"WW1 trench construction " Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Early 20th Century Discussion Message Board Back to the Terrain and Scenics Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral World War One
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Showcase ArticleNeed 16 square feet of gaming space, built to order?
Featured Profile ArticleNeed something to base your scenics on? Look in the craft aisle…
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 15 Dec 2017 11:36 a.m. PST |
Cool!
Main page link Amicalement Armand |
Golgoloth | 15 Dec 2017 12:10 p.m. PST |
Wow! I have no idea of the accuracy (or any reason to doubt it!), but that's some damned nice modelmaking! |
Vigilant | 15 Dec 2017 12:54 p.m. PST |
What a terrific idea, and very well executed. |
Colonel Bogey | 15 Dec 2017 2:39 p.m. PST |
|
Tango01 | 16 Dec 2017 10:44 a.m. PST |
Happy you enjoyed it my friends!. (smile) Amicalement Armand |
Lion in the Stars | 18 Dec 2017 6:57 p.m. PST |
That's really cool! And I wasn't aware that the edges of the trenches were raised that much higher than the surrounding terrain… |
ScottS | 18 Dec 2017 7:32 p.m. PST |
They usually weren't. Raised trenches like that are generally harder to construct, more exposed, and more vulnerable to collapse. As the text on the second profile says, that sort of construction was done in areas with a relatively high ground water level to keep the trenches from flooding. Interestingly, there are photos of the trenches built in the sandy soil near the coast; these are almost entirely above the natural ground level and are built from huge piles of sandbags. |
Lion in the Stars | 20 Dec 2017 5:12 p.m. PST |
I meant even the 'typical' and 'ideal' trenches are only about waist deep relative to the ground level, the remaining "depth" of the trench is the excavated soil. Modern foxholes are dug deeper than that (and the excavated soil is packed down). |
ScottS | 20 Dec 2017 6:55 p.m. PST |
I don't think that's the case. Obviously it did happen, but that doesn't seem to be typical. You displace soil from the trench, then pile it up on the sides. You aren't going to end up with more soil – to make two parapets – than would come from inside the excavated trench. You'd have to get soil from somewhere else, presumably from the surrounding area, and that's both dangerous and inefficient. You'd also have to compact that soil in order to keep it from sliding back into the trench. Sandbags are one option here, but they have their own limitations. I can see doing this where you have no choice, but when the ground is stable enough to support trench sides and the ground water is low enough, why not just dig down further? As it is, there are plenty of photos of trenches out there that are deep, certainly deeper than waist-high – with no sign of parapets that are taller than the depth of the trench from natural ground down. For example:
That said, yes, many photos don't really always present a clear picture, as the photographer – for obvious reasons – isn't sticking the camera up high enough above the upper edge of the trench to show the surrounding area. |
|