GDG- Arty Anti-personnel Effectiveness

[ccj at infionline.net]

Setting aside for the moment that the thread has entered into a new area of 
inquiry, this is the first I've heard that the discussion has revolved 
around the absence of data.  I have said from the beginning that there is a 
mass of medico-military information available.  I can't recall that anyone 
has said, "No, this isn't so."  Rather, what has happened, it seems to me, 
is that the results of analyses of available data that I presented were 
questioned on the bases of impressions or factoids.  There's no way I can 
help people prove their impressions by providing data that doesn't exist.

In the present instance, the question has less to do with that information. 
It has more to do (in my opinion) with doctrine and combat realities, and if 
I were inclined to investigate it, which I am not, I'd examine doctrine and 
readily-available data on artillery ammunition expenditure in battle. 
Without having looked at the data, I'd wager that the big killer in the 10% 
of casualties attributed to artillery was spherical case.  In fact, I'd say 
that that should be plain without an investigation.

Curt Johnson


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Batrinque at aol.com>
To: <gettysburg at arthes.com>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: GDG- Arty Anti-personnel Effectiveness


> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
> Just where is this basic data available? A good deal of recent discussion
> involving this thread has revolved around the absense of such data, it 
> seems.
>
>
> Bruce Trinque
> Amston, CT