance against others similarly armed and capable of defending themselves, and both men and horses are equally subject to exhaustion, the machine guns on overtaking the enemy are able to shoot down men and horses without any more effort than is needed to set up the guns and work the elevating and traversing gear. The exhaustion of men and horses has no effect upon the accuracy or intensity of the fire, while the result is further to scatter and disperse bodies that may still retain any cohesion.

IN THE PURSUIT

There are many instances in war when cavalry flushed with victory and exhausted in the pursuit have been themselves caught and ridden down by troops that have rallied or by fresh supports; but machine guns have nothing to fear from cavalry, and can confidently await their attack while covering the retirement of their own cavalry. The longer they are in action, the more time there is for their own horses to recover their “wind,” and be ready to carry their guns out of action at a speed which renders pursuit useless. It must be remembered also that the machine guns with cavalry cannot be distinguished from that arm at a distance even when moving alone, while it is impossible to do so when they are with their regiment or brigade.

The machine guns must anticipate the pursuit and race off to positions on the flanks and rear from which they can best cut off, and if possible annihilate, the retreating squadrons; no effort must be spared to inflict the maximum loss, and guns must be pushed up to close range even at the risk of being ridden down.

The troops reserved for the pursuit should have their machine guns with them, as their co-operation will be of the greatest service, and regiments will probably act separately, and may be directed to special points to intercept the enemy or prevent reinforcements coming up.

The Independent Cavalry, having defeated and scattered the enemy’s cavalry, are now in a position to send out strategical patrols; and having “torn aside the veil” are able to see the dispositions of his main armies, and are free to undertake raids on his communications and to harass and delay the march of his columns.

Raids are only justified when some specific object can be attained, and are only likely to be effective during the course of operations, when both armies are in touch and awaiting reinforcements to renew hostilities.

The cavalry will in most cases be more profitably employed in attacking the enemy’s main columns in flank or rear, and thus hindering their march by causing premature deployment. This action will bring the independent cavalry in contact with infantry. The machine guns can now be used to supplement the fire action and to enable as many squadrons as possible to remain mounted. They should be employed as separate units or attached to squadrons according to the nature of the engagement and the force to which they are opposed. Usually they will be held back in the preliminary stages of the dismounted fight, until the action has developed sufficiently to enable the general situation to be seen, when they will be sent forward under cover to positions from which they can develop superiority of fire, by concentrating against the enemy’s strongest points. This will not prevent the use of a few guns with the advanced guard to seize and hold important points, and nothing should prevent machine guns from seizing the key of the position, the moment this can be discovered.

The four batteries of machine guns of the Division may be allotted as follows: With the advanced guard, one battery; with the main body (for use in firing line), two batteries; with the G.O.C. (in reserve), one battery.

TO COVER RETIREMENT

This reserve battery will enable the G.O.C. not only to reinforce a particular point or cover the retirement with a rapidity and effectiveness that no other form of reserve could do, but to use it to turn a flank or to meet a counter-attack without exposing his squadrons to fire during the movement. The security they are able to afford to the horses of the squadrons in the firing line will justify their occupying “positions of observation” on the rear flanks, from which they can protect them while waiting other employment. The deployment of the enemy’s infantry and the development of his fire will compel the cavalry commanders to break off the engagement; and to do this without loss under the heavy rifle fire to which he will now be subjected, this fire must be temporarily checked or rendered ineffective. Every machine gun will therefore be brought up to such positions as will enable them to sweep the enemy’s firing lines, and under a simultaneous fire from the 24 guns the dismounted men will be able to retire from the firing line and regain their horses. The retirement of the machine guns must be effected in the usual way, each section acting independently and retiring by alternate guns—no gun moving till the other is ready in a fresh position to open fire. The sections on the flanks should retire first, as they are better able to protect the centre by a cross fire.

COVER IN FIRING LINE

When the country is flat or the features devoid of natural cover, it will be necessary to provide pits for the machine guns practically in the firing line. If this is carried out with skill, the guns may be perfectly concealed, and protected even from artillery fire. These pits should be made along the whole front and as widely scattered as possible, and when a gun is discovered by the artillery it should immediately be lowered into the pit, out of sight, where it will be perfectly safe, until the artillery directs its fire elsewhere. The following instance from the Russo-Japanese War is an illustration of the skilful handling of machine guns under such conditions.

EXAMPLE FROM RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR

On June 8th, 1905, at Wan-ching, General Samsonov had two cavalry regiments and a machine-gun section of four guns. During the dismounted action these machine guns were concealed in the firing line, two in the centre 100 yards apart, and one on each flank about 400 yards away. When the firing line retired, the machine guns opened fire and held the position alone; and so well had they been posted, that although attacked by infantry, which advanced to within 300 yards of the position, supported by artillery which brought a heavy fire to bear on the front occupied by the machine guns, they were able to hold their ground for nearly three hours, when the Japanese abandoned the attack and fell back. It would be interesting to know if this astonishing success of machine guns, enabling the cavalry to defeat infantry supported by artillery in a fight of several hours’ duration, without risking their personnel or abandoning their mobility, was due to the use of natural cover or, as seems more probable, to the use of pits which would have afforded protection from artillery fire as well as concealment.

IN THE BATTLE

The hostile columns having arrived within striking distance, the battle will now take place, during which the Independent Cavalry will usually occupy a position in front and on the flank of the main line of battle. From here they will be able to co-operate by attacking on the flank, from which they can bring fire to bear concentrically with the main attack, while such a position favours pursuit on parallel lines, and is also a suitable one from which to prevent pursuit in the event of a retreat.[9] The machine guns will now assemble in batteries under their G.O.C., who will use them, as the occasion may demand, to hold “positions of observation,” to protect his front and flank in the early stages of the battle, and later, in conjunction with a few dismounted squadrons, to envelop the enemy’s flank and bring a powerful volume of fire to assist the main infantry attack, or to draw troops away from the point selected for assault.

“The climax of the infantry attack is the assault which is made possible by superiority of fire,”[10] and the cavalry commander will be justified in using his 24 machine guns in assisting to attain this object, provided that in doing so they remain under his immediate orders and in a position from which they are instantly available for the pursuit.

We have already seen how machine guns should co-operate in the pursuit, and their mobility will render them even more effective when pursuing infantry. The following example from the Russo-Japanese War may be of interest in this connection.

EXAMPLE OF MACHINE GUNS USED IN PURSUIT

A Russian infantry battalion which was retreating by a pontoon bridge across the Taitzu River was almost annihilated by a Japanese cavalry regiment, accompanied by machine guns, which swept the bridge; “and for the first time in this war,” adds the Standard correspondent with Kuroki’s army, “a machine gun was used with decisive effect.”

CHAPTER IV
EMPLOYMENT IN THE FIELD WITH THE PROTECTIVE CAVALRY

Each army will usually be divided into several columns, each preceded by its advanced guard, the whole covered by the Protective Cavalry. The bulk of the latter will be scattered or remain concentrated according to the size of the zone in which it is to operate, the nature of the ground, and the first dispositions of the enemy. The veil thus formed will only be torn aside when the artillery and infantry of the advanced guards open fire.[11]

It is probable that the side which is weak in cavalry will dispense with Independent Cavalry altogether, and will meet the Independent Cavalry of the enemy with their Protective Cavalry supported by machine guns. The Japanese, who were outnumbered by six to one, were unable to use Independent Cavalry, and during the early stages of the war supported their cavalry by infantry. The Russians, who possessed masses of cavalry, used them principally as Protective Cavalry, if we except the raids made by the Division under Lieutenant-General Mishchenko after the fall of Port Arthur. The Protective Cavalry will therefore, in such a case, not only have to prevent the enemy’s Independent Cavalry from obtaining information by penetrating their screen, but will also have the task of obtaining information as to the enemy’s numbers and direction of march. That they are able to do this even in the face of greatly superior numbers has been proved by the Japanese, whose cavalry, outnumbered and badly horsed as they were, succeeded throughout the war in a remarkable degree in penetrating the enemy’s screen and obtaining information. The Russians, on the other hand, in spite of their masses of cavalry, failed not only to destroy the diminutive force opposed to them, but even to penetrate their thin veil or obtain any information of what was taking place behind it.

Are we not in precisely the same position as the Japanese in our numerical weakness in cavalry, and should we not be confronted by the same problem in the event of war with a military nation?

Let us, then, see how the Japanese Protective Cavalry was able to fulfil its mission in spite of the vastly superior numbers of its opponents. In the first place the Japanese cavalry is trained in the orthodox cavalry spirit, which is highly developed; suppleness and power to manœuvre for the delivery of the attack is the chief aim, while the charge is regarded as the culmination of manœuvre. Swordsmanship, horsemanship, and independent scouting are the features of individual training, while only thirty rounds per annum are fired in the musketry course, from the carbine with which they are armed in addition to the sword. The consequence is that the whole cavalry is saturated with a spirit of enterprise and daring, and a firm belief in its superiority to all other arms in manœuvre and offence. It was this spirit and confidence that enabled them, when outnumbered and deprived of their swordsmanship, to retain their dash and mobility, while using their carbines from behind village walls against the hosts they were unable to ride down. It must be remembered that the Japanese had practically no machine guns at the beginning of the war, and those hastily purchased after hostilities broke out were required at Port Arthur. Consequently, the Japanese had to solve the problem of how to oppose the masses of Russian cavalry with their few but highly trained squadrons, and their solution was to hold up the Russian cavalry by fire on every possible occasion, and to be held up by them as seldom as possible. For this purpose they were closely supported by infantry; and it is of interest to remember how our own light infantry were used in much the same way in the Peninsula—the 13th Light Infantry being actually mounted for the purpose. Can we ignore the lesson? Is it not plain that machine guns would not only have done the work of the carbine and rifle far more effectively, but instead of depriving the cavalry of much of their mobility and preventing them from being made full use of—as undoubtedly was the case—they would have enabled them to go anywhere with the certainty of being able to defend themselves against a greatly superior force of cavalry.

The action of Protective Cavalry on a large scale is so similar to that of Independent Cavalry—especially in the matter of patrols and contact squadrons—that it will be unnecessary to reconsider these duties. In speaking of the duties of the Protective Cavalry, Field Service Regulations, 1909, Part I., Chapter V., observes: “These functions of the Protective Cavalry will entail principally defensive action, and will necessitate extension over a considerable front; but the commander must dispose his force in sufficient depth to enable it, with the assistance of the advanced guards of the columns in rear, to check any attempt to break through and surprise the main body.”

It is obvious that fire action is here indicated, and a preceding paragraph states that mounted infantry will usually accompany the Protective Cavalry, though it is to be doubted if it will be found possible to provide horses for this purpose in time of war.

Machine guns, however, will provide the necessary fire power without requiring many men or horses, and the use of a few extra batteries of machine guns with the Protective Cavalry would give them all the stiffening and defensive power of infantry without detracting from their mobility as cavalry. If the Japanese have taught us anything, it is this—that our cavalry, small as it is, if properly supported by strong and well-trained batteries of mobile machine guns, will be able to more than hold its own against greatly superior numbers in a European campaign. To attain such an end we should at once organise cavalry machine-gun batteries, and attach two batteries to each brigade in addition to the guns they already possess. This would give each cavalry brigade the fire power of a battalion of infantry (900 rifles), while in no way detracting from their mobility, as they would only occupy the road space of two extra squadrons, and move just as rapidly over any country. The alternative is to follow Colonel Zaleski’s advice and attach two machine guns to each squadron, which would give the same number of guns, but would be likely to detract from the efficiency of both guns and squadrons. We are, however, dealing with existing organisation, and, however much we may desire to increase the efficiency of our Protective Cavalry, we have only one battery of six guns with each brigade instead of the visionary three. Let us see how we may use them to the best advantage.

Supposing the Protective Cavalry to consist of one brigade, they will probably be extended to form a screen over a considerable front. The exact formation and method of advance will entirely depend upon the proximity of the enemy, his strength, and the nature of the country. We will suppose the country open and both flanks exposed and the enemy in the immediate vicinity, the contact squadrons or patrols having gained touch with him. The duties of the Protective Cavalry are the tactical reconnaissance, and the occupation of positions of tactical importance to the infantry and artillery.

With so small a number of machine guns as a single battery, it will be necessary to decide where they may be most usefully employed, and a great deal must depend on the particular situation. If the tactical reconnaissance is incomplete, they may be used in the first instance to hold the enemy in front while the squadrons move round the flanks to complete the information required. If used in this manner, they must be handled with dash, and, working in widely extended pairs—two in the centre and two on each flank—must push forward and try to surprise the enemy in close formation, moving from position to position and never remaining stationary after fire has been opened, provided cover exists to hide movement. Six guns co-operating in a vigorous offensive, unopposed by artillery, can push up to close range and do immense damage, while the enemy should be quite unable to decide what numbers are opposed to him. A ridge, a gully, a road with good hedges parallel to the front, is sufficient to conceal the movement of machine guns; and as they have nothing to fear from cavalry and can always retire if galled by rifle fire, they can dominate the situation if handled according to the principles already laid down for them.