Question - What´s this "concrete" ?

[michelb]

It is a special foto you found, it is "Koch"-bunker
named after Gauleiter E. Koch (East Prussia)on the picture
It could be used as kampfstand , unterschlupt and
beobachterstand.etc etc.

Another thesis is, they named it after "Kochtopf" (cooking stove) becuase it looks very similar to it.

Both sound feasable. Although i don't understand why a Bunkertype is named after a Gauleiter. Never understood why Koch was so concerned with the defense of East Prussia. Het was more concerned with his power, wealth and art-robbery.

Regards,
Michel

[jopaerya]

Hello

These 2 pages contain some information on the Kochbunker .

Regards Jos

[jopaerya]

Hello

Two Koch bunkers one standing as Tobrukstand and the other lying as cover for personel or ammo .

Photo = Polish bunker Forum

Regards Jos

[Projekt-Westwall]

Hi,

Here a Pic from a Kochstand as Observation (B-Stand) near a Doppel MG- Schartenstand B1-5.

Greets

Markus

[jopaerya]

Hello Markus

Beautiful to see the early Westwall bunker alongside the latest Westwall bunker ,
are there many Kochstanden left in the Westwall by your knowledge ??

Regards Jos

[Projekt-Westwall]

Hi Jos,

Thanx,

there where ca. 10 Kochstände in the Area of this B1-5. It is a front slop position (is it the right word for Vorderhang?)

This Position is a part of the "Hilgenbachstellung" in the Saarland. You can find here "Limes-Regelbauten" and early "Pionierbauten" in B1. In 1944 the positions were reinforced with Kochständen.
I have requested that the building may be restored by me. I hope it works.

Greets Markus

[jopaerya]

Hello , this is a Kochbunker with a Ringdeckel for a binocular periscope ( Scherenfernrohr )

Regards Jos

[Projekt-Westwall]

Hi Jos,

nice drawing, thx for sharing it!

Greet Markus

[KaiserChief]

Really interesting drawing. I expect similar device for binocular was used in tobruks. Is it true or false?

V.

[jopaerya]

Hi V

That is correct the "Gerät Nr. 967 S 7" was also used in the ringstand .

Regards Jos

[Projekt-Westwall]

Here a picture from our "Kochstand" at WH 316 in the Halberg-Stellung Saarbrücken.

We had built in a "Ringlafette" from the postwar "Bundeswehr".
This mounting is was used in many older trucks.

It is not original wartime- but looks very nice...

BRegards
Markus

DSCN9495.jpg (179.96 KiB) Viewed 1178 times

DSCN9496.jpg (175.4 KiB) Viewed 1178 times

DSCN9497.jpg (156.53 KiB) Viewed 1178 times

[jopaerya]

Thanks for sharing these nice picture's and good to have you back

Regards Jos

[MLW]

Based on Markus' photographs, I do not see how the Koch bunker could be effective. First, the gunner and machine gun are exposed - there is a real risk of a head or upper body injury. Second, there is no room to maneuver. The gunner must have felt trapped in a small space. Third, when taking fire, shards of concrete would have been a danger. What soldier would prefer the "concrete coffin" of a Koch bunker to a simple earthen field work? Thoughts?

Regards, Marc

[Harpoon]

Based on Markus' photographs, I do not see how the Koch bunker could be effective. First, the gunner and machine gun are exposed - there is a real risk of a head or upper body injury. Second, there is no room to maneuver. The gunner must have felt trapped in a small space. Third, when taking fire, shards of concrete would have been a danger. What soldier would prefer the "concrete coffin" of a Koch bunker to a simple earthen field work? Thoughts?

Regards, Marc

As an old ”grunt” I would prefer concrete tobruk or Koch position any day over a dugout hole, but with additional sandbags or earth filled up to the ring. A fortified position also gives additional luxury as shelters and trenches leading up to the position. I would expect that bipod would have been favorable over a pivot, but the anti aircraft use will suffer. A concrete position gives overall better protection against all weapons and also an important factor the elements.

Harpoon

[MLW]

Hi Harpoon - it still looks like a death trap to me. Too easy to see and identify (i.e., limited concealment), no overhead cover, and too many hard surfaces to ricochet bullets. An earth or timber bunker that will blend in better with the surroundings and absorb impacts has to be preferable (in my opinion).

Regards, Marc