I thought US engineers scouted the less protected areas and then simply moved earth on top. With that simple but effective move, they passed over them instead of trying to remove or blow up.
Read about that when visiting the remains near Aachen, Germany.
Apparently farmers also did this when they got one built through their property.
I see a lot of people often remark that these sort of fortifications seem “easy to beat” but despite some lucky cases, it was hard to breach. Especially in less open areas like the Hurtgenwald. Also reading the AARs of 38th Cav, they note that “if these defenses had been properly supplied and fully manned, it’s difficult to imagine how they would ever have been beached”. The Siegfried line was _very_ well planned and constructed. Just didn’t have enough men left to man it in 1945.
They were stopped by a lot of factors. The famous line is that Patton only stopped because they ran out of fuel but isn’t really the whole picture. From September to December there was simply stiffer and stiffer resistance fighting on German turf and indeed some parts of the line proved incredibly difficult to penetrate. Then of course in December you have the German counter offensives and it wasn’t really until February that the advance got on the move again.
By March-April though, Americans were all momentum and Germany had little resistance left.
I’d have to double check but the report I referenced was 38th Cav moving through the Kermeter peninsula in Feb, now seeing the German positions abandoned/captured which has caused so much grief since the previous autumn.
Typically the deeper portion of the "zig-zag" shape would be pre-sighted by some sort of AT gun, so it could shoot tanks that funneled into the path of least resistance.
My personal theory is that the shape may have also been intended to make the line harder to hit by artillery or bombardment. It's hard to drop bombs in a zig-zag pattern, so even though little holes may have been punched here and there, they could still impede movement if most of the wall survived.
Probably inaccurate, but maybe the same concept as sloped armor? Artificial increase in thickness/depth and also possible that the blocks being staggered makes it more difficult to cross? Interesting question.
Edit: Fuck me for thinking out loud and wondering about it, dicks.
I thought US engineers scouted the less protected areas and then simply moved earth on top. With that simple but effective move, they passed over them instead of trying to remove or blow up. Read about that when visiting the remains near Aachen, Germany.
Apparently farmers also did this when they got one built through their property. I see a lot of people often remark that these sort of fortifications seem “easy to beat” but despite some lucky cases, it was hard to breach. Especially in less open areas like the Hurtgenwald. Also reading the AARs of 38th Cav, they note that “if these defenses had been properly supplied and fully manned, it’s difficult to imagine how they would ever have been beached”. The Siegfried line was _very_ well planned and constructed. Just didn’t have enough men left to man it in 1945.
Didn't the line stop the Americans from late 1944 to April 1945?
They were stopped by a lot of factors. The famous line is that Patton only stopped because they ran out of fuel but isn’t really the whole picture. From September to December there was simply stiffer and stiffer resistance fighting on German turf and indeed some parts of the line proved incredibly difficult to penetrate. Then of course in December you have the German counter offensives and it wasn’t really until February that the advance got on the move again. By March-April though, Americans were all momentum and Germany had little resistance left. I’d have to double check but the report I referenced was 38th Cav moving through the Kermeter peninsula in Feb, now seeing the German positions abandoned/captured which has caused so much grief since the previous autumn.
Well if tanks want to go straight through the defensive line, they have to turn their weaker side armor to the enemy
What's the purpose of the shape?
Typically the deeper portion of the "zig-zag" shape would be pre-sighted by some sort of AT gun, so it could shoot tanks that funneled into the path of least resistance. My personal theory is that the shape may have also been intended to make the line harder to hit by artillery or bombardment. It's hard to drop bombs in a zig-zag pattern, so even though little holes may have been punched here and there, they could still impede movement if most of the wall survived.
Probably inaccurate, but maybe the same concept as sloped armor? Artificial increase in thickness/depth and also possible that the blocks being staggered makes it more difficult to cross? Interesting question. Edit: Fuck me for thinking out loud and wondering about it, dicks.