Talk:Counter-battery fire

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Counter-battery fire article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Technology / Weaponry

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

World War I

Aerial artillery spotting in WWI had nothing to do with counterbattery missions. Aircraft-directed artillery in WWI involved a lone gun or small battery firing at a pre-registered position, then the airplane radioed corrections after noting the fall of the first shots.

Uh? The above in totally incorrect, the main role of the corps squadron RFC was to acquire and destroy enemy batteries. Eg see http://nigelef.tripod.com/p_artyint-cb.htm Nfe (talk) 08:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Use of a novel or nonstandard term

Under 'target acquisition' a bullet point lists 'secret agents or epatries'. 'Epatries' is a word I do not know and cannot find reference to. It might be a misspelling of 'apatrides' or perhaps 'expatriot', though neither seems completely appropriate. BGriffin (talk) 16:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]