Study after WW2

[mblat]

Sometime after WW2 US has conducted a study of multiple engagements. The results of the study gave birth to moniker "The side that throws more lead - wins". Basically the result was that higher number of shots was preferable to accuracy of each individual shot.

I remember reading about on wikipedia, but for the life of me I can't find it. Does anybody remember name of the study or has a link?
Want to check something in it.

Thanks

[Lexicon Devil]

You should check out this book. It has a lot of the info you're talking about

https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psychological-Cost-Learning-Society/dp/0316040932

[DolphinFan]

Spray and pray.

[The War Wagon]

Spray and pray.

I think that high-pitched whirring noise, is Jeff Cooper - rotating at 10,000rpm in his grave...

[pacrat]

I think that high-pitched whirring noise, is Jeff Cooper - rotating at 10,000rpm in his grave...

Along with Chris Kyle, Carlos Hathcock, and Simo Hayha, just to name a few.

[smle-man]

I did a study on that subject when I was at the Ordnance officer advance course. Since the beginning of firearms, fire superiority wins more engagements than aimed accurate fire. Fire superiority pins the adversary in place to allow the attacking force to maneuver and either over-run the pinned force or cause them to retreat.

The Boer wars, the India Northwest frontier, and Afghanistan are exceptions.

[Verdha603]

Honestly it's a mixture of both putting more lead down range than the other fellow followed up with good marksmanship.

You need fire superiority and more lead downrange to pin or immobilize the enemy, that way you now have the ability to maneuver yourself into a better position to finish them off, namely because a target that sits still is a lot easier to hit than a moving one. It's a concept that the US learned from the German's in WWII and the utilization of said tactic hasn't really changed much since the 50's.

Granted if your thinking of the Post-WWII study that Colonel Grossman used in his book, On Killing, chances are you also read that in those same reports that combat was a more close range affair than the leadership was thinking, with an overwhelming majority of small arms fights occurring at relatively close range, on the order of 75% of all engagements were at or closer than 200 meters, and 90% at 300 meters or less, which put the proverbial nail in the coffin on the outdated concept of "We must have every soldier be an outstanding marksmen that can provide precise fire on a target out at 1000 meters on demand!" when the numbers spoke for themselves that you only need to get most of your soldiers to be good shots out to a third of that distance, and instead set aside time and energy to teach that kind of long range accuracy to an organization of dedicated snipers.

[all-cal]

You should check out this book. It has a lot of the info you're talking about

https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psych.../dp/0316040932

The book has some good points in it, but pays tribute to neo-communism, AKA the Democrat left.

[TheSpaceNeedle]

Since you guys are into this kind of thing. I'm gonna leave this right here.

http://thegca.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Use-of-Infantry-Weapons-and-Equipment-in-Korea-1952-reduced.pdf

[tnlrat37]

[Jimi Jah]

One 1000 lb bomb works better than a machine gun.

[Tom_SoCal]

Sometime after WW2 US has conducted a study of multiple engagements. The results of the study gave birth to moniker "The side that throws more lead - wins". Basically the result was that higher number of shots was preferable to accuracy of each individual shot.

I remember reading about on wikipedia, but for the life of me I can't find it. Does anybody remember name of the study or has a link?
Want to check something in it.

Thanks

An interesting and relevant topic.

[Epaphroditus]

What study? It was big bombs and shrapnel that did most if the damage. Small arms is way down the list.

Flu and dysentery are serious problems.

[crowbar]

S. L. A. Marshall and the ratio of fire?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03071848808445332?journalCode=rusi20

[OCEquestrian]

I think that high-pitched whirring noise, is Jeff Cooper - rotating at 10,000rpm in his grave...

Exactly right. Combat at average combat ranges is different than a one on one duel at CQB ranges\ ...