Code-Breakers: Bletchley Park's Lost Heroes

bingaddick

Did anybody see this BBC Timewatch programme?

If you are interested in history, WW2 or computer sciences, this is a fascinating story about two men who broke the German Telex Code which was far more complex than the Enigma code which has been the subject of many books and at least one film. 

This is the BBC's summary

"Documentary that reveals the secret story behind one of the greatest
intellectual feats of World War II, a feat that gave birth to the
digital age. In 1943, a 24-year-old maths student and a GPO engineer
combined to hack into Hitler's personal super-code machine - not Enigma
but an even tougher system, which he called his 'secrets writer'. Their
break turned the Battle of Kursk, powered the D-day landings and
orchestrated the end of the conflict in Europe. But it was also to be
used during the Cold War - which meant both men's achievements were
hushed up and never officially recognised."

I knew a little about the story, much of which has remained secret until now, and some of it remains so. It is reckoned that this work alone, shortened the war by two years - around about how far the Nazi's were from developing nuclear weapons. These guys truly were unsung hero's and their part in developing the first digital computer has been hidden for too long with credit going to others.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016ltm0/CodeBreakers_Bletchley_Parks_Lost_Heroes/

stonemuse

You should try The Secret Life of Betchley Park by Sinclair McKay ... good book.

There's been a few on the subject, but this is more recent.

 

Apparently a good book coming out next year on Alan Turing  (by Andrew Hodges)

Uboat

I saw it and thought it was excellent. Real shame that they weren't really recognised in their own lifetimes. Also very annoying that the Americans claimed to have invented the computer, when really it was these fellas.

Greenie

Love all WW2 stuff, the Bletchley code breakers were something else though.

Recommend this stunning book:-

Between Silk and Cyanide by Leo Marks

stonemuse

Love all WW2 stuff, the Bletchley code breakers were something else though.

Recommend this stunning book:-

Between Silk and Cyanide by Leo Marks

That looks good ... going on xmas list

Greenie

Love all WW2 stuff, the Bletchley code breakers were something else though.

Recommend this stunning book:-

Between Silk and Cyanide by Leo Marks

That looks good ... going on xmas list

Wise move, it is one of my favourite books on the WW2 codebraking subject, Marks's father owned the famous bookshop 84 Charing Cross Road, he mentions meeting many 'famous' people there. Good read, I might dig it out and read it again.

BlackForestReds

I saw it and thought it was excellent. Real shame that they weren't really recognised in their own lifetimes. Also very annoying that the Americans claimed to have invented the computer, when really it was these fellas.

The problem was the computer that they built was top secret, so secret that Churchill had most of the machines destroyed barring a couple which ended up at GCHQ. After WWII we went straight into the Cold War and those machines were used to break Soviet messages so for obvious reasons no one wanted to let on that we had a machine that could de-code Russian messages.

Czech_Addick

Have to agree with Greenie - Between Silk and Cyanide is a fantastic book.

I'll definitely be checking out that Timewatch episode; must admit to not knowing anything about the story.

bingaddick

Website about the re-building of the Colossus Computer. 

http://www.codesandciphers.org.uk/lorenz/rebuild.htm

ColinTat

You do have to laugh when you get some historian nut going on about it chopping three years off the war.  Suddenly the Brits won the Battle of Kursk, what a crock of shit.  Plenty of Soviets were aware that the Kursk salient would be of intense interest to Hitler.  Plenty of other intelligence was gathered pointing to that being the case.  As if Stalin trusted intelligence reports from the Allies.  A huge build up of soldiers and material, constantly delayed start dates.  But of course Bletchley was the sole determining enterprise.

BlackForestReds

You do have to laugh when you get some historian nut going on about it chopping three years off the war.  Suddenly the Brits won the Battle of Kursk, what a crock of shit.  Plenty of Soviets were aware that the Kursk salient would be of intense interest to Hitler.  Plenty of other intelligence was gathered pointing to that being the case.  As if Stalin trusted intelligence reports from the Allies.  A huge build up of soldiers and material, constantly delayed start dates.  But of course Bletchley was the sole determining enterprise.

I'm not sure that the claim was made that deciperhing the codes won the battle, which as you say was expected and had been for at least two months or more. However it did help to give the Russians an idea of what the Nazi plan of attack in Zitadelle would be and therefore how to plan their defence and counter-attack.

The German plan of attack included over 90 different elements - from tank,infantry units, artillery and airplanes some of which formed the real attack and others were diversionary manoeuvres, making sense of that lot and a confusing, constantly changing battlefield would stretch the best military strategists. The info fed by Colossus helped the Red Army to plan and co-ordinate their defensive strategy. However the supply problems encountered by the German army delayed the start of the battle by a few days which shouldn't be under-estimated.

As for Stalin trusting the Allies - he had a good grap of long-term strategy and took whatever help was offered to him, but the Soviets did take the precaution of getting a second opinion. John Cairncross, rumoured to be the "fifth man" after Burgess, Blunt, Philby and Mclean and trusted by the Soviets, fed information secretly to the Russians and that confirmed what they had been officially told. They also had help from a spy ring based in Switzerland - the Lucy Spy ring which also confirmed some of the Nazi plans for Zitadelle.

 

bingaddick

You do have to laugh when you get some historian nut going on about it chopping three years off the war.  Suddenly the Brits won the Battle of Kursk, what a crock of shit.  Plenty of Soviets were aware that the Kursk salient would be of intense interest to Hitler.  Plenty of other intelligence was gathered pointing to that being the case.  As if Stalin trusted intelligence reports from the Allies.  A huge build up of soldiers and material, constantly delayed start dates.  But of course Bletchley was the sole determining enterprise.

So on the one hand we have a well researched documentary by theexcellent BBC Timewatch team who have accessed eminent historians view of the effectiveness of the intelligence and its impact on bringing forward the end of the war........and on the other we have your view that its all total bollocks. Well on balance I think I know who's view I am inclined to favour.

Nobody can possibly say for certain if the intelligence gathered by Colossus and Station X brought about a swifter end and the degree of shortening - its all guess work. I think if anyone is going to make a guess, those who have made it their life's work to study these things have probably go a better chance than we amatuers,

stilladdicted

I still don't understand the mathematics of how they broke the codes. If there is an idiots guide to code breaking, I'd love to know of it.

ColinTat

Hmmm BFR, a good grasp of long term strategy?  What like locking himself into his room and not talking to anyone when Barbarossa rumbled into his lands. 

 I don't doubt that Stalin adapted and well understood his political strategy, but I don't also doubt that a man in his position had deep paranoia towards huge amounts of information.  I'm not sure what you mean by second opinion?????

  Vast amounts of build-up of troops, huge build-up of radio traffic, captured prisoners, an improving and battle hardened Soviet General staff with improving strategic and tactical skills, a deep understanding of Hitler's Kesselschlacht and German general staff strategy, months of delays - waiting for Panthers, a snowballing of aims and arms, threats of invasions elsewhere - two spy rings, and various information from Bletchley.  As like most dictators Stalin wanted a pre-emptive strike, and was more concerned with territorial gains.  It was the Soviet General Staff and Zhukov that overwhelmingly favoured a defensive battle, and then encircle - something Stalin prevented over the strategy for territorial gains.

  So whatever the intelligence the strategy and implementation of battle is always down to the General staff and the men it controls.  Even in the binary scenario of Stalin pre-emptive strike, and Zhukov defensive battle, we can immediately see the lunacy of claiming that Bletchley directly led to turning the Battle of Kursk.  Without a vastly improved and excellent analysis of failures, the Soviet General staff would have struggled for strategic victory, let alone allowing for it's forces to fight to it's tactical strengths:  The Soviets many disasters in the battle would have been hugely compounded in a pre-emptive offensive .  Still historians and individuals love the singular analysis of success, it's just about what they can cope with in their simple minds and what hyperbolists love to sell themselves for.  A direct effect against Nazi U-Boats yes.

  Just on a technical front how much of the German's intelligence could be deciphered and disseminated to Moscow, and then onto the General staff.  Even what was done, how much of it got there in 24 hours?  How many Enigma messages were fully received, or when deciphered made sense to the interloper?  Was the whole Strategy of the Germans transmitted in one long message?  Steadily building a picture from vast sources, is that quicker than the Head of Communications General Staff, or the chief of Intelligence Army Group centre, or the deputy of the Abwher?  Considering Bletchley had huge black spots for German radio transmission - Stalingrad - and the official channel of information had trickled to almost nothing by 1942, that there is no evidence that The Lucy Group received their information from SIS via Bletchley - but plenty they got it from the Abwher/German General staff transmitted to Moscow within 24 hours - then you believe it solely went through Cairncross or some other perfect spy ring/link that there is no evidence for.  So it can be said by many more eminent intelligence, and Soviet sources, from a much more informed and critical view point that Bletchley held very little strategic advantage to Kursk and virtually no in-battle strategic or tactical help.

  I'd pretty much consider that The Lucy Spy Group, 3-4 months planning, on ground intelligence, knowledge of previous strategy combined to give a vastly accurate picture of Germany's strategy.  Bletchley possibly could have done that as well.  Intelligence is important, but their is little evidence to the fact that Bletchley turned the Battle of Kursk.  Their is every evidence that Zhukov and his General Staff, were a far huger factor, and gained their intelligence from superior sources.  It's frankly facile to purport it, and anyone who believes in the single keystone to success in such complex scenarios, should go and read a self help book.  Maybe a more interesting analysis is that of Stalin's adaptation after the Battle of Kursk to allowing his General staff much more leeway to formulate strategy, and Hitler's to micromanage dominating strategy, had more to play in shortening the war.

  

Henry Irving

I still don't understand the mathematics of how they broke the codes. If there is an idiots guide to code breaking, I'd love to know of it.

There was an explanation at the Museum which I can't begin to explain properly.  Looking for repeating patterns and connections as much as maths and then using that to "guess" which of the millions of possible settings of the enigma machines the Nazis were using.

 The japanese had codes but believe no foriegner could learn their language so the Americans broke thier codes before 1941

In the 1982 Falklands war the Argentine navy were still using enigma machines

And something that was obvious but I'd never thought about before going to Bletchley Park.  We had our own version of engima which as far as we know the Germans never tried to break

Stig

Found this whilst signing the Hillsborough petition. Thought it might be of interest to some other Lifers:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23526

HugoZHackenbush

A strange man by all accounts. He used to cycle around Buckinghamshire wearing a gas mask.

In those days homosexuality (if practiced) was illegal (difficult to imagine now). Hence the conviction.

Undoubtedly a genius.


I can recommend Bletchley Park to any war buff. Without all the wrens and strange Polish mathematicians it perhaps is not the place it was in the the early forties yet still it somehow retains its aura.

SE7toSG3

Fascinating stuff and I really must get up the Bletchley Park sometime soon. Could get into this side of history, when I was researching a book on wartime London a few years ago the story of Dr RV Jones and the breaking of the German knickebeam targetting system captivated me, also nice to see a program on history not fronted by David Jason or Joanna Lumley as often happens these days.

With regards to Colin Tats view, firstly history is all about conflicting opinions, as an historian I admit we are sometimes a little Anglo centric and overlook the size and scale of the Russian effort in the last war but were not alone, many Russians regard our own contribution in the same way as we look at Brazilians on the Western Front in 19114/18 (and there were actually a small few). As one of their historians once told me its all about numbers, the stand out stat is Great War - 713,000 British war dead
1939/45 war - 21,000,000 Russian war dead,

just staggering numbers, that aside a cracking program well done BBC

kimbo

Where has the quote option gone?

I have signed the petition, tragic treatment of a genius. Bletchley Park is not just for war buffs, to be honest i thought it would be very boring (we went before MK game) and ended up going back as there is so much to see. I had to explain to my friends kids what a telex machine was - made me feel ancient and i am only 49 . I have not managed to get to the Museum of Computing - only open some days.

Stig

Alan Turings birthday today. Anyone seen the Google codebreaker?