Tactics and Procurement in the Habsburg Military, 1866-1918 by John A. Dredger

Author:John A. Dredger
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Springer International Publishing, Cham

Artillery: Tactics and Numbers

For the third military branch, Habsburg leaders agreed on the importance of field guns and the use of artillery in battle. Therefore, less debate regarding cannon took place in the k.k. military journals. Austro-Hungarian officers concurred about employing artillery in masses to produce the greatest amount of firepower and thus gain superiority over the enemy at decisive points. 85 Although artillery still formed a supporting weapon for infantry, officers considered field guns essential for attaining effective levels of firepower and achieving ultimate victory. 86 The army required field guns both for offensive and defensive purposes. Even though artillery itself could not charge and thus appeared defensive, infantry required cannons to weaken the enemy before a successful assault could take place. 87 At the same time, artillery had to provide an invincible wall for shattering enemy attacks. 88 As one k.k. captain expressed the role of field guns on the battlefield, “In the attack-battle breaking a path for the masses of infantry in a destructive way, in the defense the iron rock, on which even the most violently rushing waves of the enemy assault smash powerlessly.” 89 Cannoneers also needed high morale for effective battlefield performance. Gunners had to display composure and cold-bloodedness, especially in the face of charging infantry and cavalry , to fulfill the tasks of modern artillery . 90

Compared with rifles, cannon had not developed as quickly and dramatically from 1877 to 1892, according to First Lieutenant Anton Christl of the Kriegsschule . Whereas European armies had changed infantry equipment at least twice during these years, artillery had remained the same except for an expansion in number and an increasing recognition of the importance of field guns in battle. 91 Although Christl spoke mainly for Austria-Hungary, this situation did not present difficulties as long as all armies possessed similar cannon. If even one state, however, made significant improvements to field artillery, then the other military powers would have to imitate the innovations or find even better technology . 92 During the 1880s, Habsburg officers remained convinced of the excellence of the Uchatius steel-bronze cannon and maintained that the k.k. field guns met all the requirements of the modern battlefield better than the weapons of other states. A Landwehr officer, concurring with a Prussian artillery major, claimed that the field guns of the Viennese arsenal rivaled the Krupp artillery of Prussia as the best in Europe, while Italian cannon ranked a close third. 93 Nevertheless, by the 1890s, Habsburg officers realized that the k.k. artillery needed to take advantage of technological innovations and procure better field guns. Because infantry rifles had increased in firing speed, accuracy, and range, cannon needed to fire faster and farther to compensate for these improvements in handguns. 94 One officer, citing the example of the Russian field artillery’s inability to destroy the Turkish fortifications at Plevna in 1877, advocated mortars with their higher trajectory for obliterating improved fieldworks and raising the effectiveness of k.k. artillery. 95 Once again, Habsburg officers realized

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.