Boris Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 There is one on the ECML just north of the large viaduct between Morpeth and Pegswood on the West side, but its a number of years since I was up there. Also in Whitby there is a set of loopholes by one of the railway bridges that would cover the approach to the bridge and the old level crossing, I'll dig out some photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium petethemole Posted December 8, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 8, 2013 The Defence of Britain database is a good source for pillboxes and other defences. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/ai_q.cfm The footbridge over the station throat at Southamton Terminus was loopholed. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/ai_full_r.cfm?refno=12720&CFID=307&CFTOKEN=FF85B800-DEF9-4FF5-A38D2A55AB2E7639 Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Try these guys for different ones to the Wills / Hornby versions http://henk.fox3000.com/muswell.htm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold colin penfold Posted December 9, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 9, 2013 brill, I now know my cow is in a type 28a! (see P1) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted December 10, 2013 Author Share Posted December 10, 2013 Try these guys for different ones to the Wills / Hornby versions http://henk.fox3000.com/muswell.htm Thanks ile give them try... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted December 16, 2013 Author Share Posted December 16, 2013 Found some realy good information on the Pillboxs Study Group.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted December 28, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 28, 2013 Finally managed to get somewhere near to the St Ives line. The photos aren't the best as I was on the other bank of the estuary and the light was poor. This is the one that is closest to the mouth of the Hayle Estuary. These show the pill box next to the line. There is a bridge carrying the line over a small footpath at this point. You can also see another wartime structure behind the pill box. Just below this is a quay known as dynamite quay, it was used during ww1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
10800 Posted December 28, 2013 Share Posted December 28, 2013 If you have access to the long-demised 'RailModel Digest' (Iain Rice publication from the 90s, 'bookazine' ran to 6 or 7 issues), No. 3 has an article on pillboxes (real and model) by Tim Shackleton. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 More interesting railway pillboxs!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroken1 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 More interesting railway pillboxs!! Interesting thread Neil. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted March 6, 2014 Author Share Posted March 6, 2014 Interesting thread Neil. Yer,theres that many different types of wartime pilboxs,and bunkers out n about near to main roads and railway lines... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroken1 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yer,theres that many different types of wartime pilboxs,and bunkers out n about near to main roads and railway lines... Thought bunkers were for just oil storage neil. Is pilboxs also none as bunkers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted March 7, 2014 Author Share Posted March 7, 2014 Thought bunkers were for just oil storage neil. Is pilboxs also none as bunkers? Pilboxs is different to "bunker" Bunkers are normaly found on old ww2 airfields,or in the back gardens to old houses. Well i think im right, Hooton airbase had bunkers! use to play in them as kid,think there called Stanton shelters. But ive got no photos of these,and no access to them any longer... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium petethemole Posted March 7, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 7, 2014 The main difference is that a pillbox is a fairly small defensive structure above ground whereas a bunker is mostly or completely below the ground surface, usually with apertures for weapons. They can be any size. Stanton shelters were air raid shelters of sectional reinforced concrete construction that were put in a hole to about half their height and covered over with earth. They were made by the Stanton Ironworks company. The Hooton examples survived until recently and images can be found on the web. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share Posted March 9, 2014 There also brick type pilboxs in RAF Sealand,next to the A55.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted March 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 9, 2014 Hi Class 66 Brick pillboxes are not what they seem, they are concrete boxes with a brick lining. Brick walls were used as shuttering for many pillboxes and just left in place. Where corrugated iron sheets were used for the shuttering they were often left inside the pillboxes after the concrete had set. The main difference is that a pillbox is a fairly small defensive structure above ground whereas a bunker is mostly or completely below the ground surface, usually with apertures for weapons. They can be any size. Pete Hi Pete I have never come across this definition of the terminology, I have always been of the understanding that British pillboxes were bunkers. The use of the term pillbox came from the first world war, the early German bunkers were round in shape and looked like "pillboxes" hence the troops giving them that as a name which has remained in use. The need for some form of defence system in 1940 lead to a massive quick build of small Light Machine Gun and Anti Tank Gun strong points connected by a trench system in various parts of the country. The trenches were filled in very soon after the war but the pillboxes remained. We have never been that good at building massive defensive systems, there are a few forts around our ports but nothing like the fortifications built in Europe from the late 1800s until the end of the cold war. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Presumably because nobody had mounted a successful invasion of Britain since 1066 and very few had tried, whereas Continental countries with land borders to hostile neighbours were always susceptible to invasion. Only for a fairly brief period in 1940 - so brief that most of the defences were never finished - did it seem that the Blitzkrieg* might make it across the Channel with a credible possibility of action on British soil. Augmented by the harbour fortifications mentioned, the Channel makes a very good defensive ditch! *in the original sense of rapid advance over land supported by air, not the frequent British interpretation of aerial bombing alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted March 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 9, 2014 Hi Edwin I think it comes from the British army tradition of being mobile not static. Where we have built forts they were normally to house the troops who in times of adversity march to meet the enemy in the open. Even in WW1 our trenches were to provide shelter until there was an opportunity for the big push. In WW2 when General Allen Brook took over from General Ironside he discontinued a lot of the planned fixed defences and reorganised the army so it was mobile and able to counter attack should the Germans cross the channel. As for 1066 being the last time we were invaded, depends on your view of history but Dutch invasion of 5 November 1688 when King Billy kicked James out of Britain might have been the last successful invasion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share Posted March 10, 2014 Hi Edwin I think it comes from the British army tradition of being mobile not static. Where we have built forts they were normally to house the troops who in times of adversity march to meet the enemy in the open. Even in WW1 our trenches were to provide shelter until there was an opportunity for the big push. In WW2 when General Allen Brook took over from General Ironside he discontinued a lot of the planned fixed defences and reorganised the army so it was mobile and able to counter attack should the Germans cross the channel. As for 1066 being the last time we were invaded, depends on your view of history but Dutch invasion of 5 November 1688 when King Billy kicked James out of Britain might have been the last successful invasion. You no your war stuff Clive Thanks for your good information. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted August 14, 2014 Author Share Posted August 14, 2014 Ive snapped few more pillbox pictures while out on the road,over last few months during work... Came across two large pillboxs in Farnborough. This pillbox seems to cover the road bridge and railway... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Presumably because nobody had mounted a successful invasion of Britain since 1066... Hmm. Apologies for the diversion into historical pedantry (and I accept that it is) but since Clive has already gone there... I suppose it depends how you perceive it: Henry Tudor's landing in 1485 and William and Mary's in 1688 certainly had the character of invasion, even allowing for the quite substantial domestic support. The leaders were accompanied by substantial foreign armies and resulted in what can only be described as 'regime change'. Unlike the Normans, these two did actually invade Britain, and not just England. Had it not been for some careful chicanery in 1216 you could have added that one to the list too. Back on topic, you might find these interesting: http://www.archaeologyuk.org/books/Foot2006 The defence of Britain project includes not only pill boxes but all the other features of fixed defence installations surveyed between 1995 and 2002. Many had been lost by this point already. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/index.cfm The gallery is especially interesting and, in particular, there are the loopholes in the bridge over the lines into Southampton Terminus: http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/ai_full_r.cfm?refno=12720 It's not only pill boxes. Adam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted August 17, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 17, 2014 Hmm. Apologies for the diversion into historical pedantry (and I accept that it is) but since Clive has already gone there... I suppose it depends how you perceive it: Henry Tudor's landing in 1485 and William and Mary's in 1688 certainly had the character of invasion, even allowing for the quite substantial domestic support. The leaders were accompanied by substantial foreign armies and resulted in what can only be described as 'regime change'. Unlike the Normans, these two did actually invade Britain, and not just England. Had it not been for some careful chicanery in 1216 you could have added that one to the list too. Back on topic, you might find these interesting: http://www.archaeologyuk.org/books/Foot2006 The defence of Britain project includes not only pill boxes but all the other features of fixed defence installations surveyed between 1995 and 2002. Many had been lost by this point already. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/index.cfm The gallery is especially interesting and, in particular, there are the loopholes in the bridge over the lines into Southampton Terminus: http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/ai_full_r.cfm?refno=12720 It's not only pill boxes. Adam Hi Adam Could the Jacobite Uprising of 1745 be considered an invasion? Many of Charles Stuart's regular force was French trained Irish. Then there is the Battle of Fishguard in 1797 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fishguard be regarded as the last invasion of the UK. There is also the French intervention of the Irish Rebellion of 1798, where they landed in County Mayo, now was that the last invasion of Britain as Ireland was under British control? It was not part the UK until the Act of Union of 1800. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 It's probably reasonable to differentiate between landings and effective invasions Clive or we could be here all week! The Jacobite rebellion is one of those many, many attempts of French involvement with Scottish (and Welsh) internal politics from the 13th century onwards. None of them actually achieved that much long term. Certainly, the Fishguard effort is included in the putative Welsh battlefield register but that's not in the public domain yet so far as I am aware. Leaving Ireland out of the equation is probably sensible for lots and lots of reasons... Adam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted August 17, 2014 Author Share Posted August 17, 2014 Hmm. Apologies for the diversion into historical pedantry (and I accept that it is) but since Clive has already gone there... I suppose it depends how you perceive it: Henry Tudor's landing in 1485 and William and Mary's in 1688 certainly had the character of invasion, even allowing for the quite substantial domestic support. The leaders were accompanied by substantial foreign armies and resulted in what can only be described as 'regime change'. Unlike the Normans, these two did actually invade Britain, and not just England. Had it not been for some careful chicanery in 1216 you could have added that one to the list too. Back on topic, you might find these interesting: http://www.archaeologyuk.org/books/Foot2006 The defence of Britain project includes not only pill boxes but all the other features of fixed defence installations surveyed between 1995 and 2002. Many had been lost by this point already. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/index.cfm The gallery is especially interesting and, in particular, there are the loopholes in the bridge over the lines into Southampton Terminus: http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/dob/ai_full_r.cfm?refno=12720 It's not only pill boxes. Adam Cheers Adam,ile look over those websites... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Adam, not sure how Henry Tudor's invasion of England in 1485 affected Scotland, a separate country ? Duncan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.