Hello Friends
The list from the book "Westwall" ( a very good book with refrences to achivematerial ) indicate that
there were also neu version in the Westwall , I always believed that the neuversion was only build in
the Atlantikwall ??
Regards Jos
Neu
Re:
Which ones do you mean? Because the one of the Gefechtsstand H.K.A.R. 1240 has his entrance defence cut of. And the 117 of W.N. Iltis still has got his entrance defence. So both these 117 should be a types?P. Heijkoop wrote:Loon Plage, Oostende, de Haan etc: 117b
Re: Neu
I have my dought about the 117a Neu in Holland , I think they are just like the one's in Norway
117 Typ Noorwegen but then 117 Typ Holland because the type's were only found in Holland just
like the 118 Typ Holland . If it was a Neu version it would be build in the hole area of all the Walls .
For the Warmwasserheizungkeller was only build ina few 117's .
Regards Jos
117 Typ Noorwegen but then 117 Typ Holland because the type's were only found in Holland just
like the 118 Typ Holland . If it was a Neu version it would be build in the hole area of all the Walls .
For the Warmwasserheizungkeller was only build ina few 117's .
Regards Jos
Re: Neu
Hello Maarten
I personelly think that the Neu version were drawings made for bunker in the Atlantikwall that were allready
made for the Westwall with sometimes small -( 515 neu ) and sometimes big adoptions ( 114a neu ) .
Regards Jos
I personelly think that the Neu version were drawings made for bunker in the Atlantikwall that were allready
made for the Westwall with sometimes small -( 515 neu ) and sometimes big adoptions ( 114a neu ) .
Regards Jos
Re: Neu
That would explain the term Neu perfectly. Aren't there any Neu versions build in the early days of the Westwall? Because this would bring down your theory.jopaerya wrote:Hello Maarten
I personelly think that the Neu version were drawings made for bunker in the Atlantikwall that were allready
made for the Westwall with sometimes small -( 515 neu ) and sometimes big adoptions ( 114a neu ) .
Regards Jos
-
P. Heijkoop
- Member
- Posts: 718
- Joined: 29 Feb 2004, 19:20
- Location: Middelburg, The Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Neu
Jos,
There are original German plans of the 117 with the enlarged lay-out with
the type nr 117a Neu. So, that's one thing that's clear at least.
That the 117a Neu is not found everywhere doesn't really say anything in my
opinion. Most likely it was built only in a certain (early) building programma for the Netherlands
and later abandoned for the more efficient 608. In France, Denmark the normal style 117
(with or without celler) was built and followed by the 608.
In my opinion it's most likely that the 'neu' version of the 117a was just like the 118a
a more or less regional design to be built on the wet dutch soil were no cellar could
be used. It strange that a 118a and c-version were designed. Function is largely the same,
only the 118a is somewhat more efficient I would say. Perhaps the 118c was abandoned after
a certain time, replaced by the a-version and then the 639.
Just like the 117a Neu the 117 typ Norwegen fitted local reguirements. The basic functions
of the bunker have survived (Funk, Nachrichten, Führerraum, Geschäftszimmer, Offizier),
but like many things in Norway they choose to save building materials
Peter
There are original German plans of the 117 with the enlarged lay-out with
the type nr 117a Neu. So, that's one thing that's clear at least.
That the 117a Neu is not found everywhere doesn't really say anything in my
opinion. Most likely it was built only in a certain (early) building programma for the Netherlands
and later abandoned for the more efficient 608. In France, Denmark the normal style 117
(with or without celler) was built and followed by the 608.
In my opinion it's most likely that the 'neu' version of the 117a was just like the 118a
a more or less regional design to be built on the wet dutch soil were no cellar could
be used. It strange that a 118a and c-version were designed. Function is largely the same,
only the 118a is somewhat more efficient I would say. Perhaps the 118c was abandoned after
a certain time, replaced by the a-version and then the 639.
Just like the 117a Neu the 117 typ Norwegen fitted local reguirements. The basic functions
of the bunker have survived (Funk, Nachrichten, Führerraum, Geschäftszimmer, Offizier),
but like many things in Norway they choose to save building materials
Peter
Re: Neu
Hello Peter
My greatest problem is that this bunker 117 (neu) and 118(neu) is only build in Holland and no were else
the other mystery bunker bunker 118(c) is build in the 88 A.K. 15, 7, and in the 1 Army with the same
rooms as the 118 (neu) ?? only on the other side . By my knowleghe the 117(neu) had extra rooms to house
the troops of the regiment H.Q. , the extra pit for the Warmwasserheizung in the 117 is only build on a few
places . The 118 in Hanstholm has the same pit as the 117 and no other rooms in the cellar ??
Regards Jos
My greatest problem is that this bunker 117 (neu) and 118(neu) is only build in Holland and no were else
the other mystery bunker bunker 118(c) is build in the 88 A.K. 15, 7, and in the 1 Army with the same
rooms as the 118 (neu) ?? only on the other side . By my knowleghe the 117(neu) had extra rooms to house
the troops of the regiment H.Q. , the extra pit for the Warmwasserheizung in the 117 is only build on a few
places . The 118 in Hanstholm has the same pit as the 117 and no other rooms in the cellar ??
Regards Jos
-
P. Heijkoop
- Member
- Posts: 718
- Joined: 29 Feb 2004, 19:20
- Location: Middelburg, The Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Neu
Jos,
It's only a problem if you want a Regelbau always to be built Atlantikwall-wide (or in more then one AOK) for
it to be one. Take for example the S.K.1, widely said to be a regelbau (despite the name),
but only built in the AOK 15 erea. So, a Berlin-design, used only within one AOK. Also, some well known Regelbau's are built only one time; does that make them a non-standard or local design? It's a bit the same reasoning you're using.
In analogy; the FN-Gerät. A standardised Fortress weapon, built in Ost- and Westall, and in the AW only
in the AOK 1. So, is the AW-FN-bunker in Biarritz a local design? Not per sé.
I think most is just a case of some policy discretion for the Fest.Pi.Kdr. to make 'minor' adaptions, with approval
from Berlin.
It could be so simple that the Fest.Pi.Kdr. in the Netherlands was the only one that was commissioned
with the plan of the 117aNeu from Berlin (if you presume the 'neu' is in the same 'category' as the ones in Bettingen & Büren, alas an offically by the Gen.d.Pi & Fest. modernised design). Or, the Fest.Pi.Kdr. made his own adaption based on the standard 117. He built it a number of times after which it was abandoned.
Same goes for the 117 in Norway, a Norway-only design based on a plan commissioned by Berlin.
Also, practical: when adapting a plan... how do you call it ? You can't give it a NEW number, so
you're stuck with a suffix. And then you very quickly and up using an a, b, c, or Neu....
The Regimental theory for the 117a Neu was something I proposed a year ago, with one exception for one
in IJmuiden that was built for a bataillon.
The heating cellar in the 117a/b was built in a number of bunkers. All of them on dry or high ground.
At least: Hanstholm, Katwijk, Haamstede, Ardres, Gironde-Nord, Gironde Sud?
Perhaps also a question of local preference, availability of the Heizkessel vs. WT80
Don't know wether the 118 in Hansholm has a large cellar or not. Most likely it does.
Did you come across the term 118neu in German docs? I seem to remember seeing it (or 118a) one time on a list for
a bunker in the AOK1 ?? If not, don't start making up 'neu' terms yourself...
the discussion is already complicated enough as it is.
Last remark; not all was planned in detail, not all plans were available in time... it was just make do in wartime I suppose...
Peter
It's only a problem if you want a Regelbau always to be built Atlantikwall-wide (or in more then one AOK) for
it to be one. Take for example the S.K.1, widely said to be a regelbau (despite the name),
but only built in the AOK 15 erea. So, a Berlin-design, used only within one AOK. Also, some well known Regelbau's are built only one time; does that make them a non-standard or local design? It's a bit the same reasoning you're using.
In analogy; the FN-Gerät. A standardised Fortress weapon, built in Ost- and Westall, and in the AW only
in the AOK 1. So, is the AW-FN-bunker in Biarritz a local design? Not per sé.
I think most is just a case of some policy discretion for the Fest.Pi.Kdr. to make 'minor' adaptions, with approval
from Berlin.
It could be so simple that the Fest.Pi.Kdr. in the Netherlands was the only one that was commissioned
with the plan of the 117aNeu from Berlin (if you presume the 'neu' is in the same 'category' as the ones in Bettingen & Büren, alas an offically by the Gen.d.Pi & Fest. modernised design). Or, the Fest.Pi.Kdr. made his own adaption based on the standard 117. He built it a number of times after which it was abandoned.
Same goes for the 117 in Norway, a Norway-only design based on a plan commissioned by Berlin.
Also, practical: when adapting a plan... how do you call it ? You can't give it a NEW number, so
you're stuck with a suffix. And then you very quickly and up using an a, b, c, or Neu....
The Regimental theory for the 117a Neu was something I proposed a year ago, with one exception for one
in IJmuiden that was built for a bataillon.
The heating cellar in the 117a/b was built in a number of bunkers. All of them on dry or high ground.
At least: Hanstholm, Katwijk, Haamstede, Ardres, Gironde-Nord, Gironde Sud?
Perhaps also a question of local preference, availability of the Heizkessel vs. WT80
Don't know wether the 118 in Hansholm has a large cellar or not. Most likely it does.
Did you come across the term 118neu in German docs? I seem to remember seeing it (or 118a) one time on a list for
a bunker in the AOK1 ?? If not, don't start making up 'neu' terms yourself...
the discussion is already complicated enough as it is.Last remark; not all was planned in detail, not all plans were available in time... it was just make do in wartime I suppose...
Peter
Re: Neu
Hi Peter
For the SK 1 in the 15 Army that is not true the one at Utrecht ( Baupunkt 195 ) is a SK 1 only
this one is missing the extra rooms we are talking about ( maybe build on high ground ) so maybe
in a cellar
Back to the 117 in every buidingplan and bunkerlist I have from Holland and we have a lot of information
on Holland if we compare that with other AOK but no 117(Neu) or 118( neu) . The only reference I found
of the 117a( neu) is on a bunkerplan form the firm Siemens and not from a military oganisation . I never
found any information on the 118 Neu .
The problem is that we are speculating and we have no proof and we want to give all bunker a number but
still a very interesting discussion because the same extra rooms we are talking about on the 118(c) are
build on the S.K.1 both 4.10 meter only the lenght is adopted . If we look at the original drawing of the
SK 1 it was from the O.T. Einsatz Kanalkuste .
Regards Jos
For the SK 1 in the 15 Army that is not true the one at Utrecht ( Baupunkt 195 ) is a SK 1 only
this one is missing the extra rooms we are talking about ( maybe build on high ground ) so maybe
in a cellar
Back to the 117 in every buidingplan and bunkerlist I have from Holland and we have a lot of information
on Holland if we compare that with other AOK but no 117(Neu) or 118( neu) . The only reference I found
of the 117a( neu) is on a bunkerplan form the firm Siemens and not from a military oganisation . I never
found any information on the 118 Neu .
The problem is that we are speculating and we have no proof and we want to give all bunker a number but
still a very interesting discussion because the same extra rooms we are talking about on the 118(c) are
build on the S.K.1 both 4.10 meter only the lenght is adopted . If we look at the original drawing of the
SK 1 it was from the O.T. Einsatz Kanalkuste .
Regards Jos
-
P. Heijkoop
- Member
- Posts: 718
- Joined: 29 Feb 2004, 19:20
- Location: Middelburg, The Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Neu
Hi Jos,
Well, one can discuss wether the one in Utrecht is a S.K.1.
If we have to follow the BFK's it's a S.K. The bunker is indeed
missing the annex and one row of rooms is 1m less wide. It was equipped
with normal bunkerstoves, which was relatively awkward because they had to be
refilled regularly, hence a lot of potential disturbance in the working quarters.
Although military documents indeed have to be the basis to make judgements
we all know there are also mistakes or non-consistencies on the building lists.
Construction plans from official organisations have to be preferred. For the one made by Siemens I'm
fairly sure it's based on military specs and perhaps this plan makes the regional theory on
the 117aNeu even more plausible:
Fest.Pi.Kdr. ? designed an enlarged 117 himself and asked Siemens Netherlands to develop
a heating system for it. Quite practical.
With regard to the annex of the Sk1 and 118c, as opposed to the one of the 118a:
I can see the logic behind the annexe for these specific bunkers (getting rid of the noisy
ventilators and stoves from the working rooms, hence getting more space) However, I always found
the way the annexe was constructed to be fairly inefficient. Relatively small rooms and quite demanding
equipment-wise. e.g 5x HES 1.2 etc). The a-annexe of the 118a is much better. Also, when analyzing the last
Sk(1) in Bilthoven, you can see that by an efficient design they could even create a large telephone room, with
roughly the same m3 used. In my idea a good example of the ungoing perfection of designs...
Peter
Well, one can discuss wether the one in Utrecht is a S.K.1.
If we have to follow the BFK's it's a S.K. The bunker is indeed
missing the annex and one row of rooms is 1m less wide. It was equipped
with normal bunkerstoves, which was relatively awkward because they had to be
refilled regularly, hence a lot of potential disturbance in the working quarters.
Although military documents indeed have to be the basis to make judgements
we all know there are also mistakes or non-consistencies on the building lists.
Construction plans from official organisations have to be preferred. For the one made by Siemens I'm
fairly sure it's based on military specs and perhaps this plan makes the regional theory on
the 117aNeu even more plausible:
Fest.Pi.Kdr. ? designed an enlarged 117 himself and asked Siemens Netherlands to develop
a heating system for it. Quite practical.
With regard to the annex of the Sk1 and 118c, as opposed to the one of the 118a:
I can see the logic behind the annexe for these specific bunkers (getting rid of the noisy
ventilators and stoves from the working rooms, hence getting more space) However, I always found
the way the annexe was constructed to be fairly inefficient. Relatively small rooms and quite demanding
equipment-wise. e.g 5x HES 1.2 etc). The a-annexe of the 118a is much better. Also, when analyzing the last
Sk(1) in Bilthoven, you can see that by an efficient design they could even create a large telephone room, with
roughly the same m3 used. In my idea a good example of the ungoing perfection of designs...
Peter
Last edited by P. Heijkoop on 15 Oct 2008, 12:07, edited 1 time in total.
-
P. Heijkoop
- Member
- Posts: 718
- Joined: 29 Feb 2004, 19:20
- Location: Middelburg, The Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Neu
Indeed
btw, I'm not one of those bunkerologists that want's to give every bunker a number, or
call every adaption a S.K. (I always find it funny to see a Vf Sk in 15cm brick, ahum) ...
That what I meant with saying "the 117aNeu is only a problem
when you want to give it a number and/or explain it from the
organization of the General der Pioniere u Festungen".
I merely pointed out that not everything has a logic. Well, it does...
but not everything is as integral/comprehensive as we would like to think
sometimes.
There was local/regional discretion based on higher policy guidelines
It was war and makeshift solutions were chosen...
btw, I'm not one of those bunkerologists that want's to give every bunker a number, or
call every adaption a S.K. (I always find it funny to see a Vf Sk in 15cm brick, ahum) ...
That what I meant with saying "the 117aNeu is only a problem
when you want to give it a number and/or explain it from the
organization of the General der Pioniere u Festungen".
I merely pointed out that not everything has a logic. Well, it does...
but not everything is as integral/comprehensive as we would like to think
sometimes.
There was local/regional discretion based on higher policy guidelines
It was war and makeshift solutions were chosen...
-
AvB
- Financial supporter
- Posts: 3428
- Joined: 20 Jun 2004, 01:00
- Location: Utrecht, Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Neu
Both the 117a and 119a in WN Berlin (Vieux Soulac) have the cellar.P. Heijkoop wrote:The heating cellar in the 117a/b was built in a number of bunkers. All of them on dry or high ground.
At least: Hanstholm, Katwijk, Haamstede, Ardres, Gironde-Nord, Gironde Sud?
Groundwaterlevels in Utrecht are fairly low. (That's why the medieval wharves and cellars could be built too, low groundwater)jopaerya wrote:For the SK 1 in the 15 Army that is not true the one at Utrecht ( Baupunkt 195 ) is a SK 1 only
this one is missing the extra rooms we are talking about ( maybe build on high ground ) so maybe
in a cellar.