I was visiting a friend the last night when I noticed he still had an Anderson Shelter sticking out of the ground. When examining it, it was just a thin piece of metal. How on earth would that stop any bomb?? I think an upside down bath might of proved to more efficient. I would like to hear any positive comments on the Anderson shelter because as of yet, i'm not convinced that could save much. Unless there is something I am missing.
They were meant to be covered in earth. See here,http://www.worldwar2exraf.co.uk/Online%20Museum/Museum%20Docs/airraidshelterspage2.html The shelters were then covered in a thick layer of earth (15" depth on top and 30" on sides and back).It was said the Anderson Shelter could withstand almost anything but a direct hit. BUT Anderson's were often constructed in a hurry which meant they were also unsafe because of the shortages of cement, which would have made them a more sturdy construction. The force of a bomb going off nearby would make them collapse and people eventually became too frightened to use them In a similar vein, back when I was in DPM and we built our SF trenches the overhead cover was a frame of pickets, overlaid with wriggly tin , layer of filled sand-bags then compacted earth on top.
I always assumed that the Andersons were more to get the family away from the house with it's glass windows, flying debris and danger of collapse. With earth built up until nearly buried and a tin roof there must have been reasonable protection from blast and debris. Must be near-impossible for any Civilian house to build a truly bomb-proof shelter? that seems hard enough for the military. Amazing how many survive isn't it? Look down the back row of terraced houses and there's very often curved bits of corrugated iron sticking up.
They also had shelters under a strong table.Indoors. Morrison shelters.http://www.worldwar2exraf.co.uk/Online%20Museum/Museum%20Docs/airraidshelterspage3.htm My Mum's family played Zoo in theirs. Then they had an Anderson shelter.
The thing to remember about improvised shelters, which is what an Anderson Shelter is, is that with enough over-head cover, 18 inches of compact earth or more, there is a huge improvement in blast protection. There is no way that any improvised, or even most small prepared shelters, will provide protection from a direct hit. That is any bomb that detonates and the shelter is within or very close to the crater area. There are very few 'bomb-proof' shelters and those bunkers that use that claim are walled with many feet of concrete and buried under many feet of earth. An anderson shelter was to improve your family's chances, that's all. My Grandfather and my uncle built a shelter in the garden with concrete floor and roof, double thick brick walls and a stove and chÃmney for warmth covered with several feet of compact earth. We couldn't knock it down in the late 80s when the roof began to crumble, so we just caved in the roof to stop the little ones playing in it. It was no longer safe. Much better than an Anderson Shelter, but no protection for a direct hit.
Having cringed in an Anderson while the bombing raged around. It was at least comforting, The real benefit was that it was "Dug In" just below ground level, and there fore acted much like a covered fox hole. What must be remembered that it was certainly protection from near misses, but even more so, the protection that it afforded from the rain of Ack Ack shell splinters. When I was not on duty there was just the lady of the house and myself inside. She spent the whole time in tears. I'm not surprised! Sapper
Woow. I can't even imagine what that could be like. I was listening to someone the other day saying how they were 10 years old a doodlebug landed at the house next door killing those inside. They were also saying that in the morning they would walk to school watching people pulling out bodies from the rubble. No 10 year old should go through that. It amazes me how people like yourself sapper can openly talk about it as though it was something like driving a car. My hat goes off to you and others like you. I thank you for my childrens freedom.
Woow. I can't even imagine what that could be like. I was listening to someone the other day saying how they were 10 years old a doodlebug landed at the house next door killing those inside. They were also saying that in the morning they would walk to school watching people pulling out bodies from the rubble. No 10 year old should go through that. It may be viewed like that from the western 'cotton wool' protected world that most of us live in now, but life isn't all that much better today in many places. It is as well to remember that there are children all over the world that are even today going through as bad and much worse. But it is sad to say that in many countries in Africa, the Far East and South America there are many children of 10 and even younger that are fighting as child soldiers, not just having to endure the horrors and hardships of war from the sidelines, but actually lose their childhood and fight themselves.:mellow:
Well said PP. Use of child soldiers in Africa is disgusting. I started a thread on that on the WarfareToday.com site.
It may be viewed like that from the western 'cotton wool' protected world that most of us live in now, but life isn't all that much better today in many places. It is as well to remember that there are children all over the world that are even today going through as bad and much worse. But it is sad to say that in many countries in Africa, the Far East and South America there are many children of 10 and even younger that are fighting as child soldiers, not just having to endure the horrors and hardships of war from the sidelines, but actually lose their childhood and fight themselves.:mellow: Agree with you 100% on that PP. The sad thing is these child soldiers never have a childhood to them it is the norm. To them it is killing to survive. They don't know anything different. They have nothing to compare it to, knowing of nothing else.
