Thursday, 10 August 2023

The Royal Air Force Regiment in the Ardennes

Ukraines much publicised capture of a Russian Krasukha-4 EW command module in 2022 serves as a timely reminder of the fact that, sometimes, it is operationally essential to deploy sensitive ground systems into forward and vulnerable positions. How, then, can such equipment be protected?













On 16 December 1944, the Germans launched their final western counter-offensive of the Second World War in the Ardennes. Prepared over several months under the tightest possible operational security provisions, their attack targeted a northerly portion of the American front that was thinly held by formations being rested or given front-line experience. A less well-known presence in the Ardennes in December 1944 was the Royal Air Force. Specifically, in some of the highest terrain in the northwest European theatre, 85 Group had deployed 72 Wing’s top secret radar and communications units as well as the radar warning, visual observation and signals units of 25 Base Defence Sector (BDS). RAF Regiment elements were also deployed in the Ardennes to provide force protection - to defend the 72 Wing and 25 BDS units if they were attacked, evacuate them in the event of enemy threats, and take any measures necessary to prevent their equipment falling into German hands.

The various 85 Group units were spread over a substantial area, extending from Malmedy in the northeast to Bastogne in the south and Jemelle in the west. Based just north of Bastogne were the 25 BDS elements - 6088 Light Warning Set (which included both mobile radar and signals elements), and five observer units, so-called Wireless Observation Units (WOUs), which fulfilled the same warning role as the Royal Observer Corps in the UK but reported via coded signals rather than landlines. No. 1 WOU was in the Hollange area south of Bastogne, No. 2 was at Eschweiler, west of the town, while No. 3 was north of Clervaux. The two most exposed WOUs were much further to the northeast: No. 4 was near St Vith while No. 5 was near Poteau.

To the far northeast of the 72 Wing area, at Malmedy, was a detached radio countermeasures unit numbered RJ 5369. Otherwise, between Laroche and Vielsalm were the ground stations of RAF radar and radio systems used to guide bombers to their targets at night or in bad weather - systems such as Oboe, Gee and G-H. Although positioned at several sites (including three so-called technical sites near Odeigne, Pt. 5685, Regné, Pt. 6186, and at Chene-al-Pierre, Pt. 5395), their location was usually referred to generically as Laroche; their headquarters was at Vielsalm. Oboe had played a particularly important part in increasing the accuracy of Bomber Command raids since its introduction in 1943, but from the UK reached only into western Germany. After Overlord, the establishment of Oboe ground stations on the continent extended coverage further east, and the Laroche station played a particularly important role in this regard. The records also demonstrate that, in October, Laroche was the G-H releasing station for raids against Neuss, Essen, Leverkusen, Wesselling and Bottrop.

The compact interior of a mobile Oboe station's operations vehicle.
















The RAF had been deploying highly sensitive mobile radar and communications units into vulnerable areas for much of the war. Forward positioning - often very close to the front line and in some cases beyond it - invariably produced substantial tactical rewards. The RAF Regiment, although established to provide airfield defence, was first assigned to the protection of mobile radar units in the desert theatre, notably at Cap Serrat in Tunisia early in 1943, and had retained this vital role ever since.

Providing primary force protection for the 72 Wing elements east of Laroche was 2811 Rifle Squadron under Squadron Leader Goff. Apart from the squadron elements between Laroche and Vielsalm, one of their flights had a more forward role protecting RJ 5369 at Malmedy (as well as other radar units further to the north), and another was assigned to the protection of 72 Wing Air Formation Signals at Jemelle (to the south-east) after the German offensive began. For 6088 Light Warning set and the five WOUs, the protection role was allocated to a single troop of 2804 Armoured Squadron RAF Regiment commanded by Flight Lieutenant Walter Jay; his headquarters was at Bastogne. The scale of other RAF Regiment commitments in theatre precluded the deployment of a larger force.

The approximate location of the 72 Wing technical sites and RJ 5369,
under 2811 Squadron RAF Regiment for force protection.


No. 6088 Light Warning Set was sited between Bastogne and Foy, while four of the
five WOUs were further east, near the front line. A troop of 2804 Squadron AFVs
provided force protection.

Central to RAF Regiment activity was liaison with the Americans to obtain the clearest and most up-to-date picture available of the general military situation, a timely warning of any threats, and advice on whether vulnerable posts should be evacuated. The liaison task was chiefly conducted at the US 8th Corps headquarters at Bastogne, and - particularly for the exposed and remote WOU units - through frequent patrolling and interaction with US forces across the Ardennes. Communications were not always reliable, and the RAF made extensive use of dispatch riders.

Commanding the RAF Regiment elements supporting 72 Wing and 25 BDS was Lieutenant Colonel Leith (Army officers who transferred to the RAF Regiment retained their Army ranks), but he was conducting a reconnaissance in Strasbourg on 16 December. Not until the early hours of the 18th was a temporary replacement appointed - Wing Commander Mase. Field Marshal Von Rundstedt subsequently disclosed that the Germans knew the locations of the RAF ground units in the Ardennes and other details, including their strength and degree of mobility. He detailed to one armoured formation the specific task of capturing them intact.

The offensive started from a line some 30km in front of the main 72 Wing stations and the LWS but a much shorter distance from the WOUs and RJ 5369. In the action that developed, enemy columns thrust deep into the American lines; in some cases, they reached points 30km or so from their start line on the second day of the advance. In response, the Americans deployed armour and airborne troops, the former to Vielsalm, the latter to Bastogne.

The challenge facing the RAF Regiment forces protecting the radar and signals units was immeasurably complicated by the Ardennes terrain, with its high hills and dense woodland, which confined movement to roads and tracks vulnerable to ambush tactics. The roads used for the withdrawal were typically crowded with transport or entirely deserted, making movement either difficult or uncertain due to German penetration and frequent reports of parachute landings. These were mostly incorrect. The Germans only deployed a small parachute force to an area north of Malmedy, and their night-time landings were widely dispersed. Records stating that German parachute troops were encountered near Champlon, 50km southwest of Malmedy, may reflect a few misdrops but more probably resulted from confusion and disinformation among Allied forces in the area, or from the activities of SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny’s commandos.

No. 72 Wing headquarters learnt on 16 December that ‘enemy action east of Laroche had increased considerably’ and it was clear by the 17th that the Germans had launched a major offensive. The Wing’s commanding officer, Group Captain Phillips, then faced a dilemma. The importance of the 72 Wing ground facilities underlined the case for maintaining their operational status in situ for as long as possible, and this also promised to buy time for replacement stations to be established further to the west. However, on the other hand, there was (as he put it) ‘The need for preventing technical equipment of either a useful or a secret nature from falling into the hands of the enemy, thus affording valuable information as to the function and strength of these units, and the principles upon which they operate. Furthermore it was essential to prevent, or at least limit, casualties and the loss of skilled personnel.’ In his report, he wrote that ‘the two aspects were constantly balanced as the offensive gained momentum’ but we must also acknowledge that there was an inevitable degree of tension between them.

The initial RAF reaction to news of the German offensive was further complicated by the fact that the Area Commander of the Laroche units, Squadron Leader Wardropp, had left the Ardennes to attend a conference at 72 Wing headquarters. His appointed deputy, Flight Lieutenant Craig, was placed in charge at Vielsalm. The first intimations of trouble reached Craig at 1130 on the 17th. At this stage, 2811 Squadron RAF Regiment had not received any information about the offensive, but one of their flight commanders, Flight Lieutenant Hirons, left soon afterwards to contact 8th Corps headquarters at Bastogne. The Americans reported that the enemy were advancing on Vielsalm in considerable strength. Some 12 divisions had been identified, strong in armour, and paratroops had also been dropped. Captured orders had revealed that they were aiming to reach the Meuse, and the head of intelligence at 8th Corps urged the 72 Wing units to withdraw.

Hirons arrived back at the squadron at 1345 and briefed Squadron Leader Goff. Goff immediately ordered a state of readiness and set out to warn the other 72 Wing elements and the RAF Regiment units assigned to their defence. At the main Oboe site, No. 3 Flight stood-to and manned defences. No. 4 Flight at Regné ‘had vehicles ready with essential kit and rations’ to move to the Oboe technical site to defend it. ‘No 1 Flight at Chene-al-Pierre had been warned and all defence precautions taken.’ Goff eventually returned to squadron headquarters early in the evening.

Meanwhile, at 72 Wing headquarters, Wardropp had been ordered back to Vielsalm. He reported his arrival to Goff at 2215, and the two officers met there shortly afterwards to discuss the situation. Their greatest source of concern was the Malmedy unit, RJ 5369. Neither the unit nor it’s accompanying RAF Regiment force (part of 2 Flight, 2811 Squadron) could be contacted. Two RAF drivers had arrived from Malmedy early in the afternoon and had reported that ‘conditions appeared normal’ despite reports of German parachute drops, but when they were sent back to warn No. 2 Flight of the impending threat, they were denied access by the Americans.

Overnight, the position deteriorated. After reports that the Germans had captured Recht at around 0300, Goff and Wardropp instructed their units to prepare for withdrawal. The aim was to form a convoy of vehicles under the protection of the RAF Regiment. At 0800 on the 18th, Flight Lieutenant Hirons again left for 8th Corps headquarters at Bastogne. A conference there subsequently disclosed that Bastogne was directly threatened, that St Vith was still in Allied hands, and that Clervaux had fallen to the Germans. Remnants of two American divisions were holding out in the Schnee-Eifel area, while the US 7th Armoured Division had deployed tanks around Vielsalm.

It was now obvious to Goff that withdrawal was imminent, but he had not been able to issue any instructions to No. 2 Flight at Malmedy, where the situation remained unclear. At 0910 he set out to contact 2 Flight but could not get through. When he returned to the 72 Wing area headquarters at Vielsalm, Wardropp announced that Group Captain Phillips had been appraised of the latest reports on the developing German threat and had ordered an immediate evacuation. They were to withdraw to Florennes, west of the Meuse. A situation report timed at 0900 meanwhile recorded that radar and technical personnel were preparing to evacuate, that No. 4 Flight 2811 Squadron was standing by at Regné, and that No. 3 Flight was in defensive positions at the Oboe technical site and was also assisting 72 Wing to pack up. Subsequently, No. 4 Flight joined them at the technical site and took up positions on the Vielsalm road facing east. They also helped with the packing task. The first 72 Wing vehicles left at 1100.

By 1230, the majority of 72 Wing personnel had left their sites, and only Wardropp and two other officers remained behind. However, he reported to the RAF Regiment that a wireless mast, diesel engine, trailer and workshop had been abandoned together with three vehicles, which could not be moved because no American bulldozers were available. These vehicles had been stripped of their equipment.

It proved impossible to form a convoy. The roads were clogged with traffic and no vehicles were allowed to halt to allow others to catch up. Indeed, a local American commander threatened to bulldoze any stationary RAF vehicles off the road. Consequently, the 72 Wing trucks and trailers made their way independently to Florennes without close RAF Regiment protection. Instead, the Regiment elements formed a rearguard, moving off last to ensure that no one was left behind. Shortly before their departure, they were joined by the acting RAF Regiment commander responsible for the Ardennes area, Wing Commander Mase. All the RAF elements reached Florennes successfully except for one G-H unit, which was eventually located safe and sound at Philippeville.

The fate of the Malmedy unit and its accompanying RAF Regiment personnel initially gave more cause for concern. Again, the officer who commanded the evacuation - Flying Officer Yearwood - was not in the battle area on 16 December: he was at a G-H site at Ubachsberg, north-east of Aachen and across the Dutch border. He was sent to Malmedy the following day. This was the same day that Waffen-SS troops under the command of SS-Obersturmbannführer Joachim Peiper infamously executed 84 US Army prisoners of war at the nearby Baugnez crossroads - the so-called Malmedy massacre.

Approaching Malmedy that evening in a Fordson truck, Yearwood learnt that the Germans were nearby and was forced to withdraw to a Military Police (MP) checkpoint, where he met two of the Regiment airmen from the town. They had been sent back in the optimistic hope of obtaining information from the Americans about the military situation. Together, they set out on foot for RJ 5369s technical site, reaching it shortly after midnight, ‘a particularly eerie experience having to walk about 3/4 of a mile through the woods’. He found ‘all personnel as comfortable as possible and all at the ready.’

Subsequently, Yearwood returned to the MP position to find that American reinforcements had arrived, and made the checkpoint his base. The Americans sent out patrols to Malmedy and the neighbouring areas throughout the night. It proved difficult to obtain meaningful intelligence, but they captured several German paratroops. The following morning, one of the American officers took Yearwood to Malmedy by jeep. There, he found the RAF Regiment equipment and stores intact, but their billets had been taken over by the American troops defending the town. The Regiment personnel were contributing to their preparations. ‘They were living exceptionally hard, accommodation being tents, no blankets and no change of gear at all.’

Yearwood was out of radio or other signals contact with the remainder of 72 Wing and did not receive the order to withdraw on the 18th. On the 19th, his initial impression was that the position was improving. ‘Plenty of US armour and troops were proceeding down towards Malmedy. The situation seemed exceptionally good for the present.’ On this basis, and aware of RJ 5369’s operational importance, he devised plans to relocate the station slightly south of the town. As he put it, ‘This plan was to be put into action as the OC [Officer Commanding] of the [US] Battalion had told me that no movement by the enemy threatened the hill and he felt that as he was holding the [nearby road] junction, that it would be safe.’

Over the next three hours, this assessment changed completely. At 1300, the American battalion received orders to move and deployed to the Waimes area, south-east of Malmedy to take up defensive positions. ‘German pressure was increasing.’ At 1400, Yearwood decided to evacuate.

Throughout the remainder of the afternoon, he and his men worked frantically to recover RJ 5369’s technical vehicles and equipment, and the RAF Regiment equipment. A Chevrolet 30 CWT truck was filled and dispatched to an unrecorded but apparently safe location. The RJ 5369 technical site lay down a lane that was inaccessible to wheeled transport, but the Americans provided halftracks to tow vehicles to a nearby road. Meanwhile, the Fordson broke down and a motorcyclist was sent all the way back to Ubachsberg to obtain another truck; the bike broke down too, and he subsequently rejoined Yearwood. At one point, a V-1 flying bomb reportedly landed near the site without causing any damage or casualties: ‘Shrapnel also from HE AA dropped about as it was sent up at numerous flying bombs.’ By 1700, artillery shells were bursting nearby.

At 1745, the 30 CWT returned, and the Fordson was fixed soon afterwards. And so, at 1830, Yearwood, his RAF Regiment subordinates, and the RJ 5369 personnel set off in the Fordson, the 30 CWT and the RJ 5369 Austin. Conditions were challenging: ‘Weather misty, dark, and mud plentiful.’ But they found that the road to Aachen was still open and finally arrived safely at Ubachsberg at 0230 on the 20th. News of their successful evacuation reached headquarters 72 Wing the same day.

The 72 Wing after-action report subsequently recorded that the withdrawal was conducted in an orderly fashion, no casualties to Wing personnel were sustained, nothing of a secret or documentary nature was left for the enemy, and only a few vehicles were lost. These losses were remarkably low, since more than one hundred 72 Wing vehicles were involved. They included a few W/T signals vehicles, which remained operational until the very last moment and were fired by American demolition units. The only other items of technical gear left on site were two 105 foot towers, which could not be dismantled and packed in the time available.

Map depicting the main 72 Wing and 25 BDS withdrawals from the Ardennes.


















While this appears largely correct, a degree of confusion did in fact colour events on the ground afterwards, leading to one documentary claim that does not entirely accord with 72 Wing’s assessment. To elaborate, it is necessary to return to the other RAF Regiment Squadron, 2804 Squadron, one troop of which was responsible for protecting 6088 LWS and the five attached WOUs.

At approximately 1600 on 16 December, No. 4 WOU at St Vith radioed the LWS, warned of the German offensive and reported that they were under fire. One of the 2804 Squadron armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs) under Flight Lieutenant Jay set out to evacuate the WOU, found it unscathed, and deployed anti-tank and Bren guns to provide covering fire during the withdrawal. Artillery shells had fallen within 20 yards of the WOU site, and there was considerable small-arms fire in the immediate area. Jay at first attempted to move the WOU to a new location to resume operations, but this site was also found to be under threat. Evacuation was the only safe option, and No. 4 WOU therefore joined 6088 LWS at 2300 without incurring casualties or any loss of equipment.

At 0215 the following morning, US 8th Corps headquarters in Bastogne warned that they were expecting an airborne attack. Consequently, the LWS defence plan was initiated, and all RAF Regiment personnel not already on watch or other imperative duty were deployed together with 30 US Army augmentees. Evacuation planning began immediately, all vehicles being prepared to move. An AFV patrol that had been dispatched to gain intelligence returned at 0345 with the news that paratroops had been dropped at Mabompré -northeast of Bastogne. The same patrol was then sent on a further reconnaissance along the main road north of Bastogne and returned to report that small-arms fire had been heard in the direction of Mabompré.

At daybreak on the 17th, after an entirely sleepless night, the defences of the LWS headquarters were reduced to allow personnel to rest. Flight Lieutenant Jay paid a visit to 8th Corps headquarters at 0900 in the hope of clarifying the situation but without success. However, personnel from No. 3 WOU arrived at the LWS site soon afterwards and reported that they had been under enemy fire and had evacuated. Unfortunately, one of their vehicles had then collided with a US mobile gun and had been left behind. Two AFVs left promptly for the evacuated position, taking with them a 3-ton truck, while another was sent to evacuate No. 5 WOU.

On arrival at the No. 3 WOU site, a reconnaissance by the RAF Regiment corporal in charge established that German troops were only 1,000 yards away, exchanging fire with nearby American forces. The two AFVs were deployed to give covering fire while the 3-tonner was packed with equipment and the WOU vehicle recovered. Luckily, there was no enemy interference, and the little convoy arrived back at the LWS base at about midday. 

By that time, intelligence was reporting that the Germans had occupied Clervaux, that St Vith was holding out but had been bypassed, and that the road to Vielsalm had been cut. On this basis, and on the advice of 8th Corps, evacuation of the LWS and the other units to Champlon (about 20km northwest) began, the intention being that they should resume operations from this new location. By 2330, the bulk of their equipment and the majority of personnel had been moved successfully, although Jay and a few of his subordinates remained at the original LWS site to pack what was left of their stores and direct the remaining WOUs to Champlon.

Meanwhile, the AFV sent out to evacuate No. 5 WOU faced a hazardous journey to Poteau. The roads were now blocked by American tanks, and the AFV came under German shellfire after passing through Petit Their. It encountered the WOU vehicle as it was pulling out of its original site but was then forced off the road by the Americans. The WOU was ordered southwest to Vielsalm and instructed to wait there until the AFV had been recovered and could provide an escort south. Once this had been achieved, the RAF Regiment personnel returned with the WOU to the LWS site, only to discover that it had been evacuated. They subsequently escorted the WOU to Champlon.

Further afield, in the relative safety of western Belgium, the standard of reporting on these events seems to have varied. The acting RAF Regiment area commander, Wing Commander Mase, apparently concluded at an early stage that reinforcements were needed and sent elements of 2742 Armoured Squadron to support Jay’s 2804 Squadron troop. However, at 85 Group headquarters, there were evidently doubts as to whether the situation was being competently handled, and the OC 85 Group decided to wield the ‘long screwdriver’. On the 18th, he sent his senior RAF Regiment staff officer, Lieutenant Colonel William Gray-Horton, to investigate the situation in the 72 Wing area, advise units to withdraw if necessary, or make sure that they had done so.

Gray-Horton was an interesting character. Of Franco-American extraction, son of the American impressionist painter William Samuel Horton, he was educated at Harrow and Sandhurst and obtained British citizenship in 1917 before joining the First Battalion of the Scots Guards on the western front. Still a subaltern in November, he demonstrated, in the words of the London Gazette, conspicuous gallantry and devotion to duty by organising the defence of a position against a German counter-attack, getting a Lewis gun into action and breaking up the advancing enemy units. ‘Though severely wounded, he continued to encourage his men, setting a splendid example of gallantry and endurance.’ He was subsequently awarded the Military Cross.

A keen sportsman, Gray-Horton became a member of the British bobsleigh team in the 1920s, and participated in the 1924 Winter Olympics at Chamonix. After his marriage to Gwen Le Bas at the Guards Chapel in London in 1930, he left the Army in 1932 but rejoined the Guards shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War. Then, along with many other older Army officers, he transferred to the RAF Regiment after it was established in 1942. In 1943, he set up and commanded the Fighter Command Battle School. In February 1944, he moved to 85 Group, and he was at the Group headquarters at RAF Uxbridge on Sunday 18 June when Gwen tragically attended the morning service at the chapel where they had married. Infamously, it was destroyed by a V1 and 121 worshipers were killed, Gwen included.

On 13 March 1945, after the events described here, Gray-Horton became the first British officer to lead a unit across the River Rhine proper, crossing with a small RAF Regiment reconnaissance party via a pontoon bridge erected by the Ludendorff Railway Bridge at Remagen some two weeks before Second (British) Army crossed further to the north at Wesel.

Gray-Horton, pilot of the British bobsleigh team at the 
Winter Olympics in 1924.

Members of 2742 Squadron pose next to a destroyed
Panzer IV in the Ardennes.

No. 9442 AMES, the Laroche Oboe unit, on the move
during the campaign to liberate northwest Europe.

A Wireless Observation Unit in Normandy.

Jay, still at the original LWS position, was warned of these impending arrivals early on the 18th. An advance party from 2742 Squadron under Flying Officer Roberts reached Bastogne at midday and learnt of Jay’s presence at the site. They were advised against travelling north on the Houffalize road as shelling was expected at any time, but the LWS site lay near the road so there was no alternative. They duly found Jay and recorded that he was preparing to move back to Bastogne. At 1330, Gray-Horton arrived and received a full brief on the situation in relation to the LWS and the five WOUs.

Hirons had called on Jay that morning and the latter therefore presumably had some idea of the situation further north around Vielsalm. Nevertheless, the 72 Wing units had not yet evacuated at that point, and there was no one at the LWS site who could confirm to Gray-Horton that the withdrawal had taken place. He therefore continued north through Houffalize to what had been the headquarters of 2811 Squadron at Odeigne. Of course, he found the headquarters deserted. He therefore explored the Laroche-Vielsalm road to make sure that 72 Wing had indeed been evacuated and spotted the vehicles and equipment that had been left behind at their technical sites. Of the vehicles, Gray-Horton recorded:

These had been left by the commander of the 72 Wing stations as he had not been able to move them, owing to a reliance on an American tracked vehicle, and he did not feel the military situation at the time justified their destruction. There appeared to him a very good chance that the site might be reoccupied in the course of the next few days.

This statement does not entirely accord with the 72 Wing record, which implies that nothing of significance had been left behind. As we shall see, this was not the only point on which the records diverged.

Gray-Horton’s position was simply that he had ‘5 vehicles on his hands, of unknown contents and importance’. Consequently, he decided to warn the Regiment detachment at Champlon that objects of potential significance remained at the technical site. Before this, he proceeded to Vielsalm, which he found threatened by German armour to the north and east. Progress towards Malmedy and RJ 5369 was impossible.

In the meantime, at Champlon, the RAF Regiment force was divided. Three AFVs were detailed to protect the evacuated LWS and WOU units while all remaining vehicles returned to the Bastogne-Foy area to collect any remaining stores and equipment. At about 1530, the original LWS site came under shell fire and the majority of RAF personnel finally withdrew. Some loading nevertheless continued until about 2000, and the last vehicles were just leaving the site when small arms fire erupted in an adjacent wood. They reached Champlon three hours later without incident.

Jay got to Champlon that evening to find that C Flight of 2742 Squadron, commanded by Flight Lieutenant Hargreaves, had arrived several hours earlier. The situation was deteriorating, and US vehicles of all types were pulling out of the village. Shortly before Hargreaves reached Champlon, Gray-Horton had also arrived via the Vielsalm-Laroche road. Up to this point, RAF Regiment responsibilities in the Ardennes had been rigidly divided: 2811 Squadron had been responsible for the protection of 72 Wing elements, while 2804 and 2742 Squadrons had been allocated to 25 BDS. It required the appearance of a senior officer from Group headquarters to override this demarcation and assign all RAF Regiment resources available to investigate the remaining 72 Wing vehicles and equipment at the abandoned technical sites and ensure that they were withdrawn or destroyed. Gray-Horton left orders to this effect at Champlon.

Shortly after 2200, orders from 25 BDS directed all LWS and WOU elements to withdraw from the village and return to base at Louvain, east of Brussels. At 2315, four reconnaissance cars of 2742 Squadron, 15 3-ton vehicles and the wireless vans of 6088 LWS, together with 59 of their RAF and Army personnel moved off; Hargreaves went with them. The 2742 Squadron diary records ‘hundreds of flares on both sides of road towards Marche.’ Paratroops were thought to be responsible but their true source is impossible to establish. At Champlon, to execute Gray-Horton’s orders, this left B Troop 2742 Armoured Squadron and B Troop 2804 Armoured Squadron under the command of Flight Lieutenant Jay. With this force remained a single radar expert, Flight Sergeant West.

The documentary sources afterwards diverge, recording different timelines. Gray-Horton’s report states that Jay reached the former 72 Wing sites on the 19th. The abandoned RAF trucks could not be recovered without towage by American tracked vehicles, and the only one available had a burned-out clutch, but the RAF personnel were assured of assistance the following day. However, when they returned in the 20th, the Germans had overrun the area and they were forced to abandon their mission and withdraw to Marche.

Yet the squadron diaries indicate that Jay only set out to find the abandoned items on the 20th, raising the obvious question as to what he was doing on the 19th. It is recorded that AFVs were sent that day from Champlon to a bridge on the Bastogne road (Pt. 4366), which must have been at Ortheville. They were in R/T contact with Jay’s headquarters at Champlon and he had issued instructions to stop all vehicles and establish how far the Germans had advanced. They came under small arms fire during their move to the bridge, but its origin is unclear. They subsequently returned to Champlon.

This suggests that Jay lacked information about German dispositions and was understandably reluctant to lead his very small force to the 72 Wing sites until the extent of the enemy penetration had been established. Also, he may not have been very familiar with the area between Laroche and Vielsalm, which had previously been the responsibility of 2811 Squadron. Furthermore, his normal source of intelligence, US 8th Corps headquarters, had withdrawn from Bastogne and its whereabouts were unknown. Another factor was disinformation. The Operations Record Book of 2742 Squadron records the receipt of a report that German forces were advancing towards Marche. ‘This proved to be false, as it was given out by a German officer in American uniform, who was later captured.’

By the morning of the 20th, Jay had learnt that 8th Corps headquarters had moved to Neufchateau, southwest of Bastogne, and he set out to find the Americans at 0900. They could not provide much clarification but were confident that Jay would be able to reach the three 72 Wing sites. Therefore, at 1300, a troop under Jay’s command left Champlon and drove via Laroche and Semrée to inspect them. Flight Sergeant West went with him, while another Flight Sergeant named Bunney was left in command at Champlon. According to 2804 Squadron’s account, they found a trailer at the first site - Regné - which was burned on West’s advice; while it was being destroyed, US MPs arrived and reported that enemy tanks were operating in the next valley. However, 2742 Squadron’s record goes further, referring to ‘site complete with equipment ready for use’. It is clear that at least some equipment had been left behind, and 2742 Squadron described how ‘two small hutted sites’ were ‘destroyed by grenades and fire’.

At the second 72 Wing site - Odeigne - Jay found that five VHF vehicles had been left intact, although their interior communications equipment had been removed. Four were soon running but were stuck in rough ground; the fifth proved unserviceable and was destroyed. It was at this point that the Americans offered Jay the tracked vehicle, but it could not be used as the clutch had failed. Jay was duly promised the use of another tow vehicle the following day, and this plan appeared viable as ‘there was a certain amount of US armour’ holding the Germans back, although the 2742 Squadron account refers to the enemy being only 400 yards away. ‘Small arms fire was encountered the whole time.’ Finally, the RAF Regiment detachment moved on to the third site at Chene-al-Pierre, which had been ‘efficiently destroyed and evacuated’. At about 1830, they headed back to Champlon.

Flight Lieutenant Jay led elements of 2804 and 2742 Squadrons from
Champlon to the 72 Wing technical sites on 20 December.
 
Detail enlargement of the 72 Wing area.

Odeigne in January 1945; Jay reached the technical site near the village on 
20 December but heavy fighting in the area prevented his return the
following day to recover four 72 Wing vehicles.

Early the next morning, Flight Sergeant Bunney led another patrol down the Bastogne road to the bridge at Ortheville. Again, the aim was to establish the extent of the German advance. He found the village held by an American tank destroyer unit, which reported that 101st Airborne Division was defending Bastogne. Bunney was still talking to the unit commanding officer when nearby German forces opened fire, causing several American casualties.

The Americans reported that enemy paratroops were operating close by at Baconfoy. Again, it is more likely that these were regular German ground troops. Nevertheless, Champlon was immediately evacuated, the remaining RAF vehicles withdrawing to Marche along a road crowded with refugees. The Germans were expected to mount flanking manoeuvres, cutting the roads, and German troops were reported to be wearing American uniforms and using captured American equipment.

On arrival at Marche, five AFVs under Jay set out to reach the vehicles near Odeigne located the previous day. He decided to route via Laroche. They left Marche at 1300 hours but found Laroche under mortar fire and detoured via Hotton and Erezée. At Lamormenil, one AFV broke down and was left in the village.

They continued to Dochamps, where an American tank attack was being launched to destroy an enemy road block; 2742 Squadron’s account states that they got as far as Odeigne village, which lay about one mile from the actual technical site. However, the road east was blocked by a firefight between American and German forces. There was ‘considerable small arms and mortar fire’, leaving no alternative but to withdraw to Lamormenil. From there, Jay and his men made one further attempt by proceeding about two miles along another lane. This time, they closed to within half a mile of their objective but then came under fire again from both sides of the road. As further progress was impossible, they gave up and returned to Marche for the night.

The following day, they set off back to 25 BDS, but it is an interesting reflection on the Ardennes battle that, about 10km from Sinsin (presumably at or near Hogne) they received yet another warning of ‘paratroops’ nearby. The RAF Regiment detachment then checked the documents of two civilians and discovered that they had false identity cards stamped with Swastikas. While handing them over to the Americans, they once again came under fire, which they returned before capturing one of the Germans.

Also in this period, the last of the 72 Wing units - Air Formation Signals (AFS) - was evacuated from Jemelle. Late on the 18th, the Mortar Flight of 2811 Squadron (by this time quartered at Morville) had been sent to the AFS site, and they spent the following day helping the signallers to pack up their equipment before returning to base. Subsequently, in the absence of an immediate threat, 72 Wing decided that AFS should continue operating from Jemelle for the time being.

On the 19th, the OC 2811 Squadron, Squadron Leader Goff, sent out four reconnaissance parties to establish the exact position of the Germans and to determine whether any of the evacuated 72 Wing units could resume operations in the La Roche area. The answer was emphatically that they could not; furthermore, there was a clear threat to the AFS site, which was entirely staffed by communications and radar personnel and had no permanently assigned force protection. Consequently, Goff decided to send his No. 1 Flight to Jemelle the following morning.

Once at Jemelle, the key problem facing No. 1 Flight was, yet again, the fog of war. Hard information was ‘very difficult to obtain’. The Germans were reported to have advanced past St Hubert. By the 21st, Lieutenant Colonel Leith had returned from Strasbourg and resumed his post as area RAF Regiment commander. That day, he decided to carry out his own reconnaissance, which yielded little information about the Germans but established that virtually the only Allied troops left between Bastogne and Marche were Canadian Forestry Corps personnel equipped with rifles.

Air Formation Signals (AFS) was located at Jemelle.

The road fork south of Jemelle: 2804 Squadron AFVs took up position here
on 22 December, covering the roads from Forrieres and
(through Ambly) Nassogne.

Leith then sent out dispatch riders to patrol the approach roads to Jemelle, and it was via this channel that he was warned at 1305 that the Germans had overrun the Champlon area and were heading west. The Canadians had been ordered to evacuate. Shortly afterwards, all signals personnel were ordered to withdraw from Jemelle under the protection of No. 1 Flight, although the AFS commander, Major Davis (Royal Corps of Signals) and Hirons, who commanded No. 1 Flight, remained there for the time being. AFS was evacuated with all its equipment at 1930, but Jemelle continued to serve as a base for dispatch rider reconnaissance activity, which was maintained throughout the night under extremely hazardous conditions by three Leading Aircraftsmen, Bridgewater, Stokes and Coutts.

Early the following morning, an armoured patrol of 2804 Squadron accompanied by Flying Officer Thomas of 2811 Squadron visited Jemelle, and the RAF Regiment units between them assembled the following picture: the Germans were probably in St Hubert and Laroche and were advancing northwest; Marche was still in American hands; the Germans had captured Hotton but the Americans were holding St Vith and Malmedy. The armoured vehicles then took up positions at a nearby junction that covered the roads from the south-east. There, they learnt from a civilian that American troops had been fired on by Germans operating captured US tanks at Forrieres and that four Tiger tanks had moved into Nassogne - two villages only a few kilometres away. Clearly, in such circumstances, there was no prospect of resuming AFS operations from Jemelle in the near future, and all British personnel promptly abandoned the site.

Meanwhile, 72 Wing was working flat out to restore Oboe, Gee and G-H operations from the new Florennes base, and this was achieved in a matter of days. Yet there was a price to pay: from this more westerly position, there was some loss of coverage over Germany, which is illustrated by the following map:


















The successful evacuation of 85 Group (72 Wing and 25 BDS) elements in December 1944 is a small but interesting detail in the history of the Ardennes battle - a colossal military undertaking in which entire armies confronted one another - but it is more than that. It is a story that contains lessons still relevant to military practitioners to this day, particularly with regard to the protection of highly secret capabilities positioned in forward areas.

The RAF’s dedicated force protection corps, the RAF Regiment, played a crucial role in ensuring the safe evacuation of all 85 Group personnel and virtually all their equipment. Nothing of any value fell into German hands. But it is perhaps worth reordering this fundamental point: it would have been extremely risky to deploy such secret and high-value systems as Oboe, Gee and G-H into forward areas without dedicated force protection. The 85 Group personnel positioned in the Ardennes were largely technical specialists (‘techies’) with minimal knowledge or experience of the realities of combat. Their capacity to evacuate successfully under direct pressure from the Germans without RAF Regiment support appears very doubtful. US forces in the Laroche area periodically supplied invaluable assistance but had priorities that extended far beyond the protection of British radar or signals units.

Throughout, RAF Regiment personnel frequently came under fire from small arms, mortars and artillery. They sometimes returned fire, regularly drove miles towards rather than away from the advancing German divisions, operated perilously close to forward enemy spearheads, and often conducted reconnaissance into contested areas or deployed defensively along key arteries while the 85 Group units prepared for withdrawal. Additionally, at all the sites, they helped the 85 Group units to pack for the move. The Regiment’s absence would, at the very least, have greatly increased the risk of top secret equipment falling into hostile hands.

Several problems complicated their task. Command and control was divided between three chains, one American, one 85 Group and one RAF Regiment - each with their different priorities. This was unavoidable, and the complications generated by divided command could only be addressed through close liaison or the permanent allocation of particular Regiment units to 85 Group elements. Even then, the high importance of the 85 Group mission was such that evacuation was delayed, making the Regiment’s task more difficult when the final order was given. In one instance, this apparently resulted in the abandonment of equipment that might have been useful to the Germans, although this is impossible to establish with certainty. There were also several proposals for resuming 85 Group operations from locations that were barely less vulnerable than those from which their units had been withdrawn.

Furthermore, given the highly fluid situation on the ground, rigid demarcation of RAF Regiment tactical responsibilities between 85 Group units was not always advantageous. While modern doctrine might frown on the ‘long screwdriver’ and promote mission command, Gray-Horton’s appearance near the battlefront at a key moment allowed responsibilities to be reallocated so that the limited Regiment forces available could be sent into the 72 Wing area, where they destroyed what one source described as ‘site complete with equipment ready for use’.

The other fundamental problem was situational awareness. The first few days of the German offensive were characterised by great uncertainty, the RAF being critically dependent on the US Army for accurate and timely intelligence. The fog of war combined with the fog of the Ardennes to produce a situation that was shrouded in uncertainty. Disinformation fed by German commandos in American uniforms complicated matters still further, as did the numerous inaccurate reports of airborne landings. Communications were critical in these circumstances. In the words of one report, ‘In the early days of the battle, when it was necessary to move units with great rapidity, W/T signals personnel were in many cases the last to leave the threatened area, maintaining vital communications until the very last moment possible.’

When neither the American information link nor the communications network were available, the RAF Regiment were thrown back on their own resources. These included reconnaissance patrols, the establishment of roadblocks, checkpoints and observation points, and the constant use of dispatch riders. High-priority and high-responsibility tasking was frequently passed down to the lowest levels - to junior officers, NCOs and airmen, who fulfilled their duties creditably in very difficult circumstances.

Not much more is known of the main actors in this little-known drama, but Squadron Leader Goff accompanied Gray-Horton on his reconnaissance across the Rhine at Remagen in March, together with elements of 2742 Squadron, braving mines, craters, shelling and air attack, and somehow emerging unscathed. And then there was Flight Lieutenant Jay. We may reasonably leave it to the London Gazette to describe how the gamekeeper ultimately turned poacher to earn a Military Cross:

Flight Lieutenant Jay has commanded an armoured flight for eleven months and has been actively engaged in conflict with the enemy since August, 1944. From 3rd-12th April, 1945, his flight was acting as an armoured reconnaissance unit to a special force whose speedy advance was only made possible by his determined and efficient handling of the flight. On 8th April, 1945, Flight Lieutenant Jay was ordered to carry out a reconnaissance with a troop of armoured cars which necessitated proceeding between two strongly held pockets of resistance. He was frequently under fire and once had to join battle with the enemy, giving covering fire to an American detachment in difficulties. His determination, courage and complete disregard of personal danger, enabled the force to gain its objective without casualties. The operation resulted in the capture of the entire designing staff of the Focke Wulf Aircraft Company, together with many valuable secret documents.


Notes

This blog is substantially based on the following UK National Archives sources:

AIR 37/1218, RAF Regiment in Battle of the Ardennes, 1945.

AIR 29/101/4, 2804 (Armoured) Squadron RAF Regiment Operations Record Book, 1944-1946.

AIR 29/83/2, 2742 Squadron RAF Regiment Operations Record Book, 1943-1946.

AIR 16/921, History of 72 Wing.

AIR 26/103, 72 (Signals) Wing Operations Record Book, 1940-1946.

Other sources include:

The Second World War, 1939-1945, Royal Air Force, Signals, Vol III, Aircraft Radio (Air Ministry, AHB, 1956).

The Second World War, 1939-1945, Royal Air Force, Signals, Vol IV, Radar in Raid Reporting (Air Ministry, AHB, 1950).

The Second World War, 1939-1945, Royal Air Force, Signals, Vol VII, Radio Counter-Measures (Air Ministry, AHB, 1950).

London Gazette

Tuesday, 21 March 2023

RAF Airfield Anti-Aircraft Defence from Normandy to Bodenplatte



Twenty years have passed since the RAF last deployed its own Ground-Based Air Defences in the form of Rapier missile fire units, which were sent to Kuwait to defend the Ali Al Salem Deployed Operating Base during the second Gulf War (UK Operation Telic). Subsequently, the RAF Rapiers moved even further forward to protect 1 (UK) Armoured Division from Iraqi short-range surface-to-surface missiles, as no Army Rapier elements had been sent to the Gulf. Despite this impressive display of cross-component flexibility, the RAF’s Rapier capability was axed in the following year, leaving the Army solely responsible for UK Short-Range Air Defence (SHORAD) for a brief period. Then, after the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review, the UK’s contingent SHORAD capability was eliminated too, leaving only enough Rapier systems for the Falkland Islands. It seemed that RAF air bases in the UK and overseas no longer needed GBAD. The west could take air superiority for granted and, in extremis, the Americans could always be expected to help. In this context, there could be no better time for Project Overlord to reconsider RAF airfield air defence during the liberation of Northwest Europe in 1944-45.

Throughout the inter-war years, UK Ground-Based Air Defences (GBAD) were desperately weak, despite the emergence of significant air threats in Europe, the Mediterranean and the Far East. Anti-aircraft defences proved easy to reduce after the First World War but difficult to enlarge in the 1930s. The diminutive scale of UK airfield anti-aircraft defence on the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939 was part of this broader deficiency. Its true significance would only become clear when, on the very first day of the conflict, the Luftwaffe set out to destroy the Polish Air Force on the ground. With warfare now firmly established in three dimensions, airfields had become a primary target for air attack.

In the early wartime period, the UK had no realistic alternative but to assign a preponderant airfield Anti-Aircraft (AA) role to the Army, leaving RAF personnel to provide extremely limited Light Anti-Aircraft (LAA) defence with machine guns and cannon. Yet the Army had many other AA commitments, and it was inevitable that, in the heat of battle, cover for airfields should often have been inadequate. The most effective protection was achieved by integrating GBAD with other air defences on the UK mainland or by assigning Army AA brigades to deployed air formations such as the Western Desert Air Force. When Army AA elements were not integrated with the RAF in this way, airfields were often left without effective defences. Similarly, efforts to improve air defence rarely delivered satisfactory results if they were too narrowly focused. Genuine advances in one sphere, such as GBAD, were often linked to broader developments in areas such as radar, fighter protection and passive air defence. Significant progress was difficult to achieve without accepting that air defence was a multi-faceted entity.

The creation of the RAF Regiment in 1942 promised to eliminate many of the problems that had previously arisen in the field of airfield AA defence at the air-land interface, and the RAF’s dependence on the Army for AAA also declined for other reasons. With RAF and USAAF fighters increasingly dominating the skies at medium-to-higher altitudes, there was less need for the Army’s heavy AA guns by 1943.

By the time the build-up to Operation Overlord began in earnest, UK airfield LAA defence had been entirely taken over by the RAF Regiment. As a result, a considerable number of Bofors guns had been transferred to the Regiment, although they also retained lighter weapons. The composition of the RAF Regiment component of Air Marshal Sir Arthur Coningham’s Second Tactical Air Force (2 TAF) was approved on 19 March 1944 and numbered 19 LAA squadrons at first; the total was subsequently raised to 25.(1) They were to form part of a layered and integrated air defence system to protect the Allied beachhead and the numerous advanced landing grounds. This system also involved radar warning and fighter control provided by mobile units, further warning provisions in the form of the ‘Y’ Service and visual observation, and extensive RAF and USAAF fighter cover.

Typhoons massed on a Normandy landing ground.

With aviation fuel...

And ammunition.

The last line of defence: the RAF Regiment's Bofors guns.

At an early stage, Coningham insisted that RAF Regiment LAA squadrons assigned to airfields in the Allied lodgement area should be equipped with Bofors guns and not Hispano cannons. During Operation Husky - the Allied assault on Sicily in 1943 - both the RAF Regiment’s Hispanos and the Army’s Oerlikons had revealed their limitations when operated from congested beachheads, bases or assembly zones crowded with Allied troops and equipment. As their 20mm ammunition was not self-destroying, their use could bring a downpour of lethal rounds on to nearby areas, and Hispano fire ironically caused casualties on airfields and damage to parked aircraft. Among those who witnessed this effect first-hand and only narrowly escaped death or injury was Coningham himself.

The chief difficulty with Coningham’s stipulation lay in the supply of Bofors guns, which could not keep pace with demand. The War Office agreed to support an RAF request to re-equip UK airfields with Bofors in the spring of 1944, but they balked at the prospect of supplying considerably more weapons to the Regiment squadrons bound for Normandy. Instead, they offered the 20mm Polsten gun as an alternative, stressing the tactical advantages of retaining a mix of 40mm and 20mm weapons for airfield AA defence.

However, since the appearance of the Bofors quick traverse mounting, these advantages were less pronounced, and the gun was also effective up to medium altitude whereas 20mm weapons were not. Furthermore, the Polsten was an unknown quantity, and the supply of self-destroying ammunition for it was uncertain. The RAF therefore turned down the offer and declared that, if no further Bofors guns were forthcoming from the War Office, they would be allocated to the 2 TAF squadrons from those originally deployed for airfield defence in the UK.(2) 

GBAD planning before Normandy was based on the same assumptions that guided other aspects of the air defence plan. The Allies overestimated the Luftwaffe’s response to the landings on 6 June. In the words of the official War Office history, ‘The result was perhaps an over-insurance in the matter of AA protection. On “D” day, 23 per cent of the artillery to be landed was AA, and by “D” + 1 the proportion had risen to 42 per cent, at which level it remained for the next month or more.(3)


A further assumption was that, by day, the Luftwaffe could be dealt with by the fighters alone above 3,000ft. Below that altitude, the AA guns were responsible for air defence. By night, when only a small number of Allied night-fighters could be controlled at any one time, Heavy Anti-Aircraft (HAA) barrages would be necessary to protect vulnerable areas. As in earlier operations, an Army brigade made up of three HAA and three LAA regiments was tasked to assist with protecting the airfields of 83 Group - the first 2 TAF group to come ashore. This was 106 Brigade. The AOC 83 Group also controlled searchlights, barrage balloons and smoke screens in his area of responsibility.(4)

The Normandy landings required Allied aircraft to operate at great strength over anti-aircraft gunners who were in no sense ‘air-minded’ and who had not previously fought under RAF or USAAF air cover. While fighter control during the landings was exercised afloat by ships known as Fighter Direction Tenders (FDTs), which were specially equipped and staffed for the task, wider warning responsibility was over-centralised in headquarters ships, and preparations for them to fulfil this function were inadequate. It would probably have been better exercised from the FDTs.

On the night of 5/6 June itself, naval vessels fired on the RAF troop carriers bringing 6 Airborne Division to Normandy although ‘The aircraft were so well illuminated by the tracer from the flak that the special markings [i.e. their black and white wing stripes] were easily distinguishable.’ On board the responsible headquarters ship, ‘The Admiral was so incensed that he finally threatened to engage the next offending craft with the guns of HMS Largs. At least two Dakotas were shot down by naval gunfire. A Naval Staff Officer was dispatched by boat to pass by word of mouth the order for AA guns to cease fire.’(5)

On several occasions over the following days, after a yellow warning was issued in the British sector, German raiders bombed before a red warning was given. As a result, any confidence that might have existed in the system quickly broke down, with predictable consequences.

AA gunfire control, both naval and military, from the anchorage and beaches, left much to be desired. Serious cases of firing at friendly fighter aircraft occurred in the British area. Usually it was started by the gun-crews of smaller vessels, coasters, LSTs and LCTs, but once it had started, even visual recognition was completely ignored and the firing was taken up strongly by shore AA and naval guns of all classes of warships, including cruisers – even the well disciplined gun-crews were quickly out of hand. The accuracy of gunfire from naval guns in the Eastern Task Force area was very poor, otherwise there would have been heavy casualties to Allied fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft.(6)


A later inquest revealed, among other things, a lack of R/T communications between headquarters ships and subordinate AA elements. ‘A broadcast R/T channel from the Controlling Ship, received by all ships carrying AA and operating in the assault area, was obviously necessary if full advantage were to be taken of the available radar information, and also so that on occasions when fire was opened on friendly aircraft, it could be immediately stopped.’(7)

Meanwhile, the RAF Regiment’s LAA squadrons came ashore. First to become operational was 2834 LAA Squadron, which was allocated to Brazenville airfield (numbered B.2) and reached operational status with the six guns of ‘A’ Flight before midnight on 7 June; the guns of ‘B’ Flight became operational the following day. By 18 June, ten LAA squadrons had deployed to airfields in the British sector under Mobile Wing Headquarters control.


The Regiment squadrons were responsible for the close AA defence of airfields under construction until the arrival of the first 106 Brigade units, normally just before airfields commenced operations. Responsibility for close AA defence and operational control of the RAF Regiment LAA Squadrons then passed to the local Anti-Aircraft Defence Commander, who was appointed by the commander of 106 Brigade.(8) 



RAF Regiment Bofors guns in Normandy.

The Luftwaffe’s reaction to the landings fell far short of Allied expectations, and the Allies immediately secured air superiority. Intermittent raids on the airfields called the anti-aircraft gunners into action, and the RAF Regiment LAA squadrons claimed 14 aircraft destroyed and 13 damaged between 7 June and 15-16 July.(9) Yet the Germans reorganised their western air forces, and discussions between Jagdkorps II and Seventh Army produced a plan to protect supplies and reinforcements en route to Normandy, to provide tactical support to front-line troops, and to target Allied airfields.(10)

The RAF Regiment reported ten attacks by enemy aircraft on beachhead landing grounds between 1320 hours on 4 July and 0135 hours on the morning following. A total of about 50 enemy aircraft were involved of which four Messerschmidt 109s were destroyed. There were few repetitions of these tactics during the next two days but during the afternoon, night and early morning of 7/8 July there were 11 attacks. The most active day was 14 July when 34 attacks were made on landing grounds, 19 of them by single aircraft. A total of 17 enemy aircraft were reportedly shot down. On 16 July, some 15 to 20 enemy aircraft carried out an elaborate attack on Carpiquet airfield just before midnight but except for 3 daylight attacks on 4 July, the other operations were carried out by very small numbers of aircraft and the damage done was negligible.(11) 


The raids mounted on 14 July took advantage of bad weather, which substantially reduced the Allied air effort. One of the largest involved a formation of more than 50 aircraft, which attacked Martragny airfield (B.7). The guns of 2703 LAA Squadron and units of 106 AA Brigade responded vigorously and afterwards claimed between them 14 destroyed – a figure that was officially confirmed. However, during this action, the LAA defences also fired on Allied aircraft. A subsequent enquiry exonerated the RAF Regiment squadron, but the airfield commander placed one detachment of Army gunners under arrest and charged them with ‘firing at friendly aircraft’.(12)

This was but one episode in a running inter-Service argument over the deconfliction of combat air power and AA activity. The Army naturally wanted the freedom to defend itself from air attack – a freedom that could not be exercised if there was a risk of firing on friendly aircraft. To address this situation, a system of Inner Artillery Zones (IAZs) and Gun Defended Areas (GDAs) was devised, one excluding aircraft entirely from a given area, the other excluding all aircraft except fighters and permitting AA fire subject to a raid warning, a lack of IFF from the target aircraft, and direct communication with a Gun Operations Room. Yet in the restricted airspace above the Normandy lodgement area, the employment of IAZs and GDAs imposed significant tactical constraints on the RAF and the USAAF, reducing their capacity to provide effective air cover and offensive support to ground forces.

The problem of aircraft recognition was subsequently addressed following a request from 21st Army Group by Observer Captain VO Robinson OBE, MC, of the Royal Observer Corps and six experienced Royal Observer Corps officers who deployed from the UK. In August, they toured the Army’s AAA sites in France to assess the standard of aircraft recognition and suggest improvements. After visiting 65 different units – Brigade Headquarters, batteries and individual gun crews – they concluded that there was ‘a considerable variation of efficiency’ extending across the Royal Artillery HAA and LAA elements. There were three main reasons for this: 

1) No standard was laid down.

2) No establishment of qualified aircraft identifiers existed.

3) Efficiency consequently varied with the attitude of the Commander of each individual unit to the subject. The opinion of the troops and battery commanders was the most important under the existing circumstances and organisation, and then that of the Regimental and Brigade commanders. 

Robinson and his team found that a very considerable knowledge of aircraft recognition existed but, ‘owing to lack of standard establishment and qualifications and lack of status of the subject, also owing to inadequate organisation of regimental instructors and instructional material, that knowledge was quite haphazard in its distribution.’ Some fire units were reportedly ‘very poor’, others ‘very bad and certainly likely to make mistakes.’ He recommended that there should be a minimum establishment of qualified instructors and that qualified aircraft identifiers should be provided down to the lowest tactical levels; of necessity, these identifiers should undertake recognised tests at regular intervals.(13)

Eventually, in keeping with the experience of earlier campaigns, the Luftwaffe attacks declined as Allied forces enlarged their presence in the lodgement area and strengthened their air defences. Against this background, 83 Group requested the withdrawal of some 106 Brigade Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA) cover, and both the IAZs and GDAs were substantially reduced in size. For 106 Brigade, daylight engagement beyond the revised GDA was made subject to authorisation by the 83 Group Control Centre. By night, all LAA guns were permitted to engage aircraft that were clearly hostile and were also allowed to employ barrage fire (14) against unseen targets with authorisation from the Anti-Aircraft Operations Room. If an airfield was directly attacked, this authorisation was automatically delegated. However, all barrage fire was subject to the approval of the airfield commander. The RAF Regiment LAA squadrons raised their claim to 19 aircraft destroyed and 13 damaged by the end of July, but the airfield AA guns were rarely called into action in Normandy thereafter.(15)

The Allied advance through France and Belgium and into The Netherlands involved the movement of AAA elements from one airfield to the next. Ramp space was at a premium, and the bases were often packed with aircraft, but the deterrent effect of the Allied air defences, in the context of the Luftwaffe’s weakness, kept all but a few raiders away. As 84 Group consolidated their position on the continent in support of 1st Canadian Army, more RAF Regiment squadrons deployed, and a total of 18 AA squadrons had been incorporated into 83 Group and 84 Group by the end of August.

During Operation Market Garden in the second half of September, combat aircraft from 83 Group deployed to Eindhoven, Grave and Volkel airfields in The Netherlands. Close to the front line and at first benefiting from only limited radar coverage, all three were potentially vulnerable to air attack, and they were soon occupied by a total of ten RAF Regiment LAA squadrons;(16) but growing Allied fighter strength over eastern areas of The Netherlands in late September and October eliminated much of the threat.(17) Eindhoven was visited by a lone Me 109 on 27 September, which was driven off by a single gun, and four Ju 88s ran into a storm of Bofors fire over Grave on the following day. The gunners subsequently claimed two hits.

RAF Tempests at Volkel; while under Luftwaffe occupation, 
the base had been heavily bombed by the Allies.

Typhoons at another forward base - Eindhoven.

A new challenge first appeared on 2 October, when a formation of six Me 262 jet fighter-bombers attacked Grave, causing about 35 casualties but without damaging any aircraft.(18) Another two jets targeted Grave on the 6th, wounding three RAF Regiment personnel,(19) and there were further raids on 7, 11, 12, 13 and 21 October; five more Me 262s bombed the airfield on the 22nd.(20) The Luftwaffe also attacked Volkel on 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 21 October. The second of two raids on the 11th left one Typhoon damaged, and three raids on the 12th caused both damage and casualties, including some fatalities. Between five and ten Me 262s were reportedly involved on the 14th.(21) Yet the documents show that the airfield attacks virtually ceased in the second half of the month. It was in this context - and with radar coverage improving steadily - that the 83 Group’s visual observation capability was withdrawn. The observer units appeared to be serving no useful purpose.(22)

November again witnessed a few attacks on Volkel, Eindhoven and Grave, but the German aircraft largely maintained attack profiles that made them very difficult to engage, typically flying at altitudes beyond the reach of the Bofors guns or making single passes at high speed and very low level.(23) However, on the 26th, 2875 LAA Squadron RAF Regiment, based at the newly constructed Helmond airfield, became the first ground unit in history to shoot down a jet aircraft - another Me 262 - for a total ammunition expenditure of 32 rounds. The gunners apparently observed the Me 262 formation bombing north-east of the airfield before they opened fire, and the aircraft was flying at around 2,000ft when it was hit - significantly higher than the typical Luftwaffe ‘hedge-hoppers’ but well within the Bofors’ engagement envelope. An approach at this altitude would also probably have generated a radar-based warning of impending trouble.(24) Two days later, Regiment gunners engaged two more Me 262s over Helmond and the lower aircraft, flying at about 1,000ft, was shot down during the discharge of 21 Bofors rounds.(25)


The Me 262 shot down on 26 November.

After the Germans launched their offensive in the Ardennes on 16 December, the 83 Group airfields faced a renewed challenge. Eindhoven and Volkel were among the targets of some nine attacks on the 17th, when RAF Regiment AA squadrons fired no fewer than 1,679 rounds and claimed five enemy aircraft damaged. There were further attacks the next day, and Helmond was targeted by a pair of Me 262s on the 23rd. On the 25th, the Luftwaffe struck Eindhoven, hitting the Communications Flight dispersal, destroying four Austers and wounding five airmen. None of the attackers were shot down but another Me 262 was destroyed during a raid over Heesche airfield.(26)

At the end of December 1944, the capacity of the forward Allied airfields was particularly stretched. With the Ardennes battle still raging, the pressure on ramp space was acute, and by no means every airfield in Allied hands was suitable for all-weather operations. Theoretically, 2 TAF policy was that no more than one flying wing should be assigned to each base, but this restriction had proved impossible to maintain in practice, forward deployment being essential to maximise aircraft endurance over the battle front and beyond.(27) And along with all the aircraft crammed into the main Dutch and Belgian bases came vast quantities of munitions and aviation fuel.

RAF Regiment Bofors crew in the freezing winter
of 1944-45.

Loading Bofors shells in sub-zero temperatures
 - with no gloves.

The airfields were of course heavily defended by fighters and by RAF Regiment and Army LAA units, although the scale of Army LAA cover had been cut and RAF Regiment reductions were under consideration.(28) Radar coverage from the Low Countries into north-western Germany was excellent by this time, and, as always, the ‘Y’ Service supplied further intelligence for warning and tracking purposes. However, as we have seen, visual observation no longer formed part of the air raid reporting system.

It was against this background, and in conditions of the utmost secrecy, that the Luftwaffe planned Operation Bodenplatte to target the more easterly 2 TAF and IXth Air Force airfields. Ranking as the largest single German counter-airfield operation since the invasion of the Soviet Union, Bodenplatte was eventually launched on New Year’s Day 1945. Between 790 and 870 fighters were involved, and the inclusion of a training formation within this force suggests that all available aircraft were committed. Few such operations could better illustrate the importance of layered air defence. Luftwaffe preparations were missed by Allied intelligence (layer 1); the German fighters evaded radar (layer 2) by flying at ultra-low level; unobserved by radar, they also evaded fighter interception (layer 3); they rendered themselves invulnerable to ‘Y’ (layer 4) by maintaining strict radio silence; and they were not reported by observers (layer 5) because visual observation had ceased.

Yet layer 6, the guns of the RAF Regiment and the remaining Army airfield defence AAA, could not be evaded. Moreover, Allied fighters became involved on an increasing scale as Bodenplatte progressed. The Germans secured near-complete tactical surprise, but their achievement in terms of Allied losses has proved difficult to establish with certainty. Many airfields were left in a state of chaos, strewn with wrecked aircraft and shrouded in smoke and flames; early calculations of around 300 Allied aircraft destroyed or damaged (29) have been raised in some recent histories, and innumerable bomb dumps and fuel depots also went up in smoke.

Yet the Allies escaped with relatively few personnel casualties. By contrast, Luftwaffe losses on 1 January 1945, originally estimated at between 210 and 220 aircraft destroyed or damaged, may also have been higher, and German aircraft losses were matched by aircrew casualties killed and captured. Inexperienced or under-trained, or both, many of the German pilots lingered for too long at low altitude near the Allied flak guns.(30)

The shambles of Operation Bodenplatte: USAAF B-17s.

Firemen trying to save a burning RAF Lancaster.

Another incinerated aircraft, this time a Dakota.

A burnt out RAF Mitchell.

Predictably, over-claiming was rife. While the Allied fighter forces claimed a total of 92 aircraft destroyed, British Army gunners claimed 122 and US Army gunners 194. There were doubtless many occasions when one aircraft was engaged by several guns. The RAF Regiment, positioned on the target airfields, claimed a more modest 43, but this was the highest number of claims submitted by the Regiment on a single day throughout the war by a substantial margin.(31) One Regiment gun commander was Sergeant George Daniel Toye. According to the London Gazette,

In January, 1945, Sergeant Toye was in command of a detachment which had been withdrawn from action for airfield patrol duties. The gun had been left in a position ready for action. At about 09.25 hours another airman, who was on sentry duty, warned Sergeant Toye of the approach of between 36 and 50 enemy aircraft. Sergeant Toye immediately ordered his men to take post and in spite of the automatic loader being filled with A.P. [armour piercing] ammunition, got the gun into action with such speed that he was able to engage the first of six M.E.l09s which came in to attack a nearby dispersal ground. Immediately afterwards 4 F.W.190s and 2 M.E.109s attacked Sergeant Toye’s gun post. Cannon shells and machine gun bullets struck all around and casualties were sustained. Undeterred, Sergeant Toye continued to instruct his men and engaged the attackers as they dived low to attack; one after another in rapid succession. The deliberate attack against the gun post was temporarily abandoned.  Sergeant Toye then engaged a M.E. 109 which was coming in to attack aircraft on the ground; a hit was obtained and the enemy aircraft was observed to go down omitting black smoke. A further 2 F.W.190s then came in to attack the gun post.

Sergeant Toye remained unperturbed and engaged the aircraft as they came in to attack almost simultaneously from different angles. One of the attackers was hit and set on fire. This was the first occasion on which the detachment had been under enemy fire. Sergeant Toyes outstanding courage, initiative and leadership inspired his comrades and contributed largely to the success achieved.(32)


Toye was subsequently awarded the Military Medal.

A Luftwaffe Fw 190 shot down during Bodenplatte.

Another victim - a Luftwaffe Me 109.

The tail plane of another Fw 190.

It is unlikely that the statistical discrepancies generated by Operation Bodenplatte will ever be fully resolved, but they are not especially important. The key issue is that, in the context of front-line strength, reserves and logistical capacity, the losses inflicted on the RAF and the USAAF were sustainable, whereas those incurred by the Luftwaffe were not. Indeed, they were disastrous. The Germans lost aircraft and aircrew that they could not hope to replace. Otherwise, Coningham ordered a review of 2 TAF orders for the protection of airfields and there was some reallocation of aircraft between bases to improve dispersal; on-airfield dispersal drills were similarly revived, and 2 TAF reversed their plans for cutting AAA protection. By 18 February, there were 28 RAF Regiment LAA Squadrons on the continent. But Bodenplatte would never be repeated, and these enhanced air defence measures were barely tested before the final collapse of Hitler’s Reich.

For the Allies, the Second World War in Europe ended with a salutary lesson in the dangers of reducing airfield air defence. After a long period of pinprick hit-and-run attacks on forward Allied bases, a major Luftwaffe strike seemed so unlikely by December 1944 that 2 TAF had reduced dispersal measures and withdrawn their visual observation capability. The scale of Army AA defences had been lowered, and RAF Regiment LAA cuts were also under consideration when, on 1 January 1945, the Luftwaffe delivered the sucker punch of Operation Bodenplatte. After the German fighters skillfully evaded multiple Allied countermeasures and reached the target airfields in the Low Countries and France, their only remaining adversary was the anti-aircraft gun.

Notes

1. Kingsley Oliver, The RAF Regiment at War (Leo Cooper. Barnsley, 2002),  p. 104.


2. The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord (draft Air Historical Branch narrative, no page numbering), Appendix 2. The balance for airfield defence in the UK totalled 192 guns; for 25 LAA squadrons in 2 TAF, each assigned 12 guns, the total would have been 300 without any provision for replacements.


3. Brigadier AL Pemberton, The Second World War 1939-1945, Army, The Development of Artillery Tactics and Equipment (War Office, 1950)p. 219.


4. Pemberton, Artillery Tactics and Equipment, p. 219; AHB monograph, The Second World War 1939-1945, Royal Air Force, Signals Vol IV, Radar in Raid Reporting (Air Ministry, 1950), p. 420.


5. Report by Group Captain WG Tailyour, Air Staff Officer, Force S, 19 June 1944, Appendix IV/36, Notes on the Planning and Preparation of the Allied Expeditionary Air Force for the Invasion of North West France in June 1944, Appendices to Chapters I-IV, AHB.


6. AHB, Radar in Raid Reporting, pp. 429-430.


7. AHB, Radar in Raid Reporting, pp. 429-430.


8. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


9. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


10. AHB narrative, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol IV, The Break-Out and the Advance to the Lower Rhine, 12 June-30 September 1944, p. 29.


11. AHB, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol IV, p. 30.


12. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


13. AHB narrative, The Royal Observer Corps, pp. 168-169. 


14. Due to the inadequacy of the HAA gun at low altitudes and to the lack of suitable radar equipment for laying the LAA gun, LAA barrages had become increasingly important. Barrage zones were calculated from radar information received by the LAA control nodes and passed to the guns.


15. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


16. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


17. AHB narrative, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol V, From the Rhine to the Baltic, 1 October 1944-8 May 1945, p. 30.


18. 83 Group Intelligence Summary, 3 October 1944 (held at AHB).


19. 83 Group Intelligence Summary, 7 October 1944.


20. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord; 83 Group Intelligence Summary, 22 October 1944.


21. 83 Group Intelligence Summaries of 12, 13 and 15 October 1944; Air Ministry War Room ASO Summary 1423, 14 October 1944 (AHB); AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


22. AHB, Radar in Raid Reporting, p. 455.


23. 83 Group Intelligence Summaries of 4, 5, 7 and 11 November 1944.


24. TNA AIR 29/1118, 1309 Mobile Wing RAF Regiment Operations Record Book, November 1944; 83 Group Intelligence Summary, 26 November 1944.


25. 83 Group Intelligence Summary, 28 November 1944.


26. 83 Group Intelligence Summaries of 17, 18, 23 and 25 December 1944.


27. AHB, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol V, p. 102.


28. AHB, The RAF Regiment in Operation Overlord.


29. AHB, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol V, p. 101.


30. AHB, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol V, p. 101. One contemporary German estimate based on air reconnaissance imagery was that 479 Allied aircraft were destroyed on the ground and in air combat, and 114 were damaged; see Operation Bodenplatte, translation AHB5/234, Attack on Allied Airfields on 1st January 1945 (AHB Box 485).


31. AHB, The Liberation of Northwest Europe, Vol V, p. 102.


32. London Gazette, 13 April 1945.