T2K Fortification

[ArmySGT.]

Masonry aka brick absorbs kinetic energy and turns to powder. It is stone and concrete that shatter and throws fragments.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Masonry aka brick absorbs kinetic energy and turns to powder. It is stone and concrete that shatter and throws fragments.

To a point yes: But even then, large fragments will fly out.

Its not the fragmentation though that makes masonry fortifications a bad idea - unless you put a lot of rebar and the like in it - Its the fact that unlike earth, its relatively brittle. The 'shatter' effect of direct fire HE on stone/concrete/brick is amazing. But, Earth is more, for lack of a better word, flexible. Of course, you have to take the fact that foot for foot it isn't as good as masonry into consideration when deciding how thick and how high it goes, but it is in the modern world, overall better than old fashioned works.

Its the addition of Rebar - and lots of it - that changes the equation once again. Now we have a 'binder' of sorts that, although HE will shatter the concrete, the rebar density is to the point that it will keep the wall in shape for far longer. Tiergarten is a very good example: it was so laced with rebar and such that it survived everything the soviets could through at it - and like every other flak tower of berlin, none was taken by storm. Even direct fire at almost point blank range by 203mm artillery pieces didn't faze them.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

To a point yes: But even then, large fragments will fly out.

Its not the fragmentation though that makes masonry fortifications a bad idea - unless you put a lot of rebar and the like in it - Its the fact that unlike earth, its relatively brittle. The 'shatter' effect of direct fire HE on stone/concrete/brick is amazing. But, Earth is more, for lack of a better word, flexible. Of course, you have to take the fact that foot for foot it isn't as good as masonry into consideration when deciding how thick and how high it goes, but it is in the modern world, overall better than old fashioned works.

Its the addition of Rebar - and lots of it - that changes the equation once again. Now we have a 'binder' of sorts that, although HE will shatter the concrete, the rebar density is to the point that it will keep the wall in shape for far longer. Tiergarten is a very good example: it was so laced with rebar and such that it survived everything the soviets could through at it - and like every other flak tower of berlin, none was taken by storm. Even direct fire at almost point blank range by 203mm artillery pieces didn't faze them.

The Flak towers in Berlin are reinforced concrete. The Pre-WW1 forts were masonry or masonry over stone/concrete because the brick essentially absorbed a bullet or a shell burrowed into it. No ricochets.

Building with masonry was and is more expensive than pouring concrete.

Even with explosives, when an explosive detonates the shearing forces turn the surrounding brick facade into a crater and the path of least resistance is away from the wall.

Enjoy this video by the U.S Marine Corps. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...30260633420235

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I realize we're talking about basically 500 year old weaponry but one of the great things about building early forts in FL from Coquina rock is that cannonballs (and musket balls) had a tendency to just chunk right in and stop. On the surface.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

I realize we're talking about basically 500 year old weaponry but one of the great things about building early forts in FL from Coquina rock is that cannonballs (and musket balls) had a tendency to just chunk right in and stop. On the surface.

In my student days I lived in Bergen where you had a church tower that still had English cannon balls lodged in plain view from 180something when the Brits in dastardly and conniving manner subjected the fair and peaceloving Danish-Norwegian union to unlimited blockade and naval warfare with disasterous collateral damage results.

But back to the point - the cannon balls(s) lodged themselves in there.

Another thing - I saw mythbusters ( yes..they are a tv show and not scientists etc etc ) paint a brick wall with a prepping paint ( it was red) I dont know the English word for it - we call i t grunning. This greatly enhanced the walls AV regarding concussion damages as it where.

The advent of efficient artillery ended the days of the high walled fortifications in favour of more squat and in some cases earthen covered stone constructions.

But as larger military hierarchies with access to efficient artillery become rarer - the days of the walled fortification are coming back im humble o

But dedicated fortifications are not the only ones- a multistory reinforced- concrete building ( like a sturdy built housing complex) could with a few tweaks become an efficient stronghold. It has space, firing positions could be made and so on. It wouldnt do if the enemy has modern heavy artillery - but that is getting seldom in the T2K verse as I see it.