Digging a WW2 stopline in Wales

**Gunny Hartmann** · 05-31-2015, 08:27 PM

by Glenn66

Was that seriously expected to stop the Wehrmacht?

I think mainly to slow down an advance Glenn!.....

**Formerjughead** · 05-31-2015, 08:44 PM

Just slow them down long enough to drop some artillery on them

**Glenn66** · 06-01-2015, 08:02 AM

by Formerjughead

Just slow them down long enough to drop some artillery on them

From all the heavy equipment left behind at Dunkirk? I fear the British forces might not have had sufficient hardware in quantity and quality to deter a well equipped Wehrmacht. Its all a moot point anyway as Germany hadn't planned ahead for a seaborne invasion and getting Panzers, troops and sufficient supplies across the channel in barges, small freighters etc under the noses of a pi$$ed off Royal Navy and an equally pi$$ed off RAF was never going to be a winner IMO.

**Formerjughead** · 06-02-2015, 01:22 AM

by Glenn66

From all the heavy equipment left behind at Dunkirk? I fear the British forces might not have had sufficient hardware in quantity and quality to deter a well equipped Wehrmacht. Its all a moot point anyway as Germany hadn't planned ahead for a seaborne invasion and getting Panzers, troops and sufficient supplies across the channel in barges, small freighters etc under the noses of a pi$$ed off Royal Navy and an equally pi$$ed off RAF was never going to be a winner IMO.

There was plenty left .....all they needed to do was slow them down. Obstacles are never intended to stop them cold, just slow them down or deny easy access.

**Glenn66** · 06-02-2015, 06:23 AM

Not that I want to get into a debate on this but slow them down for what? Reinforcements? From where? The UK couldn't afford to trade territory for time as per the USSR so 'slowing them down' would only have lengthened the time before the British forces were pushed back into Wales, the North and Cornwall/Devon...which wouldn't have happened anyway due to my reasons above.

This will be my last post on the subject as this is not the topic of the thread.

**Gunny Hartmann** · 06-02-2015, 07:34 AM

The phrase "fighting until the bitter end" springs to mind Glenn!...

**Gary J** · 06-02-2015, 08:24 AM

Basically the British defence had to be seen to be doing something in the eyes of the public.
.. Yes .. the stop lines were pretty futile, ... but again, like the home guard, "seen to be doing" was a better morale booster than "sitting and waiting" ...
Hence Churchill, ... "We will fight them on the beaches, .. in the fields .... down the pub" .....

Gary J.

**Jerry B** · 06-02-2015, 08:43 AM

by Glenn66

Not that I want to get into a debate on this but slow them down for what? Reinforcements?

So you can pick them off with Arty or Anti tank guns or dads army with sticky bombs or whatever you have to destroy them whilst they are stationary rather than heading full speed along the roads.

**Gary J** · 06-02-2015, 08:57 AM

There's a cracker of a stop line close to where I live in East Anglia.
You can follow it for about 10 miles across farmland, along dykes for anti-tank, embbed pillboxes in embankments, hidden pillboxes on major locks, spigot mortar positions ... etc ...
But, if you didn't know they were there, you would miss 75% of them !

Gary J.

**mpw** · 06-02-2015, 09:08 AM

Fascinating thread on a subject not often covered. Is it known just how many 'stop lines' there were throughout the UK? Near me at a place called Shooters hill the Kent side of London there were plans to slow down any advancing troops. It was well thought out by blocking all the minor roads and therefore forcing heavy armour up shooters hill towards waiting dug in artillery. On top of that if memory serves me correctly there was a plan to flood the approach with fuel and ignite it. As none of this was known to the public at the time I guess this was a serious stop line more than a moral booster.

Mark.