How to interpret trenchsystems

[myt1prod]

In between strongholds (stp/wn) we often see trenchsystems which stand on their own and have no significant constructions nore connections with nearby strongholds.
How should we interpret these positions? How can we mark them on maps? Where these small (z)Wn's... although - in case of my hometown De Panne - we don't see them mentioned on known German maps and documents? Is there information known on who manned these positions or were they only built to be manned on the moment an allied attack took place?

Thanks in advance
Jean

[TH]

The major strongpoints were just the backbone (or literally the strong points) of the HKL/HKF. In between them there were often areas covered by hills, forests, buildings or that were simply out of range. The smaller positions extended the defendable or observable area, creating a somewhat consecutive front. The extent, as well as who built and manned them obviously varied greatly between regions. From German documents I know that it was discouraged to create vast trench systems that could not be manned or armed during an attack, as these would have been taken over by the enemy. I think in Denmark it was the task of the local units to create an appropriate number of positions for the expected number of defenders and weapons.

Personally I register both individual and composed positions as "Stellung(en)". The general meaning of Widerstandsnest is a position for a group of infantry or an important weapon (MG, Pak, etc.). Following that, I think many positions can be thought of as Widerstandsnester. The official organisation of positions into Widerstandsnester and other units can of course only be learned from source material.

[jopaerya]

Hello Jean

Here some information on Z.W.N. ( BAMA )

Regards Jos

[myt1prod]

Thanks you both.
So we can designate these as 'feldpost(en)'

In De Panne there seemed to be quite a bit of these feldposten in between the strongholds; many single standing trenches and trenchsystems can be found in and around De Panne. Some of the smallest trenches are seen in the towncentre, in the gardens of houses presumably occupied by the Germans, I don't think these can be considerd as feldposten. The larger single standing trenches and trenchsystems follow the outher bounds of the aglomerations of De Panne - Adinkerke and fill in the gaps in between strongholds or they are constructed on strategic important places like accessroads, along the canal and the railway. In the document by Jos we read that it is recommended that these feldposten had at least 1 'splittersichere' shelter but when looking in the field it seems this rule wasn't generally applied. In my hometown I find many single standing trenches but most of them seem to lack any sort of construction to provide in shelter or ammostorage.

The photo shows a feldpost at Adinkerke (De Panne) constructed along the canal which connects Dunkirk with Nieuwpoort, and which is built nearby a Belgian bordercontrolpavilion which was already there as Adinkerke lays on the Franco-Belgian border. It seems logic to assume that the Germans used this border crossing which was fitted with barriers to their advantange as well as it controls both the road and the canal which runs from Belgium into France.
this far this is the only feldpost in De Panne - Adinkerke where it seems a 'splittersichere' shelter was built; as it lacks any shadows it seems to be built entirely underground and the connection to the nice trench is clearly visible. this feldpost laid in between the Stp 049 Ost-W (Bochum / Cabour) and the HKB La Panne (Duinhoek)