MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2993132642

Fire Plan: The Canadian Army’s Fire Support System in Normandy

2016· article· en· W2993132642 sur OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Grebstad

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian military history · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensWilfrid Laurier University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArtilleryInfantryBattleVictoryWorld War IIDoctrineMilitary tacticsGermanEngineeringAeronauticsLawOperations researchMilitary doctrineManagementHistoryPolitical sciencePoliticsAncient historyArchaeology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Consigned initially to a decentralized and limited tactical role, the fire support organizations of British and Canadian armies experienced exponential growth during the initial stages of World War II. By D-Day, fire support had become a critical enabler of Anglo-Canadian combat operations and artillery units were numerous, networked, and efficient. Facilitating successful tactical manoeuvre was the goal of the fire support system. This article will explore the ‘ways’ and ‘means’ of that system – the people, procedures, resources, and organizations that combined to produce the devastating battle-winning fire support that contributed to tactical success. The contribution of the artillery to final victory in the German war has been immense. This will always be so; the harder the fighting and the longer the war, the more the infantry, and in fact all the arms, lean on the gunners. The proper use of artillery is a great battle-winning factor.1 A the outbreAk of the Second World War, British and Canadian fire support doctrine focussed on decentralised fire units supporting fluid, highly-mobile, infantry and tank manoeuvres. The disastrous Anglo-French campaign in France in May 1940 and subsequent British reversals during the opening stages of the Desert Campaign in North Africa demonstrated the weakness 1 Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery, quoted in Richard Doherty, Ubique: The Royal Artillery in the Second World War (Stroud: The History Press, 2008), 13. © Canadian Military History, 2016 1 Grebstad: Fire Plan Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2016 2 The Canadian Army’s Fire Support System in Normandy of this doctrine. Once the Allies halted the expansion of German forces and assumed the strategic offensive, thanks in no small part to a marked increase in deployed artillery assets, German skill at defensive operations forced the Anglo-Canadian armies to adopt an offensive tactical doctrine predicated on massive fire support. By the close of the Desert Campaign in North Africa in 1943, the pendulum of tactical doctrine had swung from a focus on manoeuvre to a focus on firepower. So fundamental was fire support to Allied battlefield success, the tactical doctrine employed by the Canadian Army in 1944 was, essentially, artillery-based.2 Thrust into this predominant role, the fire support organisations in the British and Canadian armies experienced exponential growth. By the start of the Normandy Campaign in June 1944, Anglo-Canadian artillery units were numerous, networked, and efficient. While the ends that were furnished by the artillery of the AngloCanadian armies are generally well known, the ways and means of the fire support system are less so. Most historical works of AngloCanadian operations in Normandy focus almost exclusively on the manoeuvre element, the infantry and armour formations of the 21st Army Group. Detailed surveys of the fire support hierarchy and how it was employed are wanting. The exceptions are artillery-specific works such as, but not limited to, Colonel G.W.L. Nicholson’s official history of the Royal Canadian Artillery, The Gunners of Canada; Major-General J.B.A Bailey’s Field Artillery and Firepower; Brigadier Shelford Bidwell’s Gunners at War, and Fire-Power, The British Army Weapons & Theories of War 1904–1945 (the latter with Dominick Graham); and of course George Blackburn’s excellent trilogy of first-hand accounts Where the Hell are the Guns?, The Guns of Normandy, and The Guns of Victory. While not exclusively artillery-based, retired Canadian artillery officer Brian A. Reid’s chapter entitled “Bullets and Bombs – The Fire Plan” in No Holding Back, Operation Totalize, Normandy, August 1944, is also instructive, although he does not delve into any great detail at the lower levels of the fires support organisation. Each of these worthy historical works only scratch at the surface of fire support tactics, techniques, and procedures: How was the artillery organised? How were fire plans and barrages planned and executed? How were 2 Terry Copp, Fields of Fire, the Canadians in Normandy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003), 29. 2 Canadian Military History, Vol. 25 [2016], Iss. 1, Art. 14 http://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol25/iss1/14

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,822
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,184
Écart entre enseignants0,171 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian military historyMême sujetCanadian Identity and HistoryTravaux en français237 207