ROBOT MACHINE-GUN

Greymouth Evening Star, 13 October 1939, Page 10

ROBOT MACHINE-GUN

VALUE AND DISADVANTAGES SYDNEY, September 30. . Machine-guns fired from a distance by automatic control such as the French have reported finding amid the many German traps and obstacles barring the path to the Siegfried Line may sound fantastic, yet every new war device should be examined with a judicial mind, says the military correspondent of the ‘‘Sun.” Maiiy other devices, such as the tank, for example, were regarded as grotesque when they were first mooted, yet'they have come to be accepted as part of the normal equipment of a modern fighting force.' 'There are distinct disadvantages to remote control of machine-guns. It would prevent adjustment 'of a jammed gun and would prevent also the switching of the fire of the gun in any. direction needed. To achieve success the military mind must be flexible and not bound rigidly by tradition. We must not airily dismiss the robot-controlled ma-chine-gun as absurd or a. Wellsian dream. A number of them could lay down a screen of lead which for a time would become very troublesome to an attacking force. . Jt is well known that' the ‘ British have a robot aeroplane.-which flies itself. For peace time experiments this aeroplane has proved itself most useful in providing a realistic target for anti-aircraft gunners, and also a test of the effectiveness of anti-aircraft defence in the Navy. The extension of the use of robot-controlled-weapons on land is worthy of consideration. In fact, every new suggestion, no matter how fantastic it may appear at first sight, should be thoroughly examined. In the past the conservative heads of our Army and Navy have resisted change and frowned on the inventor.

It would be a simple matter to fire a machine-gun on a fixed target or a fixed field of fire from a distant control post. The advantage gained would be the protection of the gun crew, but the disadvantages would far outweigh the advantages. Machine-guns have a bad habit of jamming. An expert gunner is able to adjust the damage or replace parts in a few seconds, but a robot-controlled gun could not be repaired. Once the gun jammed it would be out of action.

If the gun is operated by electric control, the wire from the control post to the gun would possibly be destroyed by gunfire during the battle, thus putting the gun out of action.

In the last war our signallers knew too well how often the telephone lines from headquarters to headquarters were cut during a. bombardment, and what risks they ran in repairing the break under shell fire. A man-handled gun can switch its fire in any direction, but it is doubtful if a robot gun could be so manipulated. At times machine-gunners are forced to change their position during a buttle, in which case they lake the gun with them to the new position. Under such circumstances the robot gun would be lost. Another difficulty is the reloading of the gun after a belt of ammunition lias been expended. ANZAC EXAMPLE. In spite of all these difficulties .1 can visualise a very effective defence by j robot-controlled macliine.-gu.ns. A 1

covered by fire. The control post could be in a concrete pill-box with observation over the front. ‘ On the approach of the attackers the guns would be fired to provide a screen of lead through which the attackers could not pass. The idea is not so fantastic as at first appears, but there are many difficulties to overcome before it becomes practical. At Anzac, the Australians evolved robot rifles which, fired automatically. Each was arranged to fire at different times. These were used to deceive the Turks at the time of the evacuation from the Peninsula. For some time after all the men had left the trenches and embarked in the boats the automatic firing of these rifles was heard by the Turks, who concluded that our troops were still ashore. While machine-guns can be automatically controlled, field guns could not.' The automatic loading and unloading of field guns would require an expensive and cumbersome mechanism. The greatest difficulty, however, is to fix the gun so that the recoil would not shift off its line of sight. The gun mounting would have to be strengthened and the emplacement made of concrete.

The robot aeroplane may, too, some day be used in battle, but that day is not yet.

While a few ’planes may be robotcontrolled. it would be impossible to control a large number in any one sector. Accurate bombing would be impossible, as the speed of the ’plane is affected by wind and weather. Battles are won not by mechanical armaments, but by the men controlling them, 'fhe commander can prepare perfect plans, but once battle is joined he loses control, and junior commanders are left' to work out their own problems on the spot when some unforseen circumstance arises.

The tide of battle has often been turned by a superhuman effort of one small unit —even of one man. In war it is courage and determination that counts.

The equipment of the Australians in the last war was no better than that of the Germans. The German battle plans were usually well prepared, yet Australian troops were able to defeat them. They overcame them in attack. They defeated them in defence. They did this because they were fighters who fought with their heads as w’ell as their arms.