Talk:Enfilade and defilade

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST 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.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Enfilading of a gun[edit]

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

Separate articles?[edit]

Although these sound like intimately related concepts, I think that is just a linguistic coincidence, ie. they happen to rhyme. they actually refer to different concepts, firing position and type of cover, and I think they should be in separate articles.

Second Throktar 23:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I don't see why they are presented together. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I also agree. They seem to be vaguely related, but not so close that they should share a single article. cmadler (talk) 13:13, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
no Disagree I think the intro section misdefines the term defilade, and this is why you fail to see relation. Enfilade is for firing position, yes. But defilade is a much simpler idea than "type of cover [...]", defilade means "defense against enfilade". No sense to discuss one without discussing other. Split the article and you will have close to 100% content duplication and all the hassle. --Kubanczyk (talk) 12:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
If that's the case, then the article is in desperate need of rewriting by someone who understands the relationship. (Not me!) cmadler (talk) 12:39, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 Done --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


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

 Done --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


Two frigates exchanging fire side by side point blank can not possibly be an illustration of the concept of "defilade" as defined in the article ("protected from direct exposure to enemy fire"). Either "defilade" has a second naval-specific meaning along the lines of "firing on an enemy perpendicularly to the long axis of their formation", which would clarify (by contrast) its relation to "enfilade" (or more specifically, to "raking fire"), or the picture included to exemplify the concept is simply wrong and needs to be changed/removed.

I also wondered about the photo, and the only definitions of "defilade" I can find all refer to the "reverse-slope" protected position in land warfare. I've removed the photo, which to me is an example of ships exchanging broadside fire. GMan552 04:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

 Done --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


Could someone who knows how to pronounce these words add pronunciation to the article?

Also, I agree with the commentor above who suggested that these should really be separate articles; they don't seem to be related concepts (or at least, not closely related). cmadler (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done I've edited the article so it says what the main source (Bellamy) says, so now the concepts are related. I've linked wiktionary for pronunciation. --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

this article doesn't make any sense[edit]

Apart from the single description of the direction of fire through a column or line, and protection by means of natural barriers etc. nothing else in this article makes any sense. i'd normally just delete whole parts of it and declare it a stubby stub!! But i'll instead let user:Kubanczyk JUST DO IT!!! lol (talk) 10:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Origins of the strategies[edit]

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