Quotulatiousness

March 29, 2019

Canada and the Battle of the Atlantic, part 3 by Alex Funk

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Editor’s Note: This series was originally published by Alex Funk on the TimeGhostArmy forums (original URL – https://community.timeghost.tv/t/canada-and-the-battle-of-the-atlantic-part-1-edited/1433).

Sources:

  • The Far Distant Ships, Joseph Schull, ISBN 10 0773721606 (An official operational account published in 1950, somewhat sensationalist)
    [Schull’s book was published in part because the funding for the official history team had been cut and they did not feel that the RCN’s contribution to the Battle of the Atlantic should have no official recognition. It is very much an artifact of its era, and needs to be read that way. A more balanced (and weighty) history didn’t appear until the publication of No Higher Purpose and A Blue Water Navy in 2002, parts 1 and 2 of the Official Operational History of the RCN in WW2, covering 1939-1943 and 1943-1945, respectively.]
  • North Atlantic Run: the Royal Canadian Navy and the battle for the convoys, Marc Milner, ISBN 10 0802025447 (Written in an attempt to give a more strategic view of Canada’s contribution than Schull’s work, published 1985)
  • Reader’s Digest: The Canadians At War: Volumes 1 & 2 ISBN 10 0888501617 (A compilation of articles ranging from personal stories to overviews of Canadian involvement in a particular campaign. Contains excerpts from a number of more obscure Canadian books written after the war, published 1969)
  • All photos used exist in the Public Domain and are from the National Archives of Canada, unless otherwise noted in the caption.

I have inserted occasional comments in [square brackets] and links to other sources that do not appear in the original posts. A few minor edits have also been made for clarity.

Part 3 — The professionals and the amateurs

Marc Milner picks up the story in North Atlantic Run:

While the operational side of the navy chafed at the bit, the shore side got on with the daunting work of expansion. The first task was to provide both personnel and ships for the system of defended ports. Acquisition of the ships was a manageable problem, though the results were far from satisfactory. By the end of 1939 the RCN had managed to beg, borrow, or buy over sixty auxiliary vessels of all shapes and sizes, enough to fill out the minesweeping, anti-submarine, and harbour duties of the defended ports. Many of the ships were unreliable or unsuitable for their assigned roles and therefore badly needed replacement. In fact, few were worthy of long-term service in any but the most menial tasks.

The bulk of the auxiliary vessels taken into the RCN came from other government departments. Manning them posed no problem because most of the ships’ crewmen transferred to naval service, enlisting in the RCN Reserves, Special Service, which respected their peculiar skills (for example, ice clearance). Retired officers of the Royal Navy resident in Canada, of whom about forty were designated for duty with the RCN, also helped fill the gap in manpower.

[Editor’s Note: In general, the regular RCN consisted of professional officers and ratings who planned to continue in the navy after the war. The RCNR were professional seamen in civilian life who would return to their profession at the end of hostilities. RCNR men were highly prized in the navy for their sea-going skills. The RCNR Special Service was (I believe) just a designation for RCNR officers and ratings who had specialized skills, like icebreaking experience, over and above ordinary merchant navy experience. The RCNVR were “hostilities-only” volunteers, with a core of longer-term reservists who had some limited experience before the war. RCNR and RCNVR officers had slightly different rank insignia than RCN officers, as summarized by the Canadian Military Police Virtual Museum:]

Regular Officers in the RCN wore gold stripes on their epaulettes or on the cuffs. The uppermost stripe incorporated the “Executive Curl”. This was a holdover from the early days of the Royal Navy when officers responsible for ship handling and command were separate from other officers such as Surgeons and Engineers. Engineers were granted the curl in 1915 and by 1919 the rest of the branches had been granted it.

Officers of the Royal Canadian Navy Volunteer Reserve (RCNVR) wore similar rank insignia to those of the Regular Navy, however the stripes were of a different pattern, being a zig zag design. This of course lead to the RCNVR being nicknamed the “Wavy Navy”. [The epaulette on the left is of an RCN Lieutenant Commander. The one on the right] is that of an RCNVR Lieutenant Commander. Officers of the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve (RCNR) [in the middle] wore another special pattern of rank stripes. In this case, the curl resembled a Star of David. An RCNR Lieutenant’s rank is illustrated. These patterns of special insignia were discontinued in the mid 1950’s, after which Regular and Reserve Officers wore identical rank insignia.

Marc Milner continues:

With the dispatch of the second — and final — draft of volunteer reservists (RCNVR) to the coast on 10 September, the RCN exhausted its cadre of readily available and “trained” personnel. The first plan for further mobilization was tabled on 17 September and called for an active strength of 5,472 all ranks by the end of March 1940, rising to seven thousand by the same date in 1941. As with other personnel projections in the early months of the war, this first one was based on the needs of home defence and the availability of ships. The RCN proved rather successful at cobbling together its auxiliary fleet, and the projections for March 1940 were surpassed much earlier. Yet, despite this early trend towards rapid growth, expansion in 1939 and 1940 was choked by shortages of every conceivable type. Sailors went without proper naval uniforms because no one foresaw, at the end of 1939, that the navy’s strength would rise to ten thousand by September 1940. Further, until 1943 the “key to expansion” as the Naval Staff liked to call it, was the shortage of training staff, a shortfall which the RN unwilling to help alleviate.

What the navy badly wanted were skilled men: men whom they were losing in large numbers to the other two services, particularly the air force. For the RCN did not even have the necessary housing to take in the throngs of eager and qualified volunteers waiting to join up. The problem occasioned debate at the first Naval Staff meeting in January of 1940. The urgent need for temporary accommodation was stressed, “in order that recruiting programme could be proceeded with before the new rapidly expanding RCAF seized all the best — and particularly most skilled, men”. The RCN also found that it had to lower the minimum age of entry from twenty-one to nineteen in order to counter the ravages of the air force on available manpower.

RCN rating operating the training mechanism of a 4.7-inch gun, Royal Canadian Navy Gunnery School, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 1940.
Canada. Dept. of National Defence / Library and Archives Canada / PA-104416

Despite the struggle over manpower and the navy’s reluctance to expand too quickly, the growth of the navy soon acquired a snowball effect which it seemed incapable — or perhaps undesirous — of firmly controlling. At the end of 1939 the Naval Staff anticipated a completed wartime strength (after three years) of 1,500 officers and 15,000 ratings. This figure was reached and passed in half the time. But the really hectic pace of expansion did not begin until after the fall of France and Norway. Up to that point the RCN had planned a very deliberate and selective growth, as Vice-Admiral Nelles, Chief of the Naval Staff (CNS), explained to the naval minister in January 1940.

Macdonald had broached the subject of giving preferences in RCNVR commissions to members of prominent yacht clubs. In an illuminating statement Nelles made it clear to the minister what role “Sunday Sailors” would play in Canada’s war at sea. “The RCN is in need of many men before this war is over,” Nelles wrote, “but the [types] of ships suitable to Canadian service conditions [Tribal-class destroyers or small inshore-patrol ships] are more suited to the employment of professional seamen than of amateur small boat yachtsmen.” The CNS’s comment was no idle remark on an easily dismissed subject. Earlier in the same day Nelles had received a memorandum from his director of Naval Personnel, who, no doubt responding to the minister’s inquiry, refused to countenance the mythical value of “Sunday Sailors”. Yachting, the DNP reported to his chief, had about as much to do with modern naval skills as flying a kite had to do with modern air operations. None the less, in order to find employment for these eager warriors, Nelles informed Macdonald that he was prepared to release fifty young yachtsmen to the Royal Navy “to serve in the more interesting appointments overseas and represent Canada at the scene of active operations”. His words suggest clearly what Nelles and the navy felt of keeping the fleet in home waters. In terms of manpower this option offered an alternative to simply turning recruits away, and they would not be lost to either Canada or the war effort. The loan scheme was approved, and it was initially decided to send all RCNVR recruits in excess of 4,500 to serve in the RN. Though this plan was later drastically altered, the incident illustrates the selective nature of the navy’s expansion before the fall of Western Europe, the desire to participate in the “active” theatre, and the problems inherent in trying to expand from too small a base.

Back at sea, the phony war was one of drudgery for the RCN, aside from its participation in the capture of the SS Hannover in the Caribbean. Shuttling convoys back and forth between the defended ports of Canada to meeting points offshore, the odd troop transport across the ocean, coastal convoys between ports. All essential, but not the work the navy had been hoping for.

HMS Dunedin and HMCS Assiniboine intercepted the blockade runner SS Hannover in early March, 1940. Later, this vessel was converted into an escort aircraft carrier, HMS Audacity.
Canada. Dept. of National Defence / Library and Archives Canada / PA-104055

They got their wish soon enough. The phony war ended quite spectacularly in the spring of 1940, and a request was sent from London to Ottawa for “all available destroyers”, even as the BEF fought to disengage itself and form a secure position from which to evacuate. The cabinet eventually more or less agreed, even thought it meant virtually stripping Canada herself of naval defenses.

The fall of France left some senior Canadian politicians, Mackenzie King among them, more concerned than ever for the vulnerability of Canada’s vast coastline. However, both the Canadian Chiefs of Staff and the British, including Prime Minister Churchill (by whose opinion Mackenzie King set great store), were able to convince the Canadian prime minister that Canada’s first line of defence was the English Channel.

The navy mustered four destroyers for travel to Europe. Joseph Schull writes of their departure and first subsequent action in Far Distant Ships:

In Halifax, on the afternoon of the 24th [of May], the Canadian destroyers Restigouche, Skeena and St. Laurent were preparing to go to sea on an unscheduled voyage. Leaves had been cancelled, libertymen summoned back to their ships and all prospect of an Empire Day celebration ruined with truly naval efficiency. The mood on board St. Laurent was particularly black, as she had been recalled from one convoy and was under orders for sea again before a man could step ashore. The mess deck “buzz”, discredited and discouraged by nine months of unvarying monotony, gave promise only of another local convoy run. If there was any bright feature of the day it must have been the mild spring weather which had enabled the men to relieve their crowded mess decks by sending heavy clothes and miscellaneous cold weather gear ashore.

With early evening came the familiar “cable party fall in” and the equally familiar call for sea dutymen to muster. The destroyers nosed their way out of the harbour while men on watch speculated without much curiosity over the fact that there appeared to be no convoy in evidence.

The explanation came several hours later. There was to be no convoy this time and no turning back to Halifax after twenty-four hours. The lambie coats left in Halifax would not be seen by their owners for a considerable time. An urgent cable from the United Kingdom had arrived at Ottawa the day before. Invasion was an imminent possibility and every ship which Canada could send was required in British waters.

Restigouche, Skeena and St. Laurent were on their way. Assiniboine and Ottawa were in refit in Halifax and would not be operational until about the middle of June. Saguenay could not make the crossing as she was also badly in need of refit. Fraser, en route to Bermuda, had been assigned to the Jamaica Force of the Royal Navy in March to conduct Caribbean patrols. En route to Bermuda, had been ordered to continue her voyage, refuel at Bermuda and proceed directly to the United Kingdom.

The first wartime passage of the three destroyers was uneventful but scarcely monotonous. By day and by night the men went through intensive air raid and anti-submarine exercises. The commanding officer of Restigouche saw the efficiency of his ship increase rapidly during the voyage and suggested that the improvement “was no doubt accelerated by the realization of the ship’s company that we were rapidly approaching an extremely active war zone.”

It may well have been so. While still a day’s steaming from the United Kingdom the ships were ordered to a position of Ushant on an abortive submarine hunt; and when they finally secured at Plymouth on June 1 the evacuation of Dunkirk was at its height. The First Lord of the Admiralty found time for cordial words to the newcomers:

    The presence of units of the Royal Canadian Navy in our midst inspires us all to a still harder effort. Confident both of your skill and of your valour we wish you good luck in the fierce and exacting toil which lies before you.

March 28, 2019

Canada and the Battle of the Atlantic, part 2 by Alex Funk

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Editor’s Note: This series was originally published by Alex Funk on the TimeGhostArmy forums (original URL – https://community.timeghost.tv/t/canada-and-the-battle-of-the-atlantic-part-1-edited/1433).

Sources:

  • The Far Distant Ships, Joseph Schull, ISBN 10 0773721606 (An official operational account published in 1950, somewhat sensationalist)
    [Schull’s book was published in part because the funding for the official history team had been cut and they did not feel that the RCN’s contribution to the Battle of the Atlantic should have no official recognition. It is very much an artifact of its era, and needs to be read that way. A more balanced (and weighty) history didn’t appear until the publication of No Higher Purpose and A Blue Water Navy in 2002, parts 1 and 2 of the Official Operational History of the RCN in WW2, covering 1939-1943 and 1943-1945, respectively.]
  • North Atlantic Run: the Royal Canadian Navy and the battle for the convoys, Marc Milner, ISBN 10 0802025447 (Written in an attempt to give a more strategic view of Canada’s contribution than Schull’s work, published 1985)
  • Reader’s Digest: The Canadians At War: Volumes 1 & 2 ISBN 10 0888501617 (A compilation of articles ranging from personal stories to overviews of Canadian involvement in a particular campaign. Contains excerpts from a number of more obscure Canadian books written after the war, published 1969)
  • All photos used exist in the Public Domain and are from the National Archives of Canada, unless otherwise noted in the caption.

I have inserted occasional comments in [square brackets] and links to other sources that do not appear in the original posts. A few minor edits have also been made for clarity.

Part 2 — The Admiralty takes control

On August 26, just a few days before the official outbreak of war, a single word Admiralty telegram was received in Ottawa from London: FUNNEL. With that message all British merchant vessels passed under Admiralty control. The same transfer took place in Canada on the same day. No Canadian-registered ship, no merchant ship in any Canadian port could sail without the authority of the Royal Canadian Navy. Naval control officers faced an enormous task. All British merchant vessels in North American waters would have to be gathered in from the wide face of the sea, assembled, bunkered, stored, provided with codes and orders. Vessels of every type would have to be formed into orderly fleets, sailed at precise times and by specified routes with the precision of a crack railway, all in absolute secrecy. Halifax stirred once again with the grim vitality of a key port in a world at war. Ships put in, their schedules interrupted, their captains angry, demanding explanations they didn’t get. Painting parties descended to defile clean white ships with the drab gray of military vessels. Old naval guns were mounted on merchantmen and a few ships were issued machine guns.

[Editor’s Note: Unlike the Royal Navy’s comparatively vast administrative resources for organizing convoys, the RCN had to draw heavily upon a small number of retired RN and RCN officers living in Canada and the United States to gather enough officials to establish convoy control in Canadian ports (the same pool would also be used to recruit convoy commodores). It’s difficult for modern readers, used to networked computers with online databases, to realize just how much literal paperwork had to be created and maintained from scratch to even begin organizing the convoy system from North America to the UK: that it was done at all is amazing. That it was done about as well as could be hoped is incredible.]


Ratings mustered along the starboard side of HMCS Assiniboine at sea, ca. September 1940.
Canada. Dept. of National Defence / Library and Archives Canada / PA-104105

On August 31st HMCS Fraser and St. Laurent were re-deployed to the east coast from the west coast.

On September 16th, six days after Canada declared war, the destroyers St. Laurent and Saguenay moved out through the Halifax approaches. Following behind were the 18 merchant ships of convoy HX-1, Halifax to the UK. Awaiting them offshore were the Royal Navy cruisers HMS Berwick and HMS York. The crossing was uneventful, but these 18 were the first of a grand total of 25,343 merchant vessels that would sail from North America under Canadian escort.

To briefly discuss the convoy system itself, it’s fairly simple: merchant vessels sail in organized groups rather than on their own and are provided some form of naval escort to protect them from hostile vessels. Even lightly guarded convoys are immensely preferable to ships sailing on their own, reducing the width of the target area and forcing any potential attacker to weigh the risk of counter-attack by the escorts. [Editor’s Note: It may seem odd to landlubbers like most of us, but even a large convoy is not much easier to find than a single ship in the wide ocean. Fewer discrete targets requires more search time by enemy submarines and surface raiders.] The speedier the convoy, the better, but the limited speed of many of the merchant ships necessitated a system of fast and slow convoys with different starting points in the Americas, and different codes for identification. The merchant vessels are described by Alan Easton, captain of the corvette HMCS Baddeck in 50 North: Canada’s Atlantic Battleground [Easton’s book is factual in most ways except for the dialogue and some of the names being changed]:

We sailed to Sydney, Nova Scotia. There we spent the night, topped up with fuel and stood out of the harbour early the next morning, where we were to await the convoy we had been instructed to escort. Many ships were lying at anchor that morning in the fine, land-locked harbour, ships of numerous different Allied and neutral nations, for this was the assembly port for the eastbound slow Atlantic convoys in those days. As we moved back and forth off the harbour mouth, I fell to examining the ships as they came out, one behind the other at intervals of three or four minutes, led by the Commodore’s ship. It was always intensely interesting to me to gaze at the ships. The more weatherbeaten and decrepit the ship, the more attractive she was to me; she had a story to tell and I could sometimes discern a part of it by just looking. The newest might have been ten years old, the oldest perhaps forty or fifty. Some were built of iron — the inch-thick plating of the 1880s, before the days of steel. They were large and small, from about nine hundred tons to nine thousand. You could tell almost at a glance their nationality, or the country in which they were built, by the shape of their hulls and the construction of their upperworks. But as they came out they flew their ensigns, soon to be hauled down, so that you could not mistake their identity. They were all heavily laden, few that were not down to their Plimsoll marks and some with little freeboard, perhaps four feet between the water and the well deck.

The first ship moved slowly, marking time as it were, to allow the others to take their stations, so that the whole could form into three columns. Soon after noon, the Commodore seemed to be satisfied that all were in their correct places for he ran up a flag hoist indicating that the speed of the convoy was to be seven knots. When every ship had signified that she understood his signal, the Commodore hauled his flags down and the engines of this heterogeneous collection of vessels simultaneously moved faster, although to the onlooker there was no perceptible change in speed.

The fast/slow system was implemented fairly early on, and by August 1940 slow convoys were more often being formed in Sydney, Nova Scotia, the faster convoys in Halifax. By 1941, fast convoys left every six days and made the crossing in around 13 to 14 days. Slow convoys left every six days as well, but took 16 to 17 days to cross. The size of the convoys varied. The largest convoy to ever make the crossing was HXS-300 consisting of 167 ships, but a good benchmark was 40 or so merchant vessels. These ships are positioned in a grid with nine columns, 920 metres apart, and in each column five ships, 550 metres apart. Ships carrying dangerous cargoes, such as gas, fuel, or explosives are placed in the centre, the position that affords the most protection against enemy torpedoes. The convoy commodore, in most cases a retired naval officer, is on board one of the merchant ships to take defensive measures as required and ensure coordination with the escort.

[Editor’s Note: An image from Swansea Docks showing the schematic arrangement of slow convoy ONS-154 returning to Halifax later in the war:]

Convoy ONS-154 in December, 1942. The numbers indicate the column and row designations for each merchant ship in the convoy.
Image by Ron Tovey, Swansea Docks – click the image to visit his site.

The following system of codes was used for identification of trans-Atlantic convoys:

    HX: Fast convoys (9 knots or over) sailing from Halifax (or later New York)
    SC: Slow convoys (under 9 knots) sailing from Sydney, Halifax, or New York
    ON: westbound convoys sailing from Great Britain to North America
    ONS: slow westbound convoys sailing from Great Britain to North America

The following system of call letters was used for identification of coastal convoys:

    BX: Boston to Halifax
    XB: Halifax to Boston
    SQ: Sydney to Quebec City (via the St. Lawrence River)
    QS: Quebec to Sydney

Convoy forming in Bedford Basin, 1 April, 1942
Canada. Dept. of National Defence / Library and Archives Canada / PA-112993

There was much debate among Canadian politicians as to the role Canada would play in the war in general. In the first few weeks, much debate was had as to which services would receive what money, and how they would be integrated into the allied war effort. Prime Minister Mackenzie King had somewhat sold the war to the nation as being different from the last war [Editor’s Note: where Canada provided an over-strength army corps for the Western Front, suffering nearly 60,000 combat deaths, slightly more than the US combat losses in that war]. Finance Minister J. L. Ralston publicly envisaged a program that would be “practical rather than spectacular”. The Prime Minister spoke of protecting Canada by sending food and raw materials to Britain and building a navy and air force and munitions industry, even the first musings of what would become the BCATP [British Commonwealth Air Training Plan] (though these early plans paled in comparison to what it would eventually become.) Canada would contribute vast amounts of resources to the allied cause, but there was not going to be a need for a large land army to fight and die in Europe. The army was just as short of equipment as the navy was and the air force consisted of 3100 men and 270 mostly obsolete aircraft, with just 19 modern Hurricanes. The old issue of conscription that had led to riots in Montreal in 1917 immediately reappeared, and an important provincial election in Quebec had been called within two weeks of the declaration of war in almost direct response to it. [Editor’s Note: The risk of another conscription crisis haunted the Canadian government from the very start of the war: English Canada was heavily in favour, but Quebec was just as opposed, and the ruling Liberal Party couldn’t risk losing their support in Quebec.] What soldiers Canada did have departed Halifax as part of convoy TC-1 in early December, and by the end of the month Canada had 15,000 men in England (the 1st Canadian Infantry Division).

It is the opinion of my sources that the idea of a limited war were extremely favorable to the navy and air force in the early months. Canadian naval vessels and aircraft fighting alongside the United Kingdom was seen as an appropriate contribution, whilst at the same time, seen as far less costly in terms of lives than a large expeditionary army, which Mackenzie King was steadfastly opposed to (fear of conscription crisis was ever present). Canada’s merchant fleet was at Britain’s disposal without question, combined with the vast natural resources she could provide, quite nicely rounded out the “limited war” concept. Industrial military capacity was small, almost non-existent, and building ships, aircraft and munitions would help it grow.

Focusing specifically on the navy itself, what few ships it had were immediately deployed on patrols and put to work escorting coastal convoys within coastal waters, and trans-Atlantic convoys to a handover point mid-voyage. The reserves were activated and sent to the coasts. In November all the Canadian destroyers were placed under the command of the Royal Navy’s North America and West Indies station (somewhat to the Government’s dismay, although not the navy’s: most RCN officers had close peacetime ties to the British squadron and felt it was the natural choice. They had actually requested this at the start of the war and had been refused by the government, who wanted the RCN’s ships kept close to home.) This placement also had the benefit of assuring the RCN that they would participate in the types of operations they had trained for; fleet work, or sweeps for surface raiders. October 1939 saw the purchase of a another destroyer, re-named HMCS Assiniboine in Canadian service. These seven River-class destroyers would form the backbone of the navy well into 1943. A modest attempt had been made in 1938 to give Canadian yards some experience building warships with a minesweeper program. Despite the dispersal of the contracts to both Atlantic and Pacific yards for four Fundy-class minesweepers, the Canadian shipbuilding industry was unprepared for the demands wartime was to make of it.

Undated photograph of RCN minesweeper HMCS Fundy (J88).
Canadian Navy Heritage website. Image Negative Number NP-1404 via Wikimedia Commons.

In North Atlantic Run, Marc Milner discusses the Ottawa front of the RCN’s early wartime struggles:

In the government the navy actually had a friend, as it discovered when planners began to submit estimates for expansion. As the late Admiral L.W. Murray, RCN (in September 1939, the Director of Operations and Training) recalled, the navy was given a carte blanche to plan its growth over the succeeding four or five years. When in February 1940 Murray and the deputy minister presented the first wartime naval estimates before the Finance Committee of the cabinet, they passed despite a “fine-tooth comb” inspection. The fact was that the navy’s expansion and its attendant shipbuilding programs suited the government’s intention to profit from what was seen as a limited European war. The prime minister, W.L. Mackenzie King, was steadfastly opposed to fielding yet another large army in Europe, which might lead to high casualties and a call for conscription. Rather, his government sought to channel Canada’s war effort into the sinews of war and into much less personnel-intensive services such as the air force and the navy. Both of these services also offered excellent opportunities for the development of Canadian industry.

The link between industrial and naval expansion also went deeper than simply the building of ships. In July 1940, the expansion of the navy was given impetus by the appointment of a separate minister of Defence for the Naval Service. King chose Angus L. Macdonald, former premier of Nova Scotia. Although once rather uncharitably described as “lightweight”, Macdonald was extremely popular in his home province and a strong voice for Nova Scotia in Ottawa. Macdonald and two other prominent Nova Scotians, Colonel J.L. Ralston, the Minister of Defence, and J.L. Ilsley, the Minister of National Revenue, formed the right wing of King’s cabinet — what J.W. Dafoe called the “Tory Imperialists”. All supported a full war effort, a position that led in 1944 to a bitter break between King and the two defence ministers over the issue of conscription. But apart from Macdonald’s desire to see Canada fully represented at the front, he shared many of King’s beliefs, including the notion that the preservation of the free world depended upon the retention of power in Canada by the Liberal Party.

Macdonald also believed that Canada could and should progress industrially from the war. Long a crusader for the re-industrialization of Nova Scotia, he saw an opportunity to funnel some of government investment into his own province. There was, moreover, a direct link between industrial growth and a large navy. “What use could it be to increase our agricultural production … or to put forth the magnificent industrial effort that we have,” Macdonald asked in 1945, “unless this food and these munitions could be got safely across the sea?” Although in the end he failed to restore to Nova Scotia its past lustre, this was precisely the rationale used to justify building destroyers in Halifax during the war. In the most fundamental sense, then, the aspirations of the [full-time, professional] navy and the government coincided.

March 27, 2019

Canada and the Battle of the Atlantic, part 1 by Alex Funk

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military, WW1, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Editor’s Note: This series was originally published by Alex Funk on the TimeGhostArmy forums (original URL – https://community.timeghost.tv/t/canada-and-the-battle-of-the-atlantic-part-1-edited/1433).

Sources:

  • The Far Distant Ships, Joseph Schull, ISBN 10 0773721606 (An official operational account published in 1950, somewhat sensationalist) [Schull’s book was published in part because the funding for the official history team had been cut and they did not feel that the RCN’s contribution to the Battle of the Atlantic should have no official recognition. It is very much an artifact of its era, and needs to be read that way. A more balanced (and weighty) history didn’t appear until the publication of No Higher Purpose and A Blue Water Navy in 2002, parts 1 and 2 of the Official Operational History of the RCN in WW2, covering 1939-1943 and 1943-1945 respectively.]
  • North Atlantic Run: the Royal Canadian Navy and the battle for the convoys, Marc Milner, ISBN 10 0802025447 (Written in an attempt to give a more strategic view of Canada’s contribution than Schull’s work, published 1985)
  • Reader’s Digest: The Canadians At War: Volumes 1 & 2 ISBN 10 0888501617 (A compilation of articles ranging from personal stories to overviews of Canadian involvement in a particular campaign. Contains excerpts from a number of more obscure Canadian books written after the war, published 1969)
  • All photos used exist in the Public Domain and are from the National Archives of Canada, unless otherwise noted in the caption.

I have inserted occasional comments in [square brackets] and links to other sources that do not appear in the original posts. A few minor edits have also been made for clarity.

Canada and the Battle of the Atlantic, part 1

Canada’s navy before WW2

This is my modest attempt to illustrate Canada’s contribution to the Battle of the Atlantic and the war at sea in general. In my honest opinion it was the most important thing we did as a nation aside from the BCATP (British Commonwealth Air Training Plan).

The Naval Service of Canada/Royal Canadian Navy before World War 2

The Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) was founded in 1910 under the Naval Service Bill re-introduced by Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier (its first attempt at approval under George Foster in 1909 had failed), creating the Naval Service of Canada [Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Royal_Canadian_Navy]. A distinct naval force for the Dominion of Canada to be maintained and manned by Canadians, which could be placed under British control if needs be. Two ex-Royal Navy vessels were obtained for the purposes of training [cruisers HMCS Niobe and HMCS Rainbow].

[There actually was an even earlier attempt to create a Canadian navy, as related by Joseph Schull:]

There had been one hint, in 1880, of an awareness of naval needs. A dispatch from the Governor General to the Colonial Secretary had suggested that Canada “would not be averse to instituting a ship for training purposes if the Imperial Government would provide the ship.” To the restrained enthusiasm of this proposal the Admiralty had responded with appropriate generosity. Charybdis, an ancient steam corvette, was at the time limping homeward from the China Station. The Canadian Government could have her.

When Charybdis arrived in the United Kingdom it was discovered that her boilers were worn out. Canada paid for their replacement. The ship was then coaxed and coddled across the Atlantic by a redoubtable Captain Scott, R.N., retired. Upon arrival in Saint John, Charybdis broke loose from her moorings in a gale and damaged much of the shipping in harbour. She had hardly been secured, and the clamour of aggrieved shipowners had not died down, when two Saint John citizens, attempting to come on board, fell through the rotting wood of her gangplank and were drowned. It was sufficient naval experience for the Canadian Government of that time. The wreck was towed from Saint John and turned over to the unwelcoming authorities of the Royal Navy. Charybdis became a gruesome memory, a political Flying Dutchman which heaved over the horizon when any naval proposal was advanced during the next thirty years.

The election of a new government (which had opposed the original bill) in 1911 left the new service in limbo. [Also in 1911, the Naval Service was given permission by King George V to rename itself the Royal Canadian Navy.] Nevertheless, between the two ex-Royal Navy vessels, two submarines purchased from the US [by the provincial government of British Columbia(!)], and two government patrol vessels pressed into military service the RCN spent the early years of World War 1 patrolling the east and west coasts of North America and sometimes as far south as Panama to deter the German naval threat. As that real or perceived threat slowly evaporated, the Canadian Navy’s patrols became less frequent.

HMCS Rainbow at North Vancouver, 1910.

Photo from the City of Vancouver Library, the collection of Matthews, James Skitt, Major (1878-1970) via Wikimedia Commons.

The First World War saw the modest beginnings of the Canadian Navy, although it should be pointed out that many more Canadians chose to serve in the Royal Navy than the Canadian one, some as officers.

The inter-war years saw very little growth for the RCN. The post-war drawdown naturally occurred, and by 1922 the service had only 366 men and had paid off their only remaining cruiser. The Naval Volunteer Reserve was firmly established in Canadian cities across the country (and numbered around 1,000 men) but the Navy itself only kept two destroyers donated by the Royal Navy in service [HMCS Patriot and HMCS Patrician], until these were replaced by two more destroyers in the late 1920s (once again, ex-RN [ships renamed as HMCS Champlain and HMCS Vancouver]). 1931 saw a major facelift with the first ships built specifically for the RCN: HMCS Skeena and HMCS Saguenay.

The early 1930s saw the Navy along with the other Canadian service branches almost completely starved of funding, although by the late 30s, escalating world tension convinced the Canadian government to slowly begin rebuilding. Two more destroyers were purchased from the Royal Navy in 1937 (HMCS Fraser and HMCS St Laurent) and then two more in 1938 (HMCS Ottawa and HMCS Restigouche).

Marc Milner outlines the RCN’s original expansion plans in North Atlantic Run:

In January 1939 the government, reacting to the Munich crisis, announced its intentions to proceed with building a fleet capable defending Canada’s two coasts. The expansion plan, when completed, would give the RCN a strength of eighteen modern destroyers, sixteen minesweepers, and eight anti-submarine vessels, the numbers split evenly between Pacific and Atlantic commands, and a flotilla of eight motor torpedo boats for the east coast. Not surprisingly, little came of this plan before war broke out. In fact, by May the government had sharply cut the navy’s estimates. The 1939 building program (four anti-submarine vessels and two motor torpedo boats) was scrapped, and there was just enough money left to acquire the necessary plans. It is, however, significant that the RCN’s expansion plans were laid down in the last days of peace. Later developments would thrust a new form of expansion on the RCN, one more easily attainable in wartime than a fleet of destroyers, yet one which did not conform to the long-term goals of the professional navy.

Thus, by the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, the RCN consisted of six River-class destroyers, five minesweepers, and two small training vessels.

HMCS Vancouver (F6A) anchored off San Diego, California (USA), on 5 March 1929.
Official U.S. Navy photo 80-G-416377 from the U.S. Navy Naval History and Heritage Command, via Wikimedia Commons.

The January 1939 expansion plan belied the fact that the RCN was a traditional, gun-oriented navy. The experiences of the First World War and technological developments since had confirmed the sanctity of the gun as the pre-eminent naval weapon. Admittedly, the threat from Germany’s U-boats in 1917 had been grave. But her indiscriminate use of the submarine had brought the United States into the conflict on the Allied side and (or so it seemed) therefore cost Germany the war. It was felt that in future no nation would risk the sanction of a world coalition by resorting to “piracy” on the high seas. But even if Germany, or any other nation, turned once again to unrestricted submarine warfare on merchant shipping, the means of defeating the threat was already in service with Commonwealth navies — convoy and ASDIC.

During the First World War, before the adoption of the convoy system, German U-Boats preferred to use their deck guns to destroy lone merchant vessels, using their precious torpedoes sparingly. With the introduction of the convoy system, the days of easy targets vanished and the proximity of naval escort forced the U-Boat to either risk fighting an unequal surface battle against more heavily gunned escorts or to operate submerged. Convoys made the oceanic routes much safer, but this success was not unmixed. Cargo ships continued to sail independently and unescorted to and from convoy assembly ports in British coastal waters, and the U-boats resorted to submerged attack tactics inshore. Although Britain was never again threatened with defeat by starvation, losses to merchant shipping remained high for the rest of the war because of the virtual immunity of a submerged submarine to any threat of effective counter-attack by escort ships.

With the U-Boats relegated to nuisance status through the use of convoys, their final telling defeat simply awaited the perfection of a reliable underwater-detection device. The Allied Submarine Detection Investigation Committee was established in 1918 to resolve this problem, but it was not until the early twenties that an effective underwater sound locating and ranging set (now called sonar) was in use. ASDIC, as the British called the device, was to spell the doom of the submarine. As late as 1936 the First Sea Lord [the professional head of the Royal Navy], Admiral A.E.M. Chatfield, claimed that the RN’s anti-submarine measures were 80% effective. With location no longer a problem, it was believed that destruction of a submarine by a few well-placed depth charges would follow with equal certainty.

If anything, Canadian planners, like those elsewhere, were absorbed by the unknown dangers of air attack on trade (particularly on convoys) and by the very real threat of powerful enemy surface raiders. Both of these also presented Canada with the only real threat of direct enemy action. The RCN was therefore charged with defence against surface and air attacks on Canada and on trade in adjacent waters — the two were really inseparable. The “forms and scales of attack to which Canada would be subject,” as anticipated in 1939, reflected the preoccupation with surface and air threats. Bombardment by a single battleship and/or one or two large cruisers, by armed merchant cruisers (AMCs), or even by heavily gunned submarines was felt likely. Attacks could also be expected in the form of MTBs launched from larger ships, mines, small assault parties, or aircraft carrying torpedoes, bombs, or gas. Indeed, it was thought that aircraft launched from remote points along the Canadian coast might penetrate as far inland as Toronto. Certainly, the major coastal centres were in danger of quick and unexpected raids.

The expansion plan of January 1939 was naturally intended to counter these threats. To make good its intentions, the navy hoped to acquire the most powerful destroyers then in service, the Tribal-class. The Tribal’s high speed and heavy armament (eight 4.7-inch guns and four torpedo tubes) made it a veritable “pocket” cruiser, and several acting in concert posed a credible threat to a lone battleship. Not surprisingly, the RCN would pursue its intention to acquire Tribals throughout the entirety of the war, eventually absorbing dockyard space, resources, and trained manpower which could have been better used to maintain the escort fleet.

[Editor’s Note: On the other hand, had they not pursued a Tribal-class building program, the RCN might well have suffered a similar or even worse drawdown after the war as it did in 1919-22.]

On the eve of the Second World War the submarine was therefore considered by the RN to be a manageable problem. The same held true in the RCN. In a pre-war analysis of the threats to trade and possible countermeasures, Commodore Nelles summarized Canadian reaction to the submarine:

    If international law is complied with, Submarine attack should not prove serious. If unrestricted warfare is again resorted to, the means of combating Submarines are considered to have so advanced that by employing a system of of convoy and utilizing Air Forces, losses of Submarines would be very heavy and might compel the enemy to give up this form of attack.

Nelles went on to point out that the RCN would provide anti-submarine equipment and mines “for prosecution of offensive measures against submarine attack.” His choice of words illustrates clearly the thinking of naval contemporaries on how best to deal with submarines — offensive action. The countermeasures outlined by the CNS indicated that some lessons had been drawn from the previous war, and in the long term the combination of convoy, air power, and aggressive anti-submarine warfare proved more than a match for the U-boats. Unfortunately, Britain and her allies lacked the necessary means for a very long time, and the resilience of modern submarines proved a surprise to virtually everyone.

Chief Petty Officer Lowther delivering a lecture about various types of ammunition, Royal Canadian Navy Gunnery School, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1940.
Credit: Canada. Dept. of National Defence / Library and Archives Canada / PA-104417

March 25, 2019

Battle of Ecnomus (256 BC) – Largest Naval Battle in History

Filed under: Africa, Europe, History, Military — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Invicta
Published on 12 Sep 2016

The Battle of Ecnomus in 256 BC is arguably the largest naval battle in history with 680 warships and an estimated 290,000 rowers and marines participating! This monumental clash was fought during the First Punic War between Rome and Carthage along the coast of Sicily.

Fleet Anatomy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PhRp…
Fleet Operation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=397-i…
Fleet Tactics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOc8m…

More Classical Antiquity Documentaries: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list…

Literary Sources:
Uniforms of the Roman World by Kevin Kiley
Republican Roman Warships by Osprey Publishing
The Fall of Carthage by Adrian Goldsworthy
Augustus by Anthony Everitt

Game Engine:
Total War: Rome II

Game Mods:
Devide et Impera
Realistic Ship Colors
Ave_Gigas.pak

From the comments:

Invicta
2 years ago
It has been a real pleasure to research and produce the documentary series on the Roman Navy. This video is a culmination of that exploration into the little-covered world of ancient naval combat which I hope has been equally enlightening and entertaining. It is also worth mentioning that the battle maps I created for this video individually show the 680 vessels from both sides. Though this was painstaking to do, it was worth it to convey the insane scale of this encounter at sea.

I’d also like to point out that I tried using new effects in this video. I will continue to try new styles and adapt my presentations in the future and greatly appreciate any and all feedback. Thank you all for your support and help thus far. Its a true joy to have an audience for this passion of mine : )

March 18, 2019

The Phoney War: Actually Not Phoney

Filed under: Britain, Europe, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Historigraph
Published on 16 Mar 2019

Join us in #WarThunder for free using this link and get a premium tank or aircraft and three days of premium time as a bonus: http://v2.xyz/WarThunderWithHistorigraph

If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph

March 13, 2019

German politician floats the idea of a Franco-German aircraft carrier

Filed under: France, Germany, Military — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Hmmm. What could they call it? The Charlemagne? The Louis XIV? The Napoleon? The Friedrich der Große? The Wilhelm II? The Maréchal Pétain? The possibilities are endless…

French aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle (R91) at sea, 2009.
US Navy photo via Wikimedia Commons.

France and Germany should band together and build a European aircraft carrier to boost the continent’s defense capabilities, according to Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, a confidante and possible successor to German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Kramp-Karrenbauer, who leads the Christian Democratic Union since Merkel stepped down from that job last fall, pitched the idea in a Sunday commentary in the Germany newspaper Die Welt. The article was meant as a response to French President Emmanuel Macron’s plea days earlier toward something of a European renaissance ahead of the European Parliament’s elections in May.

“Germany and France already are working on a future European combat aircraft, where other nations are invited to join,” Kramp-Karrenbauer wrote, referring to the Future Combat Air System, or FCAS. “As a next step, we could start the symbolic project of building an aircraft carrier to give shape to the role of the European Union as a global force for security and peace.”

On the one hand, the French navy (the Marine Nationale) does have current experience operating an aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, although a second carrier was cancelled due to budget constraints. The German navy, however, has been reported to be in dire straits both financially and operationally. I suspect it would take even longer than the time elapsed to negotiate, design, and build a carrier to get the German navy sufficiently well-staffed and trained to bear their part in the shared operations.

It has taken the Royal Navy several years of preparation — including much-needed allied assistance with crew members serving on US Navy carriers — to ensure that the latest British carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth could be properly manned for working-up toward a first deployment next year. Aircraft carriers are not just bigger ships: they’re a unique type of ship and you don’t just build one (setting aside the highly specialized design requirements and finding a shipyard big enough) and then crew it with matelots from your existing fleet of frigates, corvettes, and patrol boats. I don’t think it’s expected that the Royal Navy will be able to operate both Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales simultaneously except for brief operational surges or full-scale war.

Of course, I’m far from the only doubter about this idea:

“The ‘European aircraft carrier’ is such a ridiculous and meaningless proposal (don’t get me wrong, I can imagine some French politicians having the same ‘idea’) that it does not even deserve a rebuke,” Bruno Tertrais, deputy director at the Paris-based Fondation pour la Recherce Strategique, wrote in an email to Defense News.

Ulrike Franke, a London-based defense analyst with the European Council on Foreign Relations, struck a similar chord in a Monday post on Twitter: “I am all for strengthening European capabilities, yes please. … But this appears … not particularly well thought through…?”

And Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador in Washington and doyen of the Munich Security Conference, suggested Germany wouldn’t really know what to do with such a ship.

“An aircraft carrier is an instrument of geopolitical/military power projection,” he wrote on Twitter. “A precondition for the employment would be a common strategy and decision-making process — Germany is light years away from that!”

That appears to be the crux of Germany’s defense debate: The Bundeswehr is so caught up in its disrepair that there is no space for formulating the kind of national strategy against which new capabilities could be evaluated. The lack of such a reference point gives all new military technology — from drones to artificial intelligence to naval power projection — the whiff of being far-fetched from the start, rightfully or not.

HMCS Bonaventure – Canada’s Last Aircraft Carrier

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Ganarly Films
Published on 10 Apr 2016

How Canada’s Government could be so short-sighted? A brief history of HMCS Bonaventure.

February 25, 2019

HMCS Bonaventure of the Royal Canadian Navy

Filed under: Britain, Cancon, History, Military — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Sneaky Loon
Published on 9 Apr 2017

The Bonaventure was purchased from the Royal Navy to replace HMCS Magnificent because the Bonaventure could operate fighter jets to conduct anti-submarine activities.

February 22, 2019

Germany’s armed forces – from world class to laughing stock

Filed under: Germany, Government, Military — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Germany’s military has fallen on very hard times, and there’s so much wrong that it will be very difficult to fix even with all the goodwill in the world:

The German Navy training ship Gorch Fock (launched in 1958) under full sail (less the spanker topsail) in Kiel Fjord near the Laboe Naval Memorial in July 2006.
Photo by Felix Koenig via Wikimedia Commons.

Most Germans’ eyes glaze over at the mention of the Bundeswehr’s perpetual troubles, but an affair surrounding the Gorch Fock, the navy’s three-masted naval training ship, has caught their attention.

Launched in 1958 to school a new generation of West German naval recruits, the imposing 81-meter ship, which takes its name from a popular seafaring German author’s pseudonym, is more than just a training vessel; to many, the Gorch Fock — whose likeness was etched onto some Deutsche Mark bills — is a symbol of Germany’s postwar revival.

The ship’s iconic status is one reason why few objected when the Bundeswehr announced in 2015 that it needed a major overhaul. Until, that is, the price tag exploded from an initial projection of €10 million to €135 million, according to the latest estimate.

Bundeswehr officials claimed the depth of the ship’s troubles only became clear when it was in dry dock, but few are buying such explanations. “When the repairs cost more than a new ship, something is obviously amiss,” Bartels, the Bundeswehr’s parliamentary overseer, said in an interview.

The Gorch Fock “is a symptom of the Bundeswehr’s broader problems,” Bartels said. “Everything takes too long and costs too much money. It’s as if time and money were endless resources, and in the end no one takes responsibility.”

Almost overnight, the ship has gone from pride and joy to running gag. Last week, German weekly Der Spiegel pictured the Gorch Fock on its cover under the headline, “Ship of Fools.”

It’s an apt metaphor for Germany’s body politic as well. Given Germany’s size and economic might, Berlin’s attention to security is surprisingly shallow; citizens and politicians alike often seem oblivious to the challenges the country faces. Though Germany faces growing security threats from both Russia and China, one wouldn’t know it hanging around the German capital.

Much of the media now portrays the U.S. as a security threat on par with Russia. Public attitudes have moved in a similar direction. Security discussions are driven by a handful of like-minded think tank analysts who seem to spend most their time on Twitter, fretting about whether Trump will pull the plug on NATO.

More Germans believe China is a better partner for their country than the U.S., according to a survey published last week by Atlantik Brücke, a Berlin-based transatlantic lobbying group. About 80 percent of those surveyed consider U.S.-German relations to be “negative” or “very negative.”

H/T to Instapundit for the link.

February 17, 2019

Finland’s Desperate Fight – WW2 – 025 – February 16 1940

Filed under: Europe, History, Military, Russia, WW2 — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 06:00

World War Two
Published on 16 Feb 2019

After more than a week of preliminary bombardments and attacks, the Red Army finally attacks the Finnish defensive positions on the Karelian Isthmus en masse. They throw thousands of troops at the Finns at the entire width of their lines, even exceeding them. The Finns defend the best as they can, but their winning streak seems to come to an end.

Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory
Or join The TimeGhost Army directly at: https://timeghost.tv

Follow WW2 day by day on Instagram @World_war_two_realtime https://www.instagram.com/world_war_t…

Between 2 Wars: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list…
Source list: http://bit.ly/WW2sources

Written and Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Produced and Directed by: Spartacus Olsson and Astrid Deinhard
Executive Producers: Bodo Rittenauer, Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Research by: Indy Neidell
Edited by: Iryna Dulka
Map animations: Eastory

Colorizations by Norman Stewart.
Thumbnail Colorization by Julius Jääskeläinen: https://www.flickr.com/photos/juliusjaa/

Photos of the Winter War are mostly from the Finnish Wartime Photograph Archive (SA-Kuva).

Eastory’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEly…
Archive by Screenocean/Reuters https://www.screenocean.com

A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.

From the comments:

World War Two
2 days ago

Major developments in the Winter War this week! The thumbnail (colorized by JuliusJaa – https://www.flickr.com/photos/juliusjaa/) depicts Aarne Juutilainen or the “The Terror of Morocco”. This particular photo was taken earlier in December 1939 during the battle of Kollaa, where he acquired a hero status. He owed his name to his service in the French Foreign Legion in Morocco, where he served from 1930 to 1935. By 1940, he commanded his own ‘Moroccan company’, a unit made out of decorated soldiers known for their superior skills.

We sincerely hope that you enjoy the videos we put out for you all! As Indy notes at the end of the video, especially important for today’s episode (there are 14 maps in this) is Eastory, who researches and animates our maps for us. Check out his channel as well! It’s really good -> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCElybFZ60Hk1NSjgCf7I2sg

Please do consider supporting us on Patreon. That allows us to keep working with awesome people like Eastory and will help us create even more content for you all to enjoy.

Cheers,
Joram

February 9, 2019

HMS Dreadnought – Guide 001

Filed under: Britain, History, Military, Technology — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Drachinifel
Published on 12 Dec 2018

HMS Dreadnought, the first dreadnought battleship and game changer for the British Royal Navy, is today’s subject.

Want to support the channel? – https://www.patreon.com/Drachinifel

Want to talk about ships? https://discord.gg/TYu88mt

Music – https://www.youtube.com/c/NCMEpicMusic

January 24, 2019

The Sinking of HMS Glorious: An Avoidable Tragedy?

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Historigraph
Published on 27 Aug 2018

The Sinking of HMS Glorious, on June 8 1940, was one of the worst British naval disasters of the Second World War. Over 1500 losing their lives as two German battleships sunk three British ships. In this video, we will recount the events and the heroism of Glorious’ two escorts (HMS Ardent and HMS Acasta), before looking at the post-war controversy over whether the disaster was ‘covered up’ by the Admiralty.

If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph

► Twitter: https://twitter.com/historigraph
►Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph
►Discord: https://discord.gg/f8JZw93
►My Gaming Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/Addaway

Sources:

John Winton, Carrier Glorious (Cassell: 1986)

Stephen Roskill, Churchill and the Admirals (Pen and Sword, 1977)

Corelli Barnett, Engage The Enemy More Closely: The Royal Navy in the Second World War (Penguin, 1991)

Henrik Lunde, Hitler’s Preemptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940. (kindle edition)

Earl Ziemke, German Northern Theater of Operations 1940-1945. (kindle edition)

Record of the Hansard Debate from 1999: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-ha…

Full Casualty List for HMS Glorious can be found here: http://www.naval-history.net/xDKCas19…

From the comments:

1. Unlike the Battle of the River Plate from my last video, we do not know the precise movements of the ships, particularly the British ones, during the battle. The movements in this video should thus be taken as purely illustrative.

2. As you might be able to tell there is still a pretty intense debate over the reasons for Glorious’ sinking, particularly over what knowledge the officers on board Devonshire had or didn’t have about Glorious’ trouble. In particular there is testimony from one midshipman that the ship’s captain and Admiral Cunningham (who was on board) knew what was happening and took no action. It is only his word, so many of the historians I have read do not seem to have bought much into it, but it appears in this documentary from 1997: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yAahSUiXt4

January 3, 2019

The ship that revolutionised naval warfare

Filed under: Britain, History, Military, Technology — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Lindybeige
Published on 13 Dec 2018

Thanks to World of Warships for sponsoring this video. Follow the link https://wo.ws/2Pp7LgQ and use the code “LINDYBEIGE” to receive the Premium Soviet Ship ‘Diana’, 500 Doubloons, and 7 Premium days of game time. For new accounts only.

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Lindybeige

Many thanks to the helpful staff at the Discovery Museum in Newcastle upon Tyne. Here is the museum’s website:
https://discoverymuseum.org.uk/

Lindybeige: a channel of archaeology, ancient and medieval warfare, rants, swing dance, travelogues, evolution, and whatever else occurs to me to make.

▼ Follow me…

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Lindybeige I may have some drivel to contribute to the Twittersphere, plus you get notice of uploads.

website: http://www.LloydianAspects.co.uk

December 26, 2018

Operation Sealion: Actually a Bad Idea

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Historigraph
Published on 1 Dec 2018

Join us in #WarThunder for free using this link and get a premium tank or aircraft and three days of premium time as a bonus: http://v2.xyz/WarThunderWithHistorigraph

If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph

#OperationSealion #Historigraph

►Twitter: https://twitter.com/historigraph
►Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/historigraph
►Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph
►Discord: https://discord.gg/f8JZw93
►My Gaming Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/Addaway
►My Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/addaway

Sources:

Philips Payson O’Brien, How the War was Won

Stephen Bungay, The Most Dangerous Enemy

Leo McKinstry, Operation Sealion: How Britain Crushed the German War Machine

https://www.naval-history.net for factual information on locations of RN ships

December 19, 2018

HMCS Haida – Guide 027 (Special)

Filed under: Cancon, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Drachinifel
Published on 13 Aug 2017

The most successful Canadian warship, HMCS Haida, is the subject of today’s video

The robotic narration on this video is painfully irritating!

Update, 14 February 2021: Drachinifel updated the narration at some point after I posted the original.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress