The incredible discovered one of a German site forgotten

Discussions on the fortifications, artillery, & rockets used by the Axis forces.
Mats
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 19:01
Location: Trelleborg, Sweden

Is dando here?

Post by Mats » 09 Oct 2006 19:07

Gary, I just heard that your museum has not opened yet. Couldn't you please tell us something about your plans? Do you plan to open it in April at the latest?

I would be pleased to get som info.

Best regards / Mats

User avatar
moonraker
Member
Posts: 2183
Joined: 24 Nov 2005 22:06
Location: normandie.french

Post by moonraker » 09 Oct 2006 20:04

hello,


I am still to pass yesterday in front of all is to close and without maintenance since plusior week?????
:wink: EM

picobello
Member
Posts: 7
Joined: 10 Oct 2006 09:57
Location: Holland

Post by picobello » 10 Oct 2006 10:22

Hello from 'a new guy' from Holland.
I visited the Maisy 'complex' last week, and it looks if the whole excavation is stopped. There is a large fence around the complex to keep visitors out. But I was dissapointed about the scale it was suggested,... Some postings here compare it with Point du Hoc, but that area was a much larger aera then this of-fences place. I heard through the man in the local info, that the complex will be opened in the spring of 2007 (but I have my doubts). I visited many complexes through the years, but this place will not tickle my fancy. I was expecting a complex similar to Mont Canisy, or Batterie Azeville, or even the complexes around St Nazair, but it was far from it. I was wondering if the H669 casemats on the field 'next door' are being included with the site of Gary? These are now freely to see because these are on open private land. But the best thing about the whole digging, it will preserve history as a warning for future generations. As General patton ones said (about the Westwall, but goes for the Atlantic Wall also); ‘Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of mankind’. I can't wait to visit the site when it will open (ever).
I will make a website-page of my last visit, and it will be translated to English.

http://www.strijdbewijs.nl

User avatar
moonraker
Member
Posts: 2183
Joined: 24 Nov 2005 22:06
Location: normandie.french

Post by moonraker » 10 Oct 2006 11:36

hi picobello,
welcome to the forum!!!!!!!!! :D,
I think that if you have to visit the site of maisy, you have to cross the barriers
:roll:
the complex of the three bunkers do not form part of the STP maisy and was well differ since, the three R612 casemates in is made the WN84 and the site of maisy is the WN83.
the back of the three R612 has, under the ground, there remain two shelters of which a type with tobrouck, and a VF.
but site is not more important than the others of the sector, except some standard construction and very interesting SK, than I know since I am young,there 30 years
:wink:
ètienne M

User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3410
Joined: 28 Mar 2004 01:30
Location: Devon, England

Post by David W » 27 Oct 2006 00:49

Went to GcM & PdH today. Nothing to see at GcM. PdH open but info centre not manned.

Gary, When do you go public?

(technically that 'today' in my post should read 'yesterday', as it has just turned midnight!)

User avatar
Ebusitanus
Member
Posts: 513
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 18:12

Post by Ebusitanus » 05 Feb 2007 14:27

I plan a trip to that area this spring..anyone has any news?

User avatar
moonraker
Member
Posts: 2183
Joined: 24 Nov 2005 22:06
Location: normandie.french

Post by moonraker » 05 Feb 2007 14:44

hello,
no but in the topic johnf,open in the nex week.
etienne :wink:

Mats
Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 19:01
Location: Trelleborg, Sweden

Post by Mats » 05 Feb 2007 14:57

Ebusitanus!
There was a long topic about the Perruque last year. Have you seen that one?

Mats

sturmvogel
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: 06 Mar 2003 03:05
Location: Denver area

Post by sturmvogel » 07 Feb 2007 03:34

dando wrote:Firstly may I reply to jopaerya

Your assumption that Maisy was destroyed by HMS Hawkins is just a repetition of the website and other information you quote which is incorrect. Visit the site at Maisy and you will see a) no naval damage at all. b) the site is on the reverse side of a slope and impossible for direct naval fire to destroy it. All damage was from ground troops and aeroplanes. Please stop repeating what is complete nonesense just because you have read it. The report is WRONG. Even the 3 casements at La Martiniere are in full view of the sea and have NO DAMAGE to them at all ! Please can someone who has been varify this so this is not continually repeated. Please look for yourself and then you can comment.
Gary

Gary is correct. Naval gunfire of 6"/15cm and greater generally cannot fire indirectly because they cannot elevate their guns high enough. HMS Hawkins, which only had 7.2" guns, may have engaged the battery at La Martiniere, but could not engaged anything on a reverse slope.

User avatar
Ric
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 14 Oct 2005 13:00
Location: Cherbourg

Post by Ric » 07 Feb 2007 09:24

Hello all
For the battery of Maisy what is certain it is as it did not have an important role on the unloading as well on Utah beach which could touch or elsewhere….
This battery does not have was the priority of American, It not representing a large threat for DDay et it has quickly was reduced to silence.
Now remains the site which must be sympathetic nerve visited.
Greetings

Batteries of Cotentin
http://perso.orange.fr/batteries.du.cotentin/
Image

User avatar
moonraker
Member
Posts: 2183
Joined: 24 Nov 2005 22:06
Location: normandie.french

Post by moonraker » 07 Feb 2007 09:56

hi ric,
Laugh you! The battery of maisy is lindeman of Normandy.
confused.


:wink:

User avatar
Ric
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 14 Oct 2005 13:00
Location: Cherbourg

Post by Ric » 07 Feb 2007 10:06

Sorry. :)
Greeting.

sturmvogel
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: 06 Mar 2003 03:05
Location: Denver area

Post by sturmvogel » 07 Feb 2007 21:18

I misspoke a little earlier in my post about the indirect fire capacity of naval gunfire. Ships can certainly engage targets that they cannot see. However, due to their high-velocity, flat-trajectory guns they have a lot of problems engaging targets on the reverse slope of hills and the like. It really depends on the height difference of any obstacles between the ship and the target. Howitzers don't have this issue because they can elevate their guns enough to drops shells down into ravines and the like if necessary.

Jaso

sturmvogel
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: 06 Mar 2003 03:05
Location: Denver area

Post by sturmvogel » 07 Feb 2007 21:29

I misspoke a little earlier in my post about the indirect fire capacity of naval gunfire. Ships can certainly engage targets that they cannot see. However, due to their high-velocity, flat-trajectory guns they have a lot of problems engaging targets on the reverse slope of hills and the like. It really depends on the height difference of any obstacles between the ship and the target. Howitzers don't have this issue because they can elevate their guns enough to drops shells down into ravines and the like if necessary.

Jason

ducatim901
Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: 14 Jul 2005 15:38
Location: netherlands

Post by ducatim901 » 08 Feb 2007 07:56

Hi Picobello,
I looked at your site just a minute ago, the so called "open luchtafweerstelling" for the 5 cm Flak is a emplacement for 5cm KwK, and the "belangrijkste kazemat van Wn 88" is not a casemate but for the bunkercrack a very nice example of the VF6a/b (an observationbunker).
Greetings jack.

Return to “Fortifications, Artillery, & Rockets”