Towed Versus Self-Propelled Artillery in the Period Prior to 1955: An Historical Investigation of the Argument in the United States Army

Abstract

Field artillery must move rapidly as well as shoot accurately in order to do its job. An important argument as to the best way to move cannon has been, and still is, the argument of towed versus self-propelled artillery. The purpose of this paper is to chronicle and analyze this argument in the U.S. Army prior to 1955. The analysis shows that, of the many reasons cited in the argument, only self-propelled artillery's advantage of rapid occupation of position and its disadvantage of heavy weight were significant reasons. The paper concludes that by 1955 there was not a preponderance of opinion for either mode exclusively, which was quite proper, as there were many improvements to be made to both forms of artillery transport.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
May 10, 1966
Accession Number
ADA364867

Entities

People

  • Albert C. Bole

Organizations

  • United States Army Command and General Staff College

Tags

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Ammunition
  • Artillery
  • Artillery Tactics
  • Artillery Technology
  • Artillery Units
  • Combat Forces
  • Gun Support Equipment
  • Guns
  • Howitzers
  • Indirect Fire
  • Self Propelled
  • Self Propelled Guns
  • Tracked Vehicles
  • United States
  • Vehicles
  • Warfare
  • Weapons

Readers

  • Logistics and Supply Chain Management.
  • Military History / Militaries and War Studies
  • ballistics.