Talk:British hardened field defences of World War II

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ruck Machine Gun Post[edit]

This item is giving me some difficulty. There is a picture in Beaches, fields, streets and hills which William Foot identifies as a Ruck Machine Gun Post (figure 74 on page 154), this has embrasures pointing straight up. However, the Defence of Britain database identifies only three Rucks and this is not one of them. The DoBDB examples are:

William Foot identifies the example at Reighton as a Stanton shelter -- I dare-say that is correct because it does not appear to have any embrasures, but does have a large window at one end -- on the other had it is in a poor state. I have been to visit the one at Sandiacre for myself and will post some pictures soon, it looks just like the Reighton example but with a row of small windows which might be interpreted as embrasures.

Can anybody shed some light on this? Gaius Cornelius 01:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have looked in William Foots book, the example at Reighton is not constructed from Stanton shelter sections. In the Mike Osbourne book `20th Century Defences in Britain, The East Midlands` on page 67 he shows the Ruck Pillbox at Sandiacre. (Palmiped 09:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]


Cost[edit]

What was the cost of these defences I have seen a figure of over £21 million quoted for all commands? Palmiped 16:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref- PRO: WO 199/48, 6a Palmiped 16:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Type 22 Pillbox at Gotham[edit]

Damage to the roof of the Gotham pillbox SK 523302 has exposed scrap metal including a bed frame, used as roof reinforcement- Photos of Gotham pillbox

Thanks, I have added a reference into the article. Gaius Cornelius 15:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gotham Pillbox
Gotham Pillbox close-up

Information board on Gotham Pillbox see Gotham Heritage trail --palmiped |  Talk  12:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Gotham Pillbox taken today. --palmiped |  Talk  19:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's great, did you get any close-ups? Gaius Cornelius (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close-up image added --palmiped |  Talk  16:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even better. Thanks. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tett Turret[edit]

I've added a photograph of a Tett Turret. There are some surviving Tett Turrets at the former RAF Hornchurch airfield, which is now a country park. A map of the airfield remains can be found here Snapper five (talk) 11:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice picture, but you may need to clarify copyright position. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 14:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I took a long time deliberating over the copyright and I think it's OK to post it as long as it's linked back to the original site, which it is. Snapper five (talk) 18:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check external links on main page[edit]

Check Links Palmiped (talk) 00:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very helpful - thanks. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 13:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

Would it not be more useful to have a picture of a pillbox next to the lead paragraph, rather than just a detail? Rachel Pearce (talk) 11:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had not really given it much thought, but what would be a good photograph for the lead? Each pillbox type is a bit different and I guess one could say that a picture of an embasure has the advantage of being the one feature that all pillboxes have in common. Do you have any alternative in mind? Gaius Cornelius (talk) 13:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Now I see the logic. Perhaps then the importance of the embrasure should be mentioned in the lead? I am very much a lay person when it comes to this topic, but I suppose what I was expecting to see what something like the picture of a Type 22 which is shown a little further down. This is what comes into my mind when I hear the word "pillbox", perhaps because the hexagonal shape is (I think) the one which gave rise to the name. Rachel Pearce (talk) 14:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed lead image, feel free to revert/change if you don't think suitable.--palmiped |  Talk  16:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External link[edit]

Archaeologist Francis Pryor explores the secret sites and the hidden network of WWII bunkers that riddle Britain and meets the men who built and manned these vast fortifications this link expires 15 Feb 2009. --palmiped |  Talk  19:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unrecognised circular pillbox type?[edit]

Sudbrook
Interior

This is at Sudbrook, Monmouthshire. Any thoughts on what it is?

Construction is of brick below ground with a cast concrete upper part. This 360º embrasure is similar to that of the cantilever pillbox, with a tapered slot opening towards the inside. However there is no central support pillar and the lid appears to have originally been supported on a number of steel girders between upper and lower parts. These have since been cut, allowing the lid to collapse downwards, and the slit grouted with cement.

The pillbox is located on the ramparts of the iron age hillfort, giving a commanding view across the Severn and what is now the location of the Second Severn Crossing. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a second example, also on the levee, about two miles downstream, near Magor pill. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Fine Article[edit]

This article is unquestionably one of the best military-related I've seen on Wikipedia. It's comprehensive to cover all the pillboxes and a bit more, but it doesn't bore you with excessive detail. Lots of pictures are always good. It looks like User:Gaius Cornelius has done the most here, but overall the collaboration from everyone has really achieved the ideals Wikipedia aims for, IMO. Great work.

Leidseplein (talk) 19:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is a great article and I congratulate all involved. I'm interested-but-ignorant in this field and found the article useful and very interesting. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary pictures[edit]

It would be nice to have at least one photograph of the defences in use. I'm not big on copyrights but I'd have thought that with 1940 being over 70 years ago, there would be some suitable images available.--Pontificalibus (talk) 12:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Allan Williams Turret - spelling[edit]

The article doesn't seem to quite agree with itself regarding this spelling. The English Heritage NMR thesaurus has it here as Allan Williams Turret, preferring this to the other spellings. Is the EH.NMR thing a reliable source? I hope so - I found scattered mention of this turret all over the place but with Alan, Allan and Allen and also with and without hyphen. If EH/NMR is not definitive, what is? It would be nice to get it consistent. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One needs to be a little careful with the English Heritage thesaurus, I don't think it is supposed to be anything other than a quick reference and it does contain many mistakes. The manufacturer's promotional booklet calls it the: "Allan Williams Steel Revolving Turret" - so I guess that must be the correct way to write it. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 17:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a version of Allan Willians or a different kind of turret? It seems to lack the circular port near the top. Rmhermen (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

Good article, although I'm unpersuaded by the unsupported claims that these structures would have served a useful defensive purpose. The reading I have done suggests that they were likely to be ineffective on two grounds. First, they were lightly bult and nowhere near robust enough to keep out anything more than small arms. More seriously, they tended to dispersed wide apart in single lines, so none could support any other. A properly-conceived defence would feature fortifications in some depth so that troops attempting to infiltrate around the back of the fist line would be enfiladed by the second line. One of stop lines runs past the house I grew up in and these things are situated singly at intervals up of to 3/4 mile.

I will look out some citations for this. Tirailleur (talk) 15:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Tirailleur

I can recommend that you read Ironsides Line. It is a concise history of the development of pillboxes and the thinking behind the designs how they were sited. In short the Stop Line concept, which is what you are referring to, was developed during the invasion threat emergency of 1940 by General Ironsides. The primary stop line is known as the GHQ line which runs from Bristol, East to Surrey and then down around the South of London before swinging north to the Thames. North of the Thames it becomes the Eastern Command line and runs through Esssex, Suffolk and sparsely through Lincolnshire. Along a lot of its length and especially around London and in Essex it is a defence in depth with at least two and sometimes three lines of closely spaced and mutually supporting pillboxes along the expected axes of advance of an invading force. There are a number of other stop lines which consist of single lines of pillboxes both in front of and behind the GHQ line and Eastern Command line. These are generally built along canals, rivers and rail embankments. Outflanking maneuvers would have been hindered by these obstacles making up for the lack of a supporting second line, and although their spacing may seem sparse now, many have been demolished that would have filled in the gaps. The lines were never intended to be garrisoned in their entirety and contrary to their name they were never intended to stop the enemy either, but rather slow them down and box them in to allow what remained of the Army to engage the enemy.

The pillbox designs themselves were effective against small arms fire but thin walled versions wouldn't have stood up to a 20mm round or sustained HMG fire. Thick walled versions (3ft 6in of concrete)specifically designed to face tanks such as the Type 28A would have withstood most of what Germans could have fielded at the time apart from the infamous 88mm.

However, by 1941 when General Brooke took over from Ironsides and just as the frenzied stop line building phase was coming to completion it was decided that the stop line concept was too inflexible, so the defence strategy was switched to one of Nodal Points, Anti Tank Islands and Defended Localities. Essentially fortifying towns and villages at key road and rail junctions. This would force the enemy to either bypass them and use slower minor roads or reduce each strong point in turn, slowing them down in either case. Many of the pillboxes were re-used in this concept, more were added where required and many, especially around airfields, were upgraded by thickening their walls.

If you want more detail I suggest you take a look at the Pillbox Study Group website and forum We are a friendly bunch there with a wealth of information about Pillboxes. The website is a little old fashioned but is being redesigned to be more user friendly and will be upgraded shortly. Stthomse (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Extant" Overuse[edit]

I couldn't help but notice that the word "extant" is used over and over again here. I think it would be more readable if the wording was varied. 198.255.213.165 (talk) 01:27, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hmmm yes 48 times in the page. Good point. It certainly doesn't need to be in all those photo captions, for a start. DBaK (talk) 09:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:37, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on British hardened field defences of World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:British_hardened_field_defences_of_World_War_II&oldid=1200365754"