Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!purdue!iuvax!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Battleships and bombardment
Keywords: shore bombardment vs. TacAir
Message-ID: <5986@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 27 Apr 89 03:10:58 GMT
Organization: The lowly undergrads of Purdue
Lines: 20
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: ee.ecn.purdue.edu!rowland (Hellfire)

>From what I've read, shelling by big guns has a far larger psychological effect
on a land army than bombing by TacAir.  I can't really explain it but part of 
it is that you see it coming and can't do a thing about it while with TacAir 
it's quick without a chance to prepare for it.  Maybe it makes no sense but
I think I know what I'm trying to say.  

Anyway the value of big guns for landing support can't be underestimated.  Also
big guns can switch targets very quickly while air strikes take time.

Just my 2 cents on the subject.--Andy

----
Hellfire       					     F.U.N. X G.P.A. = CONSTANT
ARPA: rowland@en.ecn.purdue.edu
UUCP: {ucbvax,rutgers,iuvax}!pur-ee!rowland
BITNET: rowland%ecn.purdue.edu@purccvm.bitnet