<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The years from 1865 to 1914 marked a golden age of tactical thought</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2026/03/the-years-from-1865-to-1914-marked-a-golden-age-of-tactical-thought/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2026/03/the-years-from-1865-to-1914-marked-a-golden-age-of-tactical-thought/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 09:53:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: T. Beholder</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2026/03/the-years-from-1865-to-1914-marked-a-golden-age-of-tactical-thought/comment-page-1/#comment-3762246</link>
		<dc:creator>T. Beholder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 02:38:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.isegoria.net/?p=54048#comment-3762246</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;The ascendancy of armor plate over gunshot and early shells was so fleeting that some analysts are prone to make light of the ram. But writings of the 1870s and 1880s extolled the ram.
&lt;/blockquote&gt; As usual. If it noticeably contributed to superiority of the Eternal Brit (or later Brit 2.0), it was Predestination, otherwise a fleeting fad.

Hence taunts like «But before, and before, and ever so long before...» from those in the know.

&lt;blockquote&gt;through a gauntlet of effective fire that was short, only a half mile deep at most.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Also, before the self-propelled torpedo, there was pole mine ram.

The first carrier ships launched mine boats.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Mines were a wicked and ungentlemanly threat in shallow water, but they were largely defensive and had to be planted by surface ships.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Offensive minelaying was a thing from IIRC the same Russia vs. Turkey war, but without a fast minelayer it required slow mine transports built for defensive work to tarry near a hostile port, thus obviously was only a very situational trick. The first minelayers designed to move and work reasonably quick were Amur &amp; Enisey, built in 1898-99.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The ascendancy of armor plate over gunshot and early shells was so fleeting that some analysts are prone to make light of the ram. But writings of the 1870s and 1880s extolled the ram.
</p></blockquote>
<p> As usual. If it noticeably contributed to superiority of the Eternal Brit (or later Brit 2.0), it was Predestination, otherwise a fleeting fad.</p>
<p>Hence taunts like «But before, and before, and ever so long before&#8230;» from those in the know.</p>
<blockquote><p>through a gauntlet of effective fire that was short, only a half mile deep at most.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Also, before the self-propelled torpedo, there was pole mine ram.</p>
<p>The first carrier ships launched mine boats.</p>
<blockquote><p>Mines were a wicked and ungentlemanly threat in shallow water, but they were largely defensive and had to be planted by surface ships.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Offensive minelaying was a thing from IIRC the same Russia vs. Turkey war, but without a fast minelayer it required slow mine transports built for defensive work to tarry near a hostile port, thus obviously was only a very situational trick. The first minelayers designed to move and work reasonably quick were Amur &amp; Enisey, built in 1898-99.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
