Question: What year was the ADGB created?

Answer: 1925

<hl> The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925 . <hl> However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!").

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in <hl> 1925 <hl>. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!").

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in <hl> 1925 <hl> .


Question: Who is probably the one who coined the term archie for anti-aircraft guns?

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!").

Answer: Amyas Borton

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. <hl> Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!"). <hl>

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by <hl> Amyas Borton <hl> and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!").


Question: What George Robey line is believed to have started the archie nickname?

Answer: "Archibald, certainly not!"

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. <hl> Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!" ) <hl> .

The term air defence was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in the UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After the First World War it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line <hl> "Archibald, certainly not!" <hl>).

Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA"); and archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line <hl> "Archibald, certainly not!" <hl> )


Question: What is the first purpose of air defence?

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

Answer: detect hostile aircraft

<hl> The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. <hl> The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

The essence of air defence is to <hl> detect hostile aircraft <hl> and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.


Question: What is the second purpose of air defence?

Answer: destroy them

<hl> The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them . <hl> The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and <hl> destroy them <hl>. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and <hl> destroy them <hl> .


Question: What is the critical issue in air defence?

Answer: to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. <hl> The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space ; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. <hl> This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is <hl> to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space <hl>; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

The critical issue is <hl> to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space <hl> ; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position.


Question: Projectiles must either be guided to the target or aimed where?

Answer: at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. <hl> This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it , taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile. <hl>

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed <hl> at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it <hl>, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed <hl> at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it <hl> , taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.


Question: What two things must be considered in regards to the projectile and target?

Answer: speed and direction

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. <hl> This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile. <hl>

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account <hl> speed and direction <hl> of both the target and the projectile.


Question: What does NATO define as passive measures to protect people, buildings and equipment from air or missile attacks?

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.

Answer: Passive air defence

<hl> Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". <hl> It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.

<hl> Passive air defence <hl> is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.


Question: Which group is heavily responsible for passive air defence?

Answer: ground forces

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". <hl> It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. <hl> Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by <hl> ground forces <hl> and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.


Question: Passive air defence includes camouflage and what?

Answer: concealment

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". <hl> It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. <hl> Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and <hl> concealment <hl> to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.


Question: What was camouflaged during World War II?

Answer: important buildings

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. <hl> Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. <hl> During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging <hl> important buildings <hl> were common in the Second World War. During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.


Question: Some airfield runways were painted green during what war?

Answer: the Cold War

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. <hl> During the Cold War the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green. <hl>

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings were common in the Second World War. During <hl> the Cold War <hl> the runways and taxiways of some airfields were painted green.


Question: How many guns or missile launchers are typically in a battery?

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

Answer: 2 to 12

<hl> The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. <hl> These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with <hl> 2 to 12 <hl> guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.


Question: In addition to guns or missile launchers, what else comprises the battery?

Answer: fire control elements

<hl> The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements . <hl> These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and <hl> fire control elements <hl>. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and <hl> fire control elements <hl> .


Question: Where do batteries typically get deployed?

Answer: in a small area

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. <hl> These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area , although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. <hl> SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy <hl> in a small area <hl>, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy <hl> in a small area <hl> , although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems.


Question: Which missile batteries often have individual launchers several kilometres from one another?

Answer: SHORAD

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. <hl> SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. <hl> When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. <hl> SHORAD <hl> missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.


Question: Several dozen teams can deploy individually in small sections when what is handled by a specialist?

Answer: MANPADS

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. <hl> When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs. <hl>

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When <hl> MANPADS <hl> is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.


Question: It was understood that ammunition needed to explode where?

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

Answer: in the air

The first issue was ammunition. <hl> Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air . <hl> Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode <hl> in the air <hl>. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode <hl> in the air <hl> .


Question: In addition to high explosive, what else was used?

Answer: shrapnel

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. <hl> Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. <hl> Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and <hl> shrapnel <hl> were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.


Question: Airburst fuses could be which two things?

Answer: igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork)

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. <hl> Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork) . <hl> Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either <hl> igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork) <hl>. Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

Airburst fuses were either <hl> igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork) <hl> .


Question: What were hydrogen filled balloons called?

Answer: Zeppelins

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. <hl> Zeppelins , being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. <hl> The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. <hl> Zeppelins <hl>, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

<hl> Zeppelins <hl> , being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream.


Question: What was used as targets in training practices?

Answer: Smoke shells

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. <hl> Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training. <hl>

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuses were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuses were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuse length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder was affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuses, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. <hl> Smoke shells <hl> were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.


Question: What was the primary method for HAA fire?

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Answer: aimed fire

<hl> Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. <hl> Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, <hl> aimed fire <hl> was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.


Question: Along with predicting the gun data from tracking the target, what else needed to be known about the target to enable the aimed fire?

Answer: its height

<hl> Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height . <hl> Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having <hl> its height <hl>. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having <hl> its height <hl> .


Question: Another assumption was that the target would maintain a steady course along with what other two factors?

Answer: speed and height

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. <hl> Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height . <hl> This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, <hl> speed and height <hl>. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, <hl> speed and height <hl> .


Question: Targets could be how many feet for the HAA to engage them?

Answer: 24,000 feet

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. <hl> This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet . <hl> Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to <hl> 24,000 feet <hl>. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

This HAA was to engage targets up to <hl> 24,000 feet <hl> .


Question: What kind of fuses were needed?

Answer: Mechanical

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. <hl> Mechanical , as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. <hl> Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. <hl> Mechanical <hl>, as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

<hl> Mechanical <hl> , as opposed to igniferous, time fuses were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuse length was not a simple function of time of flight.


Question: When were improvements developed for these guns?

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

Answer: throughout the inter-war period

<hl> The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period . <hl> However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed <hl> throughout the inter-war period <hl>. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed <hl> throughout the inter-war period <hl> .


Question: What year was the M1 version approved?

Answer: 1940

The M1 version was approved in 1940 .

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. <hl> The M1 version was approved in 1940 . <hl> During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in <hl> 1940 <hl>. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The M1 version was approved in <hl> 1940 <hl> .


Question: Only a few of the 105 mm static mounting AA guns were produced because work had started on which other gun?

Answer: 90 mm AA gun

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. <hl> However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun , with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. <hl> The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the <hl> 90 mm AA gun <hl>, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the <hl> 90 mm AA gun <hl> , with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets.


Question: When did work begin on the 105 mm static mounting AA gun?

Answer: 1924

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. <hl> However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. <hl> The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in <hl> 1924 <hl> work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.


Question: What kind of guns did the United States end WW I with?

Answer: two 3-inch AA guns

<hl> The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. <hl> However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

The US ended World War I with <hl> two 3-inch AA guns <hl> and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.


Question: Which country's air defence and aircraft has been under integrated command and control?

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

Answer: Soviet Union

<hl> In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. <hl> However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the <hl> Soviet Union <hl> and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.


Question: What other group has also been under this integrated command and control?

Answer: NATO's Allied Command Europe

<hl> In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe , ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. <hl> However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and <hl> NATO's Allied Command Europe <hl>, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and <hl> NATO's Allied Command Europe <hl> , ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control.


Question: Who will deploy their own air defence if their is an air threat?

Answer: forces in the field

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. <hl> However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field , wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. <hl> A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, <hl> forces in the field <hl>, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, <hl> forces in the field <hl> , wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat.


Question: What can be deployed as an offensive measure to refuse airspace use to an opponent?

Answer: A surface-based air defence capability

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. <hl> A surface-based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent. <hl>

In some countries, such as Britain and Germany during the Second World War, the Soviet Union and NATO's Allied Command Europe, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. However, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. <hl> A surface-based air defence capability <hl> can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.


Question: What did the United States Army begin to develop after the first World War?

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

Answer: a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon

<hl> After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon , designed by John M. Browning. <hl> It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing <hl> a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon <hl>, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing <hl> a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon <hl> , designed by John M. Browning.


Question: Who designed this cannon?

Answer: John M. Browning

<hl> After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning . <hl> It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by <hl> John M. Browning <hl>. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by <hl> John M. Browning <hl> .


Question: How many rounds did this cannon fire per second?

Answer: 125

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. <hl> However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. <hl> The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired <hl> 125 <hl> rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.


Question: What replaced the Browning 37nn because of jamming issues?

Answer: Bofors 40 mm

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. <hl> The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm . <hl> The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the <hl> Bofors 40 mm <hl>. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the <hl> Bofors 40 mm <hl> .


Question: What other US group was interested in the Bofors?

Answer: US Navy

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. <hl> The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy , but none were acquired before 1939. <hl> Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the <hl> US Navy <hl>, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

The Bofors had attracted attention from the <hl> US Navy <hl> , but none were acquired before 1939.


Question: High altitude needs in Germany were going to be handled by what?

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Answer: a 75 mm gun from Krupp

<hl> Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp , designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. <hl> In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by <hl> a 75 mm gun from Krupp <hl>, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by <hl> a 75 mm gun from Krupp <hl> , designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance.


Question: Who also collaborated in the design of the 75 mm gun?

Answer: Bofors

<hl> Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors , but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. <hl> In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart <hl> Bofors <hl>, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart <hl> Bofors <hl> , but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance.


Question: Because higher performance was needed, Krupp's workers designed what?

Answer: a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. <hl> In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36 . <hl> First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented <hl> a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36 <hl>. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

In response Krupp's engineers presented <hl> a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36 <hl> .


Question: Where was the first place the FlaK 36 was used?

Answer: Spain

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. <hl> First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks. <hl>

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in <hl> Spain <hl> during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.


Question: What war was the FlaK first used in?

Answer: Spanish Civil War

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. <hl> First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War , the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks. <hl>

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. First used in Spain during the <hl> Spanish Civil War <hl>, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.

First used in Spain during the <hl> Spanish Civil War <hl> , the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light, medium, and even early heavy tanks.


Question: What was one of the most often seen weapons that was used both on land and sea?

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

Answer: 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system

<hl> A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. <hl> The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the <hl> 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system <hl> was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.


Question: What weapons system did American troops use but received minute attention?

Answer: Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. <hl> The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. <hl> Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar <hl> Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems <hl> of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.


Question: How many of the M2HB guns were mounted together on the M45 Quadmount weapons system?

Answer: four

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. <hl> Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. <hl> Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as <hl> four <hl> of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.


Question: This system was a direct answer to what?

Answer: the Flakvierling

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. <hl> Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling ),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. <hl> Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to <hl> the Flakvierling <hl>),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.

Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to <hl> the Flakvierling <hl> ),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft.


Question: The combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread how far apart from each other?

Answer: many kilometers

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. <hl> Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft. <hl>

A plethora of anti-aircraft gun systems of smaller calibre were available to the German Wehrmacht combined forces, and among them the 1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system was one of the most often-seen weapons, seeing service on both land and sea. The similar Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems of the American forces were also quite capable, although they receive little attention. Their needs could cogently be met with smaller-calibre ordnance beyond using the usual singly-mounted M2 .50 caliber machine gun atop a tank's turret, as four of the ground-used "heavy barrel" (M2HB) guns were mounted together on the American Maxson firm's M45 Quadmount weapons system (as a direct answer to the Flakvierling),which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread <hl> many kilometers <hl> apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defence from enemy aircraft.


Question: What acted as a physical obstacle to anti-aircraft defence?

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Answer: barrage balloons

<hl> Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. <hl> The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of <hl> barrage balloons <hl> to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.


Question: What were barrage balloons initially used as an obstacle to?

Answer: bomber aircraft over cities

<hl> Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. <hl> The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to <hl> bomber aircraft over cities <hl> and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.


Question: How was a barrage balloon tethered to the ground?

Answer: steel cable

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. <hl> Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. <hl> Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the <hl> steel cable <hl> were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.


Question: What did pilots have to do to avoid the barrage balloons?

Answer: fly at a higher altitude

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. <hl> Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude , which was more favorable for the guns. <hl> Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to <hl> fly at a higher altitude <hl>, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.

Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to <hl> fly at a higher altitude <hl> , which was more favorable for the guns.


Question: What kind of success did barrage balloons have as far as bringing down aircraft?

Answer: minimal

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. <hl> Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences. <hl>

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defence was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had <hl> minimal <hl> success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defences.


Question: What is an important number when it comes to guns engaging an aircraft?

The maximum distance at which a gun or missile can engage an aircraft is an important figure. However, many different definitions are used but unless the same definition is used, performance of different guns or missiles cannot be compared. For AA guns only the ascending part of the trajectory can be usefully used. One term is 'ceiling', maximum ceiling being the height a projectile would reach if fired vertically, not practically useful in itself as few AA guns are able to fire vertically, and maximum fuse duration may be too short, but potentially useful as a standard to compare different weapons.

Answer: The maximum distance

<hl> The maximum distance at which a gun or missile can engage an aircraft is an important figure. <hl> However, many different definitions are used but unless the same definition is used, performance of different guns or missiles cannot be compared. For AA guns only the ascending part of the trajectory can be usefully used. One term is 'ceiling', maximum ceiling being the height a projectile would reach if fired vertically, not practically useful in itself as few AA guns are able to fire vertically, and maximum fuse duration may be too short, but potentially useful as a standard to compare different weapons.

<hl> The maximum distance <hl> at which a gun or missile can engage an aircraft is an important figure. However, many different definitions are used but unless the same definition is used, performance of different guns or missiles cannot be compared. For AA guns only the ascending part of the trajectory can be usefully used. One term is 'ceiling', maximum ceiling being the height a projectile would reach if fired vertically, not practically useful in itself as few AA guns are able to fire vertically, and maximum fuse duration may be too short, but potentially useful as a standard to compare different weapons.