H101 RD: House, Jonathan M., Toward Combined Arms Warfare: A Survey of 20th-Century Tactics, Doctrine, and
Organization. Research Survey No. 2, pages 7–18. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Institute Press, August
H 101RB: War, Society, and the Structure of Military Revolution
Reading H101 RB Too Busy to Learn by Robert H. Scales House extract
H111RA: World War I—Birth of Combined Arms Warfare Reading H111RA The Dardanelles and Gallipoli
by William R. Griffiths
H101RD: War, Society, and the Structure of Military Revolution Past Revolutions, Future Transformations What can the history of revolutions in military affairs tell us about transforming the US ...view middle of the document...
Not only did these smaller unit formations, based on Roman formations and only three or four ranks deep, allow for greater maneuverability and fighting power, but their adoption affected many aspects of military organization and administration.
In addition to these changes in formation, armies began to replace the pike and the lance with small arms and artillery, a move which perhaps created the need for linear formations in the first place. Because taking advantage of these smaller formations, now armed with more complicated weapons, required a greater degree of training, drill, and discipline, the officer corps of European armies grew dramatically in size during this time. One social consequence of this need for officers was that the army became, for many Europeans, a social elevator. Yet one must also admit that military events of late suggest major changes in technology and weapons with substantial implications for conducting war in the next century.
Core competency of concepts and technology are usual suspect which identifies who the dominant force is between two opposing forces. Core competency is the fundamental ability that provides the foundation for a set of military capabilities. A few examples from the H100 readings are; the ability of a longbow man to put an arrow accurately through the chain mail armor of a knight on horseback or a man-at-arms on the ground at ranges of 250–300 yards was a core competency of the English archers, the ability to gun down as many of the opposing force with automatic gun fire coming from one gun operated by one gunner and his assistant most effectively used by the German formations first then alter adopted by the American forces, and the ability to deliver accurate naval gunfire at ranges upwards of 20 miles was a core competency of the surface combat units of the U.S. Navy.
However the outcome is decided, great losses are always incurred by the opposing forces. This was so ever evident during World War I on the battle...