Top Secret British weapon…

It’s mainly a cost thing – if someone asks for ‘everything on Operation Planefare’ for example, you’d be there for years. So there’s some financial cut off point, not sure what exactly but this outlines the procedure, that‘s why they like you to narrow the scope of an enquiry. If you want something specific you’ll get it

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000036.htm

sorry JDK but your sly dig is out of date, try the FOI act, ask for something specific and you’ll get it – and sharpish too – I know, we recently declassified a Secret logbook from 2003 because some UFO spotter requested it – nothing was removed, nothing was censored, the appropriate pages were photocopied and sent out as written

Yes, but you have to know exactly what to ask for….the problem is in finding out what exists so you can ask for it!

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Glad to be of assistance JDK

For any cynics out there ‘yer but…..’ I know the paperwork went out unmodified because I dealt with it…….I’d suggest that there tends not to be a conspiracy to withhold obsolete info, it’s just ‘out of sight out of mind’ most of the time. The other problem is that you are supposed to get authority from the originator before declassification/downgrading and with almost anything over five years old the command/squadron/unit no longer exists – common sense usually rules in the end though

(Keeping quiet about my classified East German SAM map in the loft)

I stand corrected, thanks Maple.

I will resist any further sly digs. My thoughts are pure.

sorry JDK but your sly dig is out of date, try the FOI act, ask for something specific and you’ll get it – and sharpish too – I know, we recently declassified a Secret logbook from 2003 because some UFO spotter requested it – nothing was removed, nothing was censored, the appropriate pages were photocopied and sent out as written

I always understood that the full details of Upkeep and its related mechanism were finally declassified in 1973. It was that year that Revell released their 1/72 Dambusters Lancaster model. I well remember the ads in Aviation News and Aircraft Illustrated.

The traditional approach of the UK Government seems to be that no-one has any legitimate reason to know any details of any military affairs, so they can’t have them….

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

And of course the lovely British Prime Minister promised new ‘open government’ and less secrecy and an overhaul of the Official Secrets Act (1911?) when he was elected. In 1997. Waiting…

In reply to the remark above about loads of secret squirrels hoarding loads of documents, you’d be surprised and it’s so much easier to say ‘classify it top secret for thirty years than to have to read the whole content of the file and then THINK about whether to classify it or not and if so at what level.

Depends on your definition of exciting… but then I get excited about short Seamews 😀

Excited by Seamews? you’re weird, now if you’d said Seagulls I might have understood.

I’ve dealt with security clearances in my job for years now, and I’ve also gone to the trouble of obtaining declassified documents for research. The way it works in the US is like this:

1. You take a piece of information and decide what classification level to give it.
2. You then set a declassification date, upon which the document or whatever is reviewed and either declassified or reclassified for another period of time.

If a document on, say, the F-100, is clasified for 50 years from 1955, then it’d come up for review in 2005. There’s no real point to having it still classified in, say, 1980, as the aircraft is way obsolete, but you don’t know that for certain in 1955. Ergo, longer-than-needed periods of classification are often used, just to be on the safe side.

The flip side to this, as JDK rightly pointed out, is that someone also has to review everything and declassify it. This is not necessarily a high priority, and takes some substantial time, depending on the size of your agency.

Hope that sheds some light on the issue.

Thanks Alan, good story.

Dam-Busting Lancasters

Can I add my piece to JDK’s musings, please?

The following is from Bruce Robertson’s book ‘Lancaster – The Story of a Famous Bomber’ published by Harleyford in 1964. It comes from an introduction written by one D A Russell. Do bear in mind that it was written in 1963 or 1964.

“One of the most interesting, and indeed controversial, of matters is the dam-busting Lancasters of No. 617 Squadron specially modified in the spring of 1943. Recently published drawings are claimed to be authentic and various authorities are quoted, but these are at variance with drawings shown here which are supported by actual photographic evidence (see pages 30, 31 and 129). These other drawings were said, in July this year, to have been made possible by a recent tracing of information. One of the authorities mentioned said that he understood that all drawings of the modification were destroyed on Ministry instructions for security reasons! THIS WAS NOT SO.

The information on the special modification to the dam-busting Lancasters was released at 10.30 a.m. on October 18th, 1962. Ministry of Aviation sanction having been obtained, it was the prerogative of Messrs. A. V. Roe Ltd., whose property the drawings were, to release the information. The general arrangement drawing Z2352, titled ‘Lancaster Type 464 Provisioning’, dated March 1st, 1943, was produced and spread out in an office at Messrs. A. V. Roe’s Chadderton works. The firm’s security officer, a retired wing commander, in the presence of two senior staff members of the firm, struck out the words “MOST SECRET” on the drawing, appended his signature to this declassification and HANDED IT TO THE ONLY OTHER PERSON PRESENT — THE AUTHOR OF THIS BOOK. It was passed on immediately to Harleyford’s draughtsmen.”

So Bruce Robertson asked the right people, and Type 464 and Upkeep were de-classified straightaway. Perhaps the film company didn’t ask the right people and consequently had to make do with guesswork which resulted in decidedly lumpy Lancasters!

Personally, I’d rather believe this simple answer. The thought of battalions of secret squirrels hoarding obsolete drawings doesn’t quite work for me.

Allan

Depends on your definition of exciting… but then I get excited about short Seamews 😀

It’s not a wildly exciting Naval aircraft I’m afraid, aj…

The gannet? Doesn’t get much more unexciting than that, and its a big ugly beast! Someones trying to get one to fly nowadays, wonder how thats coming along.

Logically, several hours of ‘steam pigeon’ lullaby to deprive you of sleep and then a bouncing bomb through the wall of your barracks would be enough to sap the morale of the most stoic enemy…

It’s amazing the Empire came to pieces at all really…

It’s not a wildly exciting Naval aircraft I’m afraid, aj…

I wasn’t saying the Upkeep was a folly – just post war, it was as appropriate as Polish Lancers were in ’39.

As ever, DB’s put his finger on it, and that’s the point to bear in mind when someone says that ‘they’ are keeping it secert because ‘the truth cannot be told’. Usually it’s a case of admin.

The fact that there’s a lot of work taking out files and -um- not putting them back just BEFORE the release of said under the XXX Year rule by the appropriate Dept is just another theorm…

Things are kept secret to avoid giving a head start to anyone who may use it against us. A bit like how we gave our nuclear development information and research work on supersonic flight to the USA who then refused to share their info ‘on the grounds of national security’. Also, it may be that when it’s added to the secret list it has a time period set – and it won’t come up for review until that period expires.

As for actual secrecy…..I heard a story once of a young airman who, being heavily in debt, copied technical info pages from a Lightning servicing manual ( The Vol 1 ) and sent it to the Russians – offering to sell more.

Apparently they returned it to the MoD….updated !

The Upkeep mine, folly or not and I’d beg to differ with you on that, was top secret still in the 60s, probably not because there was any intention that it would be put back into production, but because as it had been previously classified as Top Secret, it would be kept as such for a defined period (30 years?).

A cold war squadron of Walrii sounds less silly when you think of Polikarpov biplanes being used (in Korea :confused: ) to play psychological warfare with American soldiers, keeping them awake at night.

Logically, several hours of ‘steam pigeon’ lullaby to deprive you of sleep and then a bouncing bomb through the wall of your barracks would be enough to sap the morale of the most stoic enemy…