It seems like there could actually be a difference between them?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_man_zone - is related to bush fires but seems like it could apply to a battlefield?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_man%27s_land

Something more akin to actually being in "measure" or strike distance vs just contested territory in between?

Edit: Sibling comment I think clears it up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_zone

> I think “no man’s land” is a pretty popular and similar expression.

No man's land is generic and is used in other non-combat scenarios, it could appear in an HOA pamphlet.

I like "dead man's zone" or "kill zone" as it clearly communicates both the contestation and lethality very clearly.

You can call it whatever you like: kill zone, gray zone, dead zone - everyone usually understands what does it means.

Good article on what it is: https://texty.org.ua/projects/116021/20-kilometers-of-the-gr...

> I haven’t heard “dead man zone”

It's the space between trenches. I've been watching a WW1 chronological documentary where they use it, but it's also been said in various ways, as you say.

Said playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB2vhKMBjSxOb_127vxja...

Time Ghost makes awesome chrono documentaries for the major wars. And a ton of mini series on special topics.