Heavy snowfall at Stalaag 13

[Ubiquitous]

After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
Ebola is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying
And Obama is giving seminars on perpetuating the Fergusen myth.

[Michael Black]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Ubiquitous wrote:

> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.
>

I thought you were going to ask a serious question.

Around 1971 and 72, we got a lot of snow close together, so it didnt'
melt. It was a time of regular "snow days". But the snow got so high, I
could step into the adjacent school yard that wsa just a chainlink fence
away, the snow, packed down, was either up to the top of that fence, or a
few inches below it. Imagine that kind of snowfall at a prison camp, the
prisoners could just step over the fence.

I bet heavy snowfall would impact the prisoners. It might get in the way
of food shipments, certainly the Red Cross packages. They might find it
cold, and might get stir crazy if they had to stay inside.

Michael

[Rhino]

On 2014-12-10 11:54 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.
>

It might be a problem if Hogan's Heroes were filmed on location but in
those days, almost everything was shot on a sound stage. Chances are
pretty good that the only snow on the tree stump was put there by
whoever was responsible for decorating the set.

There *are* some scenes in Hogan's Heroes that were clearly shot
outdoors - presumably in the nearby hills around LA - but that stump
always seemed indoors to me.


--
Rhino

[Michael Black]

I didn't think we were letting the tv show get in the way of the story.

EIther the stump would get blocked, or it wouldn't depending on the need
of the story.

On the other hand, if we're talking reality, one POW camp had a
transmitter that they built, but never used. They didnt' want to risk it,
but wanted it in case the worst should happen. They wondered if when the
Allies got near, the nazis might decide to kill off the POWs. So they
wanted that transmitter just in case such a need arose.

So to answer the question, if the stump was too buried in snow to be
useful, it might mean they had no way of getting out of camp when the
nazis decided to liquidate the camps (assuming this happened in winter).
And that might be vital when that time came. Otherwise, it just means a
temporary damper on their espionage activity.

The reality was, no tunnels remained unfound, that I've heard of. They
were either found while being created, or found when there was an escape.
The POWs didn't have the luxury of having a tunnel so they could go in and
out as desired, but which stayed through the war.

Michael

[Rhino]

On 2014-12-10 12:17 PM, Michael Black wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Ubiquitous wrote:
>
>> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
>> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.
>>
> I thought you were going to ask a serious question.
>
> Around 1971 and 72, we got a lot of snow close together, so it didnt'
> melt. It was a time of regular "snow days". But the snow got so high, I
> could step into the adjacent school yard that wsa just a chainlink fence
> away, the snow, packed down, was either up to the top of that fence, or
> a few inches below it. Imagine that kind of snowfall at a prison camp,
> the prisoners could just step over the fence.
>

Maybe you've never seen pictures of POW camps but the fences on real
camps were a lot more than 8 feet tall. I suspect they were closer to
20 or 30 feet high if not taller. Also, they were often doubled with a
dog run in between. Sometimes they were electrified. And there were
guard towers at regular intervals.

I've never heard of a snowfall in Germany that would have put the snow
up high enough to help a POW simply step over the fence. Even the Soviet
Gulag, much of which was in subarctic Siberia, didn't get that much snow....

> I bet heavy snowfall would impact the prisoners. It might get in the
> way of food shipments, certainly the Red Cross packages. They might
> find it cold, and might get stir crazy if they had to stay inside.
>

I believe the Germans were relatively humane in this regard, at least
with non-Soviet prisoners. (The Soviet Union hadn't signed the Geneva
Accords so the Germans did not treat Soviet POWs nearly as well as
British/American/Canadian prisoners.) However, if you read
Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, it is clear that harsh weather was not
going to get you a day off. Soviet prisoners sometimes went out to work
in -75 degree weather. Their winter clothing was meager and their
buildings - when they had buildings - were poorly heated at best. On top
of that, they were very poorly fed and made to work at least 6 days a
week and often 7 for long hours. They often had to walk for a couple of
hours each way to get to a work site - felling trees for instance -
before they could start their work assignments. They were marched under
guard and with a warning that a single step away from the rest of the
group would get them shot without warning or mauled by one of the guard
dogs.

In some cases, prisoners had no buildings of any kind. When a new camp
was being started, they'd simply dig holes and STAND in them all night
to get some shelter from the elements. Then, they'd get a meager meal
and be expected to do the heavy work of felling trees and constructing
buildings. It might be days or weeks before the barracks were completed
or at least habitable.

How many days could any of us survive in such conditions? It's no wonder
so few people survived their trip to the Gulag.



--
Rhino

[Rhino]

On 2014-12-10 2:54 PM, Michael Black wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Rhino wrote:
>
>> On 2014-12-10 11:54 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
>>> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.
>>>
>>
>> It might be a problem if Hogan's Heroes were filmed on location but in
>> those days, almost everything was shot on a sound stage. Chances are
>> pretty good that the only snow on the tree stump was put there by
>> whoever was responsible for decorating the set.
>>
>> There *are* some scenes in Hogan's Heroes that were clearly shot
>> outdoors - presumably in the nearby hills around LA - but that stump
>> always seemed indoors to me.
>>
> I didn't think we were letting the tv show get in the way of the story.
>

Sorry, I wasn't sure if Ubiquitous was talking about the real world or
the Hogan's Heroes universe ;-)

> EIther the stump would get blocked, or it wouldn't depending on the need
> of the story.
>

I don't remember any episodes where it was blocked by snow. I rewatched
the first four seasons a year or so back but it might have happened
during the fifth or sixth seasons. Or maybe it happened in the earlier
seasons and I just forgot....

> On the other hand, if we're talking reality, one POW camp had a
> transmitter that they built, but never used. They didnt' want to risk
> it, but wanted it in case the worst should happen. They wondered if when
> the Allies got near, the nazis might decide to kill off the POWs. So
> they wanted that transmitter just in case such a need arose.
>
> So to answer the question, if the stump was too buried in snow to be
> useful, it might mean they had no way of getting out of camp when the
> nazis decided to liquidate the camps (assuming this happened in winter).
> And that might be vital when that time came. Otherwise, it just means a
> temporary damper on their espionage activity.
>

I remember a scene where LeBeau simply raised the entire fence; it
opened like a window. That would be one way out ;-)

And I remember several references to the "emergency tunnel" which was
probably designed to enable a quick exit in a dire emergency.

> The reality was, no tunnels remained unfound, that I've heard of. They
> were either found while being created, or found when there was an
> escape. The POWs didn't have the luxury of having a tunnel so they could
> go in and out as desired, but which stayed through the war.
>

I'm not aware of any real-life tunnels that stayed hidden throughout the
war
either but I don't claim to be an expert. I don't think prisoners in
most camps even attempted tunnels.

If the Germans were as devious as the Soviets, they probably put most
camps on very sandy soil so that the odds of building a tunnel that
wouldn't quickly collapse were negligible. The Soviets also put very
heavy concrete blocks around the outside of some camps so that if a
tunnel was dug, the block would cave in crushing the diggers and foiling
the escape. The Germans may well have done the same.

The Soviets had other simple but devious tricks to deter escapes. For
instance, prisoners were always allotted trousers that were three sizes
too big and NOT given belts or suspenders. This ensured that anyone
trying to flee would need one hand to hold their pants up. This
inevitably slowed down the fleeing prisoner. (I assume that attempting
to fashion a belt or suspenders got you very severely punished.)


--
Rhino

[anim8rFSK]

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1...@darkstar.example.org>,

If the Nazis have decided to kill the prisoners, who are they going to
call?

--
Wait - are you saying that ClodReamer was wrong, or lying?

[Michael Black]

They were more worried towards the end of the war, as the nazis had to
pull back to Germany. At least some of the POW camps weren't in Germany
itself. So they worried that as the Allies moved in, the nazis might
decide to liquidate them. I'm not sure what would have happened, but if
the Allies knew the POWs were being killed, it might have caused a
different path, like rush to the prisoners instead of processing the war.

Or I suppose they could have dropped small arms for a resurrection. I get
the feeling the POWs might have been ready to fight if all was lost, but
until that threat got serious, it wsa better to wait things out (and
escape through tunnels if possible).

Michael

[Michael Black]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Rhino wrote:

> On 2014-12-10 12:17 PM, Michael Black wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>
>>> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
>>> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.
>>>
>> I thought you were going to ask a serious question.
>>
>> Around 1971 and 72, we got a lot of snow close together, so it didnt'
>> melt. It was a time of regular "snow days". But the snow got so high, I
>> could step into the adjacent school yard that wsa just a chainlink fence
>> away, the snow, packed down, was either up to the top of that fence, or
>> a few inches below it. Imagine that kind of snowfall at a prison camp,
>> the prisoners could just step over the fence.
>>
> Maybe you've never seen pictures of POW camps but the fences on real camps
> were a lot more than 8 feet tall. I suspect they were closer to 20 or 30
> feet high if not taller. Also, they were often doubled with a dog run in
> between. Sometimes they were electrified. And there were guard towers at
> regular intervals.
>

That wsa mostly a joke.

>
>> I bet heavy snowfall would impact the prisoners. It might get in the
>> way of food shipments, certainly the Red Cross packages. They might
>> find it cold, and might get stir crazy if they had to stay inside.
>>
>
> I believe the Germans were relatively humane in this regard, at least
> with non-Soviet prisoners.

Yes. But there were still limitations. WIth the general population
living in relatively limited means, they weren't going to siphon off
luxuries to the POWs. Fresh food was apparently scarce, wood or coal for
the stoves likely was limited, they certainly had no real coffee. The
POWs counted on those Red Cross packages. They weren't outright
mistreated, but if there was a storm, I bet they weren't going to shift
manpower to clearing the tracks to get supplies to the camps if it meant
not getting supplies to the soldiers at the front. I'm sure they weren't
allowed to keep the huts really hot, and I bet they weren't well
insulated.

> (The Soviet Union hadn't signed the Geneva Accords so the Germans did
> not treat Soviet POWs nearly as well as British/American/Canadian
> prisoners.) However, if you read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, it is
> clear that harsh weather was not going to get you a day off. Soviet
> prisoners sometimes went out to work in -75 degree weather. Their winter
> clothing was meager and their buildings - when they had buildings - were
> poorly heated at best. On top of that, they were very poorly fed and
> made to work at least 6 days a week and often 7 for long hours. They
> often had to walk for a couple of hours each way to get to a work site -
> felling trees for instance - before they could start their work
> assignments. They were marched under guard and with a warning that a
> single step away from the rest of the group would get them shot without
> warning or mauled by one of the guard dogs.
>

The Gulag was more like the nazi concentration camps. I don't think the
Soviets really cared about the prisoners, whether they were German POWs,
or Soviet political prisoners. It didnt' seem to matter how many died,
and they probably figured it wsa better. Remember, if you went to the
Gulag, you generally were sentenced for life. You had a finite sentence,
but in many cases, you were supposed to stay in SIberia. That changed with
time, especially after Stalin died.

I seem to recall reading that some of those political prisoners were there
simply because they'd been caught by the nazis. It was considered a crime
to become a POW.

> In some cases, prisoners had no buildings of any kind. When a new camp was
> being started, they'd simply dig holes and STAND in them all night to get
> some shelter from the elements. Then, they'd get a meager meal and be
> expected to do the heavy work of felling trees and constructing buildings. It
> might be days or weeks before the barracks were completed or at least
> habitable.
>

There are at least two books about Americans who ended up in the USSR
during the 30s (because there was work and their parents brought them
over), who ended up in the Gulag. "Coming out of the Ice" was one of
them, made into a movie that I saw a bit of 20 years ago on tv. But then
I read the book about fifteen years ago, when he's released he's supposed
to fend for himself, but he can't go back to "civilization". So he chops a
hole in the frozen earth under a tree to live. My first reaction was "how
primitive", then I remembered that wasn't that far from how many people
had lived before the revolution. They had "houses" but I bet they werne't
that well insulated or sealed up. 1950 or so wasn't that long after
people generally lived in such primitive conditions.

> How many days could any of us survive in such conditions? It's no wonder so
> few people survived their trip to the Gulag.
>

The mind boggles. I've never had to live outdoors, I've always had heat,
and generally pretty good winter clothing. I've read books about
antarctic explorers, and it's the same thing. Shackleton was able to keep
everyone alive when his ship got caught in the ice, but only the
expedition members (not the ship's crew) had proper clothing for it all.
Over a year in that cold with little heat, and generally wet most of the
time? That's amazing. Admiral Byrd spent a winter alone and away from
the base camp one year in the thirties, even with the stove on it got up
to maybe the freezing point. And then he suffered from carbon dioxide
poisoning, so he couldn't even use the stove much. NO, I don't want to
live that way, and I think I'd just give up.

Michael

[Rhino]

Absolutely! Ordinary Germans couldn't get (real) coffee so they sure
weren't going to obtain it for prisoners. (Apparently, the Germans *did*
have fake coffee, made with chicory or such things, but it wasn't
considered satisfactory compared to real coffee. I'm not sure if POWs
had even fake coffee.)

> The
> POWs counted on those Red Cross packages. They weren't outright
> mistreated, but if there was a storm, I bet they weren't going to shift
> manpower to clearing the tracks to get supplies to the camps if it meant
> not getting supplies to the soldiers at the front.

I suspect you're right. I can imagine some Nazi bigshot declaring that
they weren't going to let soldier starve or do without ammunition just
so that foreign prisoners could live decently.

> I'm sure they
> weren't allowed to keep the huts really hot, and I bet they weren't well
> insulated.
>

Germany had an abundance of coal and there was no stigma to burning coal
in those days so heating may not have been a big problem. Then again,
people to mine the coal were probably mostly at the front. I'm not sure
what kind of stockpiles they'd accumulated by the time the war started.
If the stockpiles were big enough, maybe they could just use the
stockpiles while the miners put on uniforms and headed off to the front....

>> (The Soviet Union hadn't signed the Geneva Accords so the Germans did
>> not treat Soviet POWs nearly as well as British/American/Canadian
>> prisoners.) However, if you read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, it
>> is clear that harsh weather was not going to get you a day off. Soviet
>> prisoners sometimes went out to work in -75 degree weather. Their
>> winter clothing was meager and their buildings - when they had
>> buildings - were poorly heated at best. On top of that, they were very
>> poorly fed and made to work at least 6 days a week and often 7 for
>> long hours. They often had to walk for a couple of hours each way to
>> get to a work site - felling trees for instance - before they could
>> start their work assignments. They were marched under guard and with a
>> warning that a single step away from the rest of the group would get
>> them shot without warning or mauled by one of the guard dogs.
>>
> The Gulag was more like the nazi concentration camps. I don't think the
> Soviets really cared about the prisoners, whether they were German POWs,
> or Soviet political prisoners. It didnt' seem to matter how many died,
> and they probably figured it wsa better. Remember, if you went to the
> Gulag, you generally were sentenced for life. You had a finite
> sentence, but in many cases, you were supposed to stay in SIberia. That
> changed with time, especially after Stalin died.
>

You're essentially right. Sentences *were* finite. Typically, political
prisoners got three years in the very early days after the revolution.
This gradually got extended to 8 years, then 25 years. It was very
common for people nearing the end of their sentence to get another
slapped on. Survivors of the camps - and only one in seven survived -
were usually prohibited from living in European Russia. They usually had
to stay a fixed distance from Moscow - I think it was 150km - but that
left a LOT of country.

> I seem to recall reading that some of those political prisoners were
> there simply because they'd been caught by the nazis. It was considered
> a crime to become a POW.
>

The ones who got sent to the Gulag were the lucky ones. Many former POWs
were simply shot. Churchill was very concerned about this as WW II wound
down. He knew Stalin's views and fought hard - but unsuccessfully - to
prevent forced repatriations of Soviet POWs. He knew they would feel
Stalin's wrath.

It was common knowledge in the Red Army that you NEVER admitted to being
captured by the enemy. There were cases of Soviet soldiers being
captured by the Germans and then escaping just a few hours later. In
every case, they were shot. Stalin was sure that if they had been in the
German clutches for even a few hours, they would have been "turned" and
were now enemies of the Soviet Union. After a few such incidents, Soviet
soldiers realized that the only conceivable thing was to say that you'd
been briefly lost in the forest or whatever and NOT captured.

>> In some cases, prisoners had no buildings of any kind. When a new camp
>> was being started, they'd simply dig holes and STAND in them all night
>> to get some shelter from the elements. Then, they'd get a meager meal
>> and be expected to do the heavy work of felling trees and constructing
>> buildings. It might be days or weeks before the barracks were
>> completed or at least habitable.
>>
> There are at least two books about Americans who ended up in the USSR
> during the 30s (because there was work and their parents brought them
> over), who ended up in the Gulag. "Coming out of the Ice" was one of
> them, made into a movie that I saw a bit of 20 years ago on tv. But
> then I read the book about fifteen years ago, when he's released he's
> supposed to fend for himself, but he can't go back to "civilization". So
> he chops a hole in the frozen earth under a tree to live. My first
> reaction was "how primitive", then I remembered that wasn't that far
> from how many people had lived before the revolution. They had "houses"
> but I bet they werne't that well insulated or sealed up. 1950 or so
> wasn't that long after people generally lived in such primitive conditions.
>

I was in South Dakota about 20 years back and stopped to see a local
museum about life for the pioneers on the prairies. Early settlers often
built "soddies" (that's the Canadian term; I can't remember if the
Dakotans used the same term), houses made of sod, for the first couple
of years until they could build a proper house. Probably not each and
every settler but a significant number started that way.

I know that life in Tsarist Russia was very difficult. The peasants were
90% of the populace and life among the peasants was poor and difficult.
I don't know a lot of details but I *do* know that in WW II, it was
widely noticed by Soviet soldiers entering Central Europe how prosperous
the villages looked compared to their own. Solzhenitsyn wrote about
this; he and his fellow soldiers found it very striking to see how
different East Prussia was compared to Poland and Ukraine. Apparently
Soviet soldiers entering Romania and Hungary had the same experience.

>> How many days could any of us survive in such conditions? It's no
>> wonder so few people survived their trip to the Gulag.
>>
> The mind boggles. I've never had to live outdoors, I've always had
> heat, and generally pretty good winter clothing. I've read books about
> antarctic explorers, and it's the same thing. Shackleton was able to
> keep everyone alive when his ship got caught in the ice, but only the
> expedition members (not the ship's crew) had proper clothing for it all.
> Over a year in that cold with little heat, and generally wet most of the
> time? That's amazing. Admiral Byrd spent a winter alone and away from
> the base camp one year in the thirties, even with the stove on it got up
> to maybe the freezing point. And then he suffered from carbon dioxide
> poisoning, so he couldn't even use the stove much. NO, I don't want to
> live that way, and I think I'd just give up.
>

A great many of the people in the Gulag did exactly that: gave up.

And who can blame them? Falsely accused of trying to overthrow the
state, usually after having been forced to confess via torture, sent to
the Gulag for many years and prohibited from ever returning to their
families, fed meager amounts of very bad food, freezing in summer, and
forced to work very hard under often dangerous conditions for what
little they had. That's not much to live for.

Solzhenitsyn observed that religious believers generally did better than
non-believers. Their faith made life seem just a little more tolerable.

--
Rhino

[Rhino]

Ghostbusters? ;-)


--
Rhino

[Stan Brown]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:59:53 -0500, Rhino wrote:
> I've never heard of a snowfall in Germany that would have put the snow
> up high enough to help a POW simply step over the fence.
>

And even if there were enough snow, the guards with machine guns in
towers might have acted as a deterrent.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

[Rhino]

As you say, many of the concentration camps were not in Germany proper.
Aushwitz, for example, was in Poland. Now, Aushwitz itself was liberated
by the Red Army in January 1945 but some of the camps further west
stayed in German hands longer. As the war wound down, these camps were
evacuated in some cases. Prisoners were forced to march away from the
oncoming Soviets, sometimes for days. Some of them were died along the
way; food and shelter were apparently scarce.

I'm not aware of any cases were the force-marched prisoners rose up
against their guards or where weapons were dropped to them, nor am I
aware of any actual massacres of these marching prisoners. That doesn't
mean it didn't happen. Dropping weapons to starving prisoners seems a
dubious proposition at best. What would stop the weapons from landing
among the guards, not the prisoners? What would stop the guards from
shooting any prisoner attempting to race for a gun? What are the odds
that a given prisoner would even know how to use the gun had been
dropped. Many of them would be unfamiliar with firearms and even if they
had some firearm knowledge, what are the odds that they would know the
particular weapons that had been dropped? There is a huge variety of
pistols, rifles and other such small arms and a great many variations in
how they work, particularly in details like where the safety is and how
it works on that particular gun.

If I was a military commander concerned with this kind of situation, I
would have dropped paratroopers. They are specifically trained to land
amidst enemy forces and to fight there way out. Few organizations would
be better equipped to help in that situation.

--
Rhino

[Neill Massello]

Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:

> After watching last night's ep, I wondered what happens when the camp
> gets 12 inches heavy snow, and they can't get the tree stump to open.

They do nothing, nothing!

[David Lesher]

>> If the Nazis have decided to kill the prisoners, who are they going to
>> call?
>>
>Ghostbusters? ;-)

Damn, he beat me too it.

The Germans built Stalag-Luft III on very sandy soil to deter
tunnneling. In addition, it was yellow, and there was several
inches of darker top cover added. This made it easier to spot
the removed sand being dumped.

I just read A GENIUS FOR DECEPTION : HOW CUNNING HELPED THE
BRITISH WIN TWO WORLD WARS which talked about POW camps. Red
Cross packages did NOT carry escape tools. But there were many
other packages and they often did.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[ncrdbl1]

Most of the snow you saw was actually just plain salt. The decision was made to make it winter all year long so to keep from having to change the set. That is why you see snow when the briefcase was given to the general to attempt to kill Hitler or you saw snow on the D day episode. Both happened in late spring or summer in real life. .

[Clu]

That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.

[Michael Black]

On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:

> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>

Did it open inward, or outward?

Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.

Michael

[A Friend]

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1...@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:
>
> > That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
> >
> Did it open inward, or outward?
>
> Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
> about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
> if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
> outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.

Although I don't think we ever saw it, there was probably more than one
secret way out of Stalag 13.

[Ubiquitous]

et...@ncf.ca wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:

>> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>
>Did it open inward, or outward?
>
>Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
>about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
>if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
>outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.

I was under the impression they would open out so as not to impede people
fleeing during a fire.

[Your Name]

In article <n01r4r$bf9$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous

<web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> et...@ncf.ca wrote:
> >On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:
> >>
> >> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
> >
> >Did it open inward, or outward?
> >
> >Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
> >about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
> >if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
> >outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.
>
> I was under the impression they would open out so as not to impede people
> fleeing during a fire.

Originally outside doors reportedly opened inwards because that allowed
the hinges to be hidden behind the frame ... otherwise burglars could
simply pop the hinge pins and take the door off.

They also reportedly opened inward as a sign of welcoming by the owner
(i.e. the owner pulling the door towards themselves was saying "come
in").

It also stops the owner accidently smashing a door into the knocking
person's face ... although I'd be more than happy to do that to the
door-to-door salespeople and religion nutters. :-)


The front door on our house opens inwards, but the back door opens
outwards. The garden doors in the lounge and main bedroom both slide
sideways. And the garage door open vertically upwards. Now we just need
a door that opens vertically downwards to complete the set. ;-)

[Ubiquitous]

et...@ncf.ca wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:

>> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>
>Did it open inward, or outward?

In this case, it was upward.

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
Ebola is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying

And Obama is giving tepid responses to ISIS setting people on fire.

[Ubiquitous]

I thought there was only one tree stump exit, but they had other means to
escape, the fence section that lifted up being one.

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
Ebola is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying

[Ubiquitous]

Your...@YourISP.com wrote:
>In article <n01r4r$bf9$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
><web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>> et...@ncf.ca wrote:
>> >On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:

>> >> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>> >
>> >Did it open inward, or outward?
>> >
>> >Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
>> >about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
>> >if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
>> >outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.
>>
>> I was under the impression they would open out so as not to impede people
>> fleeing during a fire.
>
>Originally outside doors reportedly opened inwards because that allowed
>the hinges to be hidden behind the frame ... otherwise burglars could
>simply pop the hinge pins and take the door off.

Good point. I was thinking of a restaurant or apartment building.

--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
Ebola is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying

[Michael Black]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2015, Ubiquitous wrote:

> et...@ncf.ca wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:
>
>>> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>>
>> Did it open inward, or outward?
>>
>> Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
>> about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
>> if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
>> outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.
>
> I was under the impression they would open out so as not to impede people
> fleeing during a fire.
>

That's a point. So perhaps there's a difference between private homes
(where there won't be the same stampede that might block the doors if the
opened inward) and public buildings.

I'm not sure there's a consistency. I was in the lobby of an apartment
building last week, and it definitely opened inward. I remember because I
started to pull it out first.

Michael

[Michael Black]

We have double doors at the side and back, replaced with screen doors when
summer actually arrives.

So the inner doors open inward, the outer doors open outward, so you get
the best of both worlds (and the worse of both worlds too).

Michael

[Michael Black]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Ubiquitous wrote:

> Your...@YourISP.com wrote:
>> In article <n01r4r$bf9$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
>> <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>>> et...@ncf.ca wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Clu wrote:
>
>>>>> That is a good question. Or have to chip ice off the opening.
>>>>
>>>> Did it open inward, or outward?
>>>>
>>>> Some years back in the Law & Order newsgroup (back when it was still
>>>> about the tv show), someone wondered about an episode with snow, wondering
>>>> if people living in a basement apartment would get stuck. But generally,
>>>> outer doors open inward, presumably for this purpose.
>>>
>>> I was under the impression they would open out so as not to impede people
>>> fleeing during a fire.
>>
>> Originally outside doors reportedly opened inwards because that allowed
>> the hinges to be hidden behind the frame ... otherwise burglars could
>> simply pop the hinge pins and take the door off.
>
> Good point. I was thinking of a restaurant or apartment building.
>

Of course, the reverse is true.

If someone wants to kick down your door, an inward opening door would seem
to be easier to kick open than one that opens outward.

Michael

[Your Name]

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1...@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:

Of course both are irrelevant since people didn't used to bother
locking their doors anyway. ;-)

[Your Name]

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1...@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:

On a busy street-based building, outward opening doors would hit or get
in the way of pedestrians walking by. Most places these days have
automatic sliding doors.