Dunkirk

[Gil Boyd]

John,
Agree to a poiny but because it was stepped inwards the richochets would have more of a tendancy to go directly into the face of the firer inside!!

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Merle]

If you should visit San Pedro, Calif you can still see the bunkers and gun pits put in to repel the expected WW2 Japanese invasion.

[Daan Kemp]

Drawing and swinging a bow to shoot to both sides without jostling the man next to you takes some space, which there usually isn't on the inside. Arrows hitting the stone sides of the embrasure will usually shatter and loose its impetus.
Allows a wider field of view without exposing yourself.

The picture of the gun position above:
The stepped space above to allow better elevation of the gun and minimal damage to the concrete above from its muzzle blast.
Explosions on the outer face won't add too much concrete dropping onto the gun and traversing capability. Absorbs the energy from direct hits quite well.
Uses less concrete for similar strength.
Looks impressive to scare you off from attacking.
Provides material for discussion many years later.

[bigduke6]

Gil, not going to say the obvious but if you look at the two pics below, one I never posted but the machine gun turret is a swivel like on a german tank and the armour is sections of 3-4 inch plate set at different sizes to create the angle but is built up as an angle as opposed as a straight line angle,the walls must be at least 3 ft thick or greater, its a far greater ark of fire and sight compared to our pill boxes that had just the small opening but was on every side.

The particular bunker I guess had something on top also as there is a section that looks like its been removed and back filled, I'll get some more pics next week. but pics below of the built up section of the machine gun turret/swivel

Its a shame the shadow on the two pics as its clear in the flesh the hole for the MG 34 or 42 that went through the other holes I can say was for viewing or even had some form of sight , telescope ?

[Paul S.]

A sensible question and one that has always baffled me. Why, right the way back to the Norman Conquests, did builders of bow and arrow and also gun slits in bunkers and walls make the redoubt or angling face inwards??

Gil, if you mean why are the firing ports, etc. wider at the outside than the inside, then the easy answer is are of fire. Having the firing port wider on the 'away' side and narrower on the firer's side allowed the firer a wider arc of fire, say 60 to 70 degrees versus 30 to 45 degrees.

[Gil Boyd]

Phil,
No it was the purely the angling of the window, appreciate acrs of fire and it would be great, however, all return of shot would be angled straight back in at you on richochet.......

[Paul S.]

Phil,
No it was the purely the angling of the window, appreciate acrs of fire and it would be great, however, all return of shot would be angled straight back in at you on richochet.......

Ricochets will normally deflect off of a surface (minus energy loss) at the same angle at which it strikes the surface just as a reflection on a mirror does. So, if the firing port has a smooth surface with a 45 Deg. angle and a bullet hitting it on a line perpendicular (from straight ahead) to the firing port aperture will deflect at 45 Deg. and should strike the opposite surface. Stepping the surface as shown in the illustrations above will, as said above, deflect a bullet coming straight at it back towards the firer (minus energy loss).

[30Three]

I have always assumed that the angles around "meurtrier" arrow slits in castle walls and gun emplacements was to allow a wider field of fire.