There was significant distance between the two armies, according to Caesar. Caesar countered this by ambushing Pompey's "hammer" element with a hidden fourth line of infantry Pompey's infantry was to be the anvil while his cavalry 'hammer' encircled Caesar's left flank. In 48 BC, Pompey the Great attempted to use it against Julius Caesar at the Battle of Pharsalus, in what was to be the decisive battle of the Great Roman Civil War. Pompey attempted to use his right flank cavalry as an hammer stroke while his heavy infantry held Caesar's legions fast in the center In all scenarios, both the hammer and anvil elements are substantial entities that can cause significant material damage to opponents, as opposed to light diversionary, or small scale holding units. Other variants of the concept allow for an enemy to be held fast by a substantial blocking or holding force, while a strong echelon, or hammer, delivers the decisive blow. The "hammer" or maneuver element succeeds because the anvil force materially or substantially weakens the enemy, preventing him from adjusting to the threat in his flank or rear.
The "anvil" echelon here is not a mere diversionary gambit, but a substantial body that hits the enemy hard to pin him down and grind away his strength. The strongest expression of the concept is where both echelons are sufficient in themselves to strike a decisive blow. The "hammer and anvil" tactic is fundamentally a single envelopment, and is to be distinguished from a simple encirclement where one group simply keeps an enemy occupied, while a flanking force delivers the coup de grace. The second phase involves a more mobile force that maneuvers around the enemy and attacks from behind or the flank to deliver a decisive blow. It may involve a frontal assault by one part of the force, playing a slower-moving or more static role.
The hammer and anvil is a military tactic involving the use of two primary forces, one to pin down an enemy, and the other to smash or defeat the opponent with an encirclement maneuver. For other uses, see Hammer and Anvil (disambiguation). MRI can thus be considered safe in usual clinical settings, as far as our studied implants are concerned.This article is about military tactics. The displacement of three of the prostheses in water is not relevant in real clinical situations. The implanted piston in the temporal bone did not move. However, while in the water-filled Petri dish, three of these moved with the flux. None of the prostheses was displaced in the empty Petri dish. In situ testing was done by implanting a piston in a cadaveric temporal bone and performing MR sequences any possible displacement was then assessed by CT scan and under microscopic vision. Eventual in vitro displacement was assessed visually by two means. Most of the prostheses were then placed in a water-filled Petri dish and reintroduced into the MRI unit. Nine middle ear prostheses (seven containing stainless steel and two made of pure gold used as control) were tested in vitro and one stainless steel stapedectomy prosthesis was tested on a cadaveric temporal bone.Įach metallic prosthesis was placed in an empty Petri dish and introduced into a 1.5-tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) unit. Investigation of the effects of magnetic resonance fields on commonly used metallic middle ear implants.
0 kommentar(er)
