id stringlengths 24 24 | title stringclasses 442
values | context stringlengths 151 3.71k | question stringlengths 12 270 | answers dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
570d55affed7b91900d45eba | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What were hydrogen filled balloons called? | {
"answer_start": [
503
],
"text": [
"Zeppelins"
]
} |
570d55affed7b91900d45ebb | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What was used as targets in training practices? | {
"answer_start": [
802
],
"text": [
"Smoke shells"
]
} |
570d656efed7b91900d45fbf | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What was the primary method for HAA fire? | {
"answer_start": [
69
],
"text": [
"aimed fire"
]
} |
570d656efed7b91900d45fc0 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | 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_start": [
192
],
"text": [
"its height"
]
} |
570d656efed7b91900d45fc1 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Another assumption was that the target would maintain a steady course along with what other two factors? | {
"answer_start": [
260
],
"text": [
"speed and height"
]
} |
570d656efed7b91900d45fc2 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Targets could be how many feet for the HAA to engage them? | {
"answer_start": [
315
],
"text": [
"24,000 feet"
]
} |
570d656efed7b91900d45fc3 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What kind of fuses were needed? | {
"answer_start": [
328
],
"text": [
"Mechanical"
]
} |
570d6620b3d812140066d813 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What kind of guns did the United States end WW I with? | {
"answer_start": [
30
],
"text": [
"two 3-inch AA guns"
]
} |
570d6620b3d812140066d814 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | When were improvements developed for these guns? | {
"answer_start": [
81
],
"text": [
"throughout the inter-war period"
]
} |
570d6620b3d812140066d815 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | When did work begin on the 105 mm static mounting AA gun? | {
"answer_start": [
126
],
"text": [
"1924"
]
} |
570d6620b3d812140066d816 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Only a few of the 105 mm static mounting AA guns were produced because work had started on which other gun? | {
"answer_start": [
275
],
"text": [
"90 mm AA gun"
]
} |
570d6620b3d812140066d817 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What year was the M1 version approved? | {
"answer_start": [
407
],
"text": [
"1940"
]
} |
570d6767fed7b91900d45ff9 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Which country's air defence and aircraft has been under integrated command and control? | {
"answer_start": [
80
],
"text": [
"Soviet Union"
]
} |
570d6767fed7b91900d45ffa | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What other group has also been under this integrated command and control? | {
"answer_start": [
97
],
"text": [
"NATO's Allied Command Europe"
]
} |
570d6767fed7b91900d45ffb | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Who will deploy their own air defence if their is an air threat? | {
"answer_start": [
319
],
"text": [
"forces in the field"
]
} |
570d6767fed7b91900d45ffc | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What can be deployed as an offensive measure to refuse airspace use to an opponent? | {
"answer_start": [
437
],
"text": [
"A surface-based air defence capability"
]
} |
570d67fafed7b91900d46011 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What did the United States Army begin to develop after the first World War? | {
"answer_start": [
49
],
"text": [
"a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon"
]
} |
570d67fafed7b91900d46012 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Who designed this cannon? | {
"answer_start": [
109
],
"text": [
"John M. Browning"
]
} |
570d67fafed7b91900d46013 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | How many rounds did this cannon fire per second? | {
"answer_start": [
348
],
"text": [
"125"
]
} |
570d67fafed7b91900d46014 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What replaced the Browning 37nn because of jamming issues? | {
"answer_start": [
522
],
"text": [
"Bofors 40 mm"
]
} |
570d67fafed7b91900d46015 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What other US group was interested in the Bofors? | {
"answer_start": [
580
],
"text": [
"US Navy"
]
} |
570d6b2bb3d812140066d8b7 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | High altitude needs in Germany were going to be handled by what? | {
"answer_start": [
68
],
"text": [
"a 75 mm gun from Krupp"
]
} |
570d6b2bb3d812140066d8b8 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Who also collaborated in the design of the 75 mm gun? | {
"answer_start": [
149
],
"text": [
"Bofors"
]
} |
570d6b2bb3d812140066d8b9 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Because higher performance was needed, Krupp's workers designed what? | {
"answer_start": [
275
],
"text": [
"a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36"
]
} |
570d6b2bb3d812140066d8ba | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Where was the first place the FlaK 36 was used? | {
"answer_start": [
322
],
"text": [
"Spain"
]
} |
570d6b2bb3d812140066d8bb | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What war was the FlaK first used in? | {
"answer_start": [
339
],
"text": [
"Spanish Civil War"
]
} |
570d6cecb3d812140066d8dd | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What was one of the most often seen weapons that was used both on land and sea? | {
"answer_start": [
134
],
"text": [
"1940-origin Flakvierling quadruple-20 mm-gun antiaircraft weapon system"
]
} |
570d6cecb3d812140066d8de | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What weapons system did American troops use but received minute attention? | {
"answer_start": [
295
],
"text": [
"Allied smaller-calibre air-defence weapons systems"
]
} |
570d6cecb3d812140066d8df | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | How many of the M2HB guns were mounted together on the M45 Quadmount weapons system? | {
"answer_start": [
588
],
"text": [
"four"
]
} |
570d6cecb3d812140066d8e0 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | This system was a direct answer to what? | {
"answer_start": [
743
],
"text": [
"the Flakvierling"
]
} |
570d6cecb3d812140066d8e1 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | The combat batteries of an Army AAA battalion were often spread how far apart from each other? | {
"answer_start": [
994
],
"text": [
"many kilometers"
]
} |
570d6dfefed7b91900d460c1 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What acted as a physical obstacle to anti-aircraft defence? | {
"answer_start": [
55
],
"text": [
"barrage balloons"
]
} |
570d6dfefed7b91900d460c2 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What were barrage balloons initially used as an obstacle to? | {
"answer_start": [
113
],
"text": [
"bomber aircraft over cities"
]
} |
570d6dfefed7b91900d460c3 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | How was a barrage balloon tethered to the ground? | {
"answer_start": [
305
],
"text": [
"steel cable"
]
} |
570d6dfefed7b91900d460c4 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What did pilots have to do to avoid the barrage balloons? | {
"answer_start": [
425
],
"text": [
"fly at a higher altitude"
]
} |
570d6dfefed7b91900d460c5 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What kind of success did barrage balloons have as far as bringing down aircraft? | {
"answer_start": [
544
],
"text": [
"minimal"
]
} |
570d7217b3d812140066d94f | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What is an important number when it comes to guns engaging an aircraft? | {
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"The maximum distance"
]
} |
570d7217b3d812140066d950 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What can be used to determine the maximum distance for an AA gun? | {
"answer_start": [
253
],
"text": [
"only the ascending part of the trajectory"
]
} |
570d7217b3d812140066d951 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | What is the term used to describe the height that a projectile would go to if it was fired vertically? | {
"answer_start": [
340
],
"text": [
"maximum ceiling"
]
} |
570d7217b3d812140066d952 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | 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. | Few AA guns are able to fire which way? | {
"answer_start": [
484
],
"text": [
"vertically"
]
} |
570d72ecfed7b91900d46131 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies. | The missile started being used more often instead of what weapon? | {
"answer_start": [
113
],
"text": [
"guns"
]
} |
570d72ecfed7b91900d46132 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies. | Small missiles were designed that could be mounted on what? | {
"answer_start": [
307
],
"text": [
"armored cars and tank chassis"
]
} |
570d72ecfed7b91900d46133 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies. | When did these missiles start to supplant gun-based SPAAG systems? | {
"answer_start": [
420
],
"text": [
"in the 1960s"
]
} |
570d72ecfed7b91900d46134 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies. | What are man-portable missiles better known as? | {
"answer_start": [
529
],
"text": [
"MANPADs"
]
} |
570d72ecfed7b91900d46135 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies. | When were MANPADs introduced? | {
"answer_start": [
581
],
"text": [
"the 1960s"
]
} |
570d7592fed7b91900d46159 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from [bomber]s. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs. | Smaller weapons are able to be used because of their low cost as well as what other factor? | {
"answer_start": [
95
],
"text": [
"ability to quickly follow the target"
]
} |
570d7592fed7b91900d4615a | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from [bomber]s. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs. | Who designed the 40 mm autocannon? | {
"answer_start": [
262
],
"text": [
"Bofors of Sweden"
]
} |
570d7592fed7b91900d4615b | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from [bomber]s. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs. | When were the surface-to-air missile systems introduced? | {
"answer_start": [
426
],
"text": [
"1950s"
]
} |
570d7592fed7b91900d4615c | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from [bomber]s. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs. | Where were surface-to-air missiles first developed? | {
"answer_start": [
533
],
"text": [
"in Nazi Germany"
]
} |
570d7592fed7b91900d4615d | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from [bomber]s. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs. | How can land-based SAMs be deployed? | {
"answer_start": [
834
],
"text": [
"from fixed installations or mobile launchers"
]
} |
570d7708b3d812140066d9af | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Smaller boats and ships typically have machine-guns or fast cannons, which can often be deadly to low-flying aircraft if linked to a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence. Some vessels like Aegis cruisers are as much a threat to aircraft as any land-based air defence system. In general, naval vessels should be treated with respect by aircraft, however the reverse is equally true. Carrier battle groups are especially well defended, as not only do they typically consist of many vessels with heavy air defence armament but they are also able to launch fighter jets for combat air patrol overhead to intercept incoming airborne threats. | What kind of weapons can usually be found on smaller boats and ships? | {
"answer_start": [
39
],
"text": [
"machine-guns or fast cannons"
]
} |
570d7708b3d812140066d9b0 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Smaller boats and ships typically have machine-guns or fast cannons, which can often be deadly to low-flying aircraft if linked to a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence. Some vessels like Aegis cruisers are as much a threat to aircraft as any land-based air defence system. In general, naval vessels should be treated with respect by aircraft, however the reverse is equally true. Carrier battle groups are especially well defended, as not only do they typically consist of many vessels with heavy air defence armament but they are also able to launch fighter jets for combat air patrol overhead to intercept incoming airborne threats. | These weapons can be deadly to aircraft that is low if it is linked to what? | {
"answer_start": [
131
],
"text": [
"a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence"
]
} |
570d7708b3d812140066d9b1 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Smaller boats and ships typically have machine-guns or fast cannons, which can often be deadly to low-flying aircraft if linked to a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence. Some vessels like Aegis cruisers are as much a threat to aircraft as any land-based air defence system. In general, naval vessels should be treated with respect by aircraft, however the reverse is equally true. Carrier battle groups are especially well defended, as not only do they typically consist of many vessels with heavy air defence armament but they are also able to launch fighter jets for combat air patrol overhead to intercept incoming airborne threats. | What type of ships are particularly well defended? | {
"answer_start": [
422
],
"text": [
"Carrier battle groups"
]
} |
570d7708b3d812140066d9b2 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Smaller boats and ships typically have machine-guns or fast cannons, which can often be deadly to low-flying aircraft if linked to a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence. Some vessels like Aegis cruisers are as much a threat to aircraft as any land-based air defence system. In general, naval vessels should be treated with respect by aircraft, however the reverse is equally true. Carrier battle groups are especially well defended, as not only do they typically consist of many vessels with heavy air defence armament but they are also able to launch fighter jets for combat air patrol overhead to intercept incoming airborne threats. | Carrier battle groups can launch what to intercept incoming threats? | {
"answer_start": [
593
],
"text": [
"fighter jets"
]
} |
570d77d0fed7b91900d46177 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Rocket-propelled grenades can be—and often are—used against hovering helicopters (e.g., by Somali militiamen during the Battle of Mogadishu (1993)). Firing an RPG at steep angles poses a danger to the user, because the backblast from firing reflects off the ground. In Somalia, militia members sometimes welded a steel plate in the exhaust end of an RPG's tube to deflect pressure away from the shooter when shooting up at US helicopters. RPGs are used in this role only when more effective weapons are not available. | What type of weapon can be used against hovering helicopters? | {
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"Rocket-propelled grenades"
]
} |
570d77d0fed7b91900d46178 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Rocket-propelled grenades can be—and often are—used against hovering helicopters (e.g., by Somali militiamen during the Battle of Mogadishu (1993)). Firing an RPG at steep angles poses a danger to the user, because the backblast from firing reflects off the ground. In Somalia, militia members sometimes welded a steel plate in the exhaust end of an RPG's tube to deflect pressure away from the shooter when shooting up at US helicopters. RPGs are used in this role only when more effective weapons are not available. | When an RPG is fired at a steep angle, who is in danger? | {
"answer_start": [
197
],
"text": [
"the user"
]
} |
570d77d0fed7b91900d46179 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Rocket-propelled grenades can be—and often are—used against hovering helicopters (e.g., by Somali militiamen during the Battle of Mogadishu (1993)). Firing an RPG at steep angles poses a danger to the user, because the backblast from firing reflects off the ground. In Somalia, militia members sometimes welded a steel plate in the exhaust end of an RPG's tube to deflect pressure away from the shooter when shooting up at US helicopters. RPGs are used in this role only when more effective weapons are not available. | An RPG fired at a steep angle has what reflecting off the ground? | {
"answer_start": [
215
],
"text": [
"the backblast"
]
} |
570d77d0fed7b91900d4617a | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Rocket-propelled grenades can be—and often are—used against hovering helicopters (e.g., by Somali militiamen during the Battle of Mogadishu (1993)). Firing an RPG at steep angles poses a danger to the user, because the backblast from firing reflects off the ground. In Somalia, militia members sometimes welded a steel plate in the exhaust end of an RPG's tube to deflect pressure away from the shooter when shooting up at US helicopters. RPGs are used in this role only when more effective weapons are not available. | What did some militia members in Somalia weld in the exhaust of the RPG tube to protect the shooter? | {
"answer_start": [
311
],
"text": [
"a steel plate"
]
} |
570d77d0fed7b91900d4617b | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Rocket-propelled grenades can be—and often are—used against hovering helicopters (e.g., by Somali militiamen during the Battle of Mogadishu (1993)). Firing an RPG at steep angles poses a danger to the user, because the backblast from firing reflects off the ground. In Somalia, militia members sometimes welded a steel plate in the exhaust end of an RPG's tube to deflect pressure away from the shooter when shooting up at US helicopters. RPGs are used in this role only when more effective weapons are not available. | What were the Somalian militia members firing RPGs at? | {
"answer_start": [
423
],
"text": [
"US helicopters"
]
} |
570d8477fed7b91900d461e1 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British adopted "effective ceiling", meaning the altitude at which a gun could deliver a series of shells against a moving target; this could be constrained by maximum fuse running time as well as the gun's capability. By the late 1930s the British definition was "that height at which a directly approaching target at 400 mph (=643.6 km/h) can be engaged for 20 seconds before the gun reaches 70 degrees elevation". However, effective ceiling for heavy AA guns was affected by non-ballistic factors: | What term is used to describe the altitude for a gun to shoot shells against a target that is moving? | {
"answer_start": [
20
],
"text": [
"\"effective ceiling\""
]
} |
570d8477fed7b91900d461e2 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British adopted "effective ceiling", meaning the altitude at which a gun could deliver a series of shells against a moving target; this could be constrained by maximum fuse running time as well as the gun's capability. By the late 1930s the British definition was "that height at which a directly approaching target at 400 mph (=643.6 km/h) can be engaged for 20 seconds before the gun reaches 70 degrees elevation". However, effective ceiling for heavy AA guns was affected by non-ballistic factors: | Who adopted the use of the term, effective ceiling? | {
"answer_start": [
0
],
"text": [
"The British"
]
} |
570d8477fed7b91900d461e3 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British adopted "effective ceiling", meaning the altitude at which a gun could deliver a series of shells against a moving target; this could be constrained by maximum fuse running time as well as the gun's capability. By the late 1930s the British definition was "that height at which a directly approaching target at 400 mph (=643.6 km/h) can be engaged for 20 seconds before the gun reaches 70 degrees elevation". However, effective ceiling for heavy AA guns was affected by non-ballistic factors: | Along with other factors, how long must a target be engaged to have effective ceiling? | {
"answer_start": [
360
],
"text": [
"for 20 seconds"
]
} |
570d8477fed7b91900d461e4 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British adopted "effective ceiling", meaning the altitude at which a gun could deliver a series of shells against a moving target; this could be constrained by maximum fuse running time as well as the gun's capability. By the late 1930s the British definition was "that height at which a directly approaching target at 400 mph (=643.6 km/h) can be engaged for 20 seconds before the gun reaches 70 degrees elevation". However, effective ceiling for heavy AA guns was affected by non-ballistic factors: | What affected the effective ceiling for heavy AA guns? | {
"answer_start": [
482
],
"text": [
"non-ballistic factors"
]
} |
570d8943fed7b91900d461f9 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy; nonetheless, damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 150 mm. | What was the standard weapon until the 1950s? | {
"answer_start": [
16
],
"text": [
"guns firing ballistic munitions"
]
} |
570d8943fed7b91900d461fa | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy; nonetheless, damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 150 mm. | After guns firing ballistic munitions lost their appeal, what weapon took their place? | {
"answer_start": [
74
],
"text": [
"guided missiles"
]
} |
570d8943fed7b91900d461fb | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy; nonetheless, damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 150 mm. | Which range did not use guided missiles? | {
"answer_start": [
122
],
"text": [
"the very shortest ranges"
]
} |
570d8943fed7b91900d461fc | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy; nonetheless, damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 150 mm. | Damaged aircraft can be out of action for days or what? | {
"answer_start": [
474
],
"text": [
"permanently"
]
} |
570d8943fed7b91900d461fd | Anti-aircraft_warfare | Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy; nonetheless, damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 150 mm. | What is the largest calibre ground-based air defence guns? | {
"answer_start": [
600
],
"text": [
"at least 150 mm"
]
} |
570d8b5bb3d812140066da15 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British recognised the need for anti-aircraft capability a few weeks before World War I broke out; on 8 July 1914, the New York Times reported that the British government had decided to 'dot the coasts of the British Isles with a series of towers, each armed with two quick-firing guns of special design,' while 'a complete circle of towers' was to be built around 'naval installations' and 'at other especially vulnerable points.' By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1-pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun). | When did the British see the need to add anti-aircraft capability? | {
"answer_start": [
106
],
"text": [
"8 July 1914"
]
} |
570d8b5bb3d812140066da16 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British recognised the need for anti-aircraft capability a few weeks before World War I broke out; on 8 July 1914, the New York Times reported that the British government had decided to 'dot the coasts of the British Isles with a series of towers, each armed with two quick-firing guns of special design,' while 'a complete circle of towers' was to be built around 'naval installations' and 'at other especially vulnerable points.' By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1-pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun). | Where did the New York times report say towers with guns should go? | {
"answer_start": [
195
],
"text": [
"the coasts of the British Isles"
]
} |
570d8b5bb3d812140066da17 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British recognised the need for anti-aircraft capability a few weeks before World War I broke out; on 8 July 1914, the New York Times reported that the British government had decided to 'dot the coasts of the British Isles with a series of towers, each armed with two quick-firing guns of special design,' while 'a complete circle of towers' was to be built around 'naval installations' and 'at other especially vulnerable points.' By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1-pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun). | What was built around naval installations? | {
"answer_start": [
319
],
"text": [
"complete circle of towers"
]
} |
570d8b5bb3d812140066da18 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British recognised the need for anti-aircraft capability a few weeks before World War I broke out; on 8 July 1914, the New York Times reported that the British government had decided to 'dot the coasts of the British Isles with a series of towers, each armed with two quick-firing guns of special design,' while 'a complete circle of towers' was to be built around 'naval installations' and 'at other especially vulnerable points.' By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1-pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun). | Who manned AA guns and searchlights? | {
"answer_start": [
457
],
"text": [
"Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR)"
]
} |
570d8b5bb3d812140066da19 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British recognised the need for anti-aircraft capability a few weeks before World War I broke out; on 8 July 1914, the New York Times reported that the British government had decided to 'dot the coasts of the British Isles with a series of towers, each armed with two quick-firing guns of special design,' while 'a complete circle of towers' was to be built around 'naval installations' and 'at other especially vulnerable points.' By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1-pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun). | Who used motorised two-gun sections? | {
"answer_start": [
586
],
"text": [
"Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA)"
]
} |
570d8c74b3d812140066da1f | Anti-aircraft_warfare | In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both home and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for air defence of the British Isles in World War I. However, during the Second World War the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command was disbanded in March 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences. | Who provided part of the air defence of the British Isles in WWI | {
"answer_start": [
187
],
"text": [
"Royal Navy"
]
} |
570d8c74b3d812140066da20 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both home and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for air defence of the British Isles in World War I. However, during the Second World War the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command was disbanded in March 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences. | Who protected airfields in WWII? | {
"answer_start": [
292
],
"text": [
"RAF Regiment"
]
} |
570d8c74b3d812140066da21 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both home and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for air defence of the British Isles in World War I. However, during the Second World War the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command was disbanded in March 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences. | The United States Air Force helped protect the UK during what 'war'? | {
"answer_start": [
415
],
"text": [
"Cold War"
]
} |
570d8c74b3d812140066da22 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both home and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for air defence of the British Isles in World War I. However, during the Second World War the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command was disbanded in March 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences. | What year was ground-based air defence taken from RAF? | {
"answer_start": [
584
],
"text": [
"2004"
]
} |
570d8c74b3d812140066da23 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both home and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for air defence of the British Isles in World War I. However, during the Second World War the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command was disbanded in March 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences. | What was disbanded in 1955? | {
"answer_start": [
594
],
"text": [
"British Army's Anti-Aircraft Command"
]
} |
570d8d82b3d812140066da29 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuse setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuse length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuse length could be read off. | What helped with better fuse setting? | {
"answer_start": [
23
],
"text": [
"range measurement"
]
} |
570d8d82b3d812140066da2a | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuse setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuse length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuse length could be read off. | What was the first model of HRF (Height Range Finder) used by the British? | {
"answer_start": [
197
],
"text": [
"Barr & Stroud UB2"
]
} |
570d8d82b3d812140066da2b | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuse setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuse length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuse length could be read off. | The HRF measured target distance and what else? | {
"answer_start": [
325
],
"text": [
"elevation angle"
]
} |
570d8d82b3d812140066da2c | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuse setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuse length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuse length could be read off. | What was the HRF used with to set fuses? | {
"answer_start": [
494
],
"text": [
"Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI)"
]
} |
570d8d82b3d812140066da2d | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuse setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuse Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuse length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuse length could be read off. | The fuse length could be set using height reported by whom? | {
"answer_start": [
645
],
"text": [
"HRF operator"
]
} |
570d8eabfed7b91900d4620b | Anti-aircraft_warfare | By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognised. | What kind of guns started attracting attention? | {
"answer_start": [
26
],
"text": [
"balloon, or airship, guns"
]
} |
570d8eabfed7b91900d4620c | Anti-aircraft_warfare | By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognised. | In addition to ammo proposals, what other need was articulated? | {
"answer_start": [
215
],
"text": [
"The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail"
]
} |
570d8eabfed7b91900d4620d | Anti-aircraft_warfare | By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognised. | The impact and time types of what were analyzed? | {
"answer_start": [
280
],
"text": [
"Fuzing options"
]
} |
570d8eabfed7b91900d4620e | Anti-aircraft_warfare | By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognised. | As of 1910, who had published info available for gun designs? | {
"answer_start": [
474
],
"text": [
"Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider"
]
} |
570d8eabfed7b91900d4620f | Anti-aircraft_warfare | By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognised. | What gun made the scene in 1910? | {
"answer_start": [
762
],
"text": [
"French balloon gun"
]
} |
570d8ff5b3d812140066da33 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, in general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuse setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets. The exception to this rule was the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon. | What two guns were propped up against a hillside to get the muzzles pointed up? | {
"answer_start": [
88
],
"text": [
"French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm"
]
} |
570d8ff5b3d812140066da34 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, in general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuse setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets. The exception to this rule was the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon. | What anti-aircraft gun did the British Army begin to use? | {
"answer_start": [
309
],
"text": [
"13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III"
]
} |
570d8ff5b3d812140066da35 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, in general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuse setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets. The exception to this rule was the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon. | What gun size was relined to take 13-pounder shells? | {
"answer_start": [
398
],
"text": [
"18-pdr guns"
]
} |
570d8ff5b3d812140066da36 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, in general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuse setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets. The exception to this rule was the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon. | What was difficult to get set right on the new guns? | {
"answer_start": [
797
],
"text": [
"get their fuse setting correct"
]
} |
570d8ff5b3d812140066da37 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, in general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuse setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets. The exception to this rule was the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon. | Where did most rounds shot at aircraft usually explode? | {
"answer_start": [
850
],
"text": [
"well below their targets"
]
} |
570d9187b3d812140066da47 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK. | What treaty was supposed to stop Germany from having antiaircraft weapons? | {
"answer_start": [
4
],
"text": [
"Treaty of Versailles"
]
} |
570d9187b3d812140066da48 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK. | When did covert antiaircraft training start in Germany? | {
"answer_start": [
197
],
"text": [
"in the late 1920s"
]
} |
570d9187b3d812140066da49 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK. | When did the 10.5 centimeter FlaK 38 appear in Germany? | {
"answer_start": [
356
],
"text": [
"In the late 1930s"
]
} |
570d9187b3d812140066da4a | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK. | When did the design begin for the 12.8 centimeter FlaK? | {
"answer_start": [
542
],
"text": [
"1938"
]
} |
570d9187b3d812140066da4b | Anti-aircraft_warfare | The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK. | What did the FlaK 39 have? | {
"answer_start": [
516
],
"text": [
"220v 24 kW generators"
]
} |
570d9275fed7b91900d46231 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | However, the problem of deflection settings — 'aim-off' — required knowing the rate of change in the target's position. Both France and UK introduced tachymetric devices to track targets and produce vertical and horizontal deflection angles. The French Brocq system was electrical, the operator entered the target range and had displays at guns; it was used with their 75 mm. The British Wilson-Dalby gun director used a pair of trackers and mechanical tachymetry; the operator entered the fuse length, and deflection angles were read from the instruments. | What did the tachymetric devices do? | {
"answer_start": [
173
],
"text": [
"track targets and produce vertical and horizontal deflection angles"
]
} |
570d9275fed7b91900d46232 | Anti-aircraft_warfare | However, the problem of deflection settings — 'aim-off' — required knowing the rate of change in the target's position. Both France and UK introduced tachymetric devices to track targets and produce vertical and horizontal deflection angles. The French Brocq system was electrical, the operator entered the target range and had displays at guns; it was used with their 75 mm. The British Wilson-Dalby gun director used a pair of trackers and mechanical tachymetry; the operator entered the fuse length, and deflection angles were read from the instruments. | Which system had electrical tracking? | {
"answer_start": [
246
],
"text": [
"French Brocq"
]
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.