The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by wadinga » Wed Mar 28, 2018 12:11 am

Hello Alberto,

You are a pretty imaginative interpreter yourself. The "Shores of France" are not mentioned anywhere. Yet you have decided that the chronologically mis-positioned description of a message "signalled accordingly" must be it, and ignore that it is described as happening after the Luftwaffe left their bases on the 27th. Very close to 11:37B/27.

Here's the digest. I am verbose because it is so much fun shooting holes in your specious speculations. :wink:
So Winston was aware that Tovey's guns had failed to sink Bismarck, before he started speaking on the morning of the 27th, and undoubtedly pestered Pound with the "tow home" twaddle he had thought up the previous night, resulting in the 11:37B actually being sent. Pressured by the PM moments before he was to address the House of Commons with unrelentingly bad news from Crete, Pound is instructed to send a "fairly stupid" signal to Tovey.
However it already too late, as it crosses with the information Winston is desperate to hear to relieve the unrelentingly bad news, and gets in the House a little while later. It is slightly more stupid as a result, but nowhere as bad as the exaggeration Tovey thought up nine years later, and which neither Kennedy nor Roskill believed enough to print.

This is a far more sensible interpretation than Pound sending a message of "criminal stupidity" and Tovey forgetting to mention it in a letters to Pound a few days later.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:29 am

Dunmunro wrote: "It demonstrates that the ROOF message was sent at 1137/27".
Hi Duncan,
no, it just demonstrates that the May 26 "Shores of France" message was "espunged" from the Admiralty records, as promised by Pound to Tovey and referred by Tovey to Roskill.

As Roskill said, the only definitive proof would have been the original signal log of KGV, but this does not exist anymore.


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:32 am

Wadinga wrote: "Here's the digest"
Hi Sean,
again you post only YOUR OWN interpretation of the words/thinking of W.C., Pound etc.... :negative:

I prefer the original evidences "because it is so much fun shooting holes in your specious and unfounded defense".
Churchill_book_3_page_282.jpg
Churchill_book_3_page_282.jpg (88.92 KiB) Viewed 3078 times
Tovey_Roskill_20-11-1954_extract.jpg
Tovey_Roskill_20-11-1954_extract.jpg (117.63 KiB) Viewed 3078 times
These clear words of Churchill and the precise circumstantial account of Tovey constitute an overwhelming evidence that there was a signal sent to the CinC HF on May 26, between 7 and 10 pm, in direct answer with the most unfortunate message sent by Tovey at 1821/26, declaring his intention to give up the chase in case Bismarck had to be followed up to the "shores of France" to sink her the next day under the Luftwaffe attacks and the U-boat torpedoes, as requested by the P.M.


As you insist to provide your own interpretation, here is mine one (that at least is supported by the evidences above):
after having sent two "kind reminders" at 0050/27 (assume you are still chasing) and at 0231/27 (Bay of Biscay weather forecasts) in answer to the 2347/26 (course 30°), when Pound received the 1028/27 (had to discontinue chase), he was forced to repeat the order at 1137/27 (Bismarck must be sunk at any cost + towing signal) that did not offend Tovey at all (he had already sunk Bismarck) and was not remembered anymore.
This last signal did not contain the "shores of France" reference anymore, replaced by the "at any cost" as the position of the action had been clearly far out of the Bay of Biscay....


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by dunmunro » Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:23 am

Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Dunmunro wrote: "It demonstrates that the ROOF message was sent at 1137/27".
Hi Duncan,
no, it just demonstrates that the May 26 "Shores of France" message was "espunged" from the Admiralty records, as promised by Pound to Tovey and referred by Tovey to Roskill.

As Roskill said, the only definitive proof would have been the original signal log of KGV, but this does not exist anymore.


Bye, Alberto
No it wasn't expunged as it was never sent. The "shores of France" ROOF message was invented by Tovey in 1950 after he read Churchill and unfortunately it destroys Tovey's credibility.
Not a single RN or Admiralty source has ever made mention of such a signal, except for Tovey and even he states:
What has surprised me is that there have, as far as | know, been no remarks made about the signal I received ordering me to continue the chase up to the shores of France, even if the K.G. had to be towed back.
Of course there were no remarks made about a signal ordering Tovey to commit suicide along with the flagship of the home fleet, because no such signal was ever sent, nor would DP have ever consented to sending such a signal. If it had been sent it would have caused enormous comment and consternation throughout the RN, and indeed the world, but strangely no one has ever mentioned it - ever! :stubborn:

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:52 am

Dunmunro wrote: "No it wasn't expunged as it was never sent. The "shores of France" ROOF message was invented by Tovey in 1950 after he read Churchill and unfortunately it destroys Tovey's credibility."
Hi Duncan,
this is your respectable opinion (you have NO PROOF whatsoever to say that the message was not sent as you don't have ANY original signal log).
In your view, the credibility of Tovey would be destroyed as well as the one of Winston Churchill, however they are both lucidly and clearly explaining that the signal on May 26 was actually sent, with circumstantial description of the situation when the message was received.


As repeatedly explained, the "shores of France" sent on May 26, must have been apparently coded for the C.in C. HF ONLY, therefore no rumors and consternation at all for the other ships/captains/flag officers.....

Do you really believe that W.C. could have seen the 1821/26 message and left it without a tough answer ? :negative:


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by wadinga » Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:08 am

Hello Dunmunro,

You are of course correct. Amongst those people who didn't mention such a signal being received were Commodore Brind, Tovey's Chief of Staff and Paymaster Captain Paffard both of whom were Tovey's close confidentes and would certainly have known. Of course it was Paffard who specifically told Kennedy of Tovey's tendency to exaggerate and Tovey himself who admitted he had a poor memory and never kept diaries.

Paffard provided much of the detail for Kennedy's in-depth treatment eg p 181 of Pursuit
I shall never forget the horrified look on "Daddy Brind's face
When Tovey announced his decision to put off the destruction of Bismarck until the morning.
it was a decision that must have taken tremendous moral courage
If this "criminally stupid" signal had ever existed, Paffard could hardly have kept it from Kennedy, who was aware Roskill had searched for it for a decade.
Of course it was Paffard who specifically told Kennedy of Tovey's tendency to exaggerate and Tovey himself who admitted he had a poor memory and never kept diaries.
All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3568
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:10 am

Hello everybody,

I think there are still 3 possibilities :

1) The message was sent on May 26th, 1941 afternoon and was later expunged by Adm Pound as Adm Tovey wrote.
Both Churchill and Tovey were correct on their written declarations.

2) The message was never sent on the 26th as Tovey and Churchill wrote, and only on the 27th morning it went out.
Churchill was wrong at first with his memory and book declaration and Adm Tovey followed him on the error.

3) We simply do not know enough about it and cannot definitively prove either one of the 2 previous above described possibilities and consequently we are forced to remain forever with this doubt, listing the facts and evidence we have about it.


My personal opinion is the number 3, ... and on this I share it with Stephen Roskill.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The KGV and Adm fuel signals on May 26 and 27.

Post by wadinga » Thu Mar 29, 2018 12:46 pm

Hello Antonio,
and on this I share it with Stephen Roskill.
Roskill's conclusion is clearly laid out in Churchill and the Admirals, he makes no mention of the "Shores of France" and quotes only the words of the 11:37B which is what he references in footnote 36. That he means he supports option 2.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

Post Reply