Condition of Airfield Buildings

Nicely put, Peter.

There were also cases of wartime hutting being deliberately cleared by local government to stop squatters use too. local cases here being Matching and Sawbridgeworth, where squatting levels were becoming a problem with displaced persons forming quite strong communities.
These were also dispersed sites and originally built on requiisitioned farmland, no doubt the local authorities clearance of these sites only preceeded the landowners intentions by a few months in any case!

To demonstrate longevity, I was very happy to see that the British Army, having seriously modified much of Bassingbourn airfield, recognised the build quality of these two Danger Buildings and spent a modest amount of money in refurbishing and securing them.

wtp2.appspot.com/wheresthepath.htm?lat=5...4404&gz=18&oz=8>=1

As they appear to have a fence round them Im guessing that theyre still being used for explosive storage.

Without a doubt.

Paul and others,
Just for information, this is an additional quote over on the other forum:
"Thank you for the reply, and your effort to come back on the different subjects.
Archeology:
Yes, a lot was found, and quickly investigated. But it could not be done in the proper way because the airstrips had to be made asap. Positive is that because of those surface excavations, so much was found on places where nobody would look otherwise. And is not so bad that some soil and concrete is poured over it to a depth of +- 1 meter ( ) It keeps scavengers away. The redundant airfields will probably undergo indepth archeological investigations afterwards.
Quality: it is a known fact that many wooden barracks were made of wood that had not dried long enough ( no time ) and was not well treated. ( lack of the right material )

Concrete building and contractors: yes, there are stories about private contractors who cheated by purpose. But others did it wrong because of lack of knowledge.
Just a small detail: my late grandfather who was a forced labourer on the Atlantikwall told stories how they sabotaged the work by messing with the right mix of the concrete.
But this is something that British labourers never would have done on their own construction sites.
I don't know if German/Italian POW's were involved in the construction of those airfields."

He does seem very knowledgeable and sincere.

From what I've seen during my various rambles, I have the idea that WW2 buildings were built to a high standard - at least not inferior to what folks would have expected or was specified.
As long as the roof is in good condition they'd last for 700 yrs not the 70 they have until now. The red brick buildings I found at Wath Head SLG (eg) in Cumbria were of superb quality.
Expansion buildings are another matter but again all they need is a good roof to keep them in A1 condition.

Although they say a lot of sabotage was carried out on the Atlantikwall I have never seen any, most of the bunkers I have seen are as good now as they were when they were finished.

This image is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.

This one was burnt in recent scrub fires and looking close up it looks as new. www.atlantikwall.co.uk/atlantikwall/fran...ck10/html/page03.htm This one is above Cherbourg At defensive position of Ostech a large radar site. But I herd that on V1 sites that had to be free from any metal so that their compass could be set that the forced labour did drop nails into the mix but if court they would have been shot.

Richard