"How did they set up the barbed wire?" Topic

I've read about the thick barbed wire entanglements in front of the trench lines. I've also read about how soldiers hardly dared to show the tiniest bit of themselves above the trenches for fear of drawing fire. So how did they string all of that barbed wire out in front of the trenches? Even if they tried to do it at night, it would inevitably make quite a lot of noise (hammering in the support stakes and all). Wouldn't that have drawn fire? Not just sniper fire, but artillery and machine gun fire, too. Seems like it would have been nearly impossible, and yet somehow they did it.

Some was done at night, other was done before forces fell back to occupy the positions. Some was 'back fill' from a line that was made, thickening the friendly side.

Those are my guesses

Saber6 is correct on both counts.

Wire teams from both sides layed and repaired the wire each night. The Hindenberg line's wire was done before the German retreat to the new line in 1917. The stakes were "Devil's Corkscrews, so Make little sound when being emplaced.

Also many troops just went out and laid the wire in the fastest/haphazard method possible. On many air photos the wire is shown as huge areas of black shadows on the landscape.

A good basic book on it is

Fortifications of the Western Front 1914–18 (Fortress Book 24)
by Paddy Griffith (Author), Peter Dennis (Illustrator)

link

Yes, at night is the answer.

Read almost any book of letters/diarys etc and you will find mentions of 'wiring parties' sent out most nights to repair the wire.

During British preparations for some of the larger offensives on the Western Front, wire-cutting was carried out with artillery and mortars during the day. MGs were then trained on the gaps that had been created, with barrage fire being laid down during the night in order to prevent the enemy wiring parties from restoring the wire.

Robert

As noted above, night was time building stuff, including wiring. Day was for sleeping.

wire-cutting was carried out with artillery and mortars during the day.

Except that artillery and mortars were not very effective at cutting wire …

I respectfully disagree, if and when both artillery and mortars were used effectively. With the Battle of the Somme, for example, there was a detailed analysis of the wire-cutting prior to the major attack in July. The analysis showed that where the observers had line of sight to the wire then it was thoroughly cut. Areas that were wired in defilade were not. You may be referring to the wire protecting the German second line for example.

By Third Ypres, the extent and depth of wire-cutting by artillery was even more extensive. Every day, reports from aerial photography were analysed to assess the effectiveness. Fire missions were then adjusted to take on new areas of un-cut wire or to further destroy any attempts to repair the cut wire.

Massed use of tanks did away with the need for prolonged preparatory bombardments, both for wire-cutting and other reasons.

Robert

TMP link

This is another reason why most militaries changed to concertina wire coils instead of linear wire. Even if the coil breaks, it's still in the way.

This is a quote from Major General John Headlam, whose report entitled 'Notes on Atillery Material in the Battle of the Somme' was dated 6 July 1916 and covered his analysis of the effects of the preliminary artillery bombardment before July 1:

'7. Wire cutting

The German defences on this front were known to be very carefully wired and the specimens attached will show the formidable character of the wire itself. In most cases, it was on iron uprights though in some cases wooden stakes were used.

Wherever it had been possible to obtain direct observation it had been destroyed as an obstacle by artillery fire, and many infantry officers and men told me that they had never been in any way retarded by the wire or ever had to use the cutters on their rifles. The difference in the effect of the different natures of shell was, however, very marked. There is no doubt whatever in my mind that 18-pdr shrapnel is far the most generally effective projectile for this purpose. It sweeps the wire away completely with damaging the surface of the ground and so substituting another obstacle. This was very marked in front of the second line where 18-pdr fire had been used exlusively.

Next to the 18-pdr comes the 2" trench mortar with the Newton fuse. This is also very effective, but not so much as the 18-pdr for the wire is heaped up. In some cases 18-pdr had been employed to sweep away the wire which had been so heaped up by the 2", and this combination is extremely effective.

But the 18-pdr is not effective against wire on a forward slope (there was a very marked case of this near Fricourt where the fire had been very accurate, but little or no damage had been done to the wire), and there will also be those places where it cannot be reached by a flat trajectory gun and which are beyond the range of a trench mortar. Against such howitzers must be employed, and I was able to examine the effect of this in several places. The 6" howitzer is quite effective in removing the wire, but the craters left are a considerable obstacle to movement. The 4.5" does not appear to have a sufficiently violent explosion for the purpose, the wire being only blown away for a very small radius around the crater, so that there is considerable danger of the result being to increase the obstacle rather than the opposite. But this appears to be due to the effect of the explosion being confined to the crater. With the new instantaneous fuse (No. 106) I imagine that the effect will resemble that of the 2" trench mortar with the Newton fuse, and if so the power of the artillery to deal with wire will be materially increased.

As regards the nature of wire, it had been anticipated that iron uprights would render the task of the artillery more difficult. I am inclined to think that this is not so. Certainly in several cases the wire was cut away more cleanly and completely from the iron than from wooden stakes – possibly on account of the greater rigidity of the former. I am inclined to think that the most difficult wire to deal with is that on the iron knife rests as these are simply blown aside by the explosion without being broken up. Gaps can of course be made, but that is all.'

As noted by the author, his report pre-dated the use of the No. 106 fuse. This contact fuse did indeed improve further the ability of artillery to cut wire.

Robert