East Wretham
EAST WRETHAM: Military aerodrome
Note: Both of these pictures were obtained from Google Earth ©
Having a map of the WW2 airfield does help of course, which I have, but a few features of the WW2 airfield can still be discerned. And indeed, unless I am mistaken (?), the pattern of the fields seems to follow two of the runways.
Military users: WW2: RAF Bomber Command
1429 (Czech) OTF (Airspeed Oxfords & Vickers Wellingtons)
115 Sqdn (Wellingtons then Avro Lancasters)
311 (Czech) Sqdn (Wellingtons)
8th USAAF 67th Fighter Wing
359th Fighter Group
368, 369 & 370 Sqdns (Republic P-49D Thunderbolts, North American P.51 Mustangs)
3rd Gunnery & Tow Target Flt (Vultee A.35B Vengeances)
Location: 6nm NE of Thetford according to official records apparently but here again I am tempted to disagree if my guess that East Wretham village is now known simply as Wretham. Comparing a WW2 map I have seen with modern maps this does seem to support my opinion. I reckon this aerodrome was W of the A1075, SW of the now Wretham village and 4.5nm NNE of Thetford
Period of operation: 1940 to 1946
Runways: NE/SW 1719 grass NNW/SSE 1280 grass
N/S 1280 grass
NOTES: Without too much doubt the Vickers Wellingtons of 115 Squadron were in the forefront of the first ‘One Thousand Bomber Raid’ launched on Cologne on the night of 30/31 May 1942. They had been in the forefront (possibly the first squadron?) to help prove the benefits of the ‘Gee’ navigation aid.
THE FIRST THOUSAND BOMBER RAID
In his excellent book Wings Patrick Bishop gives a description of the background. Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris had been elected ‘boss’ of Bomber Command and his job, by decree of the British Government, was to hit Germany hard, very hard – regardless of civilian casualties. And quite rightly too; totally justified given the 'Blitz' regime by the Luftwaffe that the UK towns and cities had suffered.
“By the end of May (My note: 1942) Harris was ready for a real spectacular. He understood the power of publicity and was keen to mount an operation that would win him and his men attention and prestige, as well as boosting British morale. He hit on the idea of launching a ‘thousand-bomber raid’. The phrase would resonate in the press and across the Atlantic. He took the idea to Churchill. The Prime Minister was a sucker for a grand gesture. The project was irresistible. The problem was that Harris had nothing like a thousand serviceable bombers standing by. To reach the magic number he had to drag in aircraft and crews from Operational Training Units.”
Quite probably I would think, seeing as the USAAF Eight Air Force were then in the process of setting up their operations in the UK, the raid would set an example to them regarding what the British could achieve. Named ‘Operation Millenium’ RAF Bomber Command had a strength of about 400 front-line aircraft. It seems Harris had planned to co-opt around 250 bombers from Coastal Command but it now appears that the Admiralty vetoed the idea, being not at all impressed and doubtful of any benefits. This meant that Harris had to, in effect, employ a huge amount of crews still under training, albeit heavily augmented with instructors, and flying mostly older well worn types.
THE RAID WAS LAUNCHED
Returning to Patrick Bishop: “On the night of 30-31 May, a bright, clear, moonlit night, the great raid was launched. There were 1,047 aircraft, most of them old types, but including seventy-three Lancasters. The volume of aircraft meant they had to move in a ‘bomber stream’, flying through different air corridors to reduce the risk of collisions. The target was Cologne, Germany’s third largest city and an important industrial centre.”
I can still remember, many years ago, being so angered to see an exhibition outside the cathedral in Cologne, which purported to illustrate the inhumanity of this and other raids. I was very tempted to buy an aerosol and spray the words – “You lot started it and you got what you deserve,” across the displays. I now wish I’d had the guts to do so.
MAKING HISTORY
Again, as Patrick Bishop recounts: “In his departing address to the crews, Harris left them in no doubt about the significance of the mission. The force, he told them, was ‘at least twice the size and has at least four times the carrying capacity of the largest air force ever before concentrated on one objective.’ They were making history. ‘You have an opportunity,’ he declared, ‘to strike a blow at the enemy which will resound, not only throughout Germany but throughout the world.’
Harris was quite right, the results were utterly devastating. Of the 1,455 tons of bombs, two thirds were incendaries. The idea was to use high explosives to blow buildings apart, and use incendaries to destroy the contents. It is claimed that the only reason the cathedral survived was because it was in the centre of the ‘target ’and therefore very few bombs hit it.
AN ANALYSIS
It seems to me to be well worthwhile to give a breakdown of the 1,047 RAF bombers engaged on this raid:
No.1 Group (Bomber Command) 156 Vickers Wellingtons
No.3 Group (Bomber Command) 134 Vickers Wellingtons & 88 Short Stirlings
No.4 Group (Bomber Command) 131 Handley-Page Halifaxs, 9 Vickers Wellingtons & 7 Armstrong-Whitworth Whitleys
No.5 Group (Bomber Command) 73 Avro Lancasters, 46 Avro Manchesters & 34 Handley-Page Hampdens
No.91 (Operational Training) Group 236 Vickers Wellingtons & 21 A.W. Whitleys
No.92 (Operational Training) Group 63 Vickers Wellingtons & 45 HP. Hampdens
Flying Training Command 4 Vickers Wellingtons
SOMETHING TO BE REMEMBERED
As pointed out below the Vickers Wellington was then the mainstay of RAF Bomber Command in both front-line squadrons and the OTUs. A breakdown of the figures reveals some other aspects not normally appreciated and not least that the Handley-Page Halifax was in advance of the Short Stirling operationally. This might well need a few chapters in certain parts of published aviation history to be re-written?
Vickers Wellington 602 (Two engines)
Handley-Page Halifax 131 (Four engines)
Short Stirlings 88 (Four engines)
Handley Page Hampdens 79 (Two engines)
Avro Lancasters 73 (Four engines)
Avro Manchesters 46 (Two engines)
Armstrong-Whitworth Whitleys 28 (Two engines)
Of the 1,047 bombers engaged on this raid, 755 were older twin-engine types of which the majority (602) were Vickers Wellingtons. Although this was, without any doubt, the forerunner of the major raids conducted by Bomber Command it was a ‘one-off’. And, the bombing campaign only came into its own when the four-engine types were in place.
ANOTHER ASPECT
It is perhaps interesting to reflect that when the bombing campaign really got into its stride the British had three major bomber types in operation, the Halifax, Lancaster and Stirling whereas the Americans had only two, the Consolidated B-24 Liberator and the Boeing B.17 Fortress of which the latter was by far the better favoured. On our side the Avro Lancaster became the iconic and without question the best of the British bombers and broadly speaking it could carry twice the bomb- load of the American Boeing B-17 Fortress.
A 1943 DETAIL
There is one small item of interest to me at least. The Avro Lancasters of 115 Sqdn based here in 1943 were powered by Bristol Hercules radials. And to think I had always thought, (until undertaking this research), that all the Lancaster variants had Rolls-Royce Merlins. It seems that 115 Sqdn was ‘renamed and/or allocated’ and incorporated with 1678 Heavy Conversion Flight, (but still known as 115 Sqdn when required on operations?) They moved to LITTLE SNORING in about August 1943.
A CHANGE OF PLAN?
I can guess that RAF Bomber Command handed over command of this aerodrome to the USAAF in about 1943 - does anybody know the exact details?
THE VICKERS WELLINGTON
The history of the Vickers Wellington bomber is fascinating too, so, seeing as some were based here it seems worthy of some mention. Many view it today as being of little distinction and having little impact on the outcome of WW2. Indeed, I wonder how many youngsters in the UK have even heard of it? It was in its day a revelation and highly regarded by its crews, not least for its revolutionary ‘geodesic’ fuselage structure being able to absorb a huge amount of battle damage, but still remain flying.
In the period 1941 to 1942 especially, when the first four- engine bombers were just coming into service with RAF Bomber Command, it provided the RAF with most of its front line bombers. And, with training aircraft, although well worn as most examples were.
THE GEODESIC DESIGN
The ‘geodesic’ design was not an invention by Barnes Wallis, (he called it ‘geodetic’), but he did use it originally in the pretty useless Vickers Wellesley bomber. Used in the Vickers Wellington this came into its own but neither Shorts, Handley-Page or Avro adopted the method in their four-engine bombers.
The career of Barnes-Wallis is well worth a study on its own and it certainly invites controversy. Especially regarding the results of his ‘bouncing-bomb’ used in the Dam-busters raid, which, although having become a legend in WW2 history, was, in many respects an abject failure. It did not inflict the wholesale disruption to German industry in the Ruhr as promised. But, as a propaganda exercise it was brilliant. However, and this really is astonishing, it now appears that senior RAF officers detailed to plan the attack on the dams, deliberately ignored his advice in order to minimise the damage to German industry! If this seems beyond belief, the records prove this was the case.
THE 'TALLBOY'
In terms of Barnes-Wallis having a major impact on the later stages of WW2 his concept of an ‘earthquake’ bomb such as the Tallboy was incredibly effective. But, it did require very highly trained RAF bomber crews to deliver them with great precision. Which, by then, they could – time and time again.
ANOTHER ASPECT
It is clearly remarkable that 11,460 Wellington bombers were built, but , it is not usually realised that many of those built rotted away unused, an utter waste of resources. But this of course reflects on the ‘efficiency’, or rather lack of it, of the Ministry controlling such matters. And I suppose, we must today ask ourselves - exactly whose side were these faceless minions actually on? See SMITHS LAWN for just one example of profligate waste.
Doug MacDonald
This comment was written on: 2017-08-11 17:11:24Just found some ammo bunkers of which I have photos. Not in a good condition and used to dump material in, but there are are least five here.
Reply from Dick Flute:
Hi Doug, Many thanks. On the basis that I do not have anything to illustrate this site, could you kindly e-mail me a j-peg scan of the best of the bunch. Best regards, Dick
We'd love to hear from you, so please scroll down to leave a comment!
Leave a comment ...
Copyright (c) UK Airfield Guide
