PDA

View Full Version : War kayak used by Royal Marine commandos



windrider
03-23-2007, 09:29 PM
Hi all, I stumbled on this on a turkish museum web page.
Can't find any other mention of this craft. I e-mailed Grumman to see if they had any confirmation, but none so far... I also e-mailed the museum to see if there was a manufactures plate with date, etc. but nope.

"This rare and important craft was made in about 1941 by the Grumman Aircraft Corporation of America. (not so sure about that, since I can't find anyone who has a record of it)
*** EDIT *** Grumman Corporation has nothing to do with this craft -

It is made of aluminium, and breaks down into three sections. The bow and stern compartments are watertight, with a locking hatch so they can store weapons and/or explosives. The centre section has two openings for the crewmen to sit in and the boat would either be paddled (outriggers retracted) or sailed (outriggers extended). The rudder was foot-operated via cables within the hull. These boats were used in WWII by special forces such as the Royal Marine Commandos, and Special Boat Section: they would be launched from submarines some distance from the target, and then, after the raiding party had returned to rendezvous with the submarine at sea, they would be scuttled."

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 05:14 AM
Not sure if they were ever used being of aluminium construction.

See here for use of other types....

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/cockleshell_heroes_of_1942.htm

http://www.specialoperations.com/History/WWII/Cockleshell.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Commandos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frankton

The cockles were all of fabric construction, perhaps the aluminium would be used later or for longer jobs?

cockle canoes.
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~acsrrrm/kayak/cockle.html

I beleivbe that it is possible to fire a mortar from a cockle, or at least the ones currently in use by teh SBS, read it in a book somewhere. And they split down in to two parts.

Could you tell us the page you found it on?

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 05:23 AM
Been on the grumman pages, there

is some info of construction of aluminium canles but only at the end of the war.

http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-past516,0,5473146.story?coll=ny-lihistory-navigation

http://www.2neatmagazines.com/life/1943.html

Rising Sun*
03-24-2007, 07:41 AM
I beleivbe that it is possible to fire a mortar from a cockle, or at least the ones currently in use by teh SBS, read it in a book somewhere. And they split down in to two parts.

Do they split into two parts normally, or just moments after the mortar fires? :D

Even a Japanese type so called "Knee mortar" http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/001248.html (about halfway down page) had a kick, but a canoe or kayak isn't likely to survive a 60mm or 81mm mortar discharge.

Apart from anything else, to get anything approaching vaguely accurate fire how do they have the necesary distance for the aiming stakes? http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-90/ch5.htm

Having spent a bit of time in small boats, unless the firing platform is equipped with some pretty sophisticated gyros etc there is no prospect that any round will be placed by reference to an earlier round. It seems to me that it's a totally useless firing platform for any gun as the first round can't be placed accurately, and neither can the rest.

I can't imagine why they'd have mortars on folboats and the like when a PIAT type round in WWII and much more sophisticated rounds nowadays would make more sense.

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 09:05 AM
The claim was about a recent boat, around 1970-80s. They could have been used for illumination, or smoke, likewise they could have just been used to fire once beached. Like I say, never used the boats for mortar, although I have paddled them.

I am guessing the aluminium canoe may never have actually been used. ALuminium would have been better used for aircraft than a throwaway (essentially) canoe.

Rising Sun*
03-24-2007, 09:51 AM
The claim was about a recent boat, around 1970-80s. They could have been used for illumination, or smoke, likewise they could have just been used to fire once beached. Like I say, never used the boats for mortar, although I have paddled them.

Fair enough! :)

I was thinking only of WWII wood - canvas folboats

Quite possible as a base for a very light mortar for non-directional fire, which I didn't think about in the context you mention.

They'd still need a solid base, which I suspect might be more than a bit of thin plywood in the base of a WWII expendable canvas folding boat.

Modern stuff might overcome the problem. Water is fluid but incompressible and with a decent surface area above it on a steady surface might hold repeated mortar charges. An aluminium boat with a relatively rigid hull might distribute the force much better than a canvas folboat.

There's still a huge problem with registering fire.

At best they're a base for non-directional or random gun fire.

windrider
03-24-2007, 10:39 AM
Hi all, here's the site where I found this,
http://www.rmk-museum.org.tr/english/exhibit/marine.html
They removed the kayak from the page
(probably too much inquiries about it, he he)
I was aware of the links you guys kindly posted, that's exactly as far as it gets for now. Still a mystery boat, and that's understandable, given the nature of the missions it was involved with. I doubt they took the time to take pictures during missions, and if they did, it was probably classified. But maybe in training?
Thanks for trying !

Rising Sun*
03-24-2007, 10:44 AM
Hi all, here's the site where I found this,
http://www.rmk-museum.org.tr/english/exhibit/marine.html
They removed the kayak from the page
(probably too much inquiries about it, he he)
I was aware of the links you guys kindly posted, that's exactly as far as it gets for now. Still a mystery boat, and that's understandable, given the nature of the missions it was involved with. I doubt they took the time to take pictures during missions, and if they did, it was probably classified. But maybe in training?
Thanks for trying !

Maybe you should look at post-war stuff.

Grumann, like many war manufacturers, played with a lot of stuff after the war when aluminium was perhaps the most plentiful and cheap material. We wouldn't have the Land Rover without it.

The museum tag might not be accurate.

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 10:54 AM
If used during the war then the pics must be out by now. 50 year rule and all that. Highly likely that they have pulled it because they do not know for sure if it was a WW2 design. The Grumann sites I have been on all seem to point to Aluminium canoes being manufactured after the war, or very late on.

Admittedly these may have been developed from an early war time design, ie this picture. But can't see why this would be so secret. Likewise if it had been a secretive unit, why did the boat survive?

For the mortars, I beleive the boats are still wood and canvas, but are fitted with a sort of board in the bottom for the mortar. It is probably the British 51 mm light mortar that is used. The book I read this in was about the SBS, by a member of that group. Can't remember it's title.

More here on the 51mm mortar.

http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_lm.htm

Here is another canoe used during world war 2 by the SOE (Special Operations Executive).

The Sleeping beauty, submersible and electric powered.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/images/gal_soe_sleeping_beauty.jpg

More here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/soe_gallery_11.shtml

Another picture here, I don't know why it is described as "semi-submersible" in the other link if able to do this...

It would come to the surface for navigation purposes.

http://www.knaw.nl/ecpa/sepia/exhibition/pro/images_pro/enlargements/Sepia_DEFE_2_1144_Br.jpg

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 11:09 AM
More on the SBS kayak here....


Two-man kayak-type canoes are used by the SBS due to their stealth capability, portability and reliability. The latest model known to be in service is the Klepper Aeres Mark 13.

From http://www.specialoperations.com/Foreign/United_Kingdom/Royal_Marines/SBS_Profile.htm

More here including the following (just to prove I am not talking rubbish!!! :D )

http://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/whatson/exhibitions/display.var.1113964.0.folding_canoe_on_display.php


Klepper invented the boat to respond to the soaring popularity of canoeing in Europe. Seeing a gap in the market for a highly portable boat he designed a canoe with a collapsible wooden frame and waterproof skin, which is still used today.

Even the military recognised the genius of Klepper's design and the canoes are still used by the Special Boat Service for covert operations. The canoe's small size means they are light enough to carry and be hidden easily. They can also be dropped to the water from helicopters or surfaced by divers and some are even designed to fit a machine gun or mortar.

Ben Lumby, Exhibition Manager, said: "These are just such ingenious boats and their 100 year old design still holds in today's high-tech world. The SBS still use them for operations and I'd quite like one for the back of my car!"

http://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/_images/db/37/44/nmmc.374437.full.jpg
Showing the strength of the design.

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 11:21 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/Klepper_vouwkano.jpg/300px-

Mil style Klepper.

More on the SBS.

http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/sbs-operations.htm


In this age of high-tech warfare, it may seem strange that the SBS are still using canoes, equipment that hasn't essentially changed much since World War 2 but the reality is that these non-metallic canoes still provide an effective, stealthy method of moving small teams of men around enemy coastlines and waterways.

The Klepper canoes can be broken down into 2 parts so that the 2 man crew can carry them on their backs across country or hide them effectively. A GPMG or mortar(!) can be fitted and crew members may carry anti-tank rockets to deal with enemy surface craft.

The Kleppers are also versatile in the way they can be deployed. They can be launched from other boats and surfaced submarines or carried to the surface by divers. Kleppers can be parachuted from C130s into the ocean or dropped out the back of RAF Chinooks.

http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/images/sbs-klepper-reserve.jpg

see http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/klepper-canoes.htm

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 11:22 AM
And from http://www.taranelektronik.com/Klepper/id1.htm

http://www.taranelektronik.com/mynet_resimlerim/klepper_mil1.jpg

http://www.taranelektronik.com/mynet_resimlerim/klepper_mil2.jpg

http://www.taranelektronik.com/mynet_resimlerim/klepper_mil3.jpg

http://www.taranelektronik.com/mynet_resimlerim/klepper_mil4.jpg

windrider
03-24-2007, 11:22 AM
If I remember correctly, the guy who answered my e-mail at the museum said that it has been recovered at the bottom by divers in the meditenanean. As to where and when, no details...
As for the aluminium, compared to canvas, the added strenght surely gave more sea-worthy and loading capacity than canvas folding boats. Even if aluminium was a strategic material, it doesn't take too much to make one.
Does anyone know of a Royal Marine veterans association web site?
Thanks for keepin diggin' !

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 11:27 AM
It could be a post war kayak, used by day trippers, and sunk by them!!! :D

Unlike the wood and canvas, it would stay together quite well.

Google RM vets or RM association, I am sure something will come up.

windrider
03-24-2007, 12:20 PM
Also strange is the fact that this was on Turkish museum's web page...
Turkey was not involved in ww2?
And if it was sunk, it was intentional. These boats don't sink easily, having air-tight compartments like all modern fiberglass kayaks.

I guess I'll have to go there and examine it myself!

2nd of foot
03-24-2007, 01:03 PM
I’m not surprised the US Army got rid of that thing it’s a monster at 121 lbs. The L16 that is used by a lot of armies now is about 40kg all up (but am willing to be corrected as I can not find my notes). And a crew of 5? Even with a crew of 3 we still have one spare to make the brew.

They are talking about the 51/2in and probably for illum. To fire put a lump of wood between your legs and no problem.

As for the metal, you are not thinking outside the box. The canoe needs to be functional not impregnable. Aluminium has no added vantages over canvas in this instant as both produce a rigid hull but canvas can be flat and folded unlike ally. Also think of getting the thing out of a sub when it is rigid. The noise factor should be taken into account as well, bang the side of an empty metal boat against a metal ship and it makes a lot of noise, but a wooden one does not. And not to forget radar.

Now list the advantages of ally?

windrider
03-24-2007, 03:12 PM
I’m not surprised the US Army got rid of that thing it’s a monster at 121 lbs.

where did you find this info?

As an owner of a 22 ft fiberglass tandem sea kayak, that weight sounds right, mine's about 100 lbs. (but all in one part).

as for the little advantage of metal over canvas,
rigidity and capacity are the main ones. The fact that it has a sail and outriggers indicate that it was used in deep sea instead of rivers. Also mentionned is watertight compartments. (klepper type boats are more of the open-top kind, covered by a sea skirt)

Anyone having paddled into 10 ft waves (I did) would prefer the sturdiness over the lightweight, canvas type.
But this is not an argument about the design and which is best, I just want to know more about this particular one!
If you have more info on this, I really want to know if this is 1941 design and what is it doing in Turkey?

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 04:06 PM
Air bags can be used, they don't have to be compartmentalised, equipment and bags of air can be shoved in to the voids.

Wood and canvas is surprisingly sturdy, see picture inmy post with the guy standing on the boat.

Have you any more info on the design, etc? How do you know it is 1941?

Just for interest, I am searching quite madly at the moment. :D

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 04:40 PM
I can not find any mention of any canoes being constructed by Grumman prior to 1944.


Bill Hoffman and John Achilich
Bill Hoffman, on vacation from building fighter aircraft during World War II, took a canoe trip in the Adirondacks in the summer of 1944. Finding wood and canvas canoes fragile and heavy, and knowing how to stretch form shapes into alum-inum, he founded Grumman Canoe.

From http://www.paddlermagazine.com/issues/2000_1/feature2.htm

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 04:50 PM
From e-bay....


In 1944, William Hoffman, Vice President of Grumman Aircraft Engineering, went on a fishing trip, where he used a heavy-wood and canvas canoe. After the trip, he decided to create a canoe using lightweight material such as stretched-formed aluminum that he used for making his carrier-based fighter planes. The aluminum canoe, which was 13-feet-long, made its debut in 1945. Due to the success of the canoe, Grumman continued to produce it in the range of 13’, 15’, 17’, 18', 19', and 20' canoes. The plant was relocated to Marathon, New York, in 1952. In 1988, Grumman manufactured the largest aluminum boat, at 22’3”.

All Grumman models feature a .060” aluminum deck and .080” steamcaps with special T-6 alumilite finish rivets for top strength. Also, the sealant makes the canoe water tight and long lasting. The sturdiness of the Grumman canoes comes from marine grade stainless-steel boats. In addition, the close riveting ties the gunnels, skin, and thwarts, resulting in extra strength. The flat water keel helps in making the paddling easy. The maneuvering of the canoe is made simpler by the shallow draft keel that has an inner keelson of rugged-strength extruded aluminum. The Grumman canoes are available in different models. The Grumman canoe unit was sold to O.M.C of Illinois in 1990. In 1996, a group of Grumman managers and investors repurchased the unit from O.M.C.

Do we know if this canoe is definitly a Grumman?

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 04:59 PM
Sorry to keep posting.

I really believe that this aluminium canoe is just a tourist boat at the bottom of the med. Or it is not a Grumman product.

Sorry.

From http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-past516,0,5473146.story?coll=ny-lihistory-navigation


Using wartime technology, Grumman produces a product for peacetime America
Paddling a Canoe to Success

By Lawrence Striegel
Staff Writer

A GRUMMAN CORP. executive was portaging a heavy wood-and-canvas canoe in the Adirondacks in 1944 (1000ydstare: it was in the summer) when he wondered if the activity might be easier if the vessel were made of aluminum.

World War II was drawing to an end and William Hoffman, a company vice president, knew that defense contractors would be looking to convert their factories for peacetime production. As he heaved the old-style canoe around, he figured that Grumman could make lighter, sturdier aluminum models with the same metal-working expertise it had used to make thousands of Hellcat, Tigercat and Bearcat warplanes.

Company heads Leroy Grumman and Jake Swirbul liked the idea. Soon, 17-foot-long prototypes were being built in the employees' bowling alley in Bethpage. After a successful test in the rapids of the Allagash River in Maine, the Grumman canoe was launched. A model was displayed in the window of Abercrombie & Fitch in Manhattan and in October, 1945, Leroy Grumman announced that the company had invented a 13-foot, 38-pound model that "even a woman can carry." The New York Times described it as lighter "than Hiawatha's birchbark vessel ... and impervious to either porcupines or termites."

The Aluminum Company of America provided a special aluminum alloy for the hull -- and an expert, too. Russell Bonetcou, a sportsman who years earlier had worked with Alcoa on the aluminum canoe idea, joined Grumman on the project.

As Grumman geared up for mass production, Hoffman tapped John Achilich, a Grumman tooling engineer, to design larger canoes of 15, 17 and 19 feet. Achilich, a lanky 27-year-old, was excited about the assignment. As a teen growing up in the Bronx, he had built his own wood-and-cloth kayak. And before and during his college years at Pratt Institute, he had worked as a lifeguard and canoe instructor.

....

Grumman canoes -- known for the booming sound they make when hitting a dock or rock (1000ydstare: doesn't lend itself to covert movement -- became fixtures at summer camps and rental sites on rivers and lakes. They were so popular that Grumman built a separate boat manufacturing plant in Marathon, 40 miles south of Syracuse, to open up space in Bethpage for Korean War aircraft production in 1952.

Edit to add:

In winter operations, the canoes would ahve been freezing. Bare flesh may have stuck to them.

1000ydstare
03-24-2007, 05:35 PM
I can't find any info on Aluminium Canoes, prior to 1944 that is.

I can't see how this canoe could have been for military purposes. No matter what you say about the strengths of aluminium compared to fabric and wood, the disadvantages of aluminium don't make up for the slight advantages over wood and fabric.

To manufacture this canoe would require large amounts of skilled men and hours, takeing them away from construction of say, Aircraft.

The fact that even today special forces use wood and fabric, shows that aluminium is not the be all and end all.

They are quite strong, I have paddled them too, including around some of the more exciting coasts.

It is perplexing to say the least. But there you go. I have a feeling this could have just be a tourist boat that has, er, gone wrong. Why would there be only one? Most raids consisted of more than one canoe.

They didn't have many attacks under sail either.

windrider
03-24-2007, 09:27 PM
I agree that it could be post-war origin,
and that the original caption from the museum could be totally incorect.
since it's the only picture of anything like it.
What attracted my interest was the fact that it was in a Turkish museum web site. (maybe turkish marines used it) It's clearly a small, sturdy ocean-going vessel but as for now,
it's still a mystery!

1000ydstare
03-25-2007, 01:58 AM
To be honest I doubt any military force used it, except maybe to test.

The old style boats are still in use by many SF units.

I am thinking tourist around the Greek/Turkish Islands. The Turks may well have found it, but theydont say where. There are plenty of little islands in that area to go exploring. This craft would be ideal.

SuperTroll
03-29-2007, 02:43 PM
There are more than one of these boats about...I have seen a posting with pictures taken in a gentlemans back yard in which he was asking for an identification of the boat you describe...one exists in the UK, and if memory serves me right, he has a link to the SBS site on his home page....I posted the link to his site here in the US but cannot now find it...I will continue looking. (The search is, however how I found this site).

windrider
03-30-2007, 08:48 AM
Thanks for the info Super Troll, and Good luck in your search,
I wonder if this guy has other unusual things in his backyard?

I've been looking into this matter for a year now, with no results.

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 11:04 AM
hi windrider.

my name is quentin rees and i have just set up a google group; WW2 British Military Canoes.

i have just finished my final (i hope) edit of my manuscript. from 160,000 words down to 100,000 words. the publisher said amongst other things that for their liking it was too long.

... the publisher actual said ' the depth of research in your work is deeply inpressive, although overwhelming might be a better description. you clearly know your subject inside out' ... followed by other constructive critisms which led to the re-write.

here is a synopsis...

Copyright Quentin Rees 2006


WAR CANOES
‘Most Secret’
British Military Canoes
of World War II


‘War Canoes’ is the complete narrative of the British Military canoe designed and manufactured during WW2. Unquestionably this is the first ever account of such craft; it is both accurate and comprehensive. The manuscript is some 100,000 words in length with many previously unpublished B&W photographs available to use.

Very rarely is there an opportunity to bring to the world something that has not been written about before; this is one such rarity.

The ‘War Canoes’ story represents the first and only definitive reference work of the entire History and Development of British Military Canoes during World War Two during 1939 to 1945; but it is indeed much more than this. It contains intricate details woven with events as well as the technology, design and the manufacture of the military canoe; it shows how the world of the canoe coloured so many areas as well as the lives of many skilled individuals.

Whilst it is a very human story about a most unusual mode of warfare it is also a celebration of those individuals who have become part of canoe history, both civilian and Military, some of great fame, many yet to become accredited through this work.

Whilst charting this fascinating evolution of the Military canoe, with the keenness to publicise the Navy’s very small ‘boats’, it is impossible not to include the activities of these craft in a tactical setting and to highlight exactly what was required of the units and therefore the men, to perform the tasks set, using these canoes.

As far as amphibious assaults and reconnaissance with canoes are concerned, a few audacious adventures of the Second World War have been written, but hardly any detailed and accurate information about the ‘accessories’ used in the various raids exist.

Much of the information in the manuscript has never been revealed before.

Few existing publications even mention canoes. Of those that do much is inaccurate and usually found in an appendix. Even the simplest dimensions are wrongly quoted. ‘Not a lot is known about this canoe’ and ‘no information exists’ are perhaps the worst of the quoted references that can be mentioned.

Yet the story of the British military canoe as written is a very interesting one.

Within the manuscript 24 canoes are identified with a full description; with a further 17 canoes dealt with on a lesser scale, this being the entire stock of canoes developed, most unknown to Military historians and therefore the general public. The manuscript is evidenced by original source material, all referenced. Every detail that exists on the British Military canoe during WW2 is reported on.

This work tries not to be too technical but has this element included as an integral of part of the overall requirement to understand the differences and the technology used in the individual canoes. It weaves the description of an intricate series of events within many different fields that have shaped the progress of development from pre-war recreational use of canoes to the needs of the military during WW2, briefly showing how some of these developments have had a direct effect and bearing on a much larger vessel of the modern day.

It tells of the epic journey of progress that canoe development took from Scotland and Cornwall, London, Cambridge, Gosport, Brentford, Warwick, Poole, Southampton, to the Island of Wight in the Solent to the tropical Island of Sri Lanka.

The work chronicles all the detailed specifications and gives a timeline during the trials and tribulations experienced within military canoe development. It explains the journey each particular ‘mark’ took and how the development stages brought about each new genus of canoe for the military. Many of these stages were pivotal moments, giving an important insight into a new organisation that required a fast moving set of operational methodologies in order to deliver what was required.

From the talents of a few the ‘War Canoe’ became a greater craft than that of recreational transport. The military used civilian held skills and technology to push the boundaries; each step was choreographed by need.

Thousands of canoes of various marks and types were sent worldwide from the U.K. as far as Australia, and used operationally. Many details for other clandestine organizations are relatively unknown until now.

The work is a product of real life testimonies within the stories of the Commanders, Inventors, Designers and the University boat race connections; together with many previously unseen photographs. The endeavour is to inform so that even from photographs it is possible to identify each Mark.

The work also describes the purpose and some operations of the units, the Admiralty departments, Combined Operations and its various facets including the various Special Forces activities; each part adding to the raison detre for the canoe, pouring out the very essence of the British spirit. The narrative goes behind the scenes to expose the internal workings; it also explains how many different companies including those in the aviation industry were used to produce the canoes and the links between certain individuals.

There are storylines which included men such as Mountbatten, Tollemarche, Hasler, Montenaro, and individuals within and connected to the C.O.H.Q. as well as the S.O.E. and describes how the S.O.E. and one of the canoe inventors had a direct influence on writings of the author Ian Fleming

Due the military association within the field of amphibious warfare it will be welcomed in the United States as the base from which their hardware evolved – proven links exist in this area are highlight within the manuscript.

The work is not a difficult read; even with the craft descriptions it is easily absorbed. It will be enlightening and yet controversial due to it being in opposition to the small amount of incorrect information published.
The work needed to be written this information has been lost to our nation for long enough – to leave it unpublished would leave a void within British Military History.

Each photograph used is accompanied with a detailed and authoritative caption.

The originality is one of the strongest selling points about the work; it is the ‘missing link’, the means by which clandestine warfare was conducted by the various Special Forces during WW2.

Quite possibly it represents the most comprehensive study ever undertaken in the field of the twentieth-century naval small ‘boats’; deserving the description ‘indispensable’.

i picked up your thread up by an alert set up on google.

Firstly the pic of the canoe .. could you send me a copy.

until now i had not seen this example in turkey.

the history of this museums' canoe....

it was bought around a couple of years ago by someone poss museum chap for the inclusion into this private museum collection. i am unsure how much was paid but it was not cheap; that does not matter as it seems to be a good example. it was bought from an antique dealer in petworth sussex who is a grumpy unco-opreative chap who wanted me to give info so he could sell to states for more money. he tried to convince himself that this was a u.s. kit. its not made in uk by an aircrar maunufacture.


i can tell you that it seems to have the original mast, yard and sail which is only the second one i know of. as to its seaworthiness etc i cannot comment.

a number of examples exist in museums in the uk but these museums have little or no correct info about them. one notable museum spent £1000's on there display info based on unintelligent research - its all wrong; they even have the wrong manufacturer! i have tried to tell them they have got it wrong and how they got it wrong but if you have made a boo boo its not easy being told!

reference your writings... where to begin! i will tell you what you have wrong.

Grumman did not manufacture this canoe. you will not find any manufacturers plate etc on any examples; all you will find is inspectors stamps and part numbers; i have one and its restored for the water!

The rudder was NOT foot-operated via cables within the hull. this particular canor was developed for the tropics and used by various groups notably detachment 385. they were primarily launched from aircraft such as a catalina; they did usually scuttle any canoe, as they were sailed to safety even if the rv was unsucessful on the first occasion.

machine guns were mounted on this and other canoes. no motars or grenades. think about it.

i could go on but time is pressing. may i suggest you usemy discussion group as i am keen to find out the interest and understanding of the populace.

many books have the wrong info these books only have afew words about the canoes and most of it is inaccurate.

re the MSC ( sleeping Beuaty pic) ... its the one that goes underwater.. that has much history and its very very very interesting. i am able to briefly (19,000 words) deal with it because it was classified as a canoe!

regards to all

hope this doesnt stir uo too much of an ant's nest.

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 11:16 AM
please see my info see quentin rees

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 11:19 AM
There are more than one of these boats about...I have seen a posting with pictures taken in a gentlemans back yard in which he was asking for an identification of the boat you describe...one exists in the UK, and if memory serves me right, he has a link to the SBS site on his home page....I posted the link to his site here in the US but cannot now find it...I will continue looking. (The search is, however how I found this site).


they guy has since , i think, sold his unseaworthy example. only a few exist undamaged and seaworthy. two to be prcise. i have one. only one (in the uk )has the original sail etc.

there are many other types of canoes tha have never been identified or known about, until now.. see my reply quentin rees regards
Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 11:40 AM
NEW INFORMATION

my name is quentin rees and i have just set up a google group; WW2 British Military Canoes.

i have just finished my final (i hope) edit of my manuscript. from 160,000 words down to 100,000 words. the publisher said amongst other things that for their liking it was too long. They also said there it was an 'interesting and saleable' manuscript.


... the publisher actual said ' the depth of research in your work is deeply inpressive, although overwhelming might be a better description. you clearly know your subject inside out' ... followed by other constructive critisms which led to the re-write.

some publishers said as no-one had any or very limited knowledge it was hard to guage!

here is the synopsis...

Copyright Quentin Rees 2006/2007


WAR CANOES
‘Most Secret’ British Military Canoes of World War II


‘War Canoes’ is the complete narrative of the British Military canoe designed and manufactured during WW2. Unquestionably this is the first ever account of such craft; it is both accurate and comprehensive. The manuscript is some 100,000 words in length with many previously unpublished B&W photographs available.

Very rarely is there an opportunity to bring to the world something that has not been written about before; this is one such rarity.

The ‘War Canoes’ story represents the first and only definitive reference work of the entire History and Development of British Military Canoes during World War Two during 1939 to 1945; but it is indeed much more than this. It contains intricate details woven with events as well as the technology, design and the manufacture of the military canoe; it shows how the world of the canoe coloured so many areas as well as the lives of many skilled individuals.

Whilst it is a very human story about a most unusual mode of warfare it is also a celebration of those individuals who have become part of canoe history, both civilian and Military, some of great fame, many yet to become accredited through this work.

Whilst charting this fascinating evolution of the Military canoe, with the keenness to publicise the Navy’s very small ‘boats’, it is impossible not to include the activities of these craft in a tactical setting and to highlight exactly what was required of the units and therefore the men, to perform the tasks set, using these canoes.

As far as amphibious assaults and reconnaissance with canoes are concerned, a few audacious adventures of the Second World War have been written, but hardly any detailed and accurate information about the ‘accessories’ used in the various raids exist.

Much of the information in the manuscript has never been revealed before.

Few existing publications even mention canoes. Of those that do much is inaccurate and usually found in an appendix. Even the simplest dimensions are wrongly quoted. ‘Not a lot is known about this canoe’ and ‘no information exists’ are perhaps the worst of the quoted references that can be mentioned.

Yet the story of the British military canoe as written is a very interesting one.

Within the manuscript 24 canoes are identified with a full description; with a further 17 canoes dealt with on a lesser scale, this being the entire stock of canoes developed, most UNKNOWN to Military historians and therefore the general public. The manuscript is evidenced by original source material, all referenced. Every detail that exists on the British Military canoe during WW2 is reported on.

This work tries not to be too technical but has this element included as an integral of part of the overall requirement to understand the differences and the technology used in the individual canoes. It weaves the description of an intricate series of events within many different fields that have shaped the progress of development from pre-war recreational use of canoes to the needs of the military during WW2, briefly showing how some of these developments have had a direct effect and bearing on a much larger vessel of the modern day.

It tells of the epic journey of progress that canoe development took from Scotland and Cornwall, London, Cambridge, Gosport, Brentford, Warwick, Poole, Southampton, to the Island of Wight in the Solent to the tropical Island of Sri Lanka.

The work chronicles all the detailed specifications and gives a timeline during the trials and tribulations experienced within military canoe development. It explains the journey each particular ‘mark’ took and how the development stages brought about each new genus of canoe for the military. Many of these stages were pivotal moments, giving an important insight into a new organisation that required a fast moving set of operational methodologies in order to deliver what was required.

From the talents of a few the ‘War Canoe’ became a greater craft than that of recreational transport. The military used civilian held skills and technology to push the boundaries; each step was choreographed by need.

Thousands of canoes of various marks and types were sent worldwide from the U.K. as far as Australia, and used operationally. Many details for other clandestine organizations are relatively unknown until now.

The work is a product of real life testimonies within the stories of the Commanders, Inventors, Designers and the University boat race connections; together with many previously unseen photographs. The endeavour is to inform so that even from photographs it is possible to identify each Mark.

The work also describes the purpose and some operations of the units, the Admiralty departments, Combined Operations and its various facets including the various Special Forces activities; each part adding to the raison detre for the canoe, pouring out the very essence of the British spirit. The narrative goes behind the scenes to expose the internal workings; it also explains how many different companies including those in the aviation industry were used to produce the canoes and the links between certain individuals.

There are storylines which included men such as Mountbatten, Tollemarche, Hasler, Montenaro, and individuals within and connected to the C.O.H.Q. as well as the S.O.E. and describes how the S.O.E. and one of the canoe inventors had a direct influence on writings of the author Ian Fleming

Due the military association within the field of amphibious warfare it will be welcomed in the United States as the base from which their hardware evolved – proven links exist in this area are highlight within the manuscript.

The work is not a difficult read; even with the craft descriptions it is easily absorbed. It will be enlightening and yet controversial due to it being in opposition to the small amount of incorrect information published.
The work needed to be written this information has been lost to our nation for long enough – to leave it unpublished would leave a void within British Military History.

Each photograph used is accompanied with a detailed and authoritative caption.

The originality is one of the strongest selling points about the work; it is the ‘missing link’, the means by which clandestine warfare was conducted by the various Special Forces during WW2.

Quite possibly it represents the most comprehensive study ever undertaken in the field of the twentieth-century naval small ‘boats’; deserving the description ‘indispensable’.

SEE the thread subscribe to windrider / quentin rees.

i should point out i am, seemingly, the leading authority on this subject matter.



regards to all worldwide.

for the U.S.A. there is some relevant information to do with interest from the u.s. about certain canoes during and post WW2

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 12:29 PM
hi

just a query

when u said "This rare and important craft was made in about 1941 by the Grumman Aircraft Corporation of America. ...
who told you this?

if it was the musuem its cos they were told by the idiot antique dealer they bought it from in sussex. no doubt this encourage the upwards price .

NO wonder they have taken the image from the site. the turkish museum are feeling a little chilly now!

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 12:32 PM
I agree that it could be post-war origin,
and that the original caption from the museum could be totally incorect.
since it's the only picture of anything like it.
What attracted my interest was the fact that it was in a Turkish museum web site. (maybe turkish marines used it) It's clearly a small, sturdy ocean-going vessel but as for now,
it's still a mystery!
hi agian
turkish military , i laughed.!

very sturdy , when mrror dingy's come in cos its too windy this little number comes into its own. it goes through the water like a destroyer.

regards

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:17 PM
no longer a mystery vessel lads.

regards
Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:23 PM
Also strange is the fact that this was on Turkish museum's web page...
Turkey was not involved in ww2?
And if it was sunk, it was intentional. These boats don't sink easily, having air-tight compartments like all modern fiberglass kayaks.

I guess I'll have to go there and examine it myself!



hi sorry to go on
but..
this vessel was bought buy a rep from the museum whilst in the uk its very lik;ly it came off the shelf post surplus or from an old chap who was in forces but never used this but had connections at time. i think i know who where .

its not like the mod day kayaks with watertight conpartments. each section had a watertight bulkhead.

you dont have to go to turkey to see it , there are a few in museums but they dont know what they are! i have one!

please dont post stuff that you dont know is accurate fellows, guessing is not the game.

regards
Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:29 PM
I’m not surprised the US Army got rid of that thing it’s a monster at 121 lbs. The L16 that is used by a lot of armies now is about 40kg all up (but am willing to be corrected as I can not find my notes). And a crew of 5? Even with a crew of 3 we still have one spare to make the brew.

They are talking about the 51/2in and probably for illum. To fire put a lump of wood between your legs and no problem.

As for the metal, you are not thinking outside the box. The canoe needs to be functional not impregnable. Aluminium has no added vantages over canvas in this instant as both produce a rigid hull but canvas can be flat and folded unlike ally. Also think of getting the thing out of a sub when it is rigid. The noise factor should be taken into account as well, bang the side of an empty metal boat against a metal ship and it makes a lot of noise, but a wooden one does not. And not to forget radar.

Now list the advantages of ally?



hi chaps
this aluminuim canoe is 18ft long . i ahve all the dimesions and blurb so stop guessing.

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:30 PM
I’m not surprised the US Army got rid of that thing it’s a monster at 121 lbs.

where did you find this info?

As an owner of a 22 ft fiberglass tandem sea kayak, that weight sounds right, mine's about 100 lbs. (but all in one part).

as for the little advantage of metal over canvas,
rigidity and capacity are the main ones. The fact that it has a sail and outriggers indicate that it was used in deep sea instead of rivers. Also mentionned is watertight compartments. (klepper type boats are more of the open-top kind, covered by a sea skirt)

Anyone having paddled into 10 ft waves (I did) would prefer the sturdiness over the lightweight, canvas type.
But this is not an argument about the design and which is best, I just want to know more about this particular one!
If you have more info on this, I really want to know if this is 1941 design and what is it doing in Turkey?


hi agian it was not biult in 1941.

regards
Q
its

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:32 PM
Sorry to keep posting.

I really believe that this aluminium canoe is just a tourist boat at the bottom of the med. Or it is not a Grumman product.

Sorry.

From http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-past516,0,5473146.story?coll=ny-lihistory-navigation



Edit to add:

In winter operations, the canoes would ahve been freezing. Bare flesh may have stuck to them.

hi yet agian
you need to have a look at my reply re ceylon.
Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:35 PM
I can't find any info on Aluminium Canoes, prior to 1944 that is.

I can't see how this canoe could have been for military purposes. No matter what you say about the strengths of aluminium compared to fabric and wood, the disadvantages of aluminium don't make up for the slight advantages over wood and fabric.

To manufacture this canoe would require large amounts of skilled men and hours, takeing them away from construction of say, Aircraft.

The fact that even today special forces use wood and fabric, shows that aluminium is not the be all and end all.

They are quite strong, I have paddled them too, including around some of the more exciting coasts.

It is perplexing to say the least. But there you go. I have a feeling this could have just be a tourist boat that has, er, gone wrong. Why would there be only one? Most raids consisted of more than one canoe.

They didn't have many attacks under sail either.

hi

it did require skilled men , to be precise aircraft manufacturers, it was built in the same way an aircraft was and had the necessary inspection stamps.

no tourist boat boys!

regrads

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:36 PM
To be honest I doubt any military force used it, except maybe to test.

The old style boats are still in use by many SF units.

I am thinking tourist around the Greek/Turkish Islands. The Turks may well have found it, but theydont say where. There are plenty of little islands in that area to go exploring. This craft would be ideal.

hi

there you go agian,.... I doubt any military force used it....

this is not good chaps.

Q

Quentin Rees
03-30-2007, 02:38 PM
Thanks for the info Super Troll, and Good luck in your search,
I wonder if this guy has other unusual things in his backyard?

I've been looking into this matter for a year now, with no results.

hi

tee hee

a year!

in my first year , there were 6 in all, i manage to find out a fair bit!

Q

except who made it.

windrider
03-30-2007, 05:27 PM
Hi Quentin,
Everything I knew about it is included in the first post...
A kayakist myself, I was intrigued by it to say the least. I Knew there was something special to it the first time I saw the picture. (by the way, it's the only pic available, from the museum's web page, and the info on the fist post is the caption that was associated with it (amost all wrong, as you kindly point out).
Thank you again for confirming that it was military, even if from the looks of it, I was almost certain of this...
I will certainly go to see your googling...
do you have pictures of yours on the web?

Thanks again
and viva da internet!

windrider
03-30-2007, 09:48 PM
Hi Quentin,
I can't find your group on google, can you please post a link ?
Thanks

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 01:55 AM
Quentin, any chance of seeing a picture of your canoe? And a bit of the blurb from you book about it?

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 05:19 AM
hi agian.
on further inspection of the canoe i am able to confirm that the sail in the photo is NOT the original sail. It is likely that the mast and yard is original although i should like to have a larger file size pic to get detail. the reason i say the mast etc is likely to be original is because it looks right and they would have had to of had an original to copy from to ensure it even looked right.

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 05:29 AM
Hi Quentin,
Everything I knew about it is included in the first post...
A kayakist myself, I was intrigued by it to say the least. I Knew there was something special to it the first time I saw the picture. (by the way, it's the only pic available, from the museum's web page, and the info on the fist post is the caption that was associated with it (amost all wrong, as you kindly point out).
Thank you again for confirming that it was military, even if from the looks of it, I was almost certain of this...
I will certainly go to see your googling...
do you have pictures of yours on the web?

Thanks again
and viva da internet!


hi W
put WW2 British Military Canoes in search under google groups.

its new and i doubt if people will bother, the reason being they simply dont know anything or very very little. anything they do know will likely to be mostly wrong as the info would have been obtained via an appendix in a book. hence my blurb in my synopsis.

when this new subject matter gets circulated there will be a growing interest. its like finding out there was a dozen or so new tanks that no-one had known about before; except that this is almost completely new.

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 05:41 AM
hi

its strange everyone has gone quiet!

no more supposition to deal with ! oh come on chaps theres more to life than gossip.

with regard to my example of this canoe....

doesnt anyone want to know anything else?

the google group WW2 british military canoes discussion group..

there is one image there. i have lots more but it is not about telling people things , its about finding out what the populace thinks and believes thay know.

all anyone need to do is ask questions. you asked some of the museum. why not ask the same questions in the discussion group.

i take it you found the turk site and your interest can about because you thought it looked military?

regards

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 05:42 AM
hi
i am about to cross swords with the turk museum. will report back!

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 05:51 AM
hi peeps

i have read with interest various bits from the site.

it would appear that the extraordinary secret Detachment 385 is not known of within your group.

maybe some of you might like to know/ find out.

it would be too easy to blurb it all out without an invite so let me know if interested.

Q:shock: :confused:

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 06:00 AM
hi W

further to my posts..

has anyone seen any other canoes anywhere in the uk or australia that look like they might be military?

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 06:04 AM
hi ref ..Very interesting story, the way it went to Turkey!
I remember asking by e-mail to the museum if there was any marking or manufacturer plate and they answered no... By the way they make their research, I'll be more suspicious with museums claims in the future...
Have you been on the water with yours or it is too precious to use?
Can't wait to have more details.


what details would you like?

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 06:11 AM
hi

Can't wait to have more details.
You can see pics of my sailing kayak here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jflemieux/sets/72157594247891626/[/QUOTE]

hi

if you like kayaks your going to love the info on the WW2 canoes. actually they should be called kayaks by the definition but the military classified them as canoes, but have researched i can understand why/how they did this.

about the only info about canoes and actions will be the cockleshell heros by lucas -phillips. a film was made about this raid .
very littleinfo about the canoe history and development is mentioned AND SUPRISING AS IT MAY SEEM LUCAS PHILLIPS GOT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE CANOE WRONG!
for myself when i researched this i found it to be easily evidenced. lucas phillips (LP) had help from hasler etc so its suprising that there was errors!

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 06:15 AM
hi re my canoe... no its due to go in water following its restoration.

i had to strip all old paint of then etch - prime it the sea-cock needs to be secured then a coat of paint or two.... then in water.

during my research i came into contact with a few of the chaps who paddled these craft. only one chap is left who is very lucid and i hope he will be there when its launched. he lives nearby.

Q

it'll be this summer, wanna visit?

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 06:49 AM
hi

its called a semi becaus it also could and was sailed and paddled. classification .. canoe.

Q

32Bravo
03-31-2007, 07:24 AM
hi peeps

i have read with interest various bits from the site.

it would appear that the extraordinary secret Detachment 385 is not known of within your group.

maybe some of you might like to know/ find out.

it would be too easy to blurb it all out without an invite so let me know if interested.

Q:shock: :confused:


Would that be those sea-soldier types paddling about Thailand?

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 10:26 AM
Just whack it up Quentin, that is what most people do.

You don't need to ask if people want it or not. Whack it up, if it get's no replys then you know no one was interested.

I like reading things on the more specialised units,

Others on here like talking about mainstream units.

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 10:34 AM
Have you got canoe like the one in the Turkish museum?

Or any other pictures of them?

One of the reasons there has been so much debate on here, is that there wasn't a lot to go on in the first place. If you know more then feel free to post away.

How do you know so much about the canoe, or it's sisters, in the Turkish museum?

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 11:11 AM
Have you got canoe like the one in the Turkish museum?

Or any other pictures of them?

One of the reasons there has been so much debate on here, is that there wasn't a lot to go on in the first place. If you know more then feel free to post away.

How do you know so much about the canoe, or it's sisters, in the Turkish museum?

hi 1000

someone hasnt been reading my posts...
firstly try this post by myself on the ww2incolor site..
New Specialist Military Information WW2 Canoes

anyway to address your questions and reiterate my posts.

yes i have a canoe as in the turks museum collection, and in a word RESEARCH. i know how and why this museum obtained their canoe; it was bought by one of their peeps from an antique dealer in petworth, sussex. he has obviously told the museum a lot of tosh and tried to inflate the price by giving it a USA reference hence Grumund ref.

please realise this canoe was uk built, aircraft spec and by aircraft maunfacturers. It was NOT manufactured by Camper and Nicholson regardless of what any museum might tell you.

the sail in the pic is not original but it would appear the yard/mast is; the yard seperates into two bits and is stowed amidships.

to be honest i would direct you to WW2 british military canoes at the google groups (i set it up as a discussion group , you will read why).

once you have read my synopsis blurb re new specialist item on new post you will probably realise why i know so much.

five years in the research and a year writing.

i do have lots of photos of various types.

but it rather seems a fruitless to do the research them give it all away.

i will be happy to put people right about what they are saying; there are enough errors from the museums and authors who have tried to write about ww2 military canoes so dont feel bad; just read the synopsis it sort of says it all... which is way its called a synopsis.

although it seems very grand to say it i am the leading authority on the subject and if thats in the uk its is also true of the world.

within some publications there are appendices that refer to canoes. most of the info is wrong. even lucas phillips who wrote the cockleshell heroes got the dimensions wrong, but i do know WHY he got it wrong.

the manuscript was 160,000 words and it had to be reduced to 100,000.

its a facinating story as well as the only true reference book for British Military canoes of WW2.

it blows your socks off.. even the chap who fought in ceylon with detachment 385 thought the read was 'incredible'. i might even let him know about this site.

i hope this goes some way to answer your post. why dont you go to the Google group and post there.
Go to google then groups and type WW2 British Military Canoes.
whilst the cupboard is somewhat bare there the reasons for setting it up are evident.

regrds

Q

windrider
03-31-2007, 11:14 AM
Hi Quentin,
I think I found it...
Is that it ? (had to use advanced search to get to it)
The picture, however, depicts a klepper-type kayak. Nothing to do with the
core of this debate.
I really would like to see pics of your aluminium canoe/kayak...
and BTW, when is your book due to be published?
As for what I would like to know, pretty much everything you can share, without putting your book contract in jeopardy:roll: (you must have some sort of exclusivity clause on this, right?)
What were the details of a typical operation? Tou said they were dropped from Catalina seaplanes, but those can't land if the sea is too rough (more than 3-4 feet waves I think, but maybe more). Also night-landing on sea is hazardous to say the least. Were they droped from other sources like fast torpedo boats, subs, etc?

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 11:34 AM
Hi Quentin,
I think I found it...
Is that it ? (had to use advanced search to get to it)
The picture, however, depicts a klepper-type kayak. Nothing to do with the
core of this debate.
I really would like to see pics of your aluminium canoe/kayak...
and BTW, when is your book due to be published?
As for what I would like to know, pretty much everything you can share, without putting your book contract in jeopardy:roll: (you must have some sort of exclusivity clause on this, right?)
What were the details of a typical operation? Tou said they were dropped from Catalina seaplanes, but those can't land if the sea is too rough (more than 3-4 feet waves I think, but maybe more). Also night-landing on sea is hazardous to say the least. Were they droped from other sources like fast torpedo boats, subs, etc?

hi oh dear

its not a klepper type canoe its a collapsible and yes it is to do with the core of MY site in the sense that this image is interesting due to showing the skeleton of a important canoe.

re book ask the publisher the cogs are slow moving

you have seen the canoe on the turks site. i am not about to explain all to everyone. its so easy at this stage for someone to get the info from me then send it on the web without any by or leave to my hours of research.

re catalinas

i NEVER said they were dropped from a seaplane. they were not dropped from any sea-plane. the aircraft had to land on water then the canoes would be decanted etc rv were arranged then the op was picked up with the canoe. they were especially designed for carraige in subs.

no read this.

i did say that THESE aluminium canoes were developed for USE IN THE TROPICS and i did mention CEYLON (for those that dont know its called Sri Lanka now). I will be happy to explain more on the google site.

ref photos etc there are copyright issues here; i know many members repro images onto the site but as a photographer i am very aware that this should not be done without prior arrangement with the publisher/author of the book... that goes for quotes from any publication.

various canoes were carried in various craft at various times in various places.
the reason the seaplanes were used was because it took to much time up using a sub and the sub was better employed in other matters.

even the cockleshell heroes raid was dependant on the commander of the sub TUNA not being sidetarck by something more pressing!

seaplanes also afforded the swift repatriation of men and stores (canoes) therefore maintaining a good fitness level as oppossed to using a sub that would take days to return and then not necessarily to the desire home location.

boy i'm tired now!

i think there is a need to understand the M.O. with regards to the special forces and actions apart from the units that seem to be 'popular'.

Force 136; detachment 385; COPPS etc etc.

regards
Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 11:56 AM
Subscribe the following address to your mailing list so that the messages from your list will reach this Google Group:
WW2BMC-garchive-48987@googlegroups.com

windrider
03-31-2007, 12:01 PM
Ceylon huh?
never heard of this major operation before!
picked from: http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation%20history/WW2/involved.htm
Ceylon
The island of Sri Lanka, or Ceylon, as it was then called, was used as a naval base for allied operations. On 5 April 1942 over 300 aircraft from Japanese carriers bombed the island. Winston Churchill called it "the most dangerous moment" of World War II, as the Japanese fleet wished to have a surprise attack on the British fleet. They did not see a repeat of the attack at Pearl Harbor as the British ships were moved to Addu Atoll, 600 miles south-west of Ceylon. Nevertheless, the British Eastern Fleet lost an aircraft carrier, two cruisers and two destroyers, while the RAF saw its squadrons massacred. The British fleet retreated to East Africa until 1944.

The Ceylon Garrison Artillery on Horsburgh Island in the Cocos Islands mutinied on the night of 8/9 May, intending to hand the islands over to the Japanese. The mutiny took place partly because of the agitation by the Lanka Sama Samaja Party. The mutiny was suppressed and three of the mutineers were the only British Commonwealth troops to be executed for mutiny during the Second World War. Bombadier Gratien Fernando, the leader of the mutiny, was defiant to the end, confident of his place in the annals of history as a fighter for freedom.

No Sri Lankan combat regiment was deployed by the British in a combat situation after the Cocos Islands Mutiny, although Supply & Transport Corps troops were used in rear areas in the Middle East. The defences of Sri Lanka were beefed up to three British army divisions because the island was strategically important, holding almost all the British Empire's resources of rubber. Rationing was instituted so that Sri Lankans were comparatively better fed than their Indian neighbours, in order to prevent disaffection among the natives.

Sri Lankans in Malaya and Singapore enlisted in the Lanka Regiment of the Indian National Army to fight on the side of the Japanese. While there was a plan to land them in Sri Lanka to start a guerrilla war, they never actually saw action.

I knew this thread would lead to some surprising, lesser-known facts about ww2...
That is exactly what I was hoping for...
Sorry Quentin for re-posting the picture without asking first.
I reduced it and considered it was public, so good for this thread.
Tell us when you have news on your publishing date, I'll be the first to order it!
This is like beeing a kid in a candy store, but with a bullet-proof glass instead of a door...

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 01:06 PM
hi

ok about pic

i had to be very choosy with which one i used.

i did laugh when you put..
This is like beeing a kid in a candy store, but with a bullet-proof glass instead of a door...

now you know how i feel.

i want the info out there it will create a great stir.

the bit re ceylon you posted does not relate to the canoe tack..

i will explain oh the hours i am going to be here!



Small Operations Group formed by S.E.A.C.

Officially formed on the 12th June 1944 it was commanded by Colonel H.T.Tollemache R.M. The group included four sections of the S.R.U., three groups of S.B.S., four units of C.O.P.P.S. and three troops of Detachment 385. These were based at Hammenheil Camp, Ceylon.

These units played a great part in the crossing of the Irrawaddy, as well as the Chindwin, by the 14th Army.
The different teams within S.O.G. could only be used in the roles specifically tuned to their type of training. All the men were operational.

The functions of the group were to…
‘‘.. Operate against enemy coastal, river or lake areas using as their final means of approach various types of small craft …. ’’

The Small Operations Group carried out 174 operations. It was disbanded following the cessation of hostilities in the Eastern Theatre in 1945.

Although there was a mix of various formations at Hammenhiel Camp very little was known about the purposes of the other, friends often did not know they were in the same area - there was ‘no careless talk’.

The smaller specialised units as is mentioned did most of their training which evolved around their equipment; within these units came additional specialisations.

Many operations by the COPP’s, SBS, and Detachment 385 were made in support of local forces throughout the areas mentioned.

if you can imagine these elite of the elite forces. the COPP's themselves were not even known about until in the 50's ithink, the U.S. media found out about them and their activities were gradually known of. i will not go on about them cos there is so very much info to get through. these guys basically were the people who planned the approach attack.
detach 385 was a unit with other specialities. some info is available on 385 but much has not even to this day.
i had to cut a lot out of the manuscript.
the amount of documentation and info i found that still has not seen light of day is incredible.

you really dont want me to start here.

i would get death threats from peeps who wanted me to stop.

i found stuff that has been unseen since it was archived and totally forgotten about.
in the uk recently there was a docu by a presenter jeremy clarkson who co -presents a uk car prog. he highlighted the raid on st nazaire. this was a largish scale suicide mission which involved a converted U.S. ship made to look like a german ship. ( it was called 'campbeltown' it was filled to the gunwhales with tnt and rammed the drydock. i wont go on but this docu had difficulty getting info on the 'campbeltown's ' design etc.

during my research a few years ago i had found the original blueprints of this converted vesssel in a place they shouldnt have been. the archivist was very pleased i found them.

the docu should have asked me! i would have told em where to find them!

stop i hear you shout

ok
snooze

Q

Quentin Rees
03-31-2007, 01:11 PM
hi not thai exactly, see my other posts to windrider.

Q

the reason no-one has much info is because it was so hush hush

Q

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 02:27 PM
Are you taking the proverbial?

Even if it was hush, hush at the time it is fast becoming less and less hush hush.

You can buy this book if you want...

BEHIND JAPANESE LINES (The untold story Royal Marines Detachment 385) by Captain Derek Oakley MBE RM £6.50

from http://www.royalmarinesregimental.co.uk/histsociety.html

Detachment 385 was Royal Marine Assault Force, which operated Phuket Island, Thailand amongst other places.

It was part of the Special Operations Group (there have been many SOGs, this one was British). I don't think it was called the "Small" Operations Group, the term "Special" during WW2 denoted a specific meaning, this was that the unit was dedicated to working in a particular theatre. Hence Special Air Service was a Specialied (dedicted) Air (Parachute) unit that operated in the desert.

Once the Second World War ended, the Special Operations Group, who operated in the Far East returned, to the UK, many of its men stayed on in the East and moved to non-specialised units. This was because conventional commanders and politicians saw little use for Special Forces in the post-war, Atomic Age, and started to disband the various Special Units.

The War Office Tactical Investigation Committee decided to raise and train short term shallow penetration Special Forces under the Royal Marines, while the other Special Forces' units were disbanded altogether.

Those sections of SOG which remained intact were transferred to the Royal Marines, and the men who formed the new sections were from the SOG (including the Special Boat Section, RM Detachment 385, Sea Reconnaissance Unit, Combined Operation Pilotage Parties and Boom Patrol detachments).

The small number of men stayed on reported to the Westward Ho! Hotel, which had been the wartime headquarters of Combined Operations Experimental Establishment. There were fewer than 60, under the command of Blondie Hasler. Westward Ho! has special meaning within this community because of this.

In early 1946, the Admiralty gave approval for the opening of the School of Combined Operations, Beach and Boat Section, (SCOBBS) at Fremington, Devon. Hasler produced a paper outlining his vision of the future, defining the role of modern amphibious Special Forces.

The SCOBBS would train a core group of men for beach surveying, intelligence gathering and sabotage, within a year it was placed under the command of the Royal Marines and merged with RMBPD and renamed the COBBS (Combined Operations Beach and Boats Section).

At the end of August the two units of 39 men and their stores moved to the RM base at Eastney, Portsmouth. By the summer of 1948 COBS had been renamed the Small Raids Wing of the Royal Marines Amphibious School at Eastney. Their first mission being ordnance removal in Palestine and removing limpet mines from ships in Haifa harbour.

At this point the guidelines for the SAS and SBS were laid down, a row ensued about the title of SBS. The RM won and was able to use SBS as a functional title.

The SAS were responsible for recce at division level, deep penetration raids, behind-the-lines harassment and training partisans. The SBS were responsible for operations against ships and coastal installations, shallow waterborne penetration raids, beach recon, landing preparation and ferrying agents.

Either could carry harassment of coastal targets, landward recon, capture of prisoners and eliminating undesirable people. However, at this time, the SBS were regulars and the SAS remained part of the Territorial Army. Specifically 21 Special Air Service (Artists)(Volunteers) (the Artists Rifles were a unit, first in the Rifle Brigade then in the Army Air Corps that allowed the Army to retain some SF personel. 21 SAS were originally the Malayan Scouts.

Suggested reading for all

Ladd, James. SBS: The Invisible Raiders ( Arms & Armour Press, 1983)

Lodwick, John. Raiders from the Sea ( Lionel Leventhal, 1990) (originally published as The Filibusters:The Story of the Special Boat Service by Methuen, 1947.)

Macksey, Kenneth. Commando: Hit-and-Run Combat in World War II (Jove, 1991)

Parker, John. SBS: The Inside Story of the Special Boat Service
( Headline, 1997)

Seymour, William. British Special Forces ( Sidgwick & Jackson, 1985)

Welham, Michael. Combat Frogmen ( Patrick Stephenson, 1989)

32Bravo
03-31-2007, 02:58 PM
21 SAS were originally the Malayan Scouts.


Are you sure about that bit?

Did not the Malayan Scouts become 22SAS, once they had got their lack of self-discipline sorted out?

21 SAS (Artist Rifles) were, and remain, Teritorial Army (TA), they were formed from the Artists Rifles, about 1947, after the SAS Regiment had been disbanded, to keep the SAS alive. That is why they have a more senior number than 22. If I remember correctly, the Malayan Scouts were formed from volunteers during the Malayan campaign, they became known as 22 SAS as the campaign progressed. They were a pretty undisciplined bunch in the beginning, and 21 were not much pleased with what the Malayan Scouts were doing with their name.

Would be interested to know the Malayan Scouts angle, I could be mistaken.

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 03:01 PM
As Ar

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 03:14 PM
It is a bit of a grey area and it will very much depend on your view point. My time line goes like this....

30th November 1946 - The SAS officially disbanded. (This would be the WW2 SAS, ie Stirlings).

1st May 1947 - the SAS is revived from whatever ex members and others with needed skills that can be found. 21st Battalion, Army Air Corps SAS, a Territorial Army Unit (The Army Air Corps at this time consitsted of the Paras, SAS, Glider pilots, RA Observers and some heli pilots).

1950 - 21 SAS deploy to the Korean War.

1950 - 1955 Malaya

21 SAS deployed to Malaya as the 'Malayan Scouts', in response to the 'Malayan Emergency' insurrection.

1952
The SAS is reorganised into:

22nd Special Air Service Regiment (formed from the Malyan Scouts).
21st Special Air Service Regiment (Artists Rifles)

1959 - The 23rd Special Air Service Regiment, a territorial army unit, is created.

Thus in fact, 22 SAS was formed from the Malayan Scouts, which in turn had been created from 21 SAS.

It is worth noting that 21 SAS was a Territorial unit in name only, it was not a regular regiment in name only. It was the last place various forward thinking brass could hide their less conventional soldiers. (Let's face it, the Guards were never going to take them!!!)

Those of the 21 SAS that didn't go to Malaya, would form the cadre of the Artists, those who did go, formed the Scouts who were later formed in to 22.

1000ydstare
03-31-2007, 03:18 PM
I beleive other units followed similar forming, ie, from one to another, to roughtly back to what they were.

Also many Special units were formed, complete, from existing units.

Similar to the current change of role for 5 Rifles (is it?) moving to Commando, I think the Somerset LI (and others) were re-roled as Paras in exactly the same way, "Oi, you lot, anyone who doesn't want to be Para one step forward, and bugger off, the remainder... Stand by."

Quentin Rees
04-01-2007, 08:05 AM
In order to better understand the elite forces of British military within S.E.A.C. it would be necessary to give some background.#

This background leads into my world of research namely.... Military canoes of WW2.

This sector of history within the development of canoes for clandestine operations melds into the aluminium constructed canoe asked about by windrider.

A synopsis of the manuscript from my research is available by searching on this site.

It occurred to me that many had not heard about the pacific clandestine forces and as a prelude to further discussions i offer this diatribe.

COPYRIGHT Quentin Rees (c) 2007 [all info in brackets]

[FONT="Arial Black"][Small Operations Group formed by S.E.A.C.

Officially formed on the 12th June 1944 it was commanded by Colonel H.T.Tollemache R.M. The group included four sections of the S.R.U., three groups of S.B.S., four units of C.O.P.P.S. and three troops of Detachment 385. These were based at Hammenheil Camp, Ceylon.

These units played a great part in the crossing of the Irrawaddy, as well as the Chindwin, by the 14th Army.
The different teams within S.O.G. could only be used in the roles specifically tuned to their type of training. All the men were operational.

The functions of the group were to…
‘‘.. Operate against enemy coastal, river or lake areas using as their final means of approach various types of small craft …. ’’

The Small Operations Group carried out 174 operations. It was disbanded following the cessation of hostilities in the Eastern Theatre in 1945.

Although there was a mix of various formations at Hammenhiel Camp very little was known about the purposes of the other, friends often did not know they were in the same area - there was ‘no careless talk’.

The smaller specialised units as is mentioned did most of their training which evolved around their equipment; within these units came additional specialisations.

Many operations by the COPP’s ( Combined Operations Pilotage Parties) SBS (special boat section) RMBPD (Royal Marine Boom Patrol Detachment) or Halser's Party as they liked to be known as, and DETACHMENT 385 (The ‘Bootnecks’), were made in support of local forces throughout the areas mentioned.

these were the elite of the elite forces.

the COPP's themselves were not even known about until in the 50's ithink, the U.S. media found out about them and their activities were gradually known of. i will not go on about them cos there is so very much info to get through. these guys basically were the people who planned the approach attack.

a little of the vast amount of info on these chaps..

based on haylaing island nr portsmouth england.

C.O.P.P.S

Combined Operations Pilotage Parties

The first C.O.P.P was formed in the U.K. in 1942 and in the words of Commander Clogstoun-Willmott they were to become ‘Rolls Royce equipped commandos’.

The actual cover title for C.O.P.P was Combined Operations Police Patrol as many of the cover activities of the unit such as canoeing in the dark near booms and gangways could be explained in this way. The Combined Operations Pilotage Party was the approved title for Combined Operations Beach and Pilotage Reconnaissance Party. Perhaps the greatest users of canoes were the C.O.P.P’s.

The party was never referred to by the word ‘reconnaissance’, but by Combined Operations Police Patrol Units or if essentially required C.O. Police Patrols, Naval Commandos or Commandos to the local populace around Hayling Island where they had their base of operation.

A subsidiary role was for Pilotage and/or canoe marking duties on any given assault and subsequent rough surveys, mine detection, guide and Pilotage duties.

The origins and value of reconnaissance work can be traced back to April 1941 when two officers, Commander Nigel Clogstoun-Willmott DSO DSC RN and Major Roger. J. Courtney MC KRRC, launched from a submarine in a two-man canoe and paddled themselves to within half mile of the shoreline of the Island of Rhodes.

For various reasons the value of such work was not realised until late 1942 when it was decided by the Chiefs of Staff that beach reconnaissance was to become an integral part of future amphibious assaults and to that end ten units were formed, trained and equipped so this work could be accomplished.

Commander Willmott was then attached to Combined Operations and along with two officers was instructed to build up the new organisation with a COPP depot.

By the end of February 1943 the sailing club at Hayling Island had been requisitioned.
Primarily Naval Parties, each team was commanded by either a Lt. Commander or Lieutenants rank with the appropriate Hydrographic or Navigation qualification and experience.



Transported to an area concerned via H.D.M.L, minor landing craft or submarine the final approach and task was carried out by canoes or with swimmers from canoes.

The very nature of COPP work called for a high degree of navigational skill. They were specially trained for detailed reconnaissance and surveys of enemy held beaches as well as the seaward approaches, land exits, provision for markers and guides for subsequent assault. A minimum of five hours of darkness was required for a successful beach reconnaissance, as well as fine weather (F2 wind) despite the workhorse , the Mark 1** being seaworthy up to F4 wind.
They had trained almost entirely with submarines; they also had trained to act as markers and pilots for the D-Day landings.

A typical operation with a submarine would consist of a party of four,

It took six months to train the Commanding Officer of a COPP unit (S/Copp) from scratch. The training syllabus for the ranks was between 13-15 weeks at the Hayling Island depot, and one week with a submarine.

The size of the unit on operations was governed by the capacity of the parent craft, usually submarine and the ‘offspring’ – the canoe.

At that time a ‘U’ class submarine could carry two teams consisting of two canoes and crew with enough room for a maintenance man or spare operational crew; the provision of four two man teams in each unit being the original intention.
At any one time there were rarely any more than 150 on active duty; during 1943-1945 the total number serving in COPP was a maximum of 250. They served in all theatres with the exception of the American and Australian Pacific.


The Officer-in-Charge during May-August 1943 was Lieutenant-Commander Nigel Clogstoun-Willmott R.N., D.S.O. D.S.C.; COPP 1 was the original team formed by Willmott which became the Training and Development Unit at Hayling Island.

During this time Willmott was concentrating on the preparations for the Normandy landings in which the COPP’s played an extremely valuable role, without which it is doubted it would have been a success.


In the Far East it was believed that reconnaissance was very important; the knowledge of the beaches in that theatre was inadequate at that time (1944) and as a large proportion of the operations were to be amphibious a considerable amount of beach reconnaissance would be required.

In early 1944 General MacLeod on behalf of S.A.C.S.E.A. had asked for as many teams as possible, but at that time the number of parties that could operate in the theatre was determined to the availability of carriers such as submarines, hence the introduction of Flying Boats.

In mid-May 1944 two COPP teams were in the Far East,
Fortunately a record of photographs showing various COPP’s parties on completion of training at the depot still exists.
Of the COPP’s time in the Far East, Willmott compared the foray in Burma with the Japanese ‘as not unlike those of crews in bomber command’. with the unhealthy water of Akakan, as well as the disease, many individuals succumbed.

Night reconnaissance was the only possible way to proceed as it was too easy for a canoe to be ambushed during daylight hours. Thus in these difficult conditions the intelligence was gathered and used for the 14th Army’s advancement south and east through Burma. ]


this is continued on an additional thread ... found it to be too long for posting

Q

Quentin Rees
04-01-2007, 08:07 AM
Continued fron canoe related info post new thread.........


A large proportion of the COPP equipment was that of Special Stores.
As with the evolved stores canoe use also changed, becoming more specialised as the need arose, especially in tropical climes.
The weapons included a silent pistol ‘The Welrod ’, Grenades 36M & 82 type, beach gradient gear and reels, special sounding reels, waterproof protection covering for various items such as watches and compasses, type 31CM RG beacons with batteries, type ‘C’ Mine detectors, underwater writing equipment, type ‘U’ RG Receiver.

The pre-depot training for Officers consisted of; three weeks Beach Pilotage at H.M.S. James Cook; 10-14 days RE beach reconnaissance at CTC Dundonald; 7-10 days of Naval beach organisation at H.M.S. Armadillo; 7 days of Navigational aids at H.M.S. Northney I; Three days with major landing craft at Troon; two days of photographic reconnaissance interpretation at Dundonald Aerodrome. H.M.S Armadillo hosted four weeks of naval beach organisation for the other ranks.

The depot training for all ranks comprised of lectures, endurance tests, demonstrations, exercises and practical canoe training. After four or five months the officers were required to be proficient in canoe work which included Pilotage, sounding methods and homing techniques, launching and recovery; planning of a reconnaissance; close combat, evasion and escape; COPP maintenance; reproduction of information by graphs and sounding data; observation through submarine periscope, sketching and photography; reconnaissance methods in surface parent craft - LCP(H), disguised fishing craft, including knowledge of beaching capabilities of various craft and capabilities and limitations of different types of vehicles and the role of the naval beach commando.


The training of the unit continued right up to the actual operation with increasing application of the task in hand anywhere in the world. Whilst in the U.K. each COPP, post training, was given further training practice in launching and recovery of canoes from submarines of five or six day’s duration.

Midget submarines or X craft were used in the technique of beach reconnaissance. The surface craft used were only suitable for specific tasks of short duration and were either LCN, LCP, disguised Prau, Caique, Dhow, and this also depended on the locality of the operation and availability of the craft. All of these craft could carry canoes for marking and swimmer carrying. There were distinct Naval and Army responsibilities.

The COPP organisation was quietly disbanded post hostilities, with the R.M.Commandos taking over the reconnaissance and special boat work. In 1945 those parties in NW Europe were regrouped and lettered A, S, M and E.

The name COPP became COBBS (Combined Operations Boat and Beach Section) and then S.C.O.B.B.S. and was based at Westward Ho! – Instow & Fremington in North Devon.

It should be noted that the COPP 7 Commander subsequently became Admiral Geoff Hall DSC.

Hall’s COPP 7 arrived in India in the autumn of 1943 and during the following twelve months was joined by other reconnaissance units eventually forming the S.O.G. team on 12th June 1944.

Hall nearly lost his life through becoming tangled in his own measuring line on one operation, when being used for a beach survey, due to heavy waves. The semi-conscious Hall was saved by his number one, Ruari Mclean. Both men were awarded the DSC for their part in the reconnaissance in Burma that later paved the way for Commando raids.

The COPP organisation remained secret until the American Press featured their work in 1954.


detach 385 was a unit with other specialities. some info is available on 385 but much has not been known of even to this day.[/FONT]


so chaps after all of this meaty feast this is a VERY small snippit of the INTRODUCTION of the manuscript. it has also been edited.

this info is not as important to me as most of the other stuff and as you cahps are interested in men/units etc it will give you a taster to the information contained within my manuscript.

believe you mee there is lots lots more. most of which has never been known of. hard to believe? i thought so when i failed to find out about canoes etc on the web!

this was hard graft for me so allow me a little secrecy on my subject matter.

interested in canoes WW2? think you know info on same try WW2 british military canoes on GOOGLE GROUPS. POST some messages and tell all!

if you have or know of a military looking canoe post info

ok?
snooze

Q

Quentin Rees
04-01-2007, 08:45 AM
I thought as a tribute to this group of chaps i would post the detachment song

We're happy,were happy, were glad to be alive,
for we are the boys of old 385
we'll fight and we'll fight,we'll fight any foe,
we are the 'bootnecks' who never say no!

we live on what we can borrow,
we dont give a damn for tomorrow,
all we want is beer, baccy and wait for it - wait for it.

down in our camp there are sergeants in rows,
where they get stripes from Lord only knows.
they stand on the square and they bawl and they shout,
all about things thay know nothing about.

sing high! sing low! wherever you go
we are the 'bootnecks' who never say no.

ops undertaken by the 385..

(all operations 1945 and burma except were indicated.)

feb
'attempt' in chaungtha, ngayokkaung and sinma
march
'copyright' (siam); chaungtha 2; bruteforce 1; noah 2 (off Malaya); bruteforce 2; pagoda point; meridian & cattle (Sumatra); clearance baker (Saim); defraud (Nicobar Isalnds); fairy; carpenter 3 (malaya); graph (Siam); slumber (off Sumatra); subtract (Siam); subtract (Siam)

aug/sept 1945 - occupation of penang malaya

these guys were based off the jaffna pennisula of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) at hammenheil camp (old dutch fort hammenheil nearby camp).

please realise the distances travelled and realise also that all these chaps had a great realisation that they might well not return from an operation. due to their M.O. very few perished.

operation Copyright

two members Major J Maxwell and Ex 682 C/Sgt E C Smith were executed ( 20th July 1945) by the japs by the sword ( beheading ) firstly buried at johore bahru there bodies now rest at Kranji war cemetery in singapore plot 23 row a 12-14 also beheaded at the same time was F/O Tomlinson.

the two japanese offices who carried out this execution werte found out and after confessing and to save the honour of their superior officers they made the ' amend honorable' ( hari )

details of this can be found from the hq malaya command intelligence summary no 10, which was based on information recieved up to 5th jan 46

a happy note is that by some quirk the relative of the F/O tomlinson had no thought he had been lost at sea. it was many years later that the true fate was revealed.

Q

1000ydstare
04-01-2007, 09:16 AM
Very nice Q.

How about posting it all on one thread though?

Start the thread, and then put the rest ina reply. Starting multiple threads just muddies the waters.

Can a mod merge these two threads please?

Dani
04-01-2007, 10:58 AM
Very nice Q.
Can a mod merge these two threads please?

So far, all related threads have been merged.

Quentin Rees
04-01-2007, 01:16 PM
forgive me but the machine would let me post all the words written and as i am so stupid i took the road most travelled for once ie the easy routee!

Q

Quentin Rees
04-01-2007, 01:39 PM
Are you taking the proverbial?

Even if it was hush, hush at the time it is fast becoming less and less hush hush.

You can buy this book if you want...

BEHIND JAPANESE LINES (The untold story Royal Marines Detachment 385) by Captain Derek Oakley MBE RM £6.50

from http://www.royalmarinesregimental.co.uk/histsociety.html

Detachment 385 was Royal Marine Assault Force, which operated Phuket Island, Thailand amongst other places.

It was part of the Special Operations Group (there have been many SOGs, this one was British). I don't think it was called the "Small" Operations Group, the term "Special" during WW2 denoted a specific meaning, this was that the unit was dedicated to working in a particular theatre. Hence Special Air Service was a Specialied (dedicted) Air (Parachute) unit that operated in the desert.

Once the Second World War ended, the Special Operations Group, who operated in the Far East returned, to the UK, many of its men stayed on in the East and moved to non-specialised units. This was because conventional commanders and politicians saw little use for Special Forces in the post-war, Atomic Age, and started to disband the various Special Units.



Suggested reading for all

Ladd, James. SBS: The Invisible Raiders ( Arms & Armour Press, 1983)

Lodwick, John. Raiders from the Sea ( Lionel Leventhal, 1990) (originally published as The Filibusters:The Story of the Special Boat Service by Methuen, 1947.)

Macksey, Kenneth. Commando: Hit-and-Run Combat in World War II (Jove, 1991)

Parker, John. SBS: The Inside Story of the Special Boat Service
( Headline, 1997)

Seymour, William. British Special Forces ( Sidgwick & Jackson, 1985)

Welham, Michael. Combat Frogmen ( Patrick Stephenson, 1989)


i reather think your mistaken.

it was hush hush at the time. obviously not now.

most of canoe info in these books is inaccurate. end of.

IT WAS called Small ops group.. so when you say 'i dont think' please do b4 posting.

i have done an aweful lot of homework and when pro's or amatuers think they are right it often means they have read it and not researched it.

there is many an author who instead of going to source material has taken what has been written in other publication as correct. mistakes are therefore made.

i have already listed the ops of 385 FROM Ceylon to various areas concerned, your mail does not state that they operated from ceylon but i understand what you mean. others may not.

i am aware of the oakley book. i ahve it! i am also aware that most of the info is not written but lifted almost entirely from org archive material. i have seen it. in fact oakley has made certain mistake.

these above points were confirmed when i talk to the RM archivists who also came to the same conclusions i reached.

the oakley book is not so much a book but a small notebook.

ladds invisible raiders is most amusing when it comes to getting accurate info on canoes!

i could waste my time telling you but i cannot be bothered.

it REALLY irritates me when someone puports the know yet makes so many basic mistakes.. i think its called lazyness.

ladd only deals with men and ops the other info on canoes is a sideshow full of inaccurate info.

regards

32Bravo
04-01-2007, 01:59 PM
I beleive other units followed similar forming, ie, from one to another, to roughtly back to what they were.

Also many Special units were formed, complete, from existing units.

Similar to the current change of role for 5 Rifles (is it?) moving to Commando, I think the Somerset LI (and others) were re-roled as Paras in exactly the same way, "Oi, you lot, anyone who doesn't want to be Para one step forward, and bugger off, the remainder... Stand by."

I have some other information on this, but I want to check it with a couple of chums. I'll post it later on a different thread.

By the way. The British SAS in WW2 were 1SAS and 2SAS When the TA regiment was formed through the Artists, it was those past numbers which gave it its identification. There was already some unit or other designated '12' (Para, I think) so, they reversed the numbers and it became designated 21SAS (just in case you didn't know that :D ) There were others in WW2, by the way, 3, 4 etc...French, Belgian etc.

32Bravo
04-01-2007, 02:05 PM
It is worth noting that 21 SAS was a Territorial unit in name only, it was not a regular regiment in name only. It was the last place various forward thinking brass could hide their less conventional soldiers. (Let's face it, the Guards were never going to take them!!!)

When 'G' Squadron, 22 SAS was first formed, its members were selected from the Guards Division, hence: 'G' Squadron.

Aye

windrider
04-01-2007, 02:15 PM
Thanks for the great info Quentin.
I'll "see ya" on your google group in the future

Quentin Rees
04-02-2007, 04:41 PM
hi given my limited field of interest i rather think its best

regards

ps when anything ww2 comes up ask me please.

Q

Panzerknacker
04-06-2007, 11:31 AM
Off topic messages deleted. Supertroll, I hope that your nickname does not indicate your job in this forum. :roll:

SuperTroll
04-06-2007, 01:24 PM
I've sent you a private message...

The original Picture went to the discussion on this thread and WAS on topic....you cut to deep.

Panzerknacker
04-06-2007, 07:41 PM
All right, then put it again.

Quentin Rees
04-07-2007, 04:36 AM
thank you for wiping my messages. how is anyone going to know the acurate info if you do this without logic.

i would like to very briefly talk about irony as it pertains to Panzerknackers moderating messages.. its like ironing but better.

the is a certain irony that Panzerknacker should be moderating a BRITISH MILITARY site and then decides to wipe out some related british military information that no one knows about.

is there a little jealosy here? i know we have an aweful lot of history in the british military.
How say you argentina ; newton's third law comes into being agian!

i would not say your actions were moderate.

regarda
Q

windrider
04-07-2007, 10:31 AM
The very reason for this thread is to get as many info on the subject.
So please...
moderate the moderation.

Quentin Rees
04-07-2007, 04:17 PM
yes you did the moderator decided to take a canoe ref out! on the basis that it was not relavant!
i then answered then that was taken off.

so if you want to find out about the canoe you'll have to go to the canoe ww2bmc site!

in future i think i will let you peeps get it wrong and not bother.

Panzerknacker
04-07-2007, 04:21 PM
the is a certain irony that Panzerknacker should be moderating a BRITISH MILITARY site and then decides to wipe out some related british military information that no one knows about.

A little mistake by my part, in any case you can repeat that information. I apologize about my fast fingers.

SuperTroll
04-07-2007, 09:19 PM
http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/03/r/gatherings/thames/SBS-canoe-s.jpg

One of the most interesting boats was a wartime canoe used by Britain’s Special Boat Squadron, the Marines’ version of the SAS. It has outriggers each side designed to be quickly detached and reattached, so when the sub surfaced to drop the soldiers on an enemy coast, the boat could be hauled through the torpedo tubes in bits and assembled on deck. A simple lateen sail provides wind power. The boat is now kept in the Classic Boat Museum on the Isle of Wight.

Quote Attributed to Mr. Chris Partridge from an article printed in an online magazine....

paste this in front of the w w w in your browser:

duckworksmagazine.com/03/r/gatherings/thames/regata.htm

SuperTroll
04-07-2007, 09:24 PM
Quinton made note of errors in the quote... my reply and his response were deleted....if he cares to note the corrections here again I'll leave it to him...suffice to say I wanted to post a more detailed photo, if you follow the link above to the article and click on the picture you will get an enlarged photo of the craft to inspect.

Quentin Rees
04-08-2007, 06:02 AM
the trouble with this site is that you expect people with knowledge, who have had years of hard work, to post answers to questions and lazy unresearched statements. then when someone suggests a specialized site you can go and ask questions someone takes away the link and or the information on the subject trhat was being discussed - then you mumour in private messages about the person you have annoyed by doing this.

words like stewing in your own juices spring to mind

its no wonder that peeps write what they do; they know no better...



Q

Dani
04-08-2007, 04:14 PM
the trouble with this site is that you expect people with knowledge, who have had years of hard work, to post answers to questions and lazy unresearched statements. then when someone suggests a specialized site you can go and ask questions someone takes away the link and or the information on the subject trhat was being discussed - then you mumour in private messages about the person you have annoyed by doing this.

words like stewing in your own juices spring to mind

its no wonder that peeps write what they do; they know no better...



Q
My bold.

Dear Quentin, why are you making statements like bolded one? It was a trouble on this thread and not a trouble on this site.
Panzerknacker apologized already for his mistake. There's no need for you to continue with harsh remarks.

I don't question ever your canoe/kayak/etc expert capabilities. I do question your patience and your mood. Don't you think that studying very deep for so many years a very limited field, you lost contact with "the outsiders" of your field of interests being in your own ivory tour?

God forbid if I say something on canoe used in ww2 (or whatever).....
Instantly I'll read: "You lazy!
i could waste my time telling you but i cannot be bothered.

it REALLY irritates me when someone puports the know yet makes so many basic mistakes.. i think its called lazyness."

Do you think that is the proper attitude? The main purpose of this board is to share and discuss things, facts pictures, etc ww2 related. If somebody made mistakes correct him with finesse not harshly. That's my advice.

Think about it!

Regards,

Dani

Edited: Not sure what you expect. Maybe confirmations. All newbies to hail you as the ultimate expert on kayak/canoes used in military. Are you ready to learn not from books, nor from documents or from studies but from real persons? Time will tell. Maybe you'll meet somebody more expert than you are. I'd like to hear/see your dialogue then. Come on! Don't be so angry Quentin!

Quentin Rees
04-21-2007, 06:02 AM
i get angry because those who moderated should know what they are doing. i know there is no-one who is more expert than i . sounds very OTT but the info uncovered has not seen the light of day since ww2 therefore no-one else would have seen it therefore i do know more than anyone else. i get irritated by those who just take and paste quotes or books which mention items ie canoe. most of the very small bits of info on the ww2 canoes are wrong and iots very easy to evidence.

i dont care one iota about you chaps getting it wrong now, if you want to put .. and i quote...

If you post idiocy, don't get upset if you are seen as an idiot.... I don't.

Here endth the lesson....

if you were to read the previous stuff that has been posted you might understand why i am irritated.

i will happily let you carry on as before , there are a number of museums who also have made great errors through unbelievably poor research , in fact no research at all or based on heresay, so you peeps can hardly take the blame entirlry.
it is quite easy - I happen to be the leading authority on the subject matter. ( see synopsis above post)
when you need something i suggest you go to the site mentioned by windrider previously.

my trouble is the same as Prince Charles .. i dont suffer fool's gladly.

Dani
04-21-2007, 09:46 PM
Too pity that you didn't understand my message.

Eh, must be my bad English. So I have to hail you on your second field on which you are expert: English language.

Sorry mate, with experts like you, there would be no history to learn.

God speed!

You are always welcomed here, if you'll decide to come back.

32Bravo
04-22-2007, 08:30 AM
my trouble is the same as Prince Charles .. i dont suffer fool's gladly.

Then stop behaving like one!

1000ydstare
04-23-2007, 02:27 PM
Quentin, the quote you quote has nothing to do with you.

I can assure you of that.

If you are hurt or what ever, get over it. it is only a Forum, I could point to some of your posts and pick them apart. But I read them and learn from them.

This isn't Google chat or what ever you have been on before. We are a different (not better) different group of people. Many on here step carefully in to the unknown and do not idolise those who idolise themselves.

tford
10-17-2007, 05:43 PM
Two points:
The aluminium kayak in the Turkish museum is British. It is manufactured from Birmabright and most likely built by Warwick Aircraft, both of Birmingham, England. Similar models were made of laminated wood. These boats were used in Burma on the Irrawaddy river (at least) in the push against the Japanese. Many were fitted with inboard/outboard motors, and machine guns were mounted forward. Some were large enough to seat 3 persons. From time to time this type of craft can be found for sale on Ebay.
Point 2. Klepper (Johann) did not invent the folding kayak - this accolade goes to Alfred Heurich who first, a student at the time, who sold(?) the rights to manufacture the kayaks to Johann Klepper. This is my first post. I will go through all posts on this subject and answer queries, and make amendments to text where I deem this necessary

Adrian Stevenson
02-15-2008, 12:23 PM
Hi Guys, I have just joined this forum after reading this thread. I found it of interest as I actually own a WW2 British Aluminium sectional canoe. I think I am actually refered too in this thread :mrgreen:

My canoe still has it's original mast and sail. And as Quentin knows me, I am pretty sure the aforementioned original sail is mine ;)

My canoe along with a fair bit of info can be seen within the British and Commonwealth forum of www.wehrmacht-awards.com where I am a senior moderator.

I have owned my canoe since 2003. Since then I have been slowly restoring it and discovering info.

Cheers, Ade.

1000ydstare
02-15-2008, 01:06 PM
Greetings.

Where do you find the info on the canoe in your site? I couldn't find it.

How far along is the canoe? Is it ready for sailingin?

Adrian Stevenson
02-15-2008, 01:19 PM
Hi, thanks for the welcome :)

I have created a direct link to the thread on the forum:

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28044

The forum is written on the same software as here and likewise you will need to register in order to see the pics. ;)

My canoe is now fully stripped of all old paint and filler and is now ready for it's first coat of etch primer. I have bought an air compressor and spray gun and will be re-spraying the boat this summer. (Assuming we have a summer in the UK this year :mrgreen:)

Cheers, Ade.

1000ydstare
02-15-2008, 01:24 PM
Here's hoping you can have it in the water by Autumn then!!!!!

What's the crack with Quentin by the way? Is he as nutty as batsh1t or did we just meet him on a bad day?

Adrian Stevenson
02-15-2008, 01:38 PM
I will certainly take photos of the restoration as it progresses.

Quentin is the man when it comes to these items. I am sure he won't mind me saying he is mad as a hatter :mrgreen:

Cheers, Ade.

windrider
02-16-2008, 12:18 PM
Hi Adrian, and welcome.
I really hope you get a summer down there ! As for here in Montreal, we're burried (again!) in snow, when it's not icy rain.

I'm eager to here comments about the performance of your ship when sailing.
I started this thread last year, as I have a BIG interest in sailing kayaks.

As you can read on the start of the thread, nobody believed it until Quentin put his "grain of salt" (or I might say, a full bag of it). (Tourist boat ? come on...):shock:
That maybe the cause of the tone sometime not so friendly employed here. But I can understand the sensibility issues. Nobody likes to being told they don't know shit!:confused:

I am glad you found this thread and thanks for the link
Let us hope now for a quick spring, and a long summer of paddling:mrgreen:

Adrian Stevenson
02-16-2008, 01:39 PM
Hi, thank you for the kind welcome. I will certainly add some more pics as and when I take them.

We are hoping for a good summer here this year. Last year was a wash out with heavy rains.

If you have not checked out the WAF forum, I think you and the other members will find this link of great interest. It shows the same pattern of boat as mine and was kindly shared by the boat designers son. The article is in a British trade magazine which was published after the war in a typical "Now it can be told" style ;)

http://dalgety.org/CTD/canoes/copp.htm

Cheers, Ade.

windrider
02-16-2008, 02:22 PM
Hi Adrian,
Thanks for the very interesting article.
What is "muscle power" mean ? They obliously don't use paddles on some pictures.
Are the handlebars-like things linked to the propeller ? If so it seems odd, but they mentionned it's a prototype...

1000ydstare
02-16-2008, 02:58 PM
at a guess, it is a pedalo type propelled kayak.

Kizzy
06-26-2008, 03:24 PM
Kizzy has more info on detachment 385

ww11freak34
09-09-2008, 10:58 PM
the british used kayaks during one night misson to attack a german ship

Walther
10-02-2008, 02:28 PM
If used during the war then the pics must be out by now. 50 year rule and all that. Highly likely that they have pulled it because they do not know for sure if it was a WW2 design. The Grumann sites I have been on all seem to point to Aluminium canoes being manufactured after the war, or very late on.

Admittedly these may have been developed from an early war time design, ie this picture. But can't see why this would be so secret. Likewise if it had been a secretive unit, why did the boat survive?

For the mortars, I beleive the boats are still wood and canvas, but are fitted with a sort of board in the bottom for the mortar. It is probably the British 51 mm light mortar that is used. The book I read this in was about the SBS, by a member of that group. Can't remember it's title.

More here on the 51mm mortar.

http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_lm.htm

Here is another canoe used during world war 2 by the SOE (Special Operations Executive).

The Sleeping beauty, submersible and electric powered.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/images/gal_soe_sleeping_beauty.jpg

More here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/soe_gallery_11.shtml

Another picture here, I don't know why it is described as "semi-submersible" in the other link if able to do this...

It would come to the surface for navigation purposes.

http://www.knaw.nl/ecpa/sepia/exhibition/pro/images_pro/enlargements/Sepia_DEFE_2_1144_Br.jpg



Yup, the folding kayak is the Klepper Aerius. My dad used to have the 1980s expedition model, which was similar to the military version, except that the military one was black and the expedition one bright red. It comes in single seat and double seat verions. I still own a 1960s Klepper Master, a folding dinghy built according to the same principle (wooden frame with a canvass / rubber skin), which holds up to five people and can be powered by a 6 hp outboard motor.

Jan

Jan

windrider
10-02-2008, 05:48 PM
I know about klepper folding kayaks, yes they were used during ww2, but if you look at the thread starter, we are talking here about an aluminium kayak. Not quite the same, and much less known.

windrider
10-02-2008, 06:28 PM
At the risk of being "flamed" by the author/researcher, I post this for people who don't take the time to read all the posts in the thread, to avoid repeating...
For more details, go to google groups "WW2 British Military Canoes"

This is the example of the Mk 7 aluminium sailing canoe (Note: It's really more a kayak than a canoe)
The floats or sponsons showing on the side of the centre section are also detachable and secure onto aluminuim arm or outrigger arms attached to a sliding mechanism on the centre section.

The bow and stern sections have integral, round, watertight, pivitol aluminium hatches. this canoe also featured a lateen sailing rig and paddles along with yoke and rudder. It was used from early 1945 from a base in Ceylon notably by COPPS and Detachment 385 although other forces had the use of but it was the M.O. that dictated the use of various canoes; some units had differing requirements.
These sections are extremley light* - so much so that one man could easily portage the sectionss alone; although two men would normally operate.
They were carried in seaplanes such as the Catalina although they were manufactured with the thought of using from submarines. By the time they came into production the seaplanes were being used as the primary method of carraige as this allowed the men on the operations to maintain their fitness level which was of paramount importance; subs took a long time to get to the operation site which was often 1000 miles away. (Note: a thousand miles in open sea is quite a journey...)

So, this is what we're talking about in this thead. Nothing to do with klepper-type boats, as you can clearly see...


*Hope you enjoy

Quentin Rees
10-16-2008, 03:27 PM
I am pleased to annouce the publication of....



The Cockleshell Canoes





This represents a very significant part of British Military Maritime history never previously written about.

The National Maritime Museum Falmouth will have THREE exceptionally rare canoes on display in DECEMBER 08 in support of the book launch.


Along with my Mark 2, the bonus item is a canoe that has never been seen since WW2.

This represents the largest collection of British Military Canoes ever to be exhibited at one venue.



Even after nearly 70 years the memory and celebration of the 'Cockleshell Heroes' effort still remain with this legendary wartime exploit.
Both film and book were produced in commemoration.

Ten highly trained commandos undertook 'The Frankton Raid' on Bordeaux Harbour in occupied France during December 1942 in five extremely specialised military canoes.

Sir Winston Churchill believed this mission shortened the war by six months.
Admiral the Earl Mountbatten deemed it as the
"most courageous and imaginative of all the raids ever carried out by the men of Combined Operations Commands".


There is continuing resurgence of wartime historical information.

Now the entire world is introduced to an entirely NEW section of hitherto unknown
British Military Maritime History
with

'The COCKLESHELL CANOES'

The publication is a truly fascinating and 'gripping tale', and also contains the complete history and development of the
British Military Canoe of World War 2.

AT LEAST 95% OF THE INFORMATION WITHIN HAS NOT BEEN REVEALED BEFORE NOW

Those hosting book launches/exhibitions will be National Maritime Museum in Cornwall, Combine Services Military Museum in Essex and Royal Marines Museum in Hampshire.

Event Date Launch c.Nov/Dec 2008 Anniversary of 1942 Frankton Raid ( 30 Nov - 12th Dec)



Copyright Quentin Rees 2008







The COCKLESHELL CANOES



British Military Canoes of World War 2

256 Pages with 133 Photographs. Size 248x172mm

ISBN 978-1-84868-065-4


Filled with many rare and unpublished photographs, this publication contains a gripping tale. A tale about a most unusual mode of warfare wrapped up within a very human story. This remarkable account represents the first and only definitive work of the entire history and development of British military canoes during World War Two. Much of the 'Most Secret' information within has never been revealed before.

The story is a celebration of those individuals, some of great fame like 'Blondie' Hasler and the other Cockleshell heroes, who have become part of canoe history. Many others will have their previously unsung roles acknowledged through this work, a weaving of real-life testimonies within the stories of the commanders, inventors and designers. It tells of the epic journey of progress that canoe development took from Cornwall, all along the Southern English Coast and beyond, even to the tropical island of Ceylon.

Thousands of various marks of canoe were sent worldwide and used operationally, this represents an entirely new facet of maritime military history and shows how clandestine warfare was conducted by the various Special Forces during World War Two, including the S.O.E. This 'Most Secret' endeavour used the code name 'Cockle' for the canoes. One such 'Cockle' was equally at ease below the water as it was above; the designer even suggested that it could be used as a carrier for an Atomic bomb.

Quite possibly it represents the most comprehensive study ever undertaken in the field of the twentieth-century naval 'small boats'.
Deserving the description 'indispensable', it tells the dramatic story of the 'Cockles' and how these tiny canoes helped the Allied cause on almost every front.

windrider
10-16-2008, 03:37 PM
Congratulations !!!
I'm eager to read it.

Adrian Stevenson
10-19-2008, 07:18 AM
Here is the cover for Quentin's book. I cannot wait to get my hands on a copy!

Cheers, Ade.

Quentin Rees
12-28-2008, 10:55 AM
Here is the cover for Quentin's book. I cannot wait to get my hands on a copy!

Cheers, Ade.

Hi ADE

Trouble is when its read all those who have written will then have all the info and then realise that what has been written by members is no accurate.

For some it will take a while to understand the finer points.

From my point of view at least I wont have to 'defend' myself.
Anyquestions you know where I am.

And before anyone goes on about the content - its eight years of research and does NOT take info from anywhere but source material.

This is the ultimate on the subject - as you will see.

Re your canoe - have you understood the weave? That last bit was only found end Nov 2008.

C U
Q

bootneck
02-12-2009, 02:09 PM
Its funny , I was the provost at Eastney Barracks in Portsmouth during the mid 80,s before it closed down, leaving just the Museum, the point is I used to wander around the old disused barrack blocks and they contained gems, there were at least 2 kleppers of ww2 vintage as well as a human torpedo type mini sub. I wonder if the Kleppers are the same ones now on display a the MM

Quentin Rees
02-12-2009, 03:58 PM
Bootneck......

Sir I know who you are, I believe.

without indicating you will know well the writer of the foreword to my book 'the Cockleshell canoes' - Lt G Davies.
when I last visited him ( you will know his recent status I think) he mentioned certain factors and I have just put 2 and 2 together having looked and now noticed your location.

If I am correct I will mention you to him tomorrow.

Q

Quentin Rees
05-07-2009, 03:46 PM
Here is the cover for Quentin's book. I cannot wait to get my hands on a copy!

Cheers, Ade.


Dear Ade..
Thought you might be interested in some important and heavyweight REVIEWS on
'The Cockleshell Canoes'

This from Prof. Eric Grove - Review in Navy News May 2009.

' this volume really is one of the most original, interesting and informative to have appeared recently'

'an excellent and ground breaking work',

'described in great detail'.

From 'The Croaker' April 2009 issue by M.J.A.

'Clarity of delivery'.

'Rees writes well and his narrative flows'

'a stimulating and revealing tract'

'fascinating and detailed accounts'

Globe and Laurel - March - April 2009 issue by G.A.D

'remarkable book',

' this great and important military and maritime story - which he tells very well',

'good looking and man sized book' with 'stunning photographs'


'Navy News' is a Uk based magazine highly rated. highly subscribed.
'The Croaker' is a Subscription only magazine especially for Special Forces past and present ONLY.
'The Globe and Laurel' is a magazine of the Royal Marines.

The Navy News does a free on line edition - review is on page 44.

Apart from the additional Television to come there is only one other thing to report on....... Cachalot has been identified.

robbie
01-31-2010, 01:13 PM
Hello There,
I am an ex RAF dog handler who was at one period stationed in Ceylon. I am researching the many RAF/FAA stations and units that were in Ceylon 1930/1959. During my research I came across Royal Marine unit 385 at Hammenheil, The RAF had a small air sea rescue unit close by and used to collect rations from the Royal Marine base. I have made contact with quite a number of the 385 unit and recieved photographs from as far as Australia, also info on the day to day operations and training. Info Available !
Regards,
Robbie,
Researcher and Historian.

Quentin Rees
01-31-2010, 06:40 PM
Hello There,
I am an ex RAF dog handler who was at one period stationed in Ceylon. I am researching the many RAF/FAA stations and units that were in Ceylon 1930/1959. During my research I came across Royal Marine unit 385 at Hammenheil, The RAF had a small air sea rescue unit close by and used to collect rations from the Royal Marine base. I have made contact with quite a number of the 385 unit and recieved photographs from as far as Australia, also info on the day to day operations and training. Info Available !
Regards,
Robbie,
Researcher and Historian.

Hi Robbie, sounds interesting especially your contact with 'quite a number of the 385 unit' ... the late Mr Buxton maybe is included?

would love to chat over the phone.. let me have a landline and i will call you. I have one chap from 385 living very close to me and another not 10 miles as the crow flys. George Davies from 385 did me the great honour of writing the forward to my book , The Cockleshell Canoes'. He too would be interested. LETS CHAT.

Q

robbie
02-01-2010, 08:27 AM
Hello There,
My Home Phone is 91352 780489 if not in please leave your number with my wife,
Regards,
Robbie.

Nickdfresh
02-02-2010, 01:52 PM
You guys are free to do what you want, but I must say I highly recommend you use the PM function, or email, to exchange phone numbers in the future...

Quentin Rees
02-02-2010, 02:20 PM
We're British of course its all fuss and nonsense to us! We liberated Europe and the far east and spent until 2007 paying back the war loans to do what we want. hell thats what its all about... oh! what fun.. to be naughty! I'm 110 you know ... ;):lol:

desmcd
07-05-2010, 05:21 PM
My dad was with Force 385 and is still alive and kicking here in California. He just had his 84th birthday. He has told me many stories of his time in Ceylon, Hammenheil Camp and in the Kayaks off Burma and Malaya.

I had no idea there were others still around with much knowledge of these things.

I'm sure my dad would like to hear from anyone who is still out there that was there with him, his name like mine, is Desmond Mc Donald. He does not have email or know how to use a computer but I can and will share info for him.

He will be visiting home this August-September down in Bristol.

Look forward to hearing anything from anyone interested in sharing info or saying hello after all these years.

Des Mc Donald Jr.
desboon@earthlink.net

Rising Sun*
07-06-2010, 07:35 AM
My dad was with Force 385 and is still alive and kicking here in California. He just had his 84th birthday. He has told me many stories of his time in Ceylon, Hammenheil Camp and in the Kayaks off Burma and Malaya.

I had no idea there were others still around with much knowledge of these things.

I'm sure my dad would like to hear from anyone who is still out there that was there with him, his name like mine, is Desmond Mc Donald. He does not have email or know how to use a computer but I can and will share info for him.

He will be visiting home this August-September down in Bristol.

Look forward to hearing anything from anyone interested in sharing info or saying hello after all these years.

Des Mc Donald Jr.
desboon@earthlink.net

I think it might have been called Detachment, rather than Force, 385.

If you haven't already found this, you or your dad might find it interesting, especially if you can track down the book mentioned as it should contain your dad's name in the nominal roll: http://www.cfww2.com/forums/showthread.php?483-Royal-Marine-s-Detachment-385&p=2057

The poster Amrit on that forum may be the same Amrit http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/member.php?3362-Amrit who posts here. If so, he's a nice bloke and I'm sure he wouldn't mind a PM from you on either forum, although he hasn't been posting here lately which is hardly surprising as he's clocked up close to 2,000 posts on the other forum since September last year.

Quentin Rees
07-07-2010, 07:10 AM
My dad was with Force 385 and is still alive and kicking here in California. He just had his 84th birthday. He has told me many stories of his time in Ceylon, Hammenheil Camp and in the Kayaks off Burma and Malaya.

I had no idea there were others still around with much knowledge of these things.

I'm sure my dad would like to hear from anyone who is still out there that was there with him, his name like mine, is Desmond Mc Donald. He does not have email or know how to use a computer but I can and will share info for him.

He will be visiting home this August-September down in Bristol.

Look forward to hearing anything from anyone interested in sharing info or saying hello after all these years.

Des Mc Donald Jr.
desboon@earthlink.net


Hi

Wonderful news

There are two others I know of , the best and most willing to chat was in troop 3 of the 385 and he wrote my foreword to 'The Cockleshell Canoes' - George Davies ( he was in Troop 3 ) was your father DJ or J mC dONALD? AS THERE WERE TWO CHAPS IN THE SAME TROOP WITH THE SAME SURNAME!!!! i AM QUITE LIKELY TO HAVE the most info on this subject and believe me there is another book there. Your father was in troop 2!!! if he is J Mc then he did operation CHAUNGTHA 2 AND THEY USED MK 1 ** CANOES , SEE BOOK.

HOPE HELPS

Q

Give my regards to your father... will PM you...

Rover
10-13-2010, 06:52 AM
New to this Forum and found this thread by accident. Some interesting comments!
So as a starter just thought I would bring up a few points.

1. For Semi-Submersible Canoe read Motorised Submersible Canoe. Nor were they built to be paddled.

2. Regarding Ceylon and mention of the SBS, COPP's and Detachment 385. Missing is the Sea Reconnaissance Unit.

3. Larger weapons that have been fired from a canoe. LMG, GPMG, 2" Mortar not to mention the 84mm Carl Gustav.

Regards
Rover

Rover
10-13-2010, 01:43 PM
Regarding other lesser known 'canoe' operations of WWII, the Frankton Raid being the one that the majority know about.

But there was also Operation Jaywick. Taken by a 'mother ship' from Australia three crews after being dropped off attacked shipping in Singapore Harbour. On completion all rejoined the 'mother ship' and returned to Australia.

Looking through these threads I also noticed a picture/diagram of a canoe on which there seems to be some uncertainty as to what it is?

IMHO I would say it is the Klepper Mk 13 without the skin on. Broken down into three separate loads to enable it to be man-packed, total weight when dry 112lbs. The heaviest pack being 56lbs consisting mainly of the skin.

WWII British military canoes tended to be called Folboats, not Kleppers.

Rover

Quentin Rees
10-13-2010, 03:09 PM
Hi
rover

Op Jaywick is mentioned in Cockleshell canoes book and a authoritative opinion is given based on my research. I think you should get this book as it will help you undersatnd matters.

the canoe in pic is not a klepper, period. you will have to read the info in the book to understand why people keep on referring (wrongly) to British military canoes being called folbots..

Its very likely that the Op.JAywick canoes used were mk1* or poss mk1**..

WWII British military canoes did NOT tend to be called Folboats. The military canoe during ww2 had a code name .. 'cockle'. they were not called folbots - thats a german term... much like klepper!
think about it

a klepper canoe being used by British special forces.... please sir can we order spares from the suppliers -- in germany!:lol::lol:

within the book the entire history is related.. it will answer all your questions and help you to realise where you are going wrong... if you go to a source that is not researched well then you will have incorrect info..






Regarding other lesser known 'canoe' operations of WWII, the Frankton Raid being the one that the majority know about.

But there was also Operation Jaywick. Taken by a 'mother ship' from Australia three crews after being dropped off attacked shipping in Singapore Harbour. On completion all rejoined the 'mother ship' and returned to Australia.

Looking through these threads I also noticed a picture/diagram of a canoe on which there seems to be some uncertainty as to what it is?

IMHO I would say it is the Klepper Mk 13 without the skin on. Broken down into three separate loads to enable it to be man-packed, total weight when dry 112lbs. The heaviest pack being 56lbs consisting mainly of the skin.

WWII British military canoes tended to be called Folboats, not Kleppers.

Rover

Rover
10-13-2010, 05:44 PM
Hello Quentin,

1
the canoe in pic is not a klepper
I refer to post No58 in which a canoe frame is shown.Which if not a Klepper Aerius is very similar in design.But it is on the Klepper web site!

2 Regarding the term Folbot.Well I did think about it.

I remembered that when the Commando units were formed in 1940, No8 Commando actually had a Troop called the Folbot Troop. A Troop
commanded by Roger Courtney using canoes.
The name Folbot Troop being taken from the company that made their particular canoe. Perhaps not a German company, if it was then it was
perhaps due to the owners name. One Jack Kissner who started the company in 1933 not in Germany but in London.
So perhaps it is understandable that WWII British Military canoes DID tend to be called Folbots.

you will have to read the info in the book to understand why people keep on referring (wrongly) to British military canoes being called folbots..
Perhaps I will pass on that.

3
The military canoe during ww2 had a code name .. 'cockle'
Bearing in mind that the term RMBPD was a cover name then again IMHO the name 'cockle' was born at this time for the self same reason.

4 Regarding the use of the name Klepper, I believe people are using this as a 'cover all' when refering to the military type canoe. In WWII
it was the Folbot that did the job!

It was not until the late 1959's that the Klepper canoe started to make its appearance with the British Military. In the 1960's the Mk13
Klepper Aerius being the model of choice with British Special Forces.

please sir can we order spares from the suppliers -- in Germany Now we do. Just shows how times have changed.

Starting to remember things I have not touched in a long time.

Rover

Quentin Rees
10-14-2010, 05:19 AM
the cockle name and how it came about and its origiinal author is also covered in the book.. kissner , folbots,, everything inc SRU etc etc... my research stopped just after WW2 they were still using mk1** canoes in c. 1950's these were the most sucessful and very like Kleppers but had air sausages on outside and could be removed..
Q

Rover
10-14-2010, 06:44 AM
One thing I have noticed about this thread is your continual 'pushing' of your book.
No problem with that, but I do find your response to anyone who tends to question your information rather disrespectful.

My only interest in canoes is just as a means of getting from A to B. Some of the technical information I find interesting, in the same field as I would put 'train spotting'.

Some mention about Detachment 385, there is a fair amount of information around, including reference again to canoes being called Folboat's.

You mention the MkIII canoe, why the **? Nothing secret about it.
Yes they had external inflatable buoyancy bags not to mention the internal use of bags of ping pong balls at the bow and stern.
Also I find interesting that it was Sir Malcolm Campbell who had the idea of a small petrol engine to drive a small propeller on a long shaft.
The purpose being to enable a quick getaway although by the time it was fixed paddle power was proved to be more effective.
On disbandment of 385 it seems all the canoes were burnt.

Amazing what one can dig out of the memory.

Rover

Quentin Rees
10-14-2010, 12:19 PM
Hi

If you had read my book even from a library you wouldnt need to ask the questions as they will be answered.... and i wouldnt have to explain over and over again. From my point of view after having spent 7 years researching and coming up with a whole section of british military history that has not been covered before its very wearing to keep on having to explain when by simply reading the book it will answer all.

for instance your ..'You mention the MkIII canoe, why the **? Nothing secret about it' shows that you have no idea about the subject matter and assume or are confused relying on other info which is mostly inaccurate.
i do not mention the Mk III i mention the mark 1 ** ( two star ) as a demarcation type as you would realise if you had taken the trouble to read my book. and as for secrecy yes there WAS something secret about it , not now but during the war years , as all were attributed the codename and all were classified as MOST SECRET.. hence the cover of the book...

I have evidenced reports that record the canoes being brought back to the uk to stores also you would find it hard to burn the aluminium canoes....

Please just read the book and you will have no more questions. I find it a shame that you have the wrong information when all you need to do is read the book.

enjoy.

ps DONT read my next book ... because i really couldnt cope with you deciding that the evidenced material within is not correct. It will be contrary to what most know..about the Cockleshell Heroes..

Q




One thing I have noticed about this thread is your continual 'pushing' of your book.
No problem with that, but I do find your response to anyone who tends to question your information rather disrespectful.

My only interest in canoes is just as a means of getting from A to B. Some of the technical information I find interesting, in the same field as I would put 'train spotting'.

Some mention about Detachment 385, there is a fair amount of information around, including reference again to canoes being called Folboat's.

You mention the MkIII canoe, why the **? Nothing secret about it.
Yes they had external inflatable buoyancy bags not to mention the internal use of bags of ping pong balls at the bow and stern.
Also I find interesting that it was Sir Malcolm Campbell who had the idea of a small petrol engine to drive a small propeller on a long shaft.
The purpose being to enable a quick getaway although by the time it was fixed paddle power was proved to be more effective.
On disbandment of 385 it seems all the canoes were burnt.

Amazing what one can dig out of the memory.

Rover

Rover
10-14-2010, 05:03 PM
Hello Quentin,

Well there you go again, read my book! I take it advertising is free on this Forum, because just about every post of yours is a continual marketing exercise.

You will find I have only asked two questions.
One referring to post No58, in which I was infact pointing out that you were wrong.
The second being in regard to the canoe classification MkIII as to MkI**.

The bulk of the remainder of my post being in response to some of your replies to members comments on aspects of canoe history both in and after WWII.
I disagree with some of the remarks you have made examples being, semi submersible, Folboat just to name two.
Your response has been to ignore or to become rather annoyed that anyone should dare question your 'expertise'.

Regarding my comment:

On disbandment of 385 it seems all the canoes were burnt.
This information from one who was there.
Think about it.

If I did read your book you may find I would have more questions.
Apart from that I would point out that people come on forums such as this to learn via asking questions.

I look forward to your book on the Cockleshell Heroes, you will be pleased to know I have never even seen the original book.
But I can assure you I will be interested in the content, as you say it will be contrary to what most people know.

Looking forward to your future post.

Rover

Rover
10-17-2010, 10:49 AM
For those interested in various canoes

http://i864.photobucket.com/albums/ab210/cahalot/TrialProject.jpg