Fig. 49 is a German work, Fort Molsheim at Strassburg. This is a
simple type of triangular fort. The main mass of concrete rests on the
gorge, and is divided by a narrow courtyard to give light and air to
the front casemates. The fort has a medium armament for the artillery
fight, consisting of four 6-in. howitzers in cupolas. On each face are
two small Q.F. guns in cupolas for close defence, for which purpose,
it will be seen, there is also an infantry parapet. At the angles are
look-out turrets. The ditch has escarp and counterscarp, and is
defended by counterscarp galleries at the angles. There is no covered
way. The thickness of concrete over the casemates, where it is
uncovered, is about 10 ft.
Fig. 50 is Fort Lyngby at Copenhagen. The new Copenhagen defences are
very interesting, giving evidence of clear and original thought, and
effectiveness combined with economy. There is one special feature
worth noting about the outer ring of forts, of which Lyngby is one.
These works are intended for the artillery fight only, their main
armament being four 6-in. guns (in pairs) and three 6-in. howitzers,
all in cupolas. The armament for immediate defence is trifling,
consisting of only two 57-mm. guns and a machine-gun. There is no
provision for infantry defence. The ditch has no escarp or
counterscarp, and is flanked by counterscarp galleries at the salient.
It is usual in the case of works so slightly organized for their own
defence, and intended only for the long-range artillery fight, to
withdraw them somewhat from the front line. The Danish engineers,
however, have not hesitated to put these works in the very front line,
some 2000 metres in front of the permanent intermediate batteries. The
object of this is to force the enemy to establish his heavy artillery
at such long ranges that it will be able to afford little assistance
to the trench attack of the infantry. The intermediate batteries,
being withdrawn, are comparatively safe. They therefore do not require
expensive protection, and can reserve their strength to resist the
advance of the attack. The success of this arrangement will depend on
the fighting strength of the cupolas under war conditions; and what
that may be, war alone can tell us.
In the details of these works, besides the bold cutting down of
defensive precautions, we may note the skilful and economical use of
layers of large stones over the casemates to diminish the thickness of
concrete required. The roofs of the casemates are stiffened underneath
with steel rails, and steel lathing is used to prevent lumps of
concrete from falling on the occupants. The living casemates look out
on the gorge, getting plenty of light and air, while the magazines are
under the cupolas.
The forts above described are all armed with a view to their taking an
important part in the distant artillery fight. The next type to be
considered (fig. 51) is selected mainly because it is a good example
of the use of concealed flanking batteries, known on the continent as
_batteries traditores_, which seem to be growing in popularity.
This design by Colonel Voorduin of the Dutch engineers has a medium
armament, which is not intended for the artillery duel, but to command
the immediate front of the neighbouring forts and the intervals. The
fort is long and narrow, with small casemate accommodation. It
contains eight 4.7-in. guns. Two of these are in a cupola concealed
from view, though not protected, by a bank of earth in front. The
other six are in an armoured battery behind the cupola. It may be
remarked that as the cupola gets no real protection from the covering
mass of earth, it would be better to be able to utilize the fire of
its guns to the front. The _batterie traditore_, if properly protected
overhead, would be very difficult to silence, and its flanking fire
would probably be available up to the last moment. There is very much
to be said both for and against the policy of so emplacing the guns.
The immediate defence of the work, with the aid of a broad wet ditch,
is easy; but the great mass of concrete, which is intended to form an
indestructible platform and breastwork for the infantry, would seem to
be a needless expense.
[Illustration: From Brialmont's _Progres de la defense des etats,
&c._, by permission of Commandant G. Meeus.