Talk:Czech hedgehog

Charleston, SC
I have seen hedgehogs scaled down for use against vehicles at some of the military bases around Charleston, SC, USA I am unsure how to research this instance of them however. Knife Knut

Rorybowman 05:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Cross section
I notice that the text mentions the Hedgehogs are made from angle iron (L-shaped cross-section), but the image shows Hedgehogs made of I-beams (I-shaped cross-section). I'm not sure if that's worthy of an edit. --Fracture98 06:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You are quite right, L-shaped cross-section was usual for the atlantic wall - I even found a picture. Gaius Cornelius 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Soviet army manuals, as mentioned in article, didn't mention the cross section at all, all they cared abot were dimensions and strenght. In fact, it is quite likely that the ones on the photo were made on the spot rather than factory assembled. Cyberodin

Czechoslovak fortification system
As it is mentioned in this wikipedia article about "Czech hedgehog" there really does exist a massive and lengthy "1935-1938 Czechoslovak fortification line" as it is described in detail at http://www.bunkry.cz/ (in czech). So the wikipedia article about that czechoslovak fortifications shoud be created and added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fortifications. It is shame that great structure doesn't have own article though some minor systems do have one. Bluewind 20:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Still in use today
I was recently watching a news item on TV about the UN in Israel and I spotted a couple of hedgehogs painted UN blue outside of a UN base or checkpoint - but I cannot recal the details. Can anybody find a reference regarding their use in modern times?

Picture?
The article mentions that there is a monument in Moscow to commemorate the defense of the city using hedgehogs. I think that it would be a good idea to get a picture of that on here, Good idea, bad idea? elnerdo 00:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Minor issues
Although it may provide some scant cover for infantry, infantry forces are generally much less effective against fortified defensive positions than mechanized units. I find this to be a questionable statement, and should be clarified. Are they refering to mechanized units such as tanks? or mechanized infantry? Fortified positions that would make use of things like this would be ment to stop purely mechanized units making them easier targets. Infanty on the other hand may stand a better chance of being able to exploit weak points and advance up lines that aren't fully covered.

These are Still Used
The US military uses these on every single base checkpoint I've ever been to. The design hasn't changed really at all, either. They generally have retractable steel bollards (or, at the Pentagon, big nasty gates that say STOP and have a mini stoplight thing) across the road and Czech hedgehogs in the grass on either side, presumably with gate-crashing terrorists in bomb-laden trucks in mind. See if we can get somebody to snap a picture without the MPs having a hissy fit. Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 05:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Tonne-force, short ton force, long ton force
The specifications strength was given as "60 tons of force". Does anybody know, which kind of ton that was? The most likely candidates are metric ton (=tonne) force, (european) and long ton force (British). Those two are the same at this level of acuracy. Short ton force is not.--ospalh (talk) 11:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

How does it work?
There is nothing in the article describing how the device actually works against tanks. Can anyone provide a description of the action (physics) involved? — Loadmaster (talk) 16:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There are no moving pieces. It sticks in the ground and then tanks can't drive over them.Bllasae (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * As the article mentions, the intention is that tanks TRY to drive over them, but end up getting stuck as the hedgehog tips and jams an 'arm' into the tank's undercarriage, propping up its front end. After taking a few hours to dig out a tank, I'm sure most artillery groups were loathe to attempt it again. -- King Öomie 18:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Rhino Tanks
It states here that Rhino Tanks were one of Hobart's Funnies. I don't think this is true. Hobart's Funnies were various modified tanks designed before the D-day landings by the British, whereas Rhino Tanks were ad hoc modifications made in the field mostly by the Americans after the landings to cope with the hedgerows in the boccage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phineas P Phagbreak (talk • contribs) 15:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Quite right. The Rhino tank is not one of "Hobart's Funnies". I'm going to correct it where I can find it. 82.182.76.119 (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)