3rd Armourd Brigade Destroyed in the Desert

[Urmel]

That's a great file. Pulled it on Saturday.

[Tom from Cornwall]

Yes, and plenty of insight on the shoestring RAC team at GHQ, ME at that point. A bit surprising that Wavell thought that was enough, even at that stage in the war.

Tom

[ClintHardware]

I have been re-reading WO 169/952 and a key to not knowing exact numbers of tanks in any category is distance of front covered, and the distance of the front from GHQ MEF Cairo, and the lack of administration support to Ricky Richards and others.

When fighting the over 100 Italian tanks the stress and resources needed in terms of staff work was far less than when combating German ground forces weeks later - the right staff and signals facilities were not present in mid 1941.

In terms of 3rd Armoured Brigade's existence or not: the July date set in a document is not the same as the personnel of briagde being absorbed and attached to other formations to fulfill new tasks. For some while there were in effect two groups of 3rd Armoured Brigade personnel, those in the Delta who had been evacuated from Tobruk because they were not needed and those remaining in Tobruk who were absorbed into the 32nd Army Tank Brigade in September 1941 or re-assigned elsewhere.

3rd Armoured Brigade was partly rearmed at Tobruk with what was present and brought in during April 1941 and later, and recycled in terms of personnel as needs required elsewhere. It wasn't destroyed as a brigade with the title of 3rd Armoured Brigade in the sense of being overrun and outflanked which is what destroyed often requires. Because of circumstances beyond Generalleutnant Rommel's resources it was too mobile for the 5. leichte Division to overrun or outflank and 15. Panzer Division didn't manage to either.

The fate of 32nd Army Tank Brigade is another matter.

What tiny detail in an unreferenced document proves otherwise?

[ClintHardware]

And in one of the documents in WO 169/952 the document author explains that to leave Cairo to arrive at the front, visit far flung units and return to Cairo took at least ten days by car. If he had flown he would arrive at a landing ground stranded without a car and unable to borrow transport because units were struggling with not enough of their own.

And another WO 169/952 document author also explains that units holding the frontline usually did not know the exact vehicle state of their own unit and once they had produced a figure it was already out of date.

Looking at the state of popular files at Kew, I get the feeling that the leftwing university educated staff have little interest in war diary document preservation/photographing/digitising. Has anyone else had that thought? Some pages are in a similar state to those shards of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

[ClintHardware]

BTW The 3rd Hussars 1941 file has some useful maps that need careful unfolding. I asked a young graduate staffer if she was OK for me to carefully unfold the maps or would she prefer to take control of the file and undo it in a file inspection room for me to then photograph the unfolded maps... She looked sternly at me and said "If we feel you are abusing the file we will eject you." I smiled at her and slowly said " I KNOW.....that is why I am asking YOU to take control of the file to allow its careful use. She said "OK Ill trust to unfold the maps". WTF. So I did

[Attrition]

You are wise in the ways of generic management irresponsibility....;o)

[Urmel]

And in one of the documents in WO 169/952 the document author explains that to leave Cairo to arrive at the front, visit far flung units and return to Cairo took at least ten days by car. If he had flown he would arrive at a landing ground stranded without a car and unable to borrow transport because units were struggling with not enough of their own.

And another WO 169/952 document author also explains that units holding the frontline usually did not know the exact vehicle state of their own unit and once they had produced a figure it was already out of date.

Looking at the state of popular files at Kew, I get the feeling that the leftwing university educated staff have little interest in war diary document preservation/photographing/digitising. Has anyone else had that thought? Some pages are in a similar state to those shards of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It could also be rightwing idiot military history researchers who mess up the documents through careless use?

Or it could just be idiots who are careless with heritage. Why on earth bring politics into it?

[Sheldrake]

And in one of the documents in WO 169/952 the document author explains that to leave Cairo to arrive at the front, visit far flung units and return to Cairo took at least ten days by car. If he had flown he would arrive at a landing ground stranded without a car and unable to borrow transport because units were struggling with not enough of their own.

And another WO 169/952 document author also explains that units holding the frontline usually did not know the exact vehicle state of their own unit and once they had produced a figure it was already out of date.

Looking at the state of popular files at Kew, I get the feeling that the leftwing university educated staff have little interest in war diary document preservation/photographing/digitising. Has anyone else had that thought? Some pages are in a similar state to those shards of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It could also be rightwing idiot military history researchers who mess up the documents through careless use?

Or it could just be idiots who are careless with heritage. Why on earth bring politics into it?

It s more likely that over enthusiastic military history geeks tear documents in their passion to photograph them. I have found the staff at Kew extremely helpful and have yet to detect any political bias.

If there is a political bias in our national Archives, it is the withholding and redacting of of documents by governments unwilling to allow for history to judge their actions. It was a left wing government that introduced the Freedom of Information Act.

There is a massive gap in the national archives concerning post war operations. None of the operational documents post 1945 have survived to explain how the British planned to defend their part of the NATO front line in Germany. No copies of the annually revised General Deployment Plan seem have been kept for historic purposes. During the cold war itself, this led to units waltzing around terrain features returning to the starting point every five years or so. There is very little history for modern day soldiers to explore when preparing for a NATO role in Eastern Europe. There isn't even any record held by the MOD of Ex United Shield 2009 the CGS staff ride to review the Cold War in retrospect in Germany. I have heard that civil servants were reluctant to document an exercise seen as "Army propaganda" by CGS David Richards as a campaign to increase the Army Budget and a series of personality clashes with the exercise organiser. The only copies of the Exercise reader (produced by leading cold war academics) were circulated privately and the MOD refers students of the topic to my website.

The 30 year rule is widely ignored. You cannot view the documents concerning the UK side of Ex Able Archer, the exercise that is considered by some to have led to a close call with a nuclear war. It forms the historic backdrop for the German TV series "Deutchland 83"

[Attrition]

"It was a left wing government that introduced the Freedom of Information Act." Eh? The Bliar regime was anything but left wing.

[Sheldrake]

"It was a left wing government that introduced the Freedom of Information Act." Eh? The Bliar regime was anything but left wing.
[/quoteCom;p

I accept that Blair is to the right of Jeremy Corbyn, bit so was Gorbachov, Tito and the Chinese Politbureau

Blair was well to the left of Cameron and Osborne, Margaret Thatcher, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage or Donald Trump

[MarkN]

Looking at the state of popular files at Kew, I get the feeling that the leftwing university educated staff have little interest in war diary document preservation/photographing/digitising. Has anyone else had that thought? Some pages are in a similar state to those shards of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The 3rd Hussars 1941 file has some useful maps that need careful unfolding. I asked a young graduate staffer if she was OK for me to carefully unfold the maps or would she prefer to take control of the file and undo it in a file inspection room for me to then photograph the unfolded maps... She looked sternly at me and said "If we feel you are abusing the file we will eject you." I smiled at her and slowly said " I KNOW.....that is why I am asking YOU to take control of the file to allow its careful use. She said "OK Ill trust to unfold the maps". WTF. So I did

It could also be rightwing idiot military history researchers who mess up the documents through careless use?

Or it could just be idiots who are careless with heritage. Why on earth bring politics into it?

I find it most amusing that from a brief exchange about reverse origami (paper unfolding) with a single staff member, poster clinthardware is able to elicit the educational background and political leanings of the entire staff at the TNA and, moreover, pass judgement that that education and political leaning is the cause of the poor state of some of the files held.

[ClintHardware]

Because I am very tired of the effects of the Left on education in the UK and USA and then their effects on our organisations and media.

Thank you for abusing me and my work Urmel. Prove me wrong instead.

I am politically Leftwing and a very hard critic of it.

Mark: Yes my broad life experiences have been useful.

Have a nice day y'all.

[Attrition]

[quote=Sheldrake post_id=2238212 time=1575898432 user_id=59253]
[quote=Attrition post_id=2238190 time=1575890036 user_id=33401]
"It was a left wing government that introduced the Freedom of Information Act." Eh? The Bliar regime was anything but left wing.
[/quoteCom;p

I accept that Blair is to the right of Jeremy Corbyn, bit so was Gorbachov, Tito and the Chinese Politbureau

Blair was well to the left of Cameron and Osborne, Margaret Thatcher, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage or Donald Trump
[/quote]

No, he was their clone.

[Urmel]

Thank you for abusing me and my work Urmel. Prove me wrong instead.

I have not abused you or your work. I have no idea about and don’t care for you political leanings.

You simply have no idea who messed up the documents. Could be lefty archivists, could be right wing researchers. So what’s the point in bringing politics into it? The state of some documents in Kew is a disgrace. That’s not a political issue related to individual archivists, to whom you owe an apology in my view, but one related to funding.

[ClintHardware]

Urmel....the documents are not being preserved properly. My complaint is not who messed them up. These are two different issues. My experiences to date including talking to staff reflect the voting that took place in Canterbury yesterday in the UK.

The misrepresented accounts concerning 3rd Armoured Brigade are also reflected in those attributed later to 2nd Armoured Brigade in 1942 but this can be dealt with in a second topic.