This Project is an investigation to determine the position that a 17th Century musket ball was fired from a musket, when given the position it was found on the battlefield. Prior to this research the main concerns with making predictions were considered to be associated with the deformed shape of the musket balls affecting their drag coefficient and therefore, their distance to ground impact. The distance they would continue after impact due to bounce and roll was unknown. Previous research has been used and built upon to recreate the conditions of the English Civil War as accurately as possible. It was found that the average distance to ground impacts were in good agreement with predictions using the drag coefficient for a sphere showing that the distorted shape resulting from the firing process of the musket ball made little difference to its drag coefficient in the majority of cases. However, the distance travelled after the first ground impact greatly exceeded expectations, with the musket balls almost doubling the total average distance to their final resting positions - an increase of 81%. From these findings the initial factors thought to have had high relevance to the final resting position of the musket ball (velocity variation and drag co-efficient) become less significant and factors such as ground hardness become more prominent. The knowledge gained during this investigation will re-establish more accurate information to be obtained on the firing positions of opposing forces during conflicts in the English Civil War.

La théorie de la guerre juste a fournit les principes qui forment la base de nos intuitions concernant l’éthique de la guerre pendant plus de milles ans. Cependant, la nature de la guerre a changé drastiquement dans les derniers 50 ans. Avec les avancés technologiques, tous les aspects de la guerre, du champ de bataille aux armes utilisées, sont aujourd’hui très différents. Ce qui est proposé dans ce texte est que les principes de jus in bello sont malgré tout encore adéquats pour les guerres contemporaines. Spécifiquement, en utilisant une analyse historique, ce texte argumentera contre la condition de l’urgence suprême de Michael Walzer pour proposer une approche qui laisse les principes de bases du jus in bello intactes. Ce texte suggère que les théoriciens de la guerre juste se penchent sur la question des armes prohibées pour avoir un impacte positif dans le domaine de l’éthique de la guerre. / Just war theory has been provided the basis for thinking about the morality of war for the past thousand years of Western history. However, the nature of warfare has dramatically altered in the last 50 years alone. With the advent of new technologies all aspects of warfare from the nature of the battlefield to the types of weapons used have changed. What this paper will argue, through a historical analysis of these technological changes, is that the principles guiding actions taken in war, the principles of jus in bello, are well equipped to deal with these changes. More specifically, this paper will argue against Michael Walzer’s famous supreme emergency condition and suggests instead that just war theorists should instead be concerned with weapons prohibitions, not in undermining the established principles of jus in bello, in order to have a favourable impact on contemporary warfare.

La théorie de la guerre juste a fournit les principes qui forment la base de nos intuitions concernant l’éthique de la guerre pendant plus de milles ans. Cependant, la nature de la guerre a changé drastiquement dans les derniers 50 ans. Avec les avancés technologiques, tous les aspects de la guerre, du champ de bataille aux armes utilisées, sont aujourd’hui très différents. Ce qui est proposé dans ce texte est que les principes de jus in bello sont malgré tout encore adéquats pour les guerres contemporaines. Spécifiquement, en utilisant une analyse historique, ce texte argumentera contre la condition de l’urgence suprême de Michael Walzer pour proposer une approche qui laisse les principes de bases du jus in bello intactes. Ce texte suggère que les théoriciens de la guerre juste se penchent sur la question des armes prohibées pour avoir un impacte positif dans le domaine de l’éthique de la guerre. / Just war theory has been provided the basis for thinking about the morality of war for the past thousand years of Western history. However, the nature of warfare has dramatically altered in the last 50 years alone. With the advent of new technologies all aspects of warfare from the nature of the battlefield to the types of weapons used have changed. What this paper will argue, through a historical analysis of these technological changes, is that the principles guiding actions taken in war, the principles of jus in bello, are well equipped to deal with these changes. More specifically, this paper will argue against Michael Walzer’s famous supreme emergency condition and suggests instead that just war theorists should instead be concerned with weapons prohibitions, not in undermining the established principles of jus in bello, in order to have a favourable impact on contemporary warfare.

Thesis (Master of Military Studies)-Marine Corps Command and Staff College, 2008. / Title from title page of PDF document (viewed on: Feb 11, 2010). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Master of Military Studies)-Marine Corps Command and Staff College, 2008. / Title from title page of PDF document (viewed on: Dec 29, 2009). Includes bibliographical references.