69 
A PLEA FOR HEAVY GUNS IN FORTRESS 
DEFENCE. | 
BY } 
CAPTAIN G. TYACKHEH, R.A. 
In the September number of the “Proceedings,””? Major Hickman, in 
a very able and interesting article on the “ Attack of a Modern Land 
Fortress,” disclaims at the outset any intention of approaching the 
subject in a dogmatic spirit. It is with the same disclaimer that I 
would preface the following remarks, which bear on one question in 
his article, viz.— 
“Why not eliminate heavy guns in permanent emplacements 
altogether from the defence?” 
To anyone approaching a subject like this pros and cons suggest 
themselves with equal readiness. Let us imagine a discussion between, 
say H. and 7.— 
T.—You say that guns in forts, unprotected with armour, must be 
quickly disabled and that they are in no case able to obtain the same 
amount of cover as howitzers. Would not guns on disappearing 
carriages with top shields be even more under cover, except at the 
moment of firing, than howitzers? 
H.—Your shield could be penetrated by high-angle fire, and the 
gun would betray its position the first time it rose to fire, and once 
that was noted its disablement by vertical fire would be easy. 
T—At Lydd in 1887, 30 rounds from an 8-inch M.L. howitzer were 
fired at a 6-inch H.P. emplacement with all the advantages of 
communication with the range party. The howitzer is said to have 
shot well, but only one hit was obtained on the shield and that glanced 
off harmlessly. 
You lay some stress on high explosive shells, but it has been shewn 
that when armour is struck, unless the shell penetrates, the effect of 
detonation on the armour is almost nil. 
When using vertical fire the velocity of the falling projectile is low, 
and the shell is not usually adapted to armour piercing, so that it 
would appear only necessary to slightly increase the strength of the 
over-head shield to make it impervious to high-angle fire. Shields of 
the present thickness “ Harveyed ” might be sufficient. 
‘he opening through which the gun rises could be automatically 
closed if desired as the gun descends. 
A 9-inch shell will not penetrate a 44-in. steel plate with the velocity 
due to falling from a height of about 7000 feet, and this is probably a 
more severe trial that is to be expected from any siege piece. 
2, VoL. XXII. 
