Arctic Convoy PQ17

[DorsetDude]

Any see this Clarkson programme last night? Bloody excellent I thought it was.
About the world war 2 convoys across the North Atlantic into Archangel in Russia.

 

[feek]

Yes, stunning story, how brave those merchant Navy sailors were. Mind you it was a total disgrace that they didn't get a campaign medal until 2012!

 

[Garry Edwards]

Yes, I almost didn't watch it because Clarkeson was presenting it, but as I knew something about the history I did...

A pretty classic example of Lions being led by Donkeys. There was a very detailed description of the conditions endured by the seamen in "The Cruel Sea" by Nicholas Monsarrett, who served on a Corvette on the runs to Murmansk.

 

[mickledore]

Yes, I've known about this story for a long time. In this age of constantly re-visiting the past and dishing out apologies left, right and centre to assorted pressure groups perhaps we ought to consider removing Dudley Pound's knighthood.

 

[arclight]

Yes, good docu.

Folk on Pprune think so too:-

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/531072-pq17.html

The history of the arctic convoys is interesting, but grim reading at times.
Some of convoys from Britain to Russia (and USA/Canada) assembled in Loch Ewe (Wester Ross). Unfortunately photography was forbidden in the Loch Ewe area at the time therefore there is no pictorial record.

 

[VirtualAdept]

I caught the last 20 minutes or so, gonna watch the whole thing later on iplayer, but I was absolutely engrossed.

 

[DaveS2]

Yes, I almost didn't watch it because Clarkeson was presenting it,

That's the reason I didn't watch it.

Those convoys were such a vital part of the war effort. Unarmed ships at the mercy of the U-Boat Wolf Packs, in icy cold unforgiving seas. VERY brave men indeed, so very deserving of the recognition they eventually received. A bit like all those brave airmen of Bomber Command.

Dave

 

[mickledore]

Clarkson was actually quite good. Similar to the programme about his FIL's V.C. Still a bit laddish, but very toned down and surprisingly easy to watch. Very different from the yobbo on Top Gear.

 

[huffy]

I watched the programme and enjoyed it and was humbled by what those men went through. I felt Clarkson was good as a presenter , he seemed to treat the subject with the dignity it deserved.

 

[Garry Edwards]

That's the reason I didn't watch it.

Those convoys were such a vital part of the war effort. Unarmed ships at the mercy of the U-Boat Wolf Packs, in icy cold unforgiving seas. VERY brave men indeed, so very deserving of the recognition they eventually received. A bit like all those brave airmen of Bomber Command.

Dave

I remember (don't where from) reading about the pilots on these convoys.
Apparently a few of the ships carried a single fighter plane, launched by steam catapault. If the Captain decided to launch the plane against bombers it was a death sentence for the pilot. The plan was to parashoot into the sea near the ship, and then be picked up, as the plane couldn't be recovered.
But the pilots had always frozen to death before a boat could reach them.

 

[Ozei]

Clarkson was actually quite good. ...

Shame he didn't check the facts.

Tirpitz wasn't the largest or most powerful battleship afloat in July 1942 - Japan's Yamato was. She was larger (in both displacement and length) and had a heavier main armament (9x18" guns vs. 8x15").

By August 1942 Japan had two of these monsters in service (the other was Musashi) - they were the largest and most powerful battleships ever built.

 

[dinners]

Clarkson was actually quite good. Similar to the programme about his FIL's V.C. Still a bit laddish, but very toned down and surprisingly easy to watch. Very different from the yobbo on Top Gear.

It was written by Clarkson not just presented by him.

It was a good watch.

 

[DuncanDisorderly]

I hope Clarkson has found his new niche, that was very good.
I could watch more of these.

 

[Ben6]

Ive literally just watched it and seen this thread.
A very interesting watch! Hope Clarkson does more things like this.

 

[dinners]

To be fair Clarkson has done a few programmes over the years on British Armed forces, Engineering and History.

 

[Earley Man]

I served my apprenticeship in Falmouth Docks between 1962 and 1967 and worked with quite a number of ex RN and Merchant Navy men who had served right through WWII. Having a keen interest in the sea and ships, I went to work in the docks as it was the only way at the time I could get into the Merchant Navy as an officer, a lot of them would talk to me about their experiences as they understood I had a very genuine interest in what they had done. And what they did, above all others, was to save this country from defeat.

For once the programme gave a reasonable feel for what it was like, although the escort provided for the Arctic convoys was vastly better than that provided for the North Atlantic convoys between 1939 and the latter part of 1942. In 1940/41 the average escort for a 60 ship convoy normally consisted of one old destroyer and three or four corvettes, which would try to defend them against a wolf pack of between four and eight U-Boats.

The men of the Merchant Navy have never been given the recognition they deserve for their bravery. Although they had a higher proportion of manpower losses to numbers engaged, approximately 30,000 out of just over 300,000, than any of the armed services, they were not under military discipline or any form of duress to sail, but were all volunteers and no ship ever failed to sail for want of a crew. I think the problem was that they didn't have smart uniforms, brass bands and shiny equipment to show off, but wore nondescript clothes, sailed equally nondescript merchant ships and died in the open sea, out of sight and out of mind.

In 1940 everybody could see the fighters in the Battle of Britain, but very few people realised at the time, and even less now, that without the men of the Merchant Navy the planes would never have got off the ground for lack of fuel, as nearly all the petrol they used was imported from the US Gulf. It must have taken a very special sort of bravery to sail a ship loaded with 12,000 tons of aviation spirit thorough waters containing U-Boats, not just for a few hours but day after day, knowing that a torpedo hit meant an enormous explosion and death, for voyage after voyage.

 

[dinners]

I served my apprenticeship in Falmouth Docks between 1962 and 1967 and worked with quite a number of ex RN and Merchant Navy men who had served right through WWII. Having a keen interest in the sea and ships, I went to work in the docks as it was the only way at the time I could get into the Merchant Navy as an officer, a lot of them would talk to me about their experiences as they understood I had a very genuine interest in what they had done. And what they did, above all others, was to save this country from defeat.

For once the programme gave a reasonable feel for what it was like, although the escort provided for the Arctic convoys was vastly better than that provided for the North Atlantic convoys between 1939 and the latter part of 1942. In 1940/41 the average escort for a 60 ship convoy normally consisted of one old destroyer and three or four corvettes, which would try to defend them against a wolf pack of between four and eight U-Boats.

The men of the Merchant Navy have never been given the recognition they deserve for their bravery. Although they had a higher proportion of manpower losses to numbers engaged, approximately 30,000 out of just over 300,000, than any of the armed services, they were not under military discipline or any form of duress to sail, but were all volunteers and no ship ever failed to sail for want of a crew. I think the problem was that they didn't have smart uniforms, brass bands and shiny equipment to show off, but wore nondescript clothes, sailed equally nondescript merchant ships and died in the open sea, out of sight and out of mind.

In 1940 everybody could see the fighters in the Battle of Britain, but very few people realised at the time, and even less now, that without the men of the Merchant Navy the planes would never have got off the ground for lack of fuel, as nearly all the petrol they used was imported from the US Gulf. It must have taken a very special sort of bravery to sail a ship loaded with 12,000 tons of aviation spirit thorough waters containing U-Boats, not just for a few hours but day after day, knowing that a torpedo hit meant an enormous explosion and death, for voyage after voyage.

Good post

For what it's worth I watched this with my eldest daughter (almost 14) and whilst I grew up up learning about things like this, for today's kids, we're at the point where this era is about to pass from the living memory of those who took part.

 

[MartynK]

I see David Irving is filing a complaint of plagiarism and threatening legal action against the BBC, alleging that a significant amount of the programme's content was taken straight from his 1967 book "The Destruction of Convoy PQ17". (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cel...s-BBC-show-in-battle-with-Nazi-historian.html).

It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Irving is controversial, particularly for his views on the holocaust, but he's written some excellent books and is one of the few British historians fluent enough in German to work with primary source material instead of relying on translations.

 

[Ozei]

I see David Irving is filing a complaint of plagiarism and threatening legal action against the BBC, alleging that a significant amount of the programme's content was taken straight from his 1967 book "The Destruction of Convoy PQ17". (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cel...s-BBC-show-in-battle-with-Nazi-historian.html).

After watching the programme I did a bit of Googling and stumbled across that book (http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/PQ17/index.html) - I have to admit I began to wonder if it had been used to form parts of the BBC's script.

 

[duggiebee]

Re David Irving....I am struggling to understand how it can be plagiarism? If an incident is factual there are only so many ways it can be explained. Facts are facts and you can re-word them, try to describe them in different language etc but essentially the details have to be the same. Plagiarism? I doubt it.

 

[MartynK]

Re David Irving....I am struggling to understand how it can be plagiarism? If an incident is factual there are only so many ways it can be explained. Facts are facts and you can re-word them, try to describe them in different language etc but essentially the details have to be the same. Plagiarism? I doubt it.

I don't know if his claim has any merit. I have the book, but I don't have immediate access to it, and I haven't seen the programme because I'm in another country at the moment. The only things I can think of are that the fate of convoy PQ17 is known, but how and why something happened is often open to interpretation; and that Irving believes the BBC/Clarkson misappropriated his work, and presented his particular arguments as the results of their own research. There are a few other criteria that come into it, such as how closely the language in the allegedly plagiarised work resembles the original, but it will be settled one way or the other eventually.

 

[Steve Smith]

Yes, I almost didn't watch it because Clarkeson was presenting it.

Yes. He is a complete a**e but it was a good programme.

I see David Irving is filing a complaint of plagiarism and threatening legal action against the BBC, alleging that a significant amount of the programme's content was taken straight from his 1967 book "The Destruction of Convoy PQ17".

Also known as research.


Steve.

 

[MartynK]

Reading books and papers is one way of carrying out research, and you can quote from these sources with proper acknowledgement, but publishing other people's work as your own is plagiarism. It's not the same thing.

 

[duggiebee]

Just as a matter of interest, if producing a documentary for TV how do you acknowledge other people's work even if quoted? Is it done beforehand? I wouldn't have thought that it is the same as writing a book where you can and do have pages of acknowledgements at the end.
I just think it is really difficult to present a limited historical act for TV in a way that someone somewhere wouldn't claim plagiarism.

 

[Ozei]

Just as a matter of interest, if producing a documentary for TV how do you acknowledge other people's work even if quoted? Is it done beforehand?

If you used a book as prime source of material the proper way to do it is a) ask the author for permission to quote from the book, and b) add the author's name to the programme credits (e.g. as a consultant).

 

[MartynK]

If you used a book as prime source of material the proper way to do it is a) ask the author for permission to quote from the book, and b) add the author's name to the programme credits (e.g. as a consultant).

Absolutely. You can also include a short interview with the author. The requirement is proper acknowledgement, and there are protocols for this.

The thing is, I can't see the BBC acknowledging David Irving. He has a reputation as a Nazi sympathiser/apologist and a holocaust denier. I don't see this as relevant to the issue of plagiarism though.