392 
FIELD ARTILLERY POSITIONS. 
your target at all, Major Keir goes on to suggest that with his 
proposed method of firing from behind cover , “ with practice, changes 
of target cau be made as rapidly from behind cover as by the 
direct method.” And also “ by this method the same latitude of 
field of fire is open to a battery using aiming posts and forming one 
of a number in a line of guns as to a battery using direct method, for 
neither can make a change of front without impeding the fir© of the 
Field Artii other batteries on either or both flanks.” I confess I cannot follow 
him here. A battery in position which gives the first advantage laid 
down for an artillery position—a clear view over the sights of the- 
target and of all ground on to which it is probable fire may have to 
be turned—can change its line of fire 45° to either side without any 
change of front by a simple movement of the trails. Major Keir 
supposes his guns in action in such a position that the No. 1 standing on 
the carriage can just see the target over the crest in front. To change 
target then the No. I has to mount up again, direct the gun on to the 
new target and get the aiming post planted. If all goes smooth this 
must take much longer than a simple movement of the trail; but 
suppose the No. 1, having mounted on the carriage, cannot see the new 
target ? and this will probably be the case. A new position, from 
which all the Nos. 1 mounted (on their horses this time) can see the 
new target, must be reconnoitred and occupied, and. then, to add to 
the difficulty, the question of impeding the fire of the other batteries 
by this change of front must not be forgotten. 
IV.—You cannot fire at moving targets at all. 
Far more important than the question of change of target is that of 
moving targets. I will only take the main points, leaving out such 
details as that Major Keir assumes the only pace for cavalry on the 
battle-field, is the gallop. He states that the regulation method of 
firing at moving targets “ assumes that the attacker will advance over 
a level plain and be visible during the whole advance;” such an 
Annu^Re. assumption is absolutely new to me and certainly not warranted by 
Gunnery, anything in Field Artillery Drill. It must be somewhat of a surprise to 
Meld Artii- officers who have practised here; our targets certainly never advance 
iery, 1895 . over a level plain, nor are they in all cases visible during the whole 
“Proceed a ^ vance ’ our cavalry targets certainly do not attack a battery “ over 
mgs, 5 ’ a mile of clear and open ground by a purely frontal attack, after 
Feb., 1896. h ay i n g gi ven it time to pick up the range.” One of the great points 
brought out by the trial of the regulation method when tested against 
another proposed by various officers was that “its advantages are 
especially apparent when the advance of the target is irregular.” 
Even more extraordinary than the assumption quoted above is this 
declaration of faith :—“ To sum up in one general creed. The 
moving target, though most useful as an exercise at the practice camp, 
will rarely be able to be practised in its entirety on the manoeuvre 
ground.” 
Until I came to the summing up I presumed that “ on the manoeuvre 
ground” was a slip for “on the battle-field,” but I find that it is 
