Film: 'Greyhound', starring Tom Hanks - 1942 - A Convoy Edges Across The Atlantic - Release Date July 2020

syrup

LE
RAF?

Ewen Montagu was a Barrister who was commissioned into the RNVR and assigned to intelligence work, which led to his involvement with the deception over Sicily.

Many Barristers did intelligence analysis work as RNVR Officers.



However, who outside of the naval diving world would know of their exploits without the film?

I know he was a Naval officer
Did you not read the bit where I stated he played an RAF Officer?
He gets to argue with the actor playing him
 
Such was the nature of the beast, capitalising on Crabb being well known. Am I right in thinking the UWWP captured a human torpedo - which we then copied?

Did the Fleet Air Arm get any real film coverage? Escort carriers were crucial in the Atlantic and the Arctic yet what coverage did they get? I know Swordfish attacks were in Sink The Bismarck, but what of the anti U boat actions or naval fighters defending convoys?
The only modern FAA story is Into the White apart from that can’t think of any. More to do with post war films having so many stories to choose from.

The only other film i can think of is BFI Screenonline: Ships with Wings (1941)
 
Last edited:

Yokel

LE
The only modern FAA story is Into the White apart from that can’t think of any. More to do with post war films having so many stories to choose from.
I have not seen that and had to Google it.

The aircraft carried by the escort carriers worked with the other warships in the convoy and also RAF Coastal Command aircraft, so convoy defence would have been a difficult thing to film.

Swordfish attacks from the carriers Victorious and Ark Royal were featured in Sink The Bismarck.
 
I have not seen that and had to Google it.

The aircraft carried by the escort carriers worked with the other warships in the convoy and also RAF Coastal Command aircraft, so convoy defence would have been a difficult thing to film.

Swordfish attacks from the carriers Victorious and Ark Royal were featured in Sink The Bismarck.
and a Blue on Blue on HMS Sheffield, tragedy only being averted due to faulty magnetic detonators IIRC
 

load_fin

War Hero
"The Good Shepherd" is a cracking book.

Krause is put in command of a scratch escort, as the most senor officer. The CO's of the two RN corvettes and one Polish destroyer are more experienced, but rank is rank.
The story is as much about Krause' inner demons (washed up and on the beach before the war) as it is about defending a convoy.
I've just watched the trailer, and Hanks's Krause is nothing like the man in my mind after reading the novel several tmes. Still, I will make a point of seeing this movie. I'm optimistic; IMO Hanks is a terrific actor.
Just read the book again.
Krause was not "on the beach", but had been passed over twice for promotion to Commander, but then the war came along and the USN expanded. He was 42 in 1942; older than the average cdr, but not as old as Tom Hanks is now. I'm sure make up can make Hanks look like a 42 year old sea dog.

The book covers a 48 hour period, and takes place on the bridge of USS Keeling, from Krause point of view. Much of the story is Krause thought process; why he positions ships where he does, what and how to attack, and how he converts sonar reports into a tactical picture of what a u boat is doing. For me, that's fascinating, but I can't see it making a decent movie for "ordinary people".

In the trailer, the sea looks like, well, CGI sea. That's from the eyes of someone who has seen The Cruel Sea and other classic sea-war movies many times. A different generation will accept it without question, and the rest of us will grow used to it. It doesn't detract from the story, and CGI enables unfilmable things to be filmed.I will still see the film ASAP.
The novel has been republished, and I've just bought a new copy to sit alongside my 1958 copy, which is a little yellowed now. I expect to read it a few more times yet.
 
A bit like our own Royal Family who promptly ditched their German surnames and called themselves after the castle.
Watching something the other night it stated Queen Victoria's children despite being brought up in the UK spoke German at home and even in old age spoke English with German accents.
I remember reading somewhere that Prince Louis of Battenberg, the shamefully treated First Sea Lord, was criticised by the Kaiser before the first unpleasantness for not leaving the Royal Navy to serve in the mighty High Seas Fleet of the German Empire, which as a proud German he should have done.

"I was serving in the Royal Navy before the German Empire even existed," he replied. Alas, as so often in Britain, his loyalty was poorly rewarded by an ungrateful nation.
 

merchantman

War Hero
[SLIGHT FRED RIFF]

The fact that part of the crew re-boarded and subsequently claimed the right of salvage was challenged by the owners: their argument being that an original crew could not claim the right of salvage of their own ship.

The case went all the way to the Admiralty Division of the High Court. As, after the re-boarding, the skeleton crew had taken up no further offers of assistance (other than an escort when approaching port), the High Court held that they had, indeed, salvaged the vessel-the maritime laws of salvage being quite strict at the time but with no mention of the abandoning crew re-boarding a vessel.

[/SLIGHT FRED RIFF]
The right of the re-boarding crew to claim salvage was not challenged by the vessel's owners. The owners, in fact guaranteed the crews costs of bringing the claim before the Admiralty Court mainly, I think, to set the precedent and to fix the level of the award. The judgment of the court makes interesting reading. Counsel for the owners, Mr Hayward K.C. said:

Mr. Hayward, for the owners, observed that in the Admiralty Court it was frequently the case that Counsel had the task of criticising, as from an armchair, the professional conduct of mariners and impugning their veracity, but fortunately in this case his task was far happier. He was there to support to the full tributes to the behaviour of these claimants which had already been made by the managing director of the firm he represented, and not to quarrel in any way with the evidence which had been given by the salvors themselves. The facts of the case presented a picture of gallant and successful endeavour by British seamen, such as rarely came before this Court for award. After undergoing the superior attack of a German ship of heavy gun power, and all the privations following, the crew of the San Demetrio were in the happy position of realising the seaman's dream of a salvage award. They did that with the encouragement and with the good wishes of their owners. This was a story which would remain in the memory of those who had heard it, and it was, he submitted, a fitting conclusion that it should be recorded in the annals of the Admiralty Court in terms not only accurate but eloquent.

The Judge, Langton J noted:

Mr. Justice LANGTON, in giving judgment, said: I am glad that it is not my duty to attempt to do justice in words to the story of this salvage service. I should feel that my powers were very unequal to the task. I have only the lesser but by no means simple duty of measuring a just award as between the salvors and the owners of the salved property. This task has been considerably simplified by the attitude adopted throughout the proceedings by the owners of the principal portion of the salved property, who are also the employers of the salvors. The owners of the San Demetrio are not only frankly grateful to the plaintiffs but, also, full of admiration for their exploit, and they have accordingly assisted them in every way in putting forward their case in this Court. They have, furthermore, taken the unprecedented course of guaranteeing to the plaintiffs their costs in the action, a gesture which reflects great credit upon them and is in accordance with the best traditions of the shipowning community.
 

syrup

LE
Two other good films set at sea are The Bedford Incident with Richard Widmark and The enemy below with Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens.
 

DAS

War Hero
This should be another good WW2 Movie for the Summer -


They were filming on Horse Guards a few weeks ago.
I'll watch that. The book was riveting.
 
This should be another good WW2 Movie for the Summer -

But will it be better then 'The Man Who Never Was'?
 
Admiral King was so anti-British he wouldn't accept any advice or assistance from RN. Cost a lot of good people their lives.
Admiral King was anti everything not USN, And no ones found any evidence of his alleged Britophobia. For someone who supposedly ‘hated’ the British, he seemed to get along well enough with the BPF’s Admirals.


Admiral King’s attitude has sometimes been ascribed to anglo-phobia. This is not altogether true. Certainly the Admiral’s loyalty was given whole-heartedly to the Navy he served. It was a feeling which led him to look upon even the United States Army and Air Force as little better than doubtful allies
Vice-Admiral Philip Louis Vian
 
The only awkward point is that well into 1942 the US Navy (well, specifically Admiral King) was still loudly denouncing convoys as cowardly, defensive inventions by British defeatists, and the USN's anti-submarine efforts - such as they were - were based on "hunting groups" roaming empty oceans wondering where the submarines were; while U-boats, operating singly off the US East Coast, sank huge numbers of unconvoyed, unprotected merchant ships.

The US did provide a small number of escorts - more Coast Guard cutters than destroyers! - but pulled many of their ships out in a pivot to the Pacific, mainly leaving the Atlantic convoy routes to the UK and Canasa.

The serious action was in 1943, such as HX229/SC122 - the largest convoy battle of the war.

(But then calling 1942 "the early days of the war" is itself fairly indicative...)

it’s also conveniently forgotten that Admiral King had some rather more pressing problem in 1942 than some sinkings off the US East coast.

Much of his Pacific Fleet was at the bottom of Pearl Harbor
The USN was locked in a furious Pacific wide war it was losing badly with the IJN that currently had the upper hand
And while all this was going on, he had to move millions of men around the world by troopship convoys and move an entire Army to invade North Africa.
 

_Chimurenga_

LE
Gallery Guru
Twelve seconds into the trailer and I am already noticing mistakes ...errrrm ... "anachronisms".

The towel that Tom Hanks is wiping his face with is from IKEA.

 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
it’s also conveniently forgotten that Admiral King had some rather more pressing problem in 1942 than some sinkings off the US East coast.
Didn't we all? Yet somehow despite assorted crises and disasters, the RN managed to avoid the apocalyptic sinking rates of Operation DRUMBEAT.

Much of his Pacific Fleet was at the bottom of Pearl Harbor
The USN was locked in a furious Pacific wide war it was losing badly with the IJN that currently had the upper hand
While we were dealing with U-boats in the Atlantic, fighting convoys through to Malta, and had just lost Force Z and were trying to avoid being entirely annihilated in the Far East. It's a hard life all round.

And while all this was going on, he had to move millions of men around the world by troopship convoys and move an entire Army to invade North Africa.
Troopship convoys? Note the contradiction there?

King was refusing to allow convoy on the US East Coast, wouldn't use USN aircraft to patrol, and resisted USAAF efforts to do so.

It's not merely that he was distracted or busy, he seemed to be actively helping the Germans.
 
Didn't we all? Yet somehow despite assorted crises and disasters, the RN managed to avoid the apocalyptic sinking rates of Operation DRUMBEAT.



While we were dealing with U-boats in the Atlantic, fighting convoys through to Malta, and had just lost Force Z and were trying to avoid being entirely annihilated in the Far East. It's a hard life all round.



Troopship convoys? Note the contradiction there?

King was refusing to allow convoy on the US East Coast, wouldn't use USN aircraft to patrol, and resisted USAAF efforts to do so.

It's not merely that he was distracted or busy, he seemed to be actively helping the Germans.
in the grand scheme of things, Drumbeat was small potatoes.
the attrition rate the USN was experiencing in the first 12 months of the Pacific campaign was brutal, far more And at a far higher tempo than anything the RN was experiencing or would experience, How many fleet actions did the RN have to fight against an enemy in many ways better equipped and with an advantage in numbers? while moving millions of men in double quick time to Europe, Africa, SEasia and the Pacific.
Adm King knew ‘stuff’ could be replaced faster than the Germans could sink it, but moving manpower and not losing in the Pacific was the strategic aim.

the British fixate on Drumbeat, but in the grand scheme of WWII, it was a very, very minor footnote.
While the Germans were fixating one running up a few ‘Expertens ’ scores, millions of men and their equipment moved unmolested across the Atlantic to seal Germanys fate.
could have, would have, should have, The USN simply didn’t have enough spare escort ships in 1942 to be everywhere. They never had more than 100 escorts in the entire Atlantic theatre throughout 1942.
They couldn't lose in the Atlantic, but they certainly could have in the Pacific in 1942.
Once the Japanese had been fought to a very bloody standstill by Autumn 1942, the USN was in a position to do other stuff, like sinking U boats, that at their worst, were only sinking ships in a couple of percentage points.
 
Last edited:

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
in the grand scheme of things, Drumbeat was small potatoes.
25% of all the merchant ships lost to submarine attack, were lost in the first half of 1942. We lost 609 ships totaling 3.1 million tons (against a loss of only 22 U-boats) - that's the exchange ratio that both the Germans and the British believed could force Britain out of the war - and that was the rate of sinking merchantmen faster than they (and their cargoes) could be replaced, that was Doenitz's goal.

So, yeah, trivial stuff, three million tons of shipping is no big deal, there's no problem, et cetera et cetera. Why did we even bother with all that tedium? It's not as if losing merchant ships, their crews and their cargoes could ever have an effect on the war...


We put the U-boats back in the box and then pretty much wiped them out by convoying merchantmen, pushing air cover over those convoys, and building frigates, sloops and "destroyer escorts" - exactly the opposite of what Admiral King wanted to do. When the sinkings started off New York, there were fourteen destroyers idle alongside in the port: they stayed alongside while Reinhard Hardegen in U-123 sank seven ships (and only stopped because he'd run out of torpedoes!)

When even US historians are calling it "America's Second Pearl Harbor" (Michael Gannon) perhaps it's a little bit more of a problem than you seem to think.

After all, the US can't lose in the Pacific: they can lose some ships and aircraft, and maybe the Japanese take Midway, and... er... that's it. The Japanese don't have the oil to keep expanding (or even to hold what they have) and they built fewer aircraft carriers during the whole war, than the US averaged in a month!
 

Latest Threads

Top