Early-twentieth-century gun growth shows why lessons do not transfer cleanly between warfare domains. Navies could absorb heavier weapons because a ship carried its ammunition, power, structural reinforcement, and supply system while the sea helped absorb firing shock. Land forces had to move, emplace, aim, and sustain the same increasingly heavy artillery without that mobile platform. The naval prestige of bigger guns nevertheless shaped the era's default answer to firepower, helping land warfare become fixated on size. Douglas Haig operated inside that intellectual environment, where commanders inherited the solutions available to their period rather than choosing from modern alternatives.
Notable Point · 1:46:07-1:47:54
Why naval big-gun logic misled land artillery planning
The self-contained support of a warship made naval gun growth a poor model for land artillery, where every increase in size deepened transport and sustainment burdens.