Lethaface Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Whatever. You're missing the point. And you're wrong: Speed zero is still a speed. I have often encountered the usage, "He only has two speeds: stopped, and flat out." Given that it's a physical fact that you will only by sheer fluke hit another tank by shooting at it while moving at any speed with an unstabilised gun, why would you ever (barring obstacles) move slower than "as fast as you can"? Which is the whole point of the paragraph, which starts by telling you to drive as fast as you can. Why would the author specify "slow down to half speed to shoot" when in the previous sentence he said "you won't hit any better by slowing down (and you'll be easier to hit if you do)"? There is obviously some sort of error, whether it be typo, transcription, dictation, interpretation of jargon or some other failing between the brain of whoever conceived the advice and the copy that made it to "Halbe", because otherwise it's just a confusing paragraph which makes no consistent sense whatsoever. Also, what, exactly might be meant by "Half speed". It makes some sense in naval parlance, since the sea is largely devoid of hills, or the instruction can mean "half of maximum revolutions of the propellor", but in a tank, which can be driving in mud or on pavement, with a gear box to change what "half revolutions" means, it's pretty meaningless. If the tank can do 27kph on flat metalled road, does it mean that you should slow down to 13.5kph to shoot? When you might not be able to maintain 13kph on the surface you're crossing with the pedal to the metal? And what about a Panther, with its 55kph notional top speed: should the tank commander consider it ideal to fire while crossing a ploughed field at 27.5 kph? Of course these are rhetorical questions; the answers are clear: no, there is no practical advantage to be gained by firing at half a notional top speed, in any circumstance. It's nonsense. And another point: "the half" isn't a speed . Half is a speed, so "...should be only two speeds: the half (for firing!) and all out forward..." makes grammatical sense, and is consistent with widespread usage. The phrase sans elision does not and is not. I believe German permits "halbe" to be used as a quantifier without an article (or the article applies to the noun it's quantifying). A little sanity-checking simply shows there's a problem with advice paragraph 8, sentence 3. The simplest solution to resolve that problem is that the author meant to say "Der Halte", because that is consistent with both the advice given elsewhere in that paragraph and pamphlet, and the laws of physics. While I follow your point of logic regarding to firing on the move off autobahn with unstabilized guns, don't try to reason german language. There are rules for that! Not a native german speaker since I'm dutch, but your missing the point. 'Halt!' means stop (or rather like the English 'Halt!'). 'The' halte (die/das/der/den/dem/des whatever) is never an instruction to stop, apart from any slang someone might have come up with. Only if you think that a stop to allow for firing is in the same dimension as something like a busstop. And I know better since Deutsch is similar to Dutch, I have had to study die/das/der etc for 4+ years (although I now wish I had put some effort in it) and Dutch nor Deutsch is easy to learn for native English speakers. Ich halte nicht die Klappe! :-P Probably there just is a flaw in the original text or like other posted: inaccurate supressive fire is intended. By the way GeorgeMC, thanks for the text! Edited July 20, 2015 by Lethaface 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) I expected a discussion on this - juts not on German grammar! Who'd have thought Cheers Lethaface - I thought it was an interesting document covering armoured tactics and approaches at the small unit level e.g. company+ Edited July 22, 2015 by George MC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) All I can think of is this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KAfKFKBlZbM Edited July 22, 2015 by sburke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 All I can think of is thishttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KAfKFKBlZbM Too long since I last saw that one. "Don't do it again!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beersmurff Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Erm, no it emphatic expletive doesn't. It says it doesn't matter what speed they're moving, you can't expect to hit anything. The "half" later in that paragraph should be a "halt". You HALT for firing, but if you're moving, move FAST. It's an axiom in Sumo, too: "When you move, move. When you are not moving, be still." O' course the reasoning behind the two are a bit difference, but stillness == stability. Yes it does. Try look at the original German text in the link. Is says "halbe". Halbe means half. No typo. Für einen Panzer sollte es nur zwei Geschwindigkeiten geben: die Halbe (fürs Feuern ) und Vollgas voraus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Welcome to the party, Beersmurff. Prosit! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kohlenklau Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Get the party started! Horseshoes and hand grenades.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Party on! If we´d just have that "original" german text. Not that it matters.... It was already made clear repeatedly that you halt for fire, if you really want to "hit" something. Otherwise you can just "suppress" an appropiate (soft) target with moving fire, either with the gun, but more likely with machine guns, if range allows. Very close range armor vs. armor engagements, might allow moving point fire with chance of success as well. But we´re speaking of the norm and that´s what the paragraph is about. First time I´d seen that english translation of the whole text, was at Mad Matt´s combatmission.com site and translation from german "original", was credited to Fionn Kelly I think. The german snippets are equally faulted re translations (to german), from that original faulty translation (from german). Now again moving full speed, to reach the next Feuerhalt.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kohlenklau Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Would anyone donate to a kickstarter to raise funds for me to track down and buy the original? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rokko Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 "ich fuhr als vorderster Wagen, und da mir die Feuerhalte immer heikler wurden, preschte ich dem Waldrand zu, der mich deckte. [...]" This is an account I've just read, were Feuerhalte, so firing stops are mentioned, FWIW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.