Russia's military uses artillery "as a crutch" for other shortcomings, and it could be in trouble if it runs out, a recent think tank report said.
www.businessinsider.com
This echoes statements of some US, UK and Canadian general staff and battalion/divisional level officers on the Western front during WW2. A common complaint was that when faced with fixed defenses, the poor bloody infantry would rather wait/dig in and call in artillery support instead of advancing against fire (even possible fire).
Funnily enough, German officers thought similar things - that Western artillery was the decisive advantage on the battlefield and that allied troops weren't as willing to go forward as German troops without major artillery preparation/support. That may have simply been because German troops didn't have nearly as much artillery support, and so if they were to advance it was with less support by necessity.
US forces on the Western Front in November alone expended 2,507,000 rounds of 105mm artillery. 105mm typically accounted for between 70% and 75% of US shell consumption, so expenditure for all calibers was likely around 3,133,000 to 3,259,000 shells for the month.
The UK/Canadian forces shot off equally staggering amounts of 25 pounder and 5.5 inch. I'll have to dig out my copy of
The Guns of War but I seem to remember one battery of eight 25-pounders firing 14,000 shells in a two day period.
www.pravda.com.ua
