PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Attack on Coventry not a surprise? (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/128106-attack-coventry-not-surprise.html)

Ignition Override 27th Apr 2004 04:52

Attack on Coventry not a surprise?
 
In the book "Native Tongues" (Grosset and Dunlap, N.Y. 1982) by preeminent linguist Charles Berlitz, he reveals this in the chapter Military Codes and Deceptions on page 265.

He claims that because of Ultra, the top-secret facility ( at B-Park) which used the several captured German Enigma machines, the British allowed the attack on Coventry, because otherwise the enemy would have realized that the code had been broken.

"Coventry was heavily bombed but the Ultra secret was preserved".


Is this true? If so, then why was the terrible revenge fire-bombing attack on Dresden necessary-just to keep up the illusion? :ouch:

West Coast 27th Apr 2004 05:25

I/O

Take cover and prepare for return fire, its coming.

henry crun 27th Apr 2004 05:43

I think the author you quote has got some of his information mixed up.

Coventry was bombed in Nov 1940, and this was known from the Ultra decrypts about 48 hours before the attack took place.
It is true that the decision was taken not to take any special precautions to avoid alerting the Germans to the success BP were having in decyphering their radio traffic.

BP had no captured enigma machines at that time, the decrypts were done using a machine devised by Alan Turing.
I think the first machine was captured from U110 on 9th May 1941 by the Royal Navy.

It is surely stretching the imagination to assume any connection between Coventry in Nov 1940 and Dresden in Feb 1945.

WC :D

Maple 01 27th Apr 2004 06:28


Is this true? If so, then why was the terrible revenge fire-bombing attack on Dresden necessary-just to keep up the illusion?
Are you David Irving?

Pilgrim101 27th Apr 2004 08:47

What a load of unmitigated bollocks ! Even if the Int people had known about the planning of the raid on Coventry, just what could the RAF have done about it without denuding other areas, arguably more vital to the war effort, of the air cover that was already fairly thinly stretched all over Southern England at the time ?

I suppose that also might be a tenuous thread to the author's assertion / assumption but without him ever having worked at BP he'd never know for sure would he ?

henry crun 27th Apr 2004 09:49

Pilgrim, from what I have read there is no doubt Ultra did give at least 48 hours warning.

The suggestion is not what the RAF could have done, which was as you state, virtually nothing, but what other precautions could have been taken.

Actions could have included, moving more AA guns, searchlights and smokescreen machines into the area, temporary evacuation of many civilians, particularly the aged and the young, reinforcing the fire and ambulance services, and alerting the hospitals and civil defence teams.

PPRuNe Pop 27th Apr 2004 10:08

I avidly read R V Jones book, "A Most Secret War", he was the architect of establishing a way to counteract the German system of target selection called "Knickebein." This was by way of two radio beams, one at Kleves in Germany and the other one in northern France. Broadly speaking the beams transmitted dots and dashes either side of a pre-determined centre line enabling the pilot to steer to a target. When he heard a continuous tone he was over the target and dropped his bombs. Simple really!

But the story of Chrurchill 'sacrificing' Coventry is as Pilgrim puts it 'cobblers.'

But..............................read THIS it will banish the theories forever. Sort of!

PPP

pr00ne 27th Apr 2004 10:16

Ignition Override,

Nonsense!

The fact that X-Gerat beams were intersecting over Coventry was detected by 3pm that afternoon. Ultra intercepts revealed that a major attack on a UK target was planned but there was some uncertainty over the code names used. Churchill was infomed that afternoon an attack was expected on london that evening, he was on his way to Chequers at the time and turned round and went back to London.

Even if it was known for certain that the target was definetely Coventry there was precious little that could have been done in the time available. Night defences were pitifully inadequate at the time and almost totally ineffective.

To link Coventry in November 1940 and Dresden in February 1945 shows you have no understanding of WW2!

henry crun 27th Apr 2004 10:46

Thanks for the link Pprune Pop, I promise never to believe Cave Brown again. :)

steamchicken 27th Apr 2004 11:06

Beams. The German navigation beams were detected in good time, but it was only the 1st or 2nd time the "Aspirin" jammers were used in anger. One was almost exactly under the beam but its frequency was slightly inaccurate and the jamming was ineffective.

Ultra. There was AFAIK an Ultra decrypt referring to a major op coming up called "Moonlight Sonata" but it didn't mention the target, so not really much use. Anyway, there would have been no need to "protect Ultra" over the issue of the X-Gerät beams as they could, of course, be detected by radio monitoring. Note, I'm not sure in my mind whether Knickebein or X was the system involved, but non-Ultra intelligence tipped us off about both. Knickebein was betrayed by a combination of ESM and POW interrogation - as well as the incident in Hyde Park where a German Nav bailed out and found on landing that he still had a notebook with various nav information on him, including freqs for something called "Willi Knickebein" with two stations and the times it would be radiating. He tore it up into some 3,000 pieces and was trying to bury them when Plod intervened. RV Jones spent a night putting the bits back together...

X was discovered by the examination of a downed He 111 fitted with the receiver. Unlike Knickebein, which used the Lorenz blind landing technology on a bigger scale, X-Gerät needed more complicated electronics and visual presentation.

Evening Star 27th Apr 2004 11:35

Cave Brown also asserts in Bodyguard of Lies that the 'Long Leg' route of the 30/31 March 1944 Nuremburg raid was leaked to the Germans to authenticate an agent. This, in his definative book on the Nuremberg raid, Martin Middlebrook refutes, using such sources as information from Harris. One is left with the impression that Bodyguard of Lies is not a reliable source of information.

A Most Secret War is a truly fascinating book. If anybody reading this thread has yet to read it ... do so NOW.

PPRuNe Pop 27th Apr 2004 14:06

Well I guess it comes down to pennies! It is certainly not first time that authors spit forth untruths, half truths and ouright lies to sell a book. If you go to my link you will see that one of the authors was a Group Captain "in the know" but even he produced unreliable information.

Sad really - but human ambition and greed.

Bletchley 27th Apr 2004 14:43

Ignition Over-ride
 
I can give you the full details if you PM me, however in summary the reason for the attack on Dresden was as follows:-

Churchill needed to demonstrate to the Russians that the Allied Forces were contributing to the War in the East.

On 4th February 1945 the Chiefs of Staff of the USA, Russia, and Britain discussed the co-ordination of Allied Offensive operations.

At this session, General Antonov, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Red Army, submitted a note on the present Soviet offensive which included several suggestions as to how the Western Allies might contribute to its success.

A number of targets were identified, including Berlin, Dresden, Leipzig, and Chemnitz as priority targets.

This had the full support of the combined Chiefs of Staff of the USA, Russia, and Britain fully supported by Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin.

Direction as to these targets was sent to Bomber Command on 6th February 1945.

Sir Arthur Harris, the Commander- In-Chief of Bomber Command telephoned Air-Vice Marshall Bottomley to confirm that Dresden should be attacked and was ordered to proceed.

Dresden was attacked on the night of 13/14 February 1945.

Everyone conveniently forgets that Bomber Command only made one raid against Dresden.

The USAAF made THREE raids - on the morning of the 14th, again on the 15th, and yet again on the morning of 2nd March.

What is absolutely disgraceful about the whole matter is the way in which the American press treated the story, and the subsequent public reaction of the USA in seeking to distance themselves from something that they had been actively involved in.

Anyone wishing to read more is recommended to read 'Bomber' Harris by Dudley Saward pub CassellISBN 0 907675 33 6. Chapter 23 is the relevant one)

West Coast 27th Apr 2004 16:48

Bomber Harris made Curtis LeMay look like a tree hugging pacifist. I have not read the book you cite. If however its a sympathetic bio of Harris I would be reticent to use it as anything but a Sunday afternoon read.

johnfairr 27th Apr 2004 19:47

WC - quite apt in the circumstances..
 
Was this the Bomber Command offensive that had been going on for a number of years, with consequent loss to both attackers and defenders, that included, over a four year period, attacks on cities in the German occupied parts of Europe?

That one of those was Dresden is not disputed, but I refer you to the post prior to your own.

The biography of ACM Sir Arthur Harris quoted is one of a number of books about the man, warts and all. He, single-handedly, grasped what modern warfare was all about in those days, ie no cigar for coming second! It must have been a very pleasant feeling in the 40s in the US to know that there was not an invasion force sidling up to invading New York because they couldn't get past a lump of land just off the coast of mainland Europe.

This post was not meant to be an anti-US comment, more of the idea that we did what was required to bring to a swift conclusion the nasty business in Germany.

:ok: :ok:

Archimedes 27th Apr 2004 19:53

WTGR, WC, I'm not sure that LeMay was 'softer' than Harris.

His record at XXI Bomber Command suggests that both men were cut from the same cloth when it came to the 'bomb the hell out of the opposition, with the aim of winning the war as quickly as possible' stakes.

johnfairr 27th Apr 2004 20:29

Mr Moderator(s) - on second thoughts....
 
Being a sad sort of chap, I've just re-read my post above. Whilst it was posted as an extra thought to the previous items, it could be construed as somewhat nationalistic/racist. Please do not take it as such.

I do get fed up with people making judgements on things of which they have limited knowledge, ie West Coast.

Sorry, but I didn't want any relative of Bomber Command casualties feeling that they had been demeaned by a careless post.

:sad: :sad:

:ok:

Bletchley 27th Apr 2004 20:31

WC
 
I am very saddened that you take such a view of Sir Arthur Harris.

It is very regrettable that immediately after WW2 was ended, that the political class did everything possible to distance themselves from the RAF.

This was compounded by the Official history which is so inaccurate and misleading as to be practically worthless. Indeed Arthur Harris refused pointblank to have anything to do with it when it was sent to him for review and they declined to modify inaccuracies.

Although not of the WW2 generation I have enormous respect and admiration for the people who gave their lives so that some people would enjoy the luxury of freedom of speech in a free society.

That people for their own particular reasons have sought to rewrite history against modern day 'standards' is a grave disservice.

The slandering of Arthur Harris that has continued apace since the end of WW2 is appalling. Even to the extent that a particularly well educated colleague of mine trotted out the usual rubbish. When challenged he hadn't studied anything or researched. Just what he learnt at school. Probably from some liberal type with a large chip or a particular political agenda.

Please do not think that I am referrring personally to you, but what I find obnoxious are the people who use this hard won freedom to write and preach inaccurate facts and use their own prejudices to slander those who cannot defend themselves.

The public perception of Arthur Harris as a vicious cold blooded killer is manifestly unfair.

I have studied and read books from all angles and perspectives on him and on Bomber Command's record. I am sure that you are perceptive enough to identify my position on the matter.

Sorry about the long rant folks but as you will see it is a subject very close to me.


JonhFairr

Your message was posted whilst I was writing.

Absolutely no need to apologise. I can see nothing wrong in your post.

I don't consider that anything on here so far has been racist or disrespectful.

johnfairr 27th Apr 2004 20:42

Bletchley
 
Third post in half an hour....

Thank you for putting a very well reasoned and accurate post. The point about you and I, I assume, not being of the same vintage as the combatants, is also well made.

It is vital that we do defend the courage and selflessness of our forefathers in the RAF, as well as the myriad other forces in WWII.

Rant off, but my old man would be spinning in the crematorium if I let this one go, even though he was in Fighter Command.

;)

vintage ATCO 27th Apr 2004 21:00

Bletchley
 
Commendable. Thank you for writing that.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.