Slashdot Mirror


Tank Hack Ensured Farmland Didn't Thwart the Invasion of Europe

szczys writes: Ingenuity reigns supreme when trying to overcome obstacles standing in your way. So was the case during the Allied invasion of Europe during WWII. Land features in the Normandy bocage region were especially difficult for tanks to navigate. The obstacles were earthen dikes topped with mature trees originally put in place to contain livestock. The solution was to reuse materials from the Axis' own anti-tank measures to build a tank attachment to cut through the obstacles. The Allies were able to take the Axis by surprise as it was assumed the armored divisions wouldn't be able to break through this area.

143 comments

  1. News for history nerds... by WilliamGeorge · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stuff that mattered 70 years ago, and is mildly interesting today :)

    --
    William George
    1. Re:News for history nerds... by WilliamGeorge · · Score: 2

      Mind you, I find military history fascinating - I'm just surprised this is on /.

      --
      William George
    2. Re:News for history nerds... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Sure, it's old technology, old engineering. But so is ENIAC...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:News for history nerds... by jimtheowl · · Score: 1

      Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it. - George Santayana ?

    4. Re:News for history nerds... by Nutria · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This was on the History Channel, "Band Of Brothers", etc.

      The latest generation needs their chance to learn it, just as my generation did.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    5. Re:News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This was on the History Channel ...

      Well maybe a decade or so ago when they showed documentaries about the Normandy invasion, more recent years probably the Military Channel. Unless we're talking about a wrestler hitting someone with a cutup i-beam or something.

      ... "Band Of Brothers" ...

      Don't think so. Except perhaps a tank so equipped may have been a background prop or something. Don't recall any explicit demonstration or discussion of the device.

    6. Re:News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it, in Summer School."

      Oh, it could be worse...

      "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it, in bed."

    7. Re: News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really think today's generation of limp wristed skinny panced vape smokers could hack it in such a critical battle?

    8. Re:News for history nerds... by murdocj · · Score: 2

      It is interesting, but it's also something that anyone interested in WW II has known about for years. How on earth is this "news".

    9. Re: News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike your pussy bitch baby boomer ass walking around smoking dope and looking for diseased hippie pussy?

    10. Re: News for history nerds... by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 5, Informative

      You really think today's generation of limp wristed skinny panced vape smokers could hack it in such a critical battle?

      Um, who is getting shot at in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere? Dumbass.

    11. Re:News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's "news" as much as it's a "hack".

      Stupid farkin' word.

    12. Re: News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really think today's generation of limp wristed skinny panced vape smokers could hack it in such a critical battle?

      The leaders of fascist Germany and imperial Japan said similar things about the youth of the United States before ww2.

      I noticed on the news one night that US troops doing room-to-room building clearing in Afghanistan had a "spade" from the deck of cards on their helmets. That would make then 502d Infantry Regiment, a unit descended from the 502d Parachute Infantry Regiment of WW2. Find a WW2 Five-oh-Deuce vet who cleared rooms in Europe and ask him if he thinks the kid from today's generation is doing anything different. Based on the 502d 101st WW2 vet I knew growing up I'd safely bet he would say its the same. I'd also wager the Marine Guadalcanal vet I knew growing up wouldn't see much difference in today's Marines who went into harms way in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a child they taught me it didn't matter if the war was big or small, popular or unpopular, bullets and shrapnel did the same thing to the soldier/marine's body; that everyone who put on the uniform and went into harms way deserved the same respect. They were speaking with respect to Vietnam vets but I can't imagine them speaking differently about Iraq and Afghanistan vets.

    13. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      This was on the History Channel, "Band Of Brothers", etc.

      The latest generation needs their chance to learn it, just as my generation did.

      This needs to be modded to 5.

      Just because some guy on Slashdot has heard of this doesn't mean that it doesn't need repeated.

      It reminds me of people who get pissed off at Thanksgiving when the media gives out advice on how to cook Turkey so that we don't get sick. There's always some asshat that might have heard it for the first time a couple years ago, and is angry that everyone didn't hear it when they did.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    14. Re:News for history nerds... by peragrin · · Score: 1

      I don't recall a specific mention of why they were doing it, but there was several scenes of american tanks going through the hedge rows.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    15. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0

      It is interesting, but it's also something that anyone interested in WW II has known about for years. How on earth is this "news".

      So no one is now allowed to get interested in WW2?

      Unfortunately, not everyone is like you, who was born knowing everything.

      It's "news" to someone, and who the fuck are you to tell them they shouldn't hear about it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    16. Re:News for history nerds... by murdocj · · Score: 0

      Where did I say anyone shouldn't hear about it? Read a history book about WW II if you are interesting. But it is NOT FUCKING NEWS! Got it?

    17. Re:News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The neat thing about history is that people are born each year that will eventually develop an interest in it. And at some point they will read a book that tells them something that is new to them. That fact that their father and grandfather once read that book does not change the newness of that something to them.

      "Stuff that Matters" could include the idea that hacking and moding is not limited to computers and computer controlled devices. And to further that point one might offer an example using scrap metal, a welding torch and a tank.

    18. Re:News for history nerds... by MrKrillls · · Score: 1

      Not sure TV, cable, or movies are places to learn our history. And sadly, History Channel has fallen apart.

      --
      Don't step on the baby.
    19. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0

      Where did I say anyone shouldn't hear about it? Read a history book about WW II if you are interesting. But it is NOT FUCKING NEWS! Got it?

      It is news to someone. Get over yourself. You aren't the arbiter of what is or isn't news.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    20. Re:News for history nerds... by murdocj · · Score: 4, Informative

      And in other breaking World War II news, there was this amazing breakthru where vacuum tubes were used to create a powerful electronic machine called "ENIAC".

    21. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And in other breaking World War II news, there was this amazing breakthru where vacuum tubes were used to create a powerful electronic machine called "ENIAC".

      Which was very cool indeed. Well, not really - all those tubes made for a lot of heat.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    22. Re: News for history nerds... by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Um, who is getting shot at in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere? Dumbass.

      If I remember correctly, the annual death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan is roughly the same as... one day on Omaha Beach, or about six hours on the Eastern Front.

    23. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Sure. But it's not really news, is it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    24. Re: News for history nerds... by LazLong · · Score: 1

      I agree about the learning. (Insert favorite quote here re: perils of not learning history) I just don't see this as being particularly apropos. Posting irrelevant tidbits dilutes Slashdot's value as "News for Nerds."

    25. Re: News for history nerds... by dryeo · · Score: 2

      Still safer then living in Chicago.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    26. Re:News for history nerds... by drnb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not sure TV, cable, or movies are places to learn our history. And sadly, History Channel has fallen apart.

      The HBO miniseries "Band of Brothers" and "The Pacific" are pretty good from a historical perspective. Very respectable adaptations of books written by a well regarded historian who did great research or written by veterans themselves. Read them all plus Winters' book. Sledge's "With The Old Breed" was probably the standout for me among the veteran's books. Very well written, of course he had been a university professor for decades by the time he authored his book.

      HBO's "The Tuskegee Airman" seemed a respectable attempt at telling that story. It may have been a little more fictionalized given its time constraints, more composite characters and coalescing of events for example, but it certainly seemed far better than the Lucas "Red Tails" mess from a historical perspective. "Red Tails" went from beyond dramatic license and into cartoonishness IMO.

    27. Re:News for history nerds... by drnb · · Score: 2

      Sure. But it's not really news, is it?

      Good thing we have the stuff that matters category too.

    28. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I always thought it was intersection, not union.

      Perhaps I should submit a story about Roman manipular tactics during the late republican period?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    29. Re:News for history nerds... by eam · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I should submit a story about Roman manipular tactics during the late republican period?

      I'd read it.

    30. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am way too lazy for this but the person who created the original idea, sort of, with all the modified tanks (I'm lazy and didn't go find his name, etc) has his own documentary. They called the tanks _____'s Funnies, as I recall. They made quite a few versions for specific goals, based on the Sherman I think, and one of the neater ones had a tarp that it drove over that was wound under it. Why? So that the tank wouldn't sink in the soft sand.

      I really should go look this up but it's just after six in the morning and I have just grabbed some coffee. Anyhow, that should be enough information for you to find the documentary if you're curious about it. It was actually pretty interesting. I think I saw it on YouTube though it may have been someone streaming it on Justin or even Hulu. It's out there, though.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    31. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      If you want a good "fiction" novel (it's not really entirely fiction I suppose), read Battle Cry, by Leon Uris.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    32. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Actually, me too. I'd probably even comment if the comments section was interesting. I say this because it'd be an interesting submission so I am encouraging such. It likely even involves tech (was modern tech at the time, even) and should be interesting.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    33. Re:News for history nerds... by towermac · · Score: 1

      Until then, you got a link?

    34. Re:News for history nerds... by Shinobi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hobart's Funnies were based around all kinds of tanks, primarily Churchills and Shermans, but there were also Valentines, LVT4's, Cromwells etc.

      As for the Bobbin, it was actually a device carried by the Churchill AVRE(together with the Crocodile and the ARK the most famous Funnies), and it laid the canvas road not only for itself but also the vehicles coming up behind it. Other devices the AVRE could carry was the Fascine, which was a bundle you dropped into ditches and trenches, so you could drive over them, and the mine plough, which could also do the same job as the hedgerow plough on the Shermans.

    35. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Sure. But it's not really news, is it?

      It's not something that happened today. But it's interesting.

      The problem I see with the "Why is this even on slashdot?" crowd is if we say, allowed everyone who gets pissed that something they don't like, could have it removed, there wouldn't be much slashdot left.

      Can't keep everyone happy. I learned that long ago when I made videos. Everyone loved them. But the aggregate of what people didn't like showed me that everything about the video was hated. By someone.

      Anyhow, I did enjoy the article and wouldn't mind even seeing more - disclaimer - I am a total slut for military history.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    36. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Awesome! I knew that someone would know exactly what I was speaking about and would remember more of it than I do. There's, as I mentioned, an excellent documentary about him and the varieties that he created. I'd thought they were mostly built on the Shermans and a few models based on the Churchills. I had no knowledge of the others being utilized, thanks for the information.

      He designed another one that was kind of interesting. It dropped sticks into and on to stuff. I thought that one was rather creative. The flailing attachment used to quickly clear a path in a mine field was also rather effective if I understand it properly and recall it properly.

      Part of my problem (if it is properly considered a problem) is that I watch only documentaries, for the most part. These are 'entertainment' for me and my goal isn't really to remember all the names. While I learn stuff the goal isn't just to learn - it's because I find them truly entertaining and get more enjoyment from those than I do from other media genres.

      I'm not sure if that makes sense...

      I end up watching for amusement and not for serious study. As it's really passive it means that I don't learn everything at depth and I don't remember things like names unless I've had lots of references to them. I usually recall enough to make for effective search engine queries but I'm also kind of lazy at times and Google is so very far away.

      Make sense?

      If it were more formal and my goal was to actually be a historian or an expert in the field then I'd make it a point to recall the information as well as to act on learning more. What's awesome is that there are usually people like yourself who will come in and fill in the blanks for me so that I'm able to bring up a subject and someone will come along and provide information that covers the gaps in my education and memory.

      The added benefit is that the information is now something I've read and interacted with (in the form of a reply) which means I'll not only have learned something new but I'll be more likely to retain it and draw on it at a later date and time.

      In short, thanks.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    37. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I always thought it was intersection, not union.

      Perhaps I should submit a story about Roman manipular tactics during the late republican period?

      Kewl! I'd like that.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    38. Re:News for history nerds... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I always thought it was intersection, not union.

      Perhaps I should submit a story about Roman manipular tactics during the late republican period?

      I had to chuckle reading the replies to this. Probably not what you expected.

      But it was a trick wasn't it? the Maniple was replaced by the Cohort around that time.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    39. Re: News for history nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be surprised. This is just szczys' daily ad for Hackaday.

    40. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The thing made of sticks (it's a bundle of bundles of fairly big logs) is called a fascine. The clever thing is that it's not bound too tightly so it automagically conforms to spread the load and fill the hole.

      It was carried on a special tipper mount on the front of the tank.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    41. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      P.S. The difference is that the funnies were specifically designed in advance, largely based on the failure[1] of the 1943 Dieppe raid, whereas the hedge cutter was improvised on the spot.

      [1] Nominated for an understatement of the century award.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    42. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I am a total slut for military history.

      Well I'm a trollop for it then.

      I also like cooking, but this isn't the place to discuss whether putting Szechuan pepper in a Moroccan tajine is cheating.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    43. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      They tried some truly awesome stuff during WWII (and other wars). I think one of my favorites (see above for why I don't know the details) was this round critter that they were planning on using to attack beaches. It was large, round, and rolled along powered by small rockets - sort of like those wheels you can ride inside of or like a bicycle wheel. It failed miserably.

      If you watch the testing, the full testing, it nearly ran over a few people of great importance and there's a big, giant, round, tumbling, out of control thing that's on fire AND being chased by a mid-sized dog who's seemingly barking at it like he's going to kill it. Ah, England... You seldom cease to amuse me. It was beautiful and I kind of want one to try on my very own.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    44. Re: News for history nerds... by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Well, basically iraqis, afghanis and other earthlings...

    45. Re:News for history nerds... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      It was called the Panjandrum.

    46. Re:News for history nerds... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The thing made of sticks (it's a bundle of bundles of fairly big logs) is called a fascine. The clever thing is that it's not bound too tightly so it automagically conforms to spread the load and fill the hole.

      It was carried on a special tipper mount on the front of the tank.

      They still use fascines in the military today.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    47. Re:News for history nerds... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Be patient, I've only got as far as the title: "Controversy rages: is it fine with a solid line, or are the gaps where it's at?"

      I did consider "Beat all enemies[1] with this one neat trick!" but it's not hip enough.

      It's also possible that Bennet Haselton might steal my thunder with his treatise "Varus and Crassus: has anyone else noticed that shit Roman generals had names ending in ~us? And here's how I would have totally won."

      [1] Disclaimer: Void for those Parthian rat- bastards. And in Germany.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    48. Re:News for history nerds... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Where did I say anyone shouldn't hear about it? Read a history book about WW II if you are interesting. But it is NOT FUCKING NEWS! Got it?

      But you get similar replies from snotty physicists or chemists or biologists every time there's a popular science story.

      "Duh, I did post-doctoral research on that three years ago, how is it news?"

      Well, thanks for letting us know how knowledgeable you are about one particular subject.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    49. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I must admit, my my curiosity is piqued. It looks like a 'well written' ED article. Actually, speaking of ED, their article on South Ossetia is absolutely fantastic.

      Here's a link:
      https://encyclopediadramatica....

      Do not visit the site if you're easily offended. Do not visit the site if you take things seriously. Do not...

      I'm not even sure why I link it - it's good though. Best read when stoned.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    50. Re:News for history nerds... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Thanks. It was awesome. It truly was. It was an epic failure, in today's nomenclature, but that they actually allowed someone to act out on that idea - to experiment, as it were, is beautiful. Some of the best inventions are originally tasked with taking the lives of other humans in new and creative ways. I'm, by no means, a fan of violence or of war. However, it sure looks like there are some very fun times to be had and there are often some great inventions that come out of conflicts. Sometimes I wonder if a tranquil society will be a stagnant society.

      Anyhow, one of the beauties of Slashdot (and other parts of the internet) is that there's almost always someone who knows what I'm talking about and can fill in the details. As I mentioned earlier, I don't watch these things or read about these things to learn but as passive entertainment. It's just what I enjoy watching and reading. I don't really know why - I mean I do learn a great deal but I only keep the basics stored.

      I think maybe it's like keeping the data in RAM while caching the rest. Eventually the cache gets dumped to backup, eventually to tape, and eventually discarded. However, there's usually a remaining unique identifier in cache that enables one to recreate the information with little effort or with the help of others. The communications on the internet are one of those ways.

      I'm somehow reminded of an image I saw of a "Yahoo! Answers" post. Someone asked, "What song is this? It goes boom dum dum dummm dum duuumm da dum dum." Someone piped up with, "Great White's, ____________." I'm not sure if it was the real answer but the person accepted the answer and I want to believe. I'm, obviously, the person asking the retarded question.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. Funny by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Informative

    " The Allies were able to take the Axis by surprise as it was assumed the armored divisions wouldn't be able to break through this area.: ...which is funny because the French didn't expect the tanks of the Germans to be able to pass through the Ardennes. The moment they realized what the plan was, it was too late and France had no option but to surrender, even if possessing a superior force.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    1. Re:Funny by mjwx · · Score: 1

      " The Allies were able to take the Axis by surprise as it was assumed the armored divisions wouldn't be able to break through this area.: ...which is funny because the French didn't expect the tanks of the Germans to be able to pass through the Ardennes. The moment they realized what the plan was, it was too late and France had no option but to surrender, even if possessing a superior force.

      The main reason the allies were able to take the Nazi's by surprise in Normandy is because they had managed to completely convince Hitler that the invasion would be led by Patton at the pas de Calais.

      On the morning of the Normandy landings, they woke Hitler and told him the allies had landed in Normandy. He dismissed this as a ruse, said the invasion would be at Calais and refused to release an armoured division to Normandy. Thanks to this, the landings were considerably less bloody than expected.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:Funny by LienRag · · Score: 1

      Actually, the military opinion of the time was that there were no way to SUPPORT a military offensive through the Ardennes - and indeed there wasn't, the german panzer force was out of support after its victory, and without fuel nor ammunition would have been unable to resist a counter-offensive if the French High Command hadn't considered that military defeat was a way to get rid of the hated Republic...

  3. The news of 70 years ago, today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And next: brave Soviet soldiers welcomed in Washington DC in what is sure to be the beginning of a long-lasting warm relationship between the USA and the USSR.

  4. What's New Is Old by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Reminds me a little of the proboscis they bolt to the front of some heavy armament today to deal with land mines and such, and in a slightly different way, the cages they build around Strikers to deal with RPGs...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  5. Re:Such ingenuity by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

    they'll need it to thwart the invasion of Europe 2015 (happening now).

    There is a great push for the world and especially Europe to accept without question waves of refugees. This, however, will not solve the problem of why these people are fleeing their countries. Indeed, it will only allow the political / religious forces that are the cause of this mass exodus to take permanent root.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  6. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Military engineering is now a "hack"?

    Here's a neat lifehack OP: Blow your fucking brains out.

    1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Military engineering is now a "hack"?

      Yes, because it was a "hack". A Sergeant at Normandy came up with the idea to cut up some beach obstacles to create some teeth to weld onto tanks. Complete on-the-scene improvisation. Therefore a hack. Not something a team of engineers back in the states came up with in response to a military request.

    2. Re: What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were born after 1990, weren't you?

    3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is called "field engineering". Ask your granddad about it someday.

    4. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he could do that on national TV. WARNING. Very graphic.

    5. Re: What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hack either means security breach, or an awful clusterfuck, as in hackjob.

      The fact that a bunch of techie douchebags and their lapdogs use the word to try and sound edgy is irrelevant to it's meaning outside of your little echo chamber.

    6. Re: What? by drnb · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hack either means security breach, or an awful clusterfuck, as in hackjob.

      No, among techies, "hack" has for decades also meant clever and innovative and unexpected solutions to a problem or want/need. Your security breach definition evolved from the preceding definition.

    7. Re: What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hack either means security breach, or an awful clusterfuck, as in hackjob.

      The fact that a bunch of techie douchebags and their lapdogs use the word to try and sound edgy is irrelevant to it's meaning outside of your little echo chamber.

      You are wrong.
      A hack is a wooden frame for drying bricks, cheeses, etc.

    8. Re: What? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Hack either means security breach, or an awful clusterfuck, as in hackjob.

      The fact that a bunch of techie douchebags and their lapdogs use the word to try and sound edgy is irrelevant to it's meaning outside of your little echo chamber.

      You are wrong. A hack is a wooden frame for drying bricks, cheeses, etc.

      I thought it was a type of horse. Or an English journalist. Or a nasty cough.

      Holy vocabulary batman, it's almost like words can mean different things at different times in different contexts!

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. Still... by ericloewe · · Score: 1

    Let's keep things in perspective. Progress in Normandy was one (or more) order(s) of magnitude slower than planned.

  8. "Tank Hack"? Use this headline-writing hack... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    ...to show everyone that you're a hack writer.

    1. Re:"Tank Hack"? Use this headline-writing hack... by Deadstick · · Score: 2

      I think "hack" is reasonable, in the sense of an improvised solution implemented in the field...

    2. Re: "Tank Hack"? Use this headline-writing hack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiotic buzzwords are never appropriate. Especially when referring to improvisations made by men who gave their lives so you can instantly broadcast your worthless opinions worldwide from a handheld device.

    3. Re:"Tank Hack"? Use this headline-writing hack... by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      I agree. I'm not sure why the vile about this. Except, I guess, "on the internet".

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
  9. Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    Sure, it's old technology, old engineering. But so is ENIAC...

    Not "engineering" in the sense that engineers at a company came up with the device. The phrase "hack" is entirely appropriate. This modification came from a Sergeant at Normandy who thought he could cut up some of the i-beam based beach obstacles and make "teeth" for the tanks. So the solution came from the blacksmith/welder types, an actual Army MOS, improvising something on the spot not the engineers designing something to meet a requirement.

    1. Re: Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure blacksmiths and welders appreciate your defense of this rather dumb and overused tech buzzword.

    2. Re: Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure blacksmiths and welders appreciate your defense of this rather dumb and overused tech buzzword.

      Blacksmith/Welder is (was) a US Army occupational specialty. They are the members of an Engineering or Armored unit who would do this sort of work.

    3. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep, it's an awesome improvised hack. I'm a WW2 history aficionado, so of course I'd heard about this before.

      For all the unbelievably thorough preparations made for the allied invasion, historians and laypersons alike have always found it fascinating or puzzling that apparently no thought was given to the potential tactical disadvantages the bocage (hedgerows) would have on the allied advance, or how the allies might try to cope with it. It took a lone Sergeant in the Army tank corps to come up with a reasonable solution to the problem. I suppose nothing tends to motivate you like facing a potentially lethal situation.

      I'd rank it up there with the CO2 scrubber hack on the Apollo 13 mission.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    4. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      It is engineering - they're operating, maintaining, and modifying machines with engines.
      There's a handful of clowns out on a "we need REAL engineers" campaign on Slashdot, yet they don't know WTF a real engineer is.

    5. Re: Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm sure blacksmiths and welders appreciate your defense of this rather dumb and overused tech buzzword.

      It was an on-the-spot improvisation with materials that happened to be on hand. Not something done with proper planning and materials. The phrase "hack" is entirely appropriate in this situation.

    6. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      It is engineering - they're operating, maintaining, and modifying machines with engines. There's a handful of clowns out on a "we need REAL engineers" campaign on Slashdot, yet they don't know WTF a real engineer is.

      Actually I'm quite familiar with the more archaic definition of engineering. My grandfather was licensed to operate and maintain various types of machinery in that domain. For example a stationary engineering license to operate a power plant in an industrial setting, i.e. boil water, produce steam, drive turbines, etc. "Stationary" to differentiate it from railway locomotives, locomotive engines, ship propulsion, etc.

      However in either the more modern or more archaic usage of "engineering" the word does not apply to this Normandy event. It was truly a hack. A complete jury-rigged improvisation with materials at hand, something expedient for the field for now. "Engineering" would be more appropriate for something with a little more design and/or a more long term solution. Later more robust engineered variants of this idea would appear.

    7. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      The ability of tanks to knock down trees and crash through brush in North America and England probably gave them a false sense of security. They just did not fully understand the density of the bocage. Its not unlike layers of specially weaved fabrics in old "bullet proof" vests, spreading the energy of impact over a larger surface area and preventing penetration.

    8. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Yep, that sounds plausible... If I had to guess, I'd also say that the planners were probably so fixated on the horrifically complex logistics of landing troops and followup supplies on the beach that everything else seemed unimportant by comparison.

      We know that the allies had ridiculously optimistic timetables as well, so perhaps overconfidence played a role as well. For instance, UK troops had originally planned to take the town of Caen as part of their D-Day objectives. Instead, thanks to German armor units and ongoing reinforcements, the fight for Caen dragged on for two months. There was a very real danger that the western front would turn into a contained, meat-grinder stalemate, like the northward advance up the Italian boot.

      That's partly why this "tank hack" was important - it provided a means for US troops to start advancing through the hedgerows with greater efficiency, and eventually led to the breakthrough into open country, thanks also in part to the distraction of an intense UK attack as well. It was then that Gen. Patton was allowed to run wild with bold, lightning-fast armored thrusts, which was what he was so good at. And of course, ultimately, that breakout and subsequent actions finally sent the Germans reeling back on the western front.

      Incidentally, I didn't actually know Roberts had given Culin the idea for the device. I'm glad to see he's given his historical due for the idea, even if it only ends up mostly as a footnote.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    9. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Princeofcups · · Score: 2

      Yep, it's an awesome improvised hack. I'm a WW2 history aficionado, so of course I'd heard about this before.

      For all the unbelievably thorough preparations made for the allied invasion, historians and laypersons alike have always found it fascinating or puzzling that apparently no thought was given to the potential tactical disadvantages the bocage (hedgerows) would have on the allied advance, or how the allies might try to cope with it.

      That's because they weren't supposed to go through the hedgerow terrain. When Montgomery failed to take Caan on the first or second day, the entire operation had to be modified, and the breakout was changed to the boccaged west instead of the east, which was excellent flat tank terrain.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    10. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      Actually, the British had given it thought. The mine plough for the Churchill AVRE could be used to go through the hedgerows too, just as one example. The US military, being far more conservative, dismissed the concept of Hobart's Funnies as frivolous and doomed to failure, and also counter to their doctrine, in that it'd make tanks take the lead and end up in combat with enemy tanks, which US doctrine specifically and emphatically discouraged: Tanks were for infantry support and breakthrough, fighting it out with enemy tanks was for the tank destroyer units.

    11. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by fnj · · Score: 1

      Montgomery failed to take Caan on the first or second day

      Caen. Completely different place from Cannes.

    12. Re: Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like the US had read Von Mellinthin's book before he had written it.

    13. Re:Blacksmith/Welder not Engineer ... by Talderas · · Score: 1

      The US rejected Hobart's funnies because most of them were based on the Churchill tank. Nothing more. Nothing less. The US had standardized around the Sherman in order to simplified the maintenance costs by making sure every chassis was using the same parts. Bringing in the funnies would have expanded the logistic requirement.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  10. There hundreds of such hacks by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The hedgerow taming attachment to the tanks are quite well known to most WW-II buffs. But there were many thousands of such local mods.

    One of the best ones I have heard about is the hacking of the Dutch telephone system by the insiders. They had special "area codes" that bypassed main trunk exchanges but allowed the resistance fighters to communicate using the regular telephone system. If Gen Montgomery knew about it or had used it, his Operation Market Garden (movie: A Bridge Too Far) might have gone differently, they last bridge group might have learned the the German General Model and his panzer divisions were being held in that area as reserve and for refitting and they were in a position to cut off the lines of communication. Need to look it up.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:There hundreds of such hacks by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Is there anywhere I could get a look at a list of such little-known hacks?

    2. Re:There hundreds of such hacks by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      An amusing 'what if' but in reality, nonsense.
      There WAS ample intelligence about German defenses and armor in the area (anathema for lightly-armed airborne troops who have little way to fight tanks), Montgomery and his asinine coterie-of-arrogance ignored it. From wiki:

      "...On 16 September ULTRA decrypts revealed the movement of 9th and 10th SS Panzer Divisions to Nijmegen and Arnhem, creating enough concern for Eisenhower to send his Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Walter Bedell Smith, to raise the issue with Montgomery on 10 September; however, Montgomery dismissed Smith's concerns and refused to alter the plans for the landing of 1st Airborne Division at Arnhem.[93] Further information about the location of the German Panzer Divisions at Arnhem was revealed by aerial photographs of Arnhem taken by a photo-reconnaissance Spitfire XI from RAF's No. 16 Squadron,[94] as well as information from members of the Dutch resistance.[95] Fearing that 1st Airborne Division might be in grave danger if it landed at Arnhem the chief intelligence officer of the division, Major Brian Urquhart, arranged a meeting with Browning and informed him of the armour present at Arnhem. Browning dismissed his claims and ordered the division's senior medical officer to send Urquhart on sick leave on account of 'nervous strain and exhaustion.'[96]"

      --
      -Styopa
    3. Re:There hundreds of such hacks by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      You are probably right, you obviously know more about WWII than I do. Monty was an arrogant jerk. He never accepted Ike as his CO, and believed he should have been named the supreme commander. He was a veritable peacock, strutting.

      Know anything about a POW camp where the hacked the church organ? It had an DC motor connected to the blower but it could also be pedal operated. The US pows hacked it so that it could be pedaled and made to work as a generator to power their smuggled in radio?

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    4. Re:There hundreds of such hacks by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Like most generals involved in actual wars, Monty was arrogant, stubborn and fallible. But he was pretty good at winning campaigns and battles.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  11. So, I actually don't understand this. by xevioso · · Score: 1

    Someone explain this to me. I don't understand from looking at the pictures.

    1) You have a tank with no Hedgehog add-on. It rolls up to a hedge. it is a heavy tank. Because it's heavy, it pushes forward and crushes the hedges underneath it. or not.

    2) You have a tank with the hedgehog add-on. It rolls up to a hedge. it is a heavy tank. Because it's heavy, it pushes forward and crushes the hedges underneath it. or not. I don't see what benefit the comb-like structure does to allow for easier crushing or rolling over the hedges. Is there a saw in there somewhere? Like a giant hair-clipper? I actually don't understand what physical advantage the add-on gives to the tank. What am I missing?

    1. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by sysrammer · · Score: 2

      "1) You have a tank with no Hedgehog add-on. It rolls up to a hedge. it is a heavy tank. Because it's heavy, it pushes forward and crushes the hedges underneath it. or not."

      "Or not" is correct. The tanks, heavy or not, could not push forward and crush the hedges.

      They needed hedge-clippers.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    2. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Informative

      Picture the hedge covered with heavy growth 15 to 30 feet high. Difficult to penetrate on foot- easy to hide in and defend.
      Picture a german bazookaman behind the hedge ready to blow a hole in your soft underbelly.
      Picture the teeth cutting 12" deep into the hedge before the tank starts to lift upwards.
      Picture the heavy growth toppling onto the defenses, the top of the hedge being shaved off to become a wide dirt road.
      Much harder to defend against the infantry following the tank through the new gap.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were the hedges at 'ground level', or were they growing on top of dikes as mentioned in the summary?

      If the hedges were on top of dikes, I still don't understand. Were the tanks trying to travel parallel to the dikes, on top of the dikes, or were they trying to travel perpendicular to the dikes? And notwithstanding what people have said, was the main problem that of anti-tank fire against their bottom-sides, or was it that the tanks were being channelled along the dikes in directions that they didn't want to go, rather than being able to cross the hedgerow areas and get into more open plains?

    4. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

      Picture terrain like this. The hedges make it hard to travel through, and give cover to defending machine gunners.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So did they actually cut teeth into the pokey metal bits and place them at an angle to saw a trunk hit head-on?

    6. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by nytes · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, the hedgerow growth was so thick (more like trees, actually) that the tank couldn't crush it readily. Instead, the front end of the tank would lift high into the air before bearing its full weight on the hedge, giving exposure to the thinnest part of the armor. Even if the tank made it over without taking a shell to its belly, the hedge probably sprang back up behind it, cutting off any infantry support it might have had following it.

      The comb allowed the tank to gain purchase between the trees or under (in the dike upon which the trees were growing) , either snapping off the trunks or uprooting them altogether.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    7. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      Imagine for 500 years a farmers would pile rocks and stumps found in their field along the borders of that field. Trees and shrubs start to grow in the piles. This turns into the 20ft tall hedgerows over time.

    8. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "Hedges" in this area are actually 6' walls of rock and dirt, which then have trees growing on top. So no add-on, tank rolls up the wall and is pointing upwards,and basically not rolling over the trees + gets the underneath blasted
      With hedgehog, plows through the wall

      hth

    9. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by jklovanc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Lets look at how a hedgerow is created. In medieval Europe fields were sectioned off into small areas with hedges between them. Every year due to frost action rocks are driven to the surface by frost action. Every year farmers go through their fields and throw these rocks into the hedges. Over the decades and centuries these hedgerows become very solid. In effect they were stone walls with hedges on top and there were a lot of them on Normandy. here is a better explanation of why hedgerows were a problem.

    10. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      No, the tanks were powerful enough to push trees over. Just like bulldozers can pull them down (and some "mere" trucks pull trees and stumps out of the ground). Unlike a truck, a sherman tank weight 66,800 pounds (30.3 tonnes; 29.8 long tons; 33.4 short tons). And had an engine powerful enough to push that weight along at 30 mph. The treads gave it incredible traction too.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    11. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by guises · · Score: 1

      There. That's the explanation I was looking for, thank you.

    12. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Have a picture:
      http://dereksweetoys.com/wp-co...

      I was there a few years back so I went to check them out in person. That photo is not mine but it's a good depiction. In some areas the overgrowth from the bocage is such that there's a tunnel that you'd drive/walk through and it's made out of trees. We see some areas like this up in Maine in the more rural areas on old dirt roads that have fallen into disuse. Your grandmother probably has a similar picture of the latter taken during foliage season and hanging on her wall in her living room. Modern roads are built up, generally, while old roads were eroded into form.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    13. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by guises · · Score: 1

      Huh. Yeah, I would certainly not want to be there in a combat situation. Must be a bitch when it rains too.

    14. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'm an automobile aficionado and, because of this, I own far more cars than is healthy. Each one of them is owned for, generally, very specific reasons and each of them is utilized to for enjoyment in those particular areas - some are also utilitarian such as an RV and a couple of pick up trucks. One of my goals is to put such vehicles through their paces. I get a great deal of enjoyment from pushing them beyond their design limits. My enjoyment means that, most weekends, I have a local garage that sends someone by to work every Saturday in my garage.

      I mention that so that I can mention this...

      One of these vehicles is a mid-1990s Subaru Outback, specifically the L.L. Bean edition. It is still in stock condition and would likely qualify as 'near mint' even after this escapade.

      Picture, if you will, Maine in the spring. Now, there are generally floods if there was a heavy snow pack, lots of rain, or the temperature is high enough to make the snow melt rapidly. Because of the bodies of water and different elevations there are numerous area that would qualify for the term 'micro climate.'

      Quite a ways from my house is a town called Rome. Google Maps will find it if you're curious. In Rome there's a 'road' (term applied loosely) called the Watson Pond Road. Off of this road is another 'road' that is no longer in use. It is The Old Rome Road and connected Rome to Mt. Vernon. It's on the Rand McNally atlas though marked in hyphens with a section that is blank in the middle. Both of those mean something.

      Now, spring has sprung and we've a fifth season here in Maine. I learned of it when I came here to attend high school and then relearned it when I moved here. It's called Mud Season. Some of us celebrate the arrival of this season with greater festivity than we celebrate Christmas or the start of hunting season. I am one of those people and have a variety of vehicles that I use to visit the tops of mountains.

      One of those vehicles is the afore mentioned Subaru. It was not designed for this. I should also mention that I don't believe in getting "towed." Getting a tow or pulled out from a ditch just means you failed to apply enough throttle. No, if you're going to do it then do it right. I believe in getting my vehicle "extracted." The difference is huge, often requires things like heavy machinery, great expense, and block and tackle setups.

      So, I take this road because I'd taken it in the summer the year before and, well, it appeared to be passable. It had rained but it wasn't that muddy. Eventually, I reach the point where it is probably too difficult to continue and decide to try to turn the vehicle around. The nice thing about a Subaru is the very tight turning radius. It was not enough, if you look at the picture as an example, I ended up wedged between the two banks with my bumpers holding the car off the ground far enough that I could no longer get traction.

      No problem. I have a bumper jack and can get the vehicle down from that position but I can only get it down and facing the same direction. So I am still faced with the same problem - the road is too rocky to risk backing out and there is no way forward without taking serious risks. I should also mention that alcohol was involved as was a friend of mine who happily encourages my behavior.

      Lacking any other choice, forward to adventure, high ho and all that. We actually manage to get through this section. Only to go another mile or less before sinking to the frame and entirely burying the vehicle to the point where extricating oneself is nigh on impossible with the equipment on hand.

      I ended up asking the land owner's permission and leaving the vehicle there for another month (and paying them for the hassle). I then went down and brought my truck and an extra winch as well as block and tackle and a number of chains and tow straps as well as a few friends (more alcohol) and some other tools like shovels and the likes. It took much work but the vehicle was finally extracted.

      It was glorious and meant a l

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    15. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      technically I should have said Panzerfaust. It also sounds cooler. But it's not common knowledge that is the name for german hand held anti-tank weapons.

      The 88 was a very effective weapon. It started as an anti-aircraft gun and had an effective range of 14,860 m (16,250 yds) (~3 miles or ~4 kilometers). It could fire vertically for over a mile. The 88m (3.46") shells would go right thru sherman tanks as if they were made of tissue paper.

      That being said, it was basically a failure as an anti-aircraft gun. it wasn't powerful enough to throw shells high enough. Then someone thought of turning it sideways.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    16. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by guises · · Score: 1

      Well. Point made.

      Sounds like a good time, so to speak.

    17. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      There are some good comments in the link, one of them has a video of a tank equipped with the device in use

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    18. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've actually been there. These things are not hedges like in your yard. The mistake you made is the same one allied planners made: they saw the hedgerows in the aerial photography, and thought the were just hedges.

      But these things have been growing in situ since William the Conqueror. For a thousand years farmers have been plowing the fields between them and throwing rocks into the roots. Water has been washing the roads between them away for just as long. So the result is that you have a six foot high, four foot deep stone and earth wall, reinforced with elastic root material. Then, on top of that, you've got the hedge itself, which is up to another twelve feed high and a mess of tangled branches as thick as your leg.

      While in the area, the Germans found that not only could a vehicle not roll through these things, construction equipment could not do it either: either you tried to use a backhoe or frontloader or some other type of digger and it would hang up on the biological material, or you would try to saw the roots and destroy your tools on the rocks. It was frankly quite reasonable to think it impenetrable; even modern tanks and ordinary construction equipment can't break through it. It's kind of like not defending the approach through a river because tanks can't cross rivers unless you spend the time to build a bridge.

      The trick that this hedge cutter invention made was that the blades would slip between the stones and slice the roots. Then the tankers could just back up and yank a section of the hedgerow out with them, which meant that the Germans suddenly had a big hole in their defenses that was breached faster than they could plug it. A nice trick, indeed.

    19. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Imagine for 500 years a farmers would pile rocks and stumps found in their field along the borders of that field. Trees and shrubs start to grow in the piles. This turns into the 20ft tall hedgerows over time.

      Yes, I think people here are confusing the Normandy hedgerows with ornamental shrubbery.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    20. Re:So, I actually don't understand this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, this was my understanding too.

      I believe the OP summary of "The obstacles were earthen dikes topped with mature trees originally put in place to contain livestock" is wrong or at the very least misleading. The hedgerows were not created to "contain livestock," they were an outgrowth of normal farmer activity to clear their land in the most efficient way possible. Hedgerows certainly would be good ways to contain livestock but that would be a beneficial secondary effect, not the primary purpose of this activity.

      In fact hedgerows also serve to fence the land and delineate one person's property from another. All of which farmers do regardless of whether they keep livestock or not.

  12. Only became necessary due to failure to take Caen by jfdavis668 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The D-Day plan included the capture of Caen on D-Day itself. If you ever visit Normandy, it is obvious that the river valley around Caen is the only good way out. The German's realized this too, and sent every possible unit there to keep the British from seizing the exit from the beaches. Battle after battle erupted in front of Caen to keep the Allies in. The Allied plan took the bocage hedgerows into account. They were protection from German counter-attack while the American Army took the port of Cherbourg and the Cotentin peninsula to serve as the staging area for incoming units to prepare for the breakout. With the main German force facing the British at Caen, the only other way to break out from the beachhead was through the bocage. This had never been part of the Allied plan, so it took some improvisation to develop tactics to break out.

  13. Re:Such ingenuity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    This, however, will not solve the problem of why these people are fleeing their countries. Indeed, it will only allow the political / religious forces that are the cause of this mass exodus to take permanent root.

    The US has already taken permanent root.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  14. Remember kids... by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

    When you assume you make an ass out of you and Hitler.

  15. Re:Such ingenuity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh now that's original!

  16. Germans ran out of ammo before US ran out of tanks by perpenso · · Score: 1

    The hedges were generally at ground level but the roads were often sunken. Traveling along these roads was dangerous. That was expected, that was where all the weapons were pointed. To maneuver freely, off-road, one had to get through the hedgerows.

    With respect to German 88mm guns it didn't matter where the US tank was hit, they didn't need to hit the thinly armored bottom. Those guns were exceptionally deadly and were waiting for tanks to drive down the road. I recall reading a US veteran's recollection. The US soldier was annoyed at the smug look of a captured German officer. He asked the German if they were such supermen why was he a prisoner. The German responded in English: I commanded an 88mm gun battery. Every time an American tank came down the road we destroyed it. Eventually we ran out of ammunition, you did not run out of tanks.

    Being a US tanker in the European theatre was extremely hazardous. You really didn't want to be seen or travel where expected. Roads, at ground level or sunken, were dangerous.

  17. Every War Has Hacking by Etherwalk · · Score: 2

    Every War Has Hacking, if you want to survive. You learn from the moment you start fighting.

    In France, there were hedgerows, and you needed a way to deal with them.

    In Korea, there were lots of jeeps but limited alcohol, so you figured out how to make a still from the parts of a jeep.

    In Iraq, the army learned it needed MRAPs right away and that the military procurement system was so terrible it would never get them, so SECDEF basically overrode the whole damn procurement apparatus.

    1. Re:Every War Has Hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best war plans last until the first arrow is fired.

  18. Impact energy distributed by perpenso · · Score: 1

    These hedgerows were not what people in the US and UK think of when someone says hedges. That was part of the problem, people in the US and UK were not used to seeing vegetation that tanks could not knock down or plow through so it was a blind spot of sorts.

    These hedgerows were incredibly large and dense with branches, vines and roots interlocking. When they took a hit from a tank the energy of impact would get distributed, its a little bit like the special fibers and weaves that help to distribute impact energy over a large area in some bullet resistant vests. They needed something to cut these branches and vines to interfere with this energy distribution.

    Or maybe think of a net, one wants to cut a slot in the net to pass through.

  19. Bureaucracy then and now by myid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article:

    When demonstrated for General Omar Bradley, he was impressed enough to order them built in quantity for the tanks. Eventually the prototype became an engineered product (dubbed the “Culin Rhino Device”) that was fitted to many tanks before being shipped over from England.

    I wonder how long it took, from the demo for Gen. Bradley, until the device was fitted on tanks sent over from England. Hopefully not too long. Imagine the tanks being made in the US today. How long would it take before they were outfitted with the "tusks"? Senator #1: "I demand that the tusks be made in my state." Senator #2: "No - make them in my state, or I'll vote against them being made at all!"

    In related news, U.S. Air Force instructs airmen on exactly how to praise the F-35. The Air Force should reject the F-35 for its many flaws, and demand their money back. Sigh. Some things really were better back in the past.

    1. Re:Bureaucracy then and now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      way to stay on topic. this is so unrelated, and i keep seeing these posts
      about the f35, that i wonder this post isn't just astroturf.

    2. Re:Bureaucracy then and now by myid · · Score: 1

      Sorry about the off-topic mention of the F-35. I wasn't trying to astroturf. I was just feeling discouraged about our non-functional federal government. (disfunctional? unfunctional?)

    3. Re:Bureaucracy then and now by tomhath · · Score: 1

      During the Iraq War the humvee's were vulnerable to roadside bombs. The soldiers added "hillbilly armor" by welding steel plates to the sides. My neighbor's son made a few runs down to Kuwait to pick up loads of steel for that purpose. Your view of the world doesn't match reality.

  20. Doesn't matter if war is large or small ... by drnb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Um, who is getting shot at in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere? Dumbass.

    If I remember correctly, the annual death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan is roughly the same as... one day on Omaha Beach, or about six hours on the Eastern Front.

    I grew up around a WW2 paratrooper, Normandy, Holland, Bastogne (frostbite), Germany (shot). According to him it didn't matter if the war is big or small, popular or unpopular. Bullets and shrapnel do the same thing to a soldier. Getting shot at is getting shot at, whether you are alone, one of ten, or one of a thousand. If you went into harms way for your country you deserve respect, period. That was his lesson during the Vietnam war. Can't imagine him having a different opinion for Iraq or Afghanistan. Especially since I've seen videos of troops from his unit, then 502 PIR now 502 INF, doing room clearing in an urban settings. Something he did in Europe and disliked very much.

    1. Re:Doesn't matter if war is large or small ... by LifesABeach · · Score: 0

      So um, next week on /., we will get to read about women's periods and how without them all humanity would be in question? How brave and noble these women are that face this every month, mostly, of their brave lives?

  21. Re:Such ingenuity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, have they tried welding large metal tusks to the front of these refugees?

  22. Re:Such ingenuity by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Oh now that's original!

    There's nothing original about the USA, either. It's just repetitions of old stories. We're repeating what we learned from other empires.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. The inconvenient truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason anglo-americans were able to advance was that 3/4rd of the Reich's efforts went to combat the moscovite on the Eastern Front. Joe Stalim himself said USSR contributed 80% to the victory over Hitler and the allies just 20%. Had Rudel and his cannoneer Stuka fought on the atlantic front, no anglo-saxon armour would have reached the Elbe ever.

    1. Re:The inconvenient truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joe Stalim himself said USSR contributed 80% to the victory over Hitler

      Stalin would say that. Doesn't make it true.

  24. tank hack ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I add a shelf in my garage, it's not a hack,,,, why is adding a cutting blade to a tank any different,, I can design and build the shelf myself, but it is still not a hack

  25. Cheers! by chthon · · Score: 1
  26. Hedge Rows by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    I think it was the hedge rows and not trees that were so difficult for tanks. Tanks can deal with trees rather easily but the hedge rows would snarl the tracks and everything else on a tank. If you think about it trees will make a poor cattle fence as cows can simply walk between the trees as there has to be a gap for trees to grow. Generally trees do not grow well, shoulder to shoulder. A hedge row can make a great fence. As I recall it was a farm boy from a rural state that showed the staff how to attach an item to the front of a tank that would rip through a hedge row. Once the tanks had that attachment they went through rather easily. Regardless of all of that a landing at Normandy was like an invitation to hell on Earth. It's a wonder anyone came back sane or alive.

    1. Re:Hedge Rows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who didn't see what is a bocage by themselves can't realise how it acts on the tank. It's not about the trees, it's not about the hedge rows (too high for a tank to climb on). The thing is that everything in the row is imbricated, trees, stones, all kind of plants, roots, dead woods, the result is like an elastic wall very hard to cut through.

  27. Re:Such ingenuity by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Invasion? There is no invasion.

  28. Both a computer and history nerd ... by drnb · · Score: 1

    I always thought it was intersection, not union. Perhaps I should submit a story about Roman manipular tactics during the late republican period?

    Man did that sarcastic remark backfire. I am in fact both a computer nerd and a history nerd, happy to read classics like Bjarne Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language" and Titus Livius' "The History of Rome". Well, the 2,000 pages of Livy's work that has been discovered. So feel free, submit your work.

  29. "little tactical value" by PJ6 · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    Without Sgt. Culin’s battlefield hack, and his inspiration by a hillbilly named Roberts whom history otherwise forgets, the invasion of Europe might have taken a very different course.

    Others say, not so much.

    Military historian Steven Zaloga claims that the devices "were not as widely used as the legend would suggest", nor were they as effective as is often believed.[13] But Max Hastings and Chester Wilmot credit the invention with restoring battlefield maneuverability to the Allied force.[6][19] Martin Blumenson states that while the device restored mobility in hedgerow country, it "was of little tactical value in the breakout, except possibly as a morale factor to the troops, since the tanks advanced on the roads, not cross-country."[20]

  30. Re:Both a computer and history twat ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you should include reading comprehension & logic in your awesomely broad range of studies, because nothing that you say invalidates my point that it isn't news.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  31. Re:Both a computer and history twat ... by drnb · · Score: 1

    Sure. But it's not really news, is it?

    Good thing we have the stuff that matters category too.

    ...

    Perhaps you should include reading comprehension & logic in your awesomely broad range of studies, because nothing that you say invalidates my point that it isn't news.

    Sorry, the reading comprehension and logic fails are entirely yours. That "stuff that matters" comment I made earlier. Guess where it comes from? Slashdot's self description: "Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters". Slashdot is widely characterized as a "science and technology" site. You are wrong that posts need to be news and you are wrong that its an intersection not a union.

    As I mentioned elsewhere, its useful to point out to impressionable youth that the concept of "hacking" does not solely apply to computers and computer controlled devices. That elegant improvised solutions with materials at hand applies to a broad set of areas. So, this story is something that matters to nerds with respect to this notion and others.

  32. It's called Dave420 "eats his words" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & "read em' & weep" Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    APK

    P.S.=> How'd they taste, Dave420? Flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", & washed down with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down?? LMAO @ U, fool... apk