"The Cantankerous Captain of HMS Glorious" Topic

This is the title of an article Stephen Roskill published in the early 1980s about the circumstances of the ship's loss. Unfortunately, it seems to be hard to come by; does anyone have an electronic copy they can post a link to?

I understand he wanted to get back to Scapa Flow quickly in order to bring his air commander to court martial. I can't help with the article though.

The TV series 'Secret History' devoted a very good episode to this back in the 90's – 'The Tragedy of HMS Glorious'. After 20+ years, it's bound to be on the internet somewhere.

Can't help with the Roskill article either, though. Sorry :(

if it helps, the article was published in the 'Sunday Times Review' on 15th June 1980.

Might be accessible from an archive somewhere?

Maybe some clues on the article here:

link

link

link

more current info? I don't have a subscription

last one, Parliament UK, 1999….scroll down to "HMS Glorious"

link

Thanks- I have seen these, and read the brief account of "Glorious'" sinking in Roskill's "Churchill and the Admirals," where he stated he intended to publish the whole of the story later. The later was the journal article, which I have never found.

I would like to think that, facing oblivion, someone on the bridge looked at him and said,

"You ignorant _______"

Starts with "T" and rhymes with "splat."

IIRC, she was hit on the bridge early in the action.

Roskill knew about the fuel story from an early stage, but seems to have held off on publication until after the death of the captain's widow.

You must pronounce the "a" differently on that side of the pond, but I get your meaning.

hmsglorious.com

@Deucey:

Interesting analysis. However, even if Glorious left the convoy under orders from Adm. Wells to execute Operation Paul, it still doesn't exonerate her captain from his ship's unready condition when intercepted by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, IMHO.

BTW, the desire to hide information on this (and on other similar matters) by the UK government is pretty incredible, given the time which has elapsed.

MH

This is all new to me. I looked it up thanks to the catchy title of this post.

I find it fascinating. Especially the part about the heroic destroyers!

I seem to remember there were no awards for the destroyer captains because the Admiralty wanted to draw a veil over the whole affair. The Germans were clear in their admiration, though.

My great uncle was killed on the Glorious; D'Oyly-Hughes may have been personally brave but he was, well – Exeter said it best :)

Nick

The title was Roskill's. The piece about Operation Paul was interesting, but unconvincing. It doesn't feel to me like the kind of secret that merits that kind of post hoc protection. It's not as if the British hadn't just planned to do the same thing to Norway. The only reasons that I can think of that explain the reaction are 1) embarrassment about the court-martial story, 2) a desire to conceal the fact that a British ship. heard the distress call but didn't respond, because it was carrying the Norwegian Royal family and gold reserves, and 3) desire to avoid an inquiry into the reason 2) was allowed to trump the moral obligation to aid the survivors.

I seem to remember my dad talking about a NAAFI manager in the '60s who was on board the Devonshire. Secret signals or not, gossip gets round a warship fast; the crew were extremely unhappy that they didn't do anything.

I'll ask him about it tonight if I see him.