344 
COMMENDED ESSAY, 1898. 
Taking the maximum ordinary rate with the fortress Q.F. gun as 10 
rounds per minute, or one round in six seconds, it is obvious that in a 
battery of six guns no delay would be caused by firing in rotation with 
one second interval, and a fortiori, if I am correct in the maximum rate 
1 have estimated for battery fire, no delay can possibly occur with the 
Q.F. field gun when fired in rotation from a flank with 3J- seconds 
intervals. 
Even supposing delay were caused by fire in rotation, I do not for 
one moment believe the latter could be abolished. The appalling 
confusion in a battery habitually carrying on independent fire, even by 
sections, the immense difficulty in maintaining control, the almost 
certain waste of ammunition, the husbanding of which is of primary 
importance, present arguments so overwhelming that nothing further 
need be said to emphasize the necessity of maintaing our fire control, the 
growth of the experience of years, as it is in this respect.* 
(V.) Advantages and disadvantages of Q.F. field guns. 
From the foregoing pages it will be seen that the Q.F. field artillery 
of which I propose to discuss the advantages and disadvantages will be 
organized in batteries of six guns, will differ from existing equipments 
only in certain details of the gun carriage, and not at all in ability to 
meet all service requirements,! will have a drill and fire discipline 
practically identical with those now in use, and will possess under 
favourable conditions rates of fire as follows :— 
Battery fire—three rounds per gun per minute. 
Section fire—five „ „ „ „ 
I propose to deal with the disadvantages, probable and alleged, first. 
The first probable disadvantage which I foresee, results from the 
carriage being fixed in the ground after the first recoil. Unless, there¬ 
fore, when firing at an obliquely or laterally moving objective, a careful 
watch be kept on the independent traversing gear (see page 340) and 
the trail shifted when the limit of traverse is approached, it may very 
well happen that, just at the moment when a high rate of fire may be 
most desirable, the detachments will be occupied in extricating the guns 
in order to be able to lay. 
Again, on soft ground, there may be difficulties in obtaining sufficient 
depression, since the tendency with a checked recoil is for the gun and 
carriage to revolve vertically backwards round the point of the trail 
and so cause the latter to dig into the ground.! 
Either of these occurrences will not only cause a diminution of fire, 
but that confusion which is very noticeable when the steady rotation of 
fire is upset. 
There will also be a disadvantage, when using very rapid fire, in the 
* It may be urged against these arguments that the Navy employ independent fire 
with Q F. guns. This is the case, but it is forced on the Navy, owing to guns being 
frequently placed so that they cannot well be controlled in battery. Naval officers, 
I believe, by no means regard independent fire with enthusiasm. On the other hand the 
Infantry endeavour to continue fire by volleys by word of command as long as possible, 
although in this case the loss of rate of fire is very marked. (See “Musketry Regula¬ 
tions,” 1898, page 82.) 
f It may very well be that some years of experience and trial will be necessary to 
meet the unforeseen difficulties which are certain to arise. It has taken close on ten 
years to evolve our existing field equipments. 
i Annual Report, School of Gunnery, Horse and Field Artillery, 1895, page 19. 
