The principle of mass, more so than any other U.S. principle of war, has evolved to accommodate changes in warfare capabilities, doctrine, and strategy. Despite the views of some officers, the principle of mass is not dead; in contrast, the current U.S. joint definition has actually improved on previous definitions with the change from a combat power focus to a focus on effects of combat power. The current definition conveys not only the intent of the theorists, but acknowledges the reality of the way U.S. military operations will be conducted in the 21st century. Far from being irrelevant, the principle of mass should be understood in terms of its components: (1) effects - not forces, (2) place and time, (3) joint integration, and (4) synchronization. (29 refs.).


    Access

    Access via TIB

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite



    Navy Operational Planner

    J. F. Deleon | NTIS | 2015



    Trajectory planner

    FEBBO HUCKLEBERRY / HUANG JIAWEI / ISELE DAVID FRANCIS | European Patent Office | 2024

    Free access

    TRAJECTORY PLANNER

    FEBBO HUCKLEBERRY / HUANG JIAWEI / ISELE DAVID FRANCIS | European Patent Office | 2021

    Free access

    Optimal flight planner

    WALTNER PETER JAMES / HERTER JOHN R / STUBBENDORFF PER LARS R | European Patent Office | 2019

    Free access