Talk:Enfilade and defilade

message: I was wondering what a phrase like "enfilading to 400 meters" means. See the page on the Jarmann M1884. One of its specs is "Enfilading	438 m (1,437 ft)", and it gives no explanation to what that means on the page (or anywhere convenient I can find on the internet). Fresheneesz 19:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Enfilading of a gun

message: In this article's discussions of aiming a gun, people talk about "rotation", but there are different kinds of rotation...optics nomenclature has "tip and tilt", while pilot jargon has "yaw, pitch and roll".  I understand the artillery term for the kind of rotation discussed here is "traverse"...but it actually took some thinking to figure out what the text of this article meant. --Joel 17:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  rotate 

message: Two frigates exchanging fire side by side point blank can not possibly be an illustration of the concept of "defilade" as defined in the article ("protected from direct exposure to enemy fire").  Either "defilade" has a second naval-specific meaning along the lines of "firing on an enemy perpendicularly to the long axis of their formation", which would clarify (by contrast) its relation to "enfilade" (or more specifically, to "raking fire"), or the picture included to exemplify the concept is simply wrong and needs to be changed/removed.
I also wondered about the photo, and the only definitions of "defilade" I can find all refer to the "reverse-slope" protected position in land warfare.  I've removed the photo, which to me is an example of ships exchanging broadside fire. GMan552 04:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration 

message: Could someone who knows how to pronounce these words add pronunciation to the article?
Also, I agree with the commentor above who suggested that these should really be separate articles; they don't seem to be related concepts (or at least, not closely related). cmadler (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the article so it says what the main source (Bellamy) says, so now the concepts are related. I've linked wiktionary for pronunciation. --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 

message: Apart from the single description of the direction of fire through a column or line, and protection by means of natural barriers etc. nothing else in this article makes any sense. i'd normally just delete whole parts of it and declare it a stubby stub!! But i'll instead let user:Kubanczyk JUST DO IT!!! lol 115.242.20.61 (talk) 10:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article doesn't make any sense 

message: I've added the actual origins of the strategies which were invented after the Battle of Bannockburn and before the start of the Battle of Dupplin Moor in 1332. It seems the French have been in English articles again lol. Twobells (talk) 12:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the strategies 

message: Currently the article claims that the English first invented the concept of enfilading fire sometime in the fourteenth century A.D. This is dubious since deliberately positioning archers for enfilade fire is well attested in battles many centuries beforehand, including enfilade being explicitly called out in other articles on this encyclopedia (e.g., Battle_of_Taginae in the sixth century A.D., which is slightly earlier than the fourteenth). Enfilade is also well known in classical fortification as well as pitched battles (as noted in, e.g., Encyclopedia Britannica, on fortifications in classical antiquity, "Fortifications in antiquity were designed primarily to defeat attempts at escalade, though cover was provided for archers and javelin throwers along the ramparts and for enfilade fire from flanking towers. [...] Roman fortresses of the 2nd century CE, largely designed for logistic and administrative convenience, tended to have square or rectangular outlines, and were situated along major communication routes. By the late 3rd century, their walls had become thicker and had flanking towers strengthened to support mechanical artillery.").
Considering such sources I don't think a claim that the fourteenth-century English invented the entire concept of enfilade can be made. It seems likelier that they reinvented or perhaps re-emphasized a tactic that had existed long before. Comments on changing the article to reflect this?
(Also, I tried to check the BB link that this claim is cited to, but it seems to have fallen to link rot).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aithiopika (talk • contribs) 22:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing English invention to English reinvention/re-emphasis?