The New Technology of War
Tanks were massive killing machines, which could hold many goods and many men. This was an advantage because before tanks were invented, the soldiers had to walk to and from different battlefields under the risk of shellfire. The tanks were obviously bullet proof and protective and could move through the battlefield. They could go through wire entanglements and cross enemy trenches. This was useful to make a space for friendly soldiers to attack and could push back the enemy frontline a few miles. The tanks were strong enough to carry massive guns capable of blowing down enemy trench walls from a 100 metres away.
Ties meant that the enemy would be open so the friendly soldiers could shoot in. Because the tanks were so massive, they tear up mud by their caterpillar tracks, which make it a disadvantage for friendly troops to run and walk over. Many of the German trenches were too wide so the tank’s front fell into the trenches instead of going over. Consequently if the machine gunners were close to the tank, they could put sticky bombs on the side of it. The tanks were sometimes unreliable and most broke down at the start. This meant that lots of them would be a waste of money.
There were still many mechanical problems with tanks, but they proved themselves to be a weapon of the future. In the event, the full potential of the tank was not to be realised until it had been from its infantry support role. Once it appeared, backed by air power, the age of battlefield domination was over. Wars of movement were once possible. With machine guns the tanks were killing machines that were lethal. Machine guns: It provided rapid and sustained fire so you wouldn’t waste valuable time reloading the weapon.
This also meant that the enemy could be mowed down easily so that it could hold the frontline and was a very valuable defensive item. They were useful in planes because it was very hard to hit enemy planes so machine guns could fire randomly and fast so there would be a definite hit. The machine guns were very expensive and when in a time of war, countries were strapped for cash so they were very rare. They also used a lot of ammunition. Around 120 bullets were fired per minute so it would cost lots and lots of money to fuel it. The machine guns could not be used to attack because they were too heavy.
Also if their own troops were going across, then the machine gunners would have to stop because they would kill their own men. The machine guns were a great invention and provided a fresh new start for some future technology. It proved useful in many battles. These machines mainly won some of these battles. Gas: The gas method was deadly and had never been seen before. It could spread through walls and trenches and went as far as it could until it diffused. This meant that you didn’t always have to hit the right spot while releasing the gas.
The gas could also kill people fast and could cloud the vision of many people so they would wander out, linking it to the tanks and so the tanks could move across without being seen or heard if the soldiers had gas masks on until the tanks came close. Usually to attack you would need to lose a few men at least but this new method meant that no friendly soldier would be hurt in the process. Although gas could kill quickly, it took a long time to get to its destination just like a zeppelin. Lots of gas was really needed to kill the enemy soldiers because the gas needed to be dense.
This meant that it was expensive to use the gas and it wasn’t always effective because most of the soldiers had gas masks after a few months. This meant that gas could be totally ineffective and so it would be such a waste of money on the gas. Gas, of course, could accidentally come back to your own trenches from wind coming your way. Gas was highly feared by many humans throughout Europe because many rumours had gone around that it was the work of the devil and could kill anything so when gasmasks were introduced it meant that many people were rushing around for them like they were a saviour.
Planes and Zeppelins: Planes and zeppelins were very useful because there was warfare everywhere. On land, under ground and on water but now in the air. It was useful because no guns were able to fire up at 180i?? so planes were very unlikely to get shot down. They could drop bombs straight down on the enemy. This meant they could be accurate. Planes are linked with machineguns because of the use of them in planes so you didn’t have to be accurate to shoot fighter planes. Zeppelins could be massive transport carriers of weapons and other goods.
These sorts of machines would take a lot of time to make and be expensive which makes them like tanks. They were not always in the air and so had hangers and such where lots of bombers could easily blow them up before they could get into the air. Like most of technology, both sides would always find out the secret of the new machine so battles in the sky would always take place and would normally be a long battle or a stalemate. Planes were lightweight because they could not fly if they weren’t so this meant they had no armour so were unreliable.
Planes and zeppelins were not used until the Second World War because earlier planes were unsuccessful and zeppelins hadn’t been invented yet. But planes were found to be useful and they evolved around the war. The zeppelins were massive airplanes like air tanks ready to drop massive bombs. Modern Technology These modern methods were more effective, accurate and much more reliable. The older methods included horses, which were fast, but as animals they needed feeding, looking after and they needed rest so that meant they would have to wait prolonged periods for the chance to attack.
It would cost money to feed the horse. They needed medicine to look after the horse as well. Dogs and pigeons were also used in the war for communication. Pigeons could fly distances of up to 60 miles and 80% of messages got through. But radio messages and telegraph wires were much more useful and would have direct contact with HQ and all messages would get through. So the older methods were fine for the time. Most battles did not take place and were stalemates so the newer technology was needed to break the stalemate and reach a quicker end of a battle, meaning a quicker war.
But machine guns were meant to defend trenches and so were effective that they caused most of the stalemates. Many people had good ideas but tanks were the best and this pushed back enemy lines because enemy machine guns could not shoot them and waves of soldiers followed behind them. But tanks were for blowing up artillery not soldiers. So the army needed a weapon for killing masses of soldiers. The answer was gas. At first gas was used to knockout enemy soldiers but gradually more lethal gases were introduced.
To kill, blind, maim and blister the enemy. Gas broke stalemates easily 178,500 British were hurt and 7,500 killed by gas. The Germans had 101,650 hurt and 5,350 killed. But then gas masks were invented and gas became so useless that some other machine was needed. Planes were used in earlier wars but were not effective but now new types were available so armies tried them and they seemed unstoppable by guns because they were so fast and there were battles in the air but as per usual there were guns to shoot down planes.
So many new inventions were made and were, as you can see from my evidence, much more effective then old fashioned methods but there was always something to stop the new technology. The best defensive weapon is apparent to be the machinegun out of the new and old technology. This is because of the way it mowed down the enemy soldiers coming towards the trench.
The best technology for attack was the planes because of their ability to pass over anything and have no boundaries unlike tanks, which can’t pass over some trenches. They were able to break the stalemate by bombing front trenches and pushing the enemy back. “New Technology and inventions were vital in breaking the stalemate in the war on the western front and completely replaced older fashioned methods. ” To discuss this we need to look at different parts of the sentence. To start off with “New technology and inventions were vital to break the stalemate in the war” can be discussed easily.
It says that they were vital but they were not only used to break the stalemate they were used also to keep the stalemate (machine guns). Some were not vital to the breaking of the stalemate but some were just used to destroy the trenches but not actually cause enough damage to break the stalemate and push the enemy back. The second part of the sentence is “… and completely replaced older fashioned methods. ” The word completely should not be used because if all the modern technology failed then the soldiers would have to rely on the older methods.
So the word “completely” should be changed to “parts”. The fact is that nothing is ever totally replaced or exterminated. For example small pox is still around in the world today but not in Europe and that is why it is like the new technology. It may have replaced the older fashioned methods in Europe but it still did not replace it in the whole world. For example in China at that time, many horses were still used at the time. This sentence only complies with the positive side of the effect of modern technology.
It uses two main facts to present the idea that the modern technology was only good. Coming into the new century was a big time for the old 19th century people. They were a new generation of invention lovers who were not afraid of the new technology unlike the generation before them. So they welcomed the new machines not fearing what damage they could do because they had only experienced mostly good things from new machines. Conclusion: The whole point of the essay was not to find out both sides of the modern weapon findings.
As I went over the project I found different ideas and views on how technology was good and needed and how European Warfare would have been better off without it. I found out which machines were useful and which caused more hassle than good. I found why people views were what they were and whether they were good enough or not. At first before I came into this project fully, my views were that all technology was for the best but some were not and some were vital for peace. Weapons can be used for peace but they are mostly used for war. I found that tanks, if not invented, would surely effect the damage felt on Britain.
Most probably increasing it because of the way the British used it so much. I had also found that if the German machine gun had not been invented, that the Germans may have lost the war much quicker because of the way they fiercely mowed down enemy soldiers heading towards the trenches. I found that many people had to put their trust in the machines and use them because of the inevitable increase in use of them. Many people I have read about have pushed for an technological advance in weapon warfare where others have the sure belief that it will all end up wrong.