← Document collections
TNA / CAB 103 191

TNA CAB 103 191

TNA CAB 103 191
Collection details

TNA CAB 103 191

Cabinet Office papers concerning the proposed publication of a book about Operation Dynamo and the 1940 evacuation from Dunkirk, dating from April 1949 to February 1950.

Holding archive
TNA
Collection reference
CAB 103 191
View the archive catalogue entry ↗

Source: The National Archives, Kew, CAB 103/191. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Showing only pages tagged with the vessel name Success. Tags are exact matches from this collection’s OCR tag index. Clear vessel filter ×

2 matching pages. OCR may contain transcription errors.

List page 1 of 1 Showing document pages 7–91 of this collection
Page ImageOCR textOCR tags
7 Page 7 Log in to enlarge

I am surprised that the Admiralty should be willing to sponsor a book written as this is, but that is their affair. I don't think it will hurt anyone but themselves. But it seems to me to be patently untrue to say, as the introduction does, (to mention but one example) that the evacuation from Dunkirk was "unspectacular"
and then to write it up in a whole book: to claim that the whole success was entirely due to the Navy; to give no credit - not even to mention, in the introduction - the work of the Air Force; to say that it was the Navy alone who got the troops into the boats,*
and even to claim thatall the credit of the work by something like
600 non naval craft belongs to the Navy.
P.
4
The first para on page 4 is a queer description of an
"unspectacular" operation!
p.
4
Lord Gort had warned the Cabinet that evacuation from Dunkirk might be moved on May 19 and the Admiralty began considering it that day. Operation Dynamo began on May 26. Is this so "audden"
for the Navy?
p. 5
2nd para. The Army didn't all "wait on the beaches" while the minute. And is it true to imply that while the Navy had the gallant navy did all the work. The Army fought till the last great losses stated the Army personnel lost at sea was only
"hundreds".
p.7
The description of the Campaign on p.7 seems to me almost wholly inaccurate. What is a "typical fighting retreat"? The whole of the B.E.F. fighting is discussed in the sentence "small delaying actions by non combatants".
Counter attack "next day" if this means the 20th it p. 8
Top is inaccurate. para. It appears on this page that operation in Dynamo the was not, introduction, for here the War Office and Ministry of Shipping after all, planned wholly by the Navy as claimed
If to the first conference on evacuation) it was not then are the last para is still describing the 20th (which is the mentioned.
"next day" that Calais was finally cut off and the garrison can at be Boulogne said clear evacuated till May 24th. Also I doubt if it then was accurately not that Destroyers "blew up the port of Boulogne" or at any time.
p. 9
It is - "the Navy was right" in wishing to use a port. a This not true to suggest that the Army wished evacuation from the particular beaches boast is meaningless for any sane man prefers port if it is available. 20th the leading troops of the B.E.F. reached untrue. Dunkirk" The is meangingless quoted was sent by Mr Eden on the 27th May. Gen till Adam was
"on May and the end of this para is wholly not telegram approached to organise the defence of the perimeter
May 26th.
The final and para the Germans were well aware of it. By the also page Dynamo is only half true. Evacuation started before time
Dynamo started about 30,000 had already been evacuated (see 26).
And carelessly so written and full all of implied I have had or explicit seems open mis-statements. to question.
on. All the potted history seems to me to be far too on I have p.36 not for read instance it all it but than is ridiculous rifles they (and had quite defeated untrue) it the with German to say
Armour". Agincourt that "with This when little is the more made victorious more ridiculous bow. troops had by the comparing advantage of a new long range weapon in the long
* See for instance the photo opposite p.70.

91 Page 91 Log in to enlarge

OF SHIPPING,
VESSEL
OWNERS
ROSELYNE
ROSE MARIE
RUMMY II
ROYAL THAMES
Capt. C. Dines
F. Upton
REMARKS
J. Mears
RAPID RYEGATE II
A.G. Smith
Returned Released 1.6.40
REMARKS
A.E. Ryland
OWNERS
RUBY
P.G. Broom
Prepared Re-allocated A.P.S. Returned for to to Owner. Owner. Owner. 'to
SSEL
J.F. Caine
Returned to Owners.
RK VI
Bolsons Co.
T.98. T.98. Returned to Owners 17.6.
ROSE LNN.19 ROSABELLE
-do-
ARK IX
Returned to owner.
J.C. Wood
ARK X
Mr. Jackson
A. Large
Returned Returned to Owners 5.6.40.
to Owners.
T.B. Brookman
SCARBOROUGH
ARK
G. Alexander
Vessel Returned Prepared No trace did to but Owner Owner. did Dynamo not 7.6.40. TA but
ING THROUGH
H. Cartridge
T.98. T.98. Re-allocated to A.P.S.
A.W. Williams
Returned Returned to to of Owner return from GLER I
Returned to owner.
G.D. Leyte
Re-allocated A.P.S.
ST.
BUNTING
Mr. Wray
No report received from List of
Loft, West Ltd.
Missing Vessels.
W.B. Thompson
Allen
No information of return from was
SALVAGE FORTH SALLY
THERN QUEEN
C.H. Harvey.
Dunkirk T.98.
SANTOSY?4B
LAUNCH
Dr.,Purvis
PL.17
Returned to owner.
Released Returned to T.98. of No 1.6.40.r. report Vessels."eceived not 7.6.40.
P. Shore
T.98. Returned to owner 19.6.
TH RAY
SATYR
L.
S. Figg
Returned Returned to owner 5.6.40.
to owner.
in
NAWAY
A. Hewitt
INDRIFT
T.98. T.98. No report received from List
DS
SCENE SHIFTER
T. Brown tis
SCHEDAR
B.E. Longman
C.H. Masters
RFISH
W.H. Stonehouse of Missing Vessels.
ONEHAVEN
SEA FALCON
E.C. Wood
MAID
F.M. Brown
T.98. of to Ondowner MMER JRREY
Cdr.C.H. Lightoller
A.P.S. Re-allocated No information to of A.P.S. return from Dunkirk.
SEAGUAM
W.H. Elce
NSHINE R.13)
A.J. Berrion
Returned to owner.
E.T. Thomas
A.P.S.
SEASALTER
E.G. King
W.T. Cayton c/o Toughs
Mr.
Returned Listened Dover to and A.P.S.
OUTHEND BRITANNIA Southend
Britannia Co.
Returned Re-allocated to Special Admiralty to owners.
SEASCHOOL
ROSE
Jubilee Fishing Co.
Returned to
Service Prepared for Dynamo but owner. did not go.
(6A).
SHAMROCK SEASWALLOW CASTLE
Returned Reted Returned to to owner.P.S. Owner. Owner Owner.
C.H. Anderson
Damaged. Returned to
18.6.
EA AIR
W.H. Ringer
SOUTHERN KIPJACK QUEEN
C. Mockridge & Exrs.
Returned to owner.
R.
A. Bart Steam of E. Saunders
SHELDRAKE
Did
Mr. Peters
Boat
Co.
Returned to owner.
Per H.J. Davis
S.
Howden
SILVER SPRAY
FOAM
TANKERTON TOWERS
T.98. Returned to owners.
Mrs. Spragge
W.T. J. Crouch Eng. Co.
c/o Toughs
Taken Lost while being towed from Dunkirk.
by owners.
SINBAD SILVERY BREEZE
TARPON
A.W. werley
Colleton
TOTAL THE
THARK
H.F. Eaton
SILVER SPRAY
THETIS
Mr. Colding
Returned Returned - to unsuitable. owner prepared did not go.
THE ANGLER
J.T. Phelps
SKYLARK II.230 W.A.
Hare
THELMA
THURN
Schofield Ramsgate Diesel
A.P.S. Released 1.6.40 Allocated to Special
Admiralty Service. 6A
SUCCESS SARAH & EMILY SM.281 J. F.T. Toddlins Begless
A.P.S. Returned to Owner. Owner 19.6.
THYME
Trawlers
Returned 3.6.40.
THREE BROTHERS
C.F. Grant
H. Hastings
Damaged. Re-allocated Returned Special to Admiralty owner. Service
M. Leadley
Returned to Owner.
TIGRIS. ONE
T. Hill
TOM HILL
(6A). Returned to owner 19.6.
Presumed
Dr. E. Williams
T.98. T.98. No report received to List of
SKYLARK SKYLARK SKYLARK I (SM. 5) F.T. Myellostock Ltd.
TRILLENE
W.D. Wills
Missing Vessels.
BE OF DE
TRITON
from
R. Hayes
T.98. No report Returned received to owner. from List of Missing
III
SM.
SKYLARK SKYLARK III II
F.T. (w. (N.E. Collinsond Collins Knight not go to List Dunkirk. of
TWO SISTERS
F.E. Fothergill
TWO RIVERS
Vessels. Held at Tough Bros. Owner unknown.
391
Not required.
TORTOISE
S. Rowden
Returned to owner.
Myalls Ltd.
Coisan
Reported (6A). Service to Special to owners.
TREASURE TONY LN.40
T. Neilson lost of release Office