Before I began to do any real research on the topic of World War I Era Communication Technologies, I thought I knew what that entailed and what I pictured was right. I found out very quickly that I was mistaken. I had a difficult time trying to find acceptable sources that included enough information on the topic to make it usable. I obtained most of my information from two of my sources. The first being from an article from Britannica Academic Edition entitled,
Military Communication, which cover a wide range of years that communications were utilized during. And the second came from the communications section in
The World War One Source Book, which cover communications exclusively in World War One and which supported the first of the two sources.
At the start of the war both sides in the war equipped themselves with modern electrical communications. What neither side was aware of was just how taxing it was to properly maintain the systems. Of all the nations involved in world war one, Great Britain had the most developed communication service, while at the other end of the spectrum was the Russians with the least developed systems. Due to how easy it was for communications to be intercepted created the need for messages to become encoded. Electric communication methods provided a faster means for communicating.
I decided to look a little closer at the “hazards” and basic problems of maintaining the equipment and setup required for the modern electrical communications to operate correctly. Even though the cable-lines that were used to actually communicate were buried several feet below the surface of the ground, as described earlier, it was not uncommon for those cables to break during the frequent bombardments that happened constantly during the war. This meant that the task of repairing broken lines was a very dangerous task. There was also the major problem of how vulnerable the portable communication sets and cables that soldiers would carry from place to place. In order to be able to use the portable handsets soldiers had to carry and lay cable to use. This was a very exposed and vulnerable setup, especially if the enemy were to get a hold of a handset.
I discovered, to my surprise that on innumerable occasions communications could be traced back and identified as the reason an operation went awry. With most of those instances being the lack or inability to communicate between the rear and the front of the forces. This was a major problem when it came to successfully completing an operation. This completely disproved what I had pictured about communications during world war one, which caused me to look at the big picture in a whole new way. From this I inferred, and later proved after reading, that this meant once an operation began commanders lost most of the control they had over it, and it would be very difficult to change the course of the preset plans for that operation on the fly. This meant that with more modern communications, commanders actually had less control over any given situation that they previously had had in other wars or engagements before world war one.
The next thing I learned in my research really took me aback. I learned that due to the problems that plagued the modern electric communications and the issues they also caused as a result of their ineffectiveness, both sides began to reemployment older communication methods to try and resolve the problems that came with electric communications. Some of these older communication methods included: flag signals; heliograph signals, which was the use of light signals; pyrotechnics, such as signal-rockets, and flares which would be prearranged to signal something specific; messenger services that delivered messages by runners, motorcycles, bicycle, and automobiles; and the use of animals to carry a message to a destination, like carrier pigeons and dogs (Germans were highly efficient using dogs to carry messages. All of this information was, to me, completely crazy for before I had learned all of this new information I had believed that those older methods of communication had long been forgotten and left behind.
At the start of the war both sides in the war equipped themselves with modern electrical communications. What neither side was aware of was just how taxing it was to properly maintain the systems. Of all the nations involved in world war one, Great Britain had the most developed communication service, while at the other end of the spectrum was the Russians with the least developed systems. Due to how easy it was for communications to be intercepted created the need for messages to become encoded. Electric communication methods provided a faster means for communicating.
I decided to look a little closer at the “hazards” and basic problems of maintaining the equipment and setup required for the modern electrical communications to operate correctly. Even though the cable-lines that were used to actually communicate were buried several feet below the surface of the ground, as described earlier, it was not uncommon for those cables to break during the frequent bombardments that happened constantly during the war. This meant that the task of repairing broken lines was a very dangerous task. There was also the major problem of how vulnerable the portable communication sets and cables that soldiers would carry from place to place. In order to be able to use the portable handsets soldiers had to carry and lay cable to use. This was a very exposed and vulnerable setup, especially if the enemy were to get a hold of a handset.
I discovered, to my surprise that on innumerable occasions communications could be traced back and identified as the reason an operation went awry. With most of those instances being the lack or inability to communicate between the rear and the front of the forces. This was a major problem when it came to successfully completing an operation. This completely disproved what I had pictured about communications during world war one, which caused me to look at the big picture in a whole new way. From this I inferred, and later proved after reading, that this meant once an operation began commanders lost most of the control they had over it, and it would be very difficult to change the course of the preset plans for that operation on the fly. This meant that with more modern communications, commanders actually had less control over any given situation that they previously had had in other wars or engagements before world war one.
The next thing I learned in my research really took me aback. I learned that due to the problems that plagued the modern electric communications and the issues they also caused as a result of their ineffectiveness, both sides began to reemployment older communication methods to try and resolve the problems that came with electric communications. Some of these older communication methods included: flag signals; heliograph signals, which was the use of light signals; pyrotechnics, such as signal-rockets, and flares which would be prearranged to signal something specific; messenger services that delivered messages by runners, motorcycles, bicycle, and automobiles; and the use of animals to carry a message to a destination, like carrier pigeons and dogs (Germans were highly efficient using dogs to carry messages. All of this information was, to me, completely crazy for before I had learned all of this new information I had believed that those older methods of communication had long been forgotten and left behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment