Dieppe Raid
Dieppe Raid | |
---|---|
Part of the Dieppe, France 49°56′00″N 1°05′00″E / 49.9333°N 1.0833°E | |
Result | German victory |
- United Kingdom
- Canada
- Free France
- United States
- Poland[a]
- Czechoslovakia[b]
- Louis Mountbatten
- John Roberts
- Trafford Leigh-Mallory
- John Hughes-Hallett
- Lord Lovat
Royal Navy
237 ships and landing craft including eight destroyers
Royal Air Force
74 squadrons
Canada:
907 killed
2,460 wounded
1,946 captured[5]
United Kingdom:
275 commandos
United States:
3 killed
5 wounded
3 captured [6]
Royal Navy
1 destroyer
33 landing craft
550 killed and wounded
Royal Air Force
64 Supermarine Spitfire fighters
20 Hawker Hurricane fighters
6 Douglas Boston bombers
10 North American Mustang Mk 1 fighters
62 killed 30 wounded 17 captured
Wehrmacht:
311 killed
280 wounded
Kriegsmarine
1 submarine chaser UJ-1404 sunk
Luftwaffe
23 Fw 190
25 Dornier Do 217
Operation Jubilee or the Dieppe Raid (19 August 1942) was an unsuccessful
The port was to be captured and held for a short period, to test the feasibility of a landing and to gather intelligence. German coastal defences, port structures and important buildings were to be demolished. The raid was intended to boost Allied morale, demonstrate the commitment of the United Kingdom to re-open the Western Front and support the Soviet Union, fighting on the Eastern Front.
Aerial and naval support was insufficient to enable the ground forces to achieve their objectives; the tanks were trapped on the beach and the infantry was largely prevented from entering the town by obstacles and German fire.
Within ten hours, 3,623 of the 6,086 men who landed had been killed, wounded, or taken prisoner. The Luftwaffe made a maximum effort against the landing as the RAF had expected, but the RAF lost 106 aircraft (at least 32 to anti-aircraft fire or accidents) against 48 German losses. The Royal Navy lost 33 landing craft and a destroyer.
Both sides learned important lessons regarding coastal assaults. The Allies learned lessons that influenced the success of the
Background
Dunkirk to Dieppe
In the aftermath of the Dunkirk evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force in May 1940, the British started on the development of a substantial raiding force under the umbrella of Combined Operations Headquarters. This was accompanied by the development of techniques and equipment for amphibious warfare. In late 1941, a scheme was put forward for the landing of 12 divisions around Le Havre, assuming a withdrawal of German troops to counter Soviet success in the east. From this came Operation Rutter to test the feasibility of capturing a port by an opposed landing, the investigation of the problems of operating the invasion fleet and testing equipment and techniques of the assault.[9]
After its victory in the Battle of Britain in 1940 and the Luftwaffe having switched to night bombing in the autumn of 1940, the day fighters of Royal Air Force Fighter Command were "a force without an immediate mission".[10] Without anything else to do, the day fighters of RAF Fighter Command were in the spring of 1941 deployed on a series of search-and-destroy missions of flying over France to engage the Luftwaffe in combat. In the second half of 1941, the aerial offensive over France was greatly stepped up, leading to the loss of 411 British and Canadian aircraft.[10] In the spring of 1942, the Luftwaffe deployed the new Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighter to its airfields in France.[11]
The Fw 190 was superior to the Supermarine Spitfire Mk V and Hawker Hurricane Mk IIs used by the British and Canadian pilots and losses over France increased.[11] The RAF was convinced it was winning the air war, believing that the loss of 259 Spitfires over France in the first six months of 1942 were justified by the reported destruction of 197 German aircraft in the same period. A major problem for the RAF was that the Luftwaffe German fighter pilots declined to engage in combat over the French coast and instead operated inland, forcing the British Spitfires to fly deeper into France, using up their fuel, placing them at a disadvantage when the Luftwaffe engaged, and, critically, if RAF pilots had to bail out they would be in enemy occupied territory, i.e. RAF Fighter command was now operating with all the disadvantages the Luftwaffe had to contend with in the Battle of Britain. Thanks to intelligence provided by Ultra, the British knew that if any Allied force attempted to seize a port in France, the Germans would assume it to be the beginning of an invasion and thus the Luftwaffe was to mount a maximum effort. Fighter Command lobbied in early 1942, for a raid to seize a French port to provoke the Luftwaffe into action with the RAF at an advantage.[11]
Dieppe
Dieppe, a coastal town in the
There was also intense pressure from the Soviet government to open a second front in Western Europe. By early 1942, the Wehrmacht's Operation Barbarossa had clearly failed to destroy the Soviet Union. However, the Germans in a much less ambitious summer offensive launched in June, were deep into southern Soviet territory, pushing toward Stalingrad. Joseph Stalin himself repeatedly demanded that the Allies create a second front in France to force the Germans to move at least 40 divisions away from the Eastern Front to remove some of the pressure put on the Red Army in the Soviet Union.[13]
The proposed Allied invasion of continental Europe in 1943, Operation Roundup, was considered impractical by military planners, and the alternative of landing in 1942, Operation Sledgehammer, even more difficult. The British had been engaged with the Italians and the Germans in the Western Desert campaign since June 1940. At the Second Washington Conference in June 1942, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill decided to postpone the cross-English Channel invasion and schedule Operation Torch, the Anglo-American invasion of French North Africa, for later that year. In the interim, a large-scale Canadian-led raid on the French coast was intended to take some of the pressure off the Soviet Union.[14]
The objective of the raid was discussed by Winston Churchill in his war memoirs:[15]
I thought it most important that a large-scale operation should take place this summer, and military opinion seemed unanimous that until an operation on that scale was undertaken, no responsible general would take the responsibility of planning the main invasion ...In discussion with
C.I.G.S., Admiral Mountbatten, and the Naval Force Commander, Captain J. Hughes-Hallett.
Role of Louis Mountbatten
On the directive of Winston Churchill, Louis Mountbatten was recalled from captaincy of the aircraft carrier
COHQ proposed flanking landings that would take Dieppe in a pincer movement, but Home Forces argued for a frontal attack as, within the 15-hour window of the raid, the flank attacks would not have enough time to achieve success. At meetings Mountbatten argued that it was sufficient for the raid to show that the tactics would have worked, Montgomery countered that if the raid did not take Dieppe it would be seen as a failure.[20] An initial heavy bombardment from the air was approved (despite concerns about civilian casualties) then rescinded due to army opinion that wreckage would block streets for the tanks and RAF belief that most of the bombs would end up in the sea or inland. Mountbatten pressed for the firepower of a battleship for bombardment in lieu of bombing but neither this nor cruisers was permitted. Equally, Combined Operations' proposed assault force of marines and commandos was passed over in favour of untried Canadian troops.[21]
Mountbatten was well known for his chivalry and charming abilities; however, he lacked experience in terms of actual warfare.[f] Even before taking up this role, Mountbatten had faced a rough patch at sea captaining the British Navy's HMS Kelly as commander of the 5th Destroyer Flotilla, where his performance was so below par that Denis Healey – who was secretary of state for defence when Mountbatten was chief of the defence staff in the 1960s – remarked, "but his birth saved him from the court martial any other officer would have faced".[22]
Despite his shortcomings,[citation needed] Mountbatten played an important role in the planning of the whole operation. The Dieppe raid was intended as an experiment and was initially planned to take place at the end of June 1942. Preparations were in full swing with two rehearsals taking place in Bridport on 13 and 23 June; the second due to the debacle the first turned into.[23] However, bad weather delayed the operation by three weeks and two vessels that were to be used had been put out action by bombs.[23] This made the chiefs of staff uneasy thinking that the Germans would have found out about the attack by then as the plan was no longer a secret to the more than 10,000 Allied troops who had been informed of it. On 8 July, General Bernard Montgomery recommended calling off the attack altogether, and the idea would probably have been shelved had it not been for Mountbatten's proposal to relaunch the operation six weeks later, still aiming at Dieppe. His argument was that although the enemy must have found out that Dieppe had been the original target, "the very last thing they'd (Germans) ever imagine is that we would be so stupid as to lay on the same operation again".[23]
Mountbatten's hubristic approach convinced the generals to go ahead with the plan, which ultimately turned out to be catastrophic. Although Churchill, Eisenhower and Mountbatten collectively staved off any blame for the outcome, Mountbatten bore the brunt of it. Mountbatten was reluctant to accept the blame and shifted it to peripheral reasons by passing apologetic and sometimes insensitive remarks.[citation needed]
Operation Rutter
Operation Rutter was devised to satisfy several objectives, as a show of support for the
Prelude
Operation Jubilee
The Dieppe landings were planned on six beaches: four in front of the town itself, and two to the eastern and western flanks respectively. From east to west, the beaches were codenamed Yellow, Blue, Red, White, Green and Orange. No. 3 Commando would land on Yellow beach, the
Armoured support was provided by the
The Royal Navy supplied 237 ships and landing craft. However, pre-landing naval gunfire support was limited, consisting of six
Air plan
Fighter Command
Over the past eighteen months of inconclusive attritional engagements, Fighter Command had established a measure of air superiority within range of its fighters. Day incursions into British airspace had dwindled to the occasional pair of German fighter bombers racing across the Channel, dropping their bombs and racing back. At 06:15 on 7 July, two ships in the Solent, with troops for Rutter on board, were hit but the bombs failed to explode and passed through their hulls, causing only four casualties. German photographic reconnaissance was much more difficult, because adequate results required the aircraft to fly a set course and height. Repeat sorties once or twice a week were ideal for comparative analysis of photographs but the Luftwaffe could manage only one set of pictures a month. A partial reconnaissance was obtained from 28 to 31 July, after Rutter had been cancelled and not again until 24 August, five days after Jubilee.[31] The air plan was to exploit the raid to force the Luftwaffe to fight on British terms and suffer a serious defeat; Air Vice-Marshal Trafford Leigh-Mallory, the commander of 11 Group Fighter Command was to command the air effort, for which 56 fighter squadrons, comprising Spitfire fighters, Hurricane fighter-bombers and Typhoon low-level interceptors.[g] Four Mustang Mk I squadrons of Army Cooperation Command were provided for long-range reconnaissance and a contingent of five bomber squadrons were to participate for smoke laying and tactical bombing. The landings could be expected to prompt a maximum effort by the Luftwaffe in Northern France, Belgium and the Netherlands, with about 250 fighters and 220 bombers.[32]
Leigh-Mallory controlled the air battle from 11 Group headquarters at
The moving of squadrons within 11 Group and reinforcement with 15 squadrons from outside 11 Group were carried out 14–15 August under the guise of "Exercise Venom".[35]
2 Group
On 29 June,
Intelligence
Intelligence on the area was sparse: there were dug-in German gun positions on the cliffs, but these had not been detected or spotted by air reconnaissance photographers. The planners had assessed the beach gradient and its suitability for tanks only by scanning holiday snapshots, which led to an underestimation of the German strength and of the terrain.[26] The outline plan for the abortive Operation Rutter (which became the basis for Operation Jubilee) stated that "intelligence reports indicate that Dieppe is not heavily defended and that the beaches in the vicinity are suitable for landing infantry, and armoured fighting vehicles at some".[37]
German forces
Army
The Germans were aware that the Allies might launch a large-scale amphibious operation some time in summer 1942. In July, Supreme Commander in the West Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt wrote an assessment which concluded that paratroops were to be expected, as well as a large Allied fighter and bomber force. Rundstedt wrote that "at the point of landing, the enemy will win command of the air. He will then use the bulk of his air forces against defences on the ground ... The enemy – in order to achieve an attack en masse – will use all the aircraft he has, even slower types".[38]
In August, German forces at Dieppe were on high alert, having been warned by French
Luftwaffe
The Luftwaffe fighter force comprised Jagdgeschwader 2 (JG2) and Jagdgeschwader 26 (JG26), with about 120 serviceable fighters, mostly Fw 190s to oppose the landings and escort around 100 serviceable bombers of Kampfgeschwader 2 and the specialist anti-shipping bombers of III./Kampfgeschwader 53 (KG 53), II./Kampfgeschwader 40 (KG 40) and I./Kampfgeschwader 77 (KG 77) mostly equipped with Dornier 217s.[citation needed]
Battle
On the night of 18/19 August, RAF Coastal Command carried out anti-surface vessel patrols of the coast from Boulogne to Cherbourg; after sunrise the patrols were carried out by fighters. The Allied fleet left the south coast of
Initial landings
The initial landings began at 04:50 on 19 August, with attacks on the artillery batteries on the flanks of the main landing area. These were
Yellow beach
The mission for
The craft carrying No. 3 Commando, approaching the coast to the east, were not warned of the approach of a German coastal
Orange beach
The mission for Lieutenant Colonel
Blue beach
The naval engagement between the small German convoy and the craft carrying No. 3 Commando had alerted the German defenders at Blue beach. The landing near Puys by the Royal Regiment of Canada plus three platoons from the
Green Beach
On Green beach at the same time that No. 4 Commando had landed at Orange Beach, the South Saskatchewan Regiment's 1st Battalion was headed towards Pourville. They beached at 04:52, without having been detected. The battalion managed to leave their landing craft before the Germans could open fire. However, on the way in, some of the landing craft had drifted off course and most of the battalion found themselves west of the River Scie rather than east of it. Because they had been landed in the wrong place, the battalion, whose objective was the hills east of the village and the Hindenburg Battery artillery, had to enter Pourville to cross the river by the only bridge.[12] Before the Saskatchewans managed to reach the bridge, the Germans had positioned machine guns and anti-tank guns there which stopped their advance. With the battalion's dead and wounded piling up on the bridge, Lieutenant Colonel Charles Merritt, the commanding officer, attempted to give the attack impetus by repeatedly and openly crossing the bridge, in order to demonstrate that it was feasible to do so.[44] However, despite the assault resuming, the South Saskatchewans and the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada, who had landed beside them, were unable to reach their target.[12] While the Camerons did manage to penetrate further inland than any other troops that day, they were also soon forced back as German reinforcements rushed to the scene.[26] Both battalions suffered more losses as they withdrew; only 341 men were able to reach the landing craft and embark, and the rest were left to surrender. For his part in the battle, Lieutenant Colonel Merritt was awarded the Victoria Cross.[41]
Pourville radar station
One of the objectives of the Dieppe Raid was to discover the importance and performance of a German radar station on the cliff-top to the east of the town of Pourville. To achieve this, RAF
After the war, Lord Mountbatten said to author James Leasor, when being interviewed during research for the book Green Beach, that "If I had been aware of the orders given to the escort to shoot him rather than let him be captured, I would have cancelled them immediately". Nissenthall and his bodyguards failed to overcome the radar station defences but Nissenthall was able to crawl up to the rear of the station under enemy fire and cut all telephone wires leading to it. The operators inside resorted to radio to talk to their commanders which was intercepted by listening posts on the south coast of England. The Allies were able to learn a great deal about the improved accuracy, location, capacity and density of German radar stations along the Channel coast which helped to convince Allied commanders of the importance of developing radar jamming technology. Only Nissenthall and one South Saskatchewan of the party returned to England.[24][page needed][46]
Main Canadian landings
Red and White Beaches
Preparing the ground for the main landings, four destroyers were bombarding the coast as landing craft approached. At 05:15, they were joined by five RAF Hurricane squadrons who bombed the coastal defences and set a smokescreen to protect the assault troops. Between 03:30, and 03:40, 30 minutes after the initial landings, the main frontal assault by The Essex Scottish Regiment and the
Unaware of the situation on the beaches because of a smoke screen laid by the supporting destroyers, Major General Roberts sent in the two reserve units: the Fusiliers Mont-Royal and the Royal Marines. At 07:00, the Fusiliers under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Dollard Ménard in 26 landing craft sailed towards their beach. They were heavily engaged by the Germans, who hit them with heavy machine gun, mortar and grenade fire, and destroyed them; only a few men managed to reach the town.[12] Those men were then sent in towards the centre of Dieppe and became pinned down under the cliffs and Roberts ordered the Royal Marines to land in order to support them. Not being prepared to support the Fusiliers, the Royal Marines had to transfer from their gunboats and motorboat transports onto landing craft. The Royal Marine landing craft were heavily engaged on their way in with many destroyed or disabled. Those Royal Marines that did reach the shore were either killed or captured. As he became aware of the situation the Royal Marine commanding officer Lieutenant Colonel Phillipps, stood upon the stern of his landing craft and signalled for the rest of his men to turn back. He was killed a few moments later.[26]
During the raid, a mortar platoon from the
At 09:40, under heavy fire, the withdrawal from the main landing beaches began and was completed by 14:00.[26]
Air operations
At 04:16 six
The airfield at
As more German aircraft appeared, the number of British aircraft over Dieppe was increased from three to six squadrons and at times up to nine squadrons were present.[56]
Six squadrons (four British, two Canadian) flew the Spitfire Mk IX, the only British fighter equal to the Fw 190, on its operational debut at Dieppe.
Aftermath
Analyses
German
The capture of a copy of the Dieppe plan allowed the Germans to analyse the operation. Rundstedt criticised the plan's rigidity, saying that "the plan is in German terms not a plan, it is more a position paper or the intended course of an exercise."[59] Other senior German officers were equally unimpressed; General Konrad Haase considered it "incomprehensible" that a division was expected to overrun a German regiment that was supported by artillery, "...the strength of naval and air forces was entirely insufficient to suppress the defenders during the landings".[60] General Adolf-Friedrich Kuntzen could not understand why the Pourville landings were not reinforced with tanks where they might have succeeded in leaving the beach.[61] The Germans were unimpressed by the Churchill tanks left behind; the armament and armour were compared unfavourably with that used in German and Soviet tanks.[60]
The Luftwaffe was pleased with how it had performed during the air battle. One report judged the Fw 190, which formed the bulk of the air defence, to be 'in every way suitable as a fighter-bomber'. It ascribed its good performance despite its marked numerical superiority to the "aggressiveness and better training of the German fighter pilots". The Luftwaffe had been so active during the battle that only 70 of the 230 airframes available at the start of the day were combat ready by day's end. The Luftwaffe had consumed all its 20mm cannon ammunition available in the West, so much so that there was not enough for routine flight operations in the next couple of days.[62]
The Germans were pleased with their successful defence whilst noting faults in their own communications, transport and location of support forces but recognised that the Allies were certain to learn some lessons from the operation and set about improving the fixed defences.[24] As the overall theatre commander in the West, Rundstedt was adamant that the Germans must learn Dieppe's lessons. He was anxious that the Germans were not left behind in learning from Dieppe: "Just as we have gained the most valuable experience from the day of Dieppe, the enemy has learnt as well. Just as we evaluate the experience for the future, so will the enemy. Perhaps he will do this to an even greater extent because he has paid so dearly for it".[63]
The Dieppe raid also provoked longer-term strategic decisions. In October, Hitler's high command produced a "Memorandum Regarding Experiences in Coastal Defence", which was provoked in large part by Dieppe. This document provided a framework for German commanders to plan coastal defence in the future. It laid down, amongst other principles, that air superiority was the key to a successful coastal defence strategy.[62]
Allied
Dieppe became a textbook example of "what not to do" in amphibious operations and laid the framework for the Normandy landings two years later. Dieppe showed the need for
- Preliminary artillery support, including aerial bombardment[26]
- Surprise
- Proper intelligence concerning enemy fortifications
- Avoidance of a frontal attack on a defended port
- Proper re-embarkation craft[64]
While the Canadian contingent fought boldly in the face of a determined enemy, it was ultimately circumstances outside their control which sealed their fate.[64] Despite criticism concerning the inexperience of the Canadian brigades, scholars have noted that even seasoned professionals would have been hard-pressed under the deplorable conditions brought about by their superiors. The commanders who planned the raid on Dieppe had not envisaged such losses.[64] This was one of the first attempts by the Western Allies on a German-held port city. As a consequence, planning from the highest ranks in preparation for the raid was minimal. Basic strategic and tactical errors were made which resulted in a higher than expected Allied (particularly Canadian) death rate.[citation needed]
To help future landings, the British would develop specialist armoured vehicles for engineers to perform tasks protected by armour. Because the tracks of most of the Churchill tanks were caught up in the shingle beach, the Allies began to study beach geology where they intended to land and adapting vehicles for them.[65] The Allies changed their view that capturing a major port was necessary to establish a second front; the damage inflicted on a port to capture it and by the Germans firing demolition charges would make it useless afterwards. Prefabricated Mulberry harbours were to be built and towed to beaches during the invasion.[66]
While the RAF were generally able to keep German aircraft from the land battle and the ships, the operation demonstrated the need for air superiority as well as showing "major deficiencies in RAF ground support techniques" and this led to the creation of an integrated tactical air force for army support.[67]
Casualties
Of the nearly 5,000-strong Canadian contingent, 3,367 were killed, wounded or taken prisoner, an exceptional casualty rate of 68 per cent.[68] The 1,000 British Commandos lost 247 men. The Royal Navy lost the destroyer Berkeley (on the return crossing, it was hit by bombs from a Fw 190 and then scuttled by Albrighton) and 33 landing craft, suffering 550 dead and wounded. The RAF lost 106 aircraft. RAF Air Sea Rescue Services picked up around 20 pilots at the loss of three of Dover's five High Speed Launches.[69] Among the RAF losses, six RAF aircraft had been shot down by gunners on their own side, one Typhoon was shot down by a Spitfire and two others were lost when their tails broke off (a structural issue with early Typhoons), and two Spitfires collided during the withdrawal across the Channel.[70]
The Germans suffered 591 casualties, 322 fatal and 280 wounded, 48 aircraft and one patrol boat.[71] Of the 50 US Army Rangers serving in Commando units, six were killed, seven wounded and four captured.
The losses at Dieppe were claimed to be a necessary evil.[64] Mountbatten later justified the raid by arguing that lessons learned at Dieppe in 1942 were put to good use later in the war. He later claimed, "I have no doubt that the Battle of Normandy was won on the beaches of Dieppe. For every man who died in Dieppe, at least 10 more must have been spared in Normandy in 1944."[citation needed] In direct response to the raid on Dieppe, Churchill remarked that "My Impression of 'Jubilee' is that the results fully justified the heavy cost" and that it "was a Canadian contribution of the greatest significance to final victory."[72]
To others, especially Canadians, it was a major disaster. The exception was the success gained by the battle-hardened British commandos against the coast artillery batteries near Varengeville. Of the nearly 5,000 Canadian soldiers, more than 900 were killed (about 18 per cent) and 1,874 taken prisoner (37%).[5][73]
German propaganda
Dieppe was a German
The air battle
Fighter Command claimed to have inflicted many losses on the
Prisoners of war
Brigadier William Southam brought ashore his copy of the assault plan, classified as a secret document. Southam tried to bury it under the pebbles at the time of his surrender but was spotted and the plan retrieved by the Germans. The plan, later criticised[by whom?] for its size and needless complexity, contained orders to shackle prisoners.[84] The British Special Service Brigade tied the hands of prisoners taken on raids and the practice had been ordered for the Dieppe Raid "to prevent destruction of their documents". Roberts objected to this with the chief of combined operations. After capturing the orders for Operation Jubilee, the Germans threatened on 2 September to shackle the prisoners taken at Dieppe. The War Office announced that if an order existed it would be rescinded and the Germans withdrew the threat on 3 September. On 7 October the Germans revived the controversy after more information emerged about the Dieppe operation and that German prisoners taken during the small 4 October raid on Sark on were alleged to have been tied. On 8 October British and Canadian prisoners were tied in reprisal, which led to counter reprisals.[85][page needed] Supposed violations of the Geneva Convention committed by Allied commandos against German POWs at Dieppe and Sark was one of the reasons Hitler gave for the Commando Order of October 1942 for all Allied commando prisoners to be executed.[86]: 73
Civilians
Civilians were handed leaflets by the Canadians telling them it was only a raid and not to get involved; despite this a small number of civilians provided help to the wounded and later passed clothing and food to Canadian prisoners.[24][page needed] Civilians also volunteered to help collect and bury the Canadian fallen, including the 475 washed ashore.[24][page needed] Hitler decided to reward the town for not helping in the raid by freeing French POWs from Dieppe and Berlin radio announced the release of 750 "sons of Dieppe" imprisoned since 1940.[77] For the town residents' "perfect discipline and calm", although the residents had not had much time to furnish the invaders with an instant Fifth Column, Hitler gave the town a gift of Fr 10 million, to repair the damage caused during the raid.[87]
German preparedness
The fiasco has led to a discussion of whether the Germans knew of the raid in advance.[88] Since June 1942, the BBC had been broadcasting warnings to French civilians of a "likely" action, urging them to quickly evacuate the Atlantic coastal districts.[89][90][91] Indeed, on the day of the raid itself, the BBC announced it, albeit at 08:00, after the landings had taken place.[92]
First-hand accounts and memoirs of many Canadian veterans who documented their experiences on the shores of Dieppe remark about the preparedness of the German defences as if they were warned, on touching down on the Dieppe shore, the landing ships were immediately shelled with the utmost precision as troops disembarked.[93] Commanding officer Lt Colonel Labatt testified to having seen markers on the beach used for mortar practice, which appeared to have been recently placed.[94]
The belief that the Germans were forewarned has been strengthened by accounts of German and Allied POWs. Major C. E. Page, while interrogating a German soldier, found out that four machine-gun battalions were brought in "specifically" in anticipation of a raid. There are numerous accounts of interrogated German prisoners, German captors and French citizens who all conveyed to Canadians that the Germans had been preparing for the landing for weeks.[95][96] Captain Stephen Roskill, Britain's official naval historian, wrote an article for the prestigious Royal United Services Institution arguing the opposite case in 1964. Roskill's article relied on German documentary evidence to show that any warnings of an Allied raid on Dieppe were purely coincidental.[97] In his 2023 study of the battle from the German point of view, James Shelley concluded that there was no evidence to support the view that the Germans had any specific intelligence that a raid was planned against Dieppe.[98]
The German convoy that bumped into the Allied ships failed to get messages to shore due to damage to their radio aerials in the fire fight; however, the operator of the long range Freya 28 (Radar) at Pourville correctly identified five columns of stationary ships at 03:45 at a range of 35 km. An alert was given to the Navy command who did not believe the warning, but when the ships started to head to shore a further warning was given at 04:35. Troops along the coast had heard gun fire out to sea and some units went to alert. It was 05:05 before German orders came from Le Havre for artillery to open fire. Within an hour the extent of the attack was being understood by German command and reserves were notified to prepare to move to the coast.[24]
Daily Telegraph crossword controversy
On 17 August 1942, the clue "French port (6)" appeared in the
The Enigma pinch
Research undertaken over a 15-year period by military historian
No. 30 Commando was formed, as the Special Intelligence Unit, in September 1942 (a month after the raid), composed of 33 (Royal Marines) Troop, 34 (Army) Troop, 35 (RAF) Troop and 36 (Royal Navy) Troop. It was later renamed 30 RN Commando (Special Engineering Unit).[4] Later research identified the unit in the Dieppe raid as No. 3 Troop of No. 10 (Inter-Allied) Commando, known as the X-Troop.
In August 2017, naval historian Eric Grove described 'Enigma Pinch' as "more a reflection of the contemporary fascination with secret intelligence rather than the reality of 1942."[101] Obtaining useful intelligence was among the objectives – including the capture of a four-rotor Enigma cipher machine but it was one of many objectives. Grove concludes that the Dieppe Raid was not, as claimed, cover for a 'snatch' and also recognises that the decision to form the Intelligence Assault Units to gather intelligence material was not made until after Operation Jubilee had been ordered.[101]
Leah Garret in her 2021 book X-Troop: The Secret Jewish Commandos of World War Two,[102] found new evidence to support O'Keefe's conclusion that Dieppe was a cover for a pinch on naval headquarters. A British unit was created made up of anti-Nazi Germans who had fled the Sudetenland; a five-man team from X Troop was to break into the Enigma machine's room at Dieppe and take the machine and code books. (German speakers were needed to identify the relevant code documents, and possibly, to interrogate prisoners taken.) Garret found a formerly classified after-action report written by "Maurice Latimer", the Anglicised name of the one Sudeten German who returned from the mission, who reported that his orders were "to proceed immediately to German General HQ in Dieppe to pick up all documents, etc of value, including, if possible, a new German respirator" (almost certainly a code word referring to the Enigma machine). The mission failed, with one member killed, another seriously wounded, and two taken prisoner.[103]
Commemoration
Location | Date | Description | Manufacturer | Inscription | Window |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sir Arthur Currie Hall, Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, Ontario | 1968 | 1 light Dieppe Dawn | Robert McCausland Limited | * In memory of Dieppe Dawn 19 August 1942 by classes of 1948–52 |
Dieppe War Cemetery
Allied dead were initially buried in a mass grave but at the insistence of the German Army Graves Commission the bodies were reburied at a site used by a British hospital in 1939 in Vertus Wood on the edge of the town.[104][24] The Dieppe Canadian War Cemetery headstones have been placed back-to-back in double rows, the norm for a German war cemetery but unusual for Commonwealth War Graves Commission sites. When the Allies liberated Dieppe as part of Operation Fusilade in 1944, the grave markers were replaced with standard CWGC headstones but the layout was left unchanged to avoid disturbing the remains.[citation needed]
Honours and awards
Three Victoria Crosses were awarded for the operation: one to Captain Patrick Porteous, Royal Regiment of Artillery attached to No. 4 Commando, in the British forces; and two to Canadians – the Reverend
Porteous was severely wounded in the battle but was evacuated at the end of the battle; both Foote and Merritt were captured and became
Marcel Lambert of the 14th Army Tank Regiment (The Calgary Regiment (Tank)), fought aggressively in the battle and was captured. He, along with all the participants in the raid, was awarded a "certificate" from the Government of France. In the 1980s the Government of Canada issued to all raid veterans a "volunteer service medal."[106]
Despite the failure of the operation, Major General Roberts was awarded the Distinguished Service Order. Among the enlisted personnel, Private William A. Haggard[107] of the South Saskatchewan Regiment was awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal, and subsequently, field promoted to lieutenant, for his actions during the raid.[citation needed]
A Canadian signalman, Sergeant David Lloyd Hart, was awarded the Military Medal for his efforts during the raid. Hart maintained what became the sole line of radio communications between the men ashore and the commanders out at sea. He is credited with saving the lives of 100 men through his signals work, being able to order their retreat. Hart later became the longest-serving officer in the Canadian Armed Forces, serving in active and honorary roles for 81 years. He died in March 2019, aged 101.[108][109]
U.S. Army Ranger Corporal Frank Koons became the first American soldier in the Second World War to receive a British award for bravery in action, a Military Medal.[24]
See also
- Beach Comber, a famous war pigeon that was highly decorated for his role in the Dieppe Raid.
- Operation Jubilee order of battle for all units involved.
- Dieppe, a Canadian television miniseries that dramatised the events leading up to Operation Jubilee.
Notes
- 303, 306, 308 and No. 317 Fighter Squadrons of the Polish Air Forces fighting with the RAF,[1] as well as the ORP Ślązak destroyer[2]
- No. 310 and No. 312 Fighter Squadronsof the RAF
- ^ O'Keefe alternately states they were sent in as part of 40 Commando[3] but 30 Commando/30AU was not formed until a month later and indications that it was involved may be erroneous[4]
- ^ Mountbatten had been posted early to the ship, which was not expected to be back in service until November, so he could tour the states meeting influential members of press, military and the administration[16]
- Zeebrugge raid
- ^ Mountbatten had served in the Royal Navy since 1916
- ^ The Hurricanes were a mix of "Cannon-armed" Hurricane IIC and bomb carrying Hurricanes
- ^ Leigh-Mallory reported losses of 70 pilots and 10 crew killed or missing; aircraft destroyed as 88 fighters, 10 Army Cooperation aircraft, one from 2 Group and seven of the smoke laying aircraft.[81]
- ^ Son of the novelist John Buchan, former Governor General of Canada
References
Citations
- ^ Król 1990, pp. 95–96, 250.
- ^ a b Ford 2004, p. 41.
- ^ a b Ogrodnik, Irene. "Breaking German codes real reason for 1942 Dieppe raid: historian." Archived October 24, 2012, at the Wayback Machine Global News, 9 August 2012. Retrieved: 13 August 2012.
- ^ a b "History of 30 Assault Unit 1942–1946". Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives, King's College London. December 1999.
- ^ a b Herd, Alex. "Dieppe Raid'Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved: May 26, 2021.
- ^ Defelice, James. "First Blood for the Army Rangers at Dieppe.'history.net. Retrieved: 26 July 2019.
- ISBN 978-1-4711-6644-0.
- ^ Shelley, James. "Dieppe: a German Learning Experience". media.kcl.ac.uk. King's College London. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
- ^ Buckingham 2004, p. 15.
- ^ a b Copp, Terry. "The Air over Dieppe." Legion, June 1996, p. 6.
- ^ a b c Copp, Terry. "The Air over Dieppe." Legion, June 1996, p. 7.
- ^ a b c d e f g "Dieppe raid." Juno Beach Centre. Retrieved: 23 March 2016.
- ^ Whitaker 1992, p. 29.
- ^ "Normandy Landings, Operations Overlord and Neptune". www.naval-history.net. Retrieved 27 November 2020.
- ^ Churchill 1950, pp. 509–510.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, pp. 148–150.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, p. 155.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, pp. 156, 160.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, pp. 168–169.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, pp. 187–188.
- ^ Ziegler 1985, pp. 199–189.
- ^ Healy, Denis. The Time of My Life. p. 259.
- ^ a b c Ziegler 1985, p. 190.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-908291-10-3.[page needed]
- ^ Christie 2000, pp. 6–7.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Julian Thompson: The Dieppe Raid. BBC (World Wars in Depth series), 6 June 2010.
- ^ "Operation Jubilee." Combined Operations, 7 June 2010.
- ^ Henry 1993, p. 6.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 24.
- ^ Copp 2004, p. 34.
- ^ Greenhous 1994, pp. 232–233.
- ^ Richards & Saunders 1975, pp. 143–144.
- ^ a b Leigh-Mallory p. 61
- ^ Macksey 2004, p. 151.
- ^ Leigh-Mallory "After Action Report", para 7, 69
- ^ Bowyer 1979, pp. 248–249.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 23.
- ^ Shelley 2021, pp. 4–6.
- ^ "Dieppe – Operation Jubilee" Warfare Magazine
- ^ "No. 35729". The London Gazette (Supplement). 2 October 1942. p. 4328.
- ^ a b "No. 35729". The London Gazette (Supplement). 2 October 1942. pp. 4323–4324.
- ^ "No. 35730". The London Gazette (Supplement). 2 October 1942. p. 4339.
- ^ Dunning 2003, pp. 65–87.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 141.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 136.
- ^ Goldstein, Ron. "Jack Nissenthall: The VC Hero Who Never Was (Part 1a)." BBC (WW2 People's War), 2004. Retrieved: 30 April 2009.
- ^ Kelly, Arthur. "A battle doomed to fail for all the wrong reasons."The National Post, 17 August 2012. Retrieved: 5 January 2016.
- ^ "Mortar platoon." Archived December 15, 2005, at the Wayback Machine calgaryhighlanders.com. Retrieved: 8 April 2010.
- ^ "Lyster and Pittaway." Archived 2010-12-31 at the Wayback Machine Harry Palmer Gallery. Retrieved: 8 April 2010.
- ^ "Casualty Details: Insinger, Theodor Marie". Commonwealth War Graves Commission.
- ^ Bowyer 1979, pp. 249–250.
- ^ Leigh-Mallory, After Action Report, p. 65
- ^ a b c Leigh-Mallory, Trafford (2003), "Air Operations at Dieppe: An After-Action Report", Canadian Military History, XII (4), Article 6,
Report by the Air Force Commander on the Combined Operation Against Dieppe – August 19th, 1942, 5 September 1942
- ^ a b Richards & Saunders 1975, p. 144.
- ^ Atkin p. 199
- ^ Leigh-Mallory, After Action Report, p. 67
- ^ a b c d e Copp, Terry. "The Air over Dieppe." Legion, June 1996, p. 8.
- ^ Macksey 2004, pp. 151, 68.
- ^ Shelley 2021, pp. 10–11.
- ^ a b Atkin 1980, p. 262.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 261.
- ^ a b Shelley 2021, pp. 7–9.
- ^ Shelley 2021, p. 12.
- ^ a b c d Maguire 1963, p. 190.
- ^ Foot, M.R.D. "The Dieppe raid."History Today, August 1992. Retrieved: 29 November 2015.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 274
- ^ "RAF History Timeline 1942." Archived 2010-12-06 at the Wayback Machine raf.mod.uk, 2012 [last update]. Retrieved: 21 July 2012.
- ^ Robertson 1962, p. 386.
- ^ Leigh Mallory, After Action Report, p. 57
- ^ Schoeman, Michael (December 1969), "Air Umbrella – Dieppe", Military History Journal, vol. I, no. 5, The South African Military History Society
- ^ Rahn 2001, p. 441.
- ^ Maguire 1963, p. 181.
- ^ Grimsley, Mark. "What If the Dieppe Raid Had Succeeded? Historynet.com, 2 June 2011. Retrieved: 19 August 2013.
- ^ a b Hall, David. "The German View of the Dieppe Raid." Archived 20 August 2018 at the Wayback Machine Lecture to the Laurier Centre for Military Strategic and Disarmament Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, 13 October 2011.
- ISBN 978-1399030601., p. 250
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 257.
- ^ a b Smith 2010, p. 338.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 208.
- ^ Franks 1998, pp. 56–62.
- ^ Weal 1996, p. 26.
- ^ Leigh-Mallory Appendix C
- ^ Leigh-Mallory "Covering Letter by Air Force Commander", After Action Report, p. 2
- ^ "No. 35729". The London Gazette (Supplement). 2 October 1942. p. 4331.
- ^ Turcotte, Jean-Michel (January 2018). "Bowmanville, 1942: The 'Shackling Crisis' and the Treatment of German Prisoners of War in Canada". Online Atlas on the History of Humanitarianism and Human Rights. IEG. Retrieved 7 June 2019.
- ^ Stacey 1956, pp. 396–297.
- ISBN 978-0750964364.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 264.
- ^ Campbell 1993, pp. 4–5.
- ^ a b Fleming, Vic. "Mystery of the D-day crosswords, Part 1." Archived January 19, 2012, at the Wayback Machine Daily Record (Little Rock), 2008. Retrieved: 7 June 2010.
- ^ "Warning by radio: Notice of 'likely' war moves given civilians in Nazi-held zone." The New York Times, 9 June 1942, p. 1. Retrieved: 20 August 2012.
- Pittsburgh Press8 June 1942. Retrieved: 9 September 2010.
- ^ Campbell 1993, p. 4.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 266.
- ^ Stacey 1944, par. 43.
- ^ Poolton and Poolton-Turney 1998, p. 46.
- ^ Whitaker 1992, p. xv.
- ^ Roskill 1964
- ISBN 978-1399030601., pp. 39–40, 247.
- ^ Gilbert 2008, pp. 19–20.
- ^ Wallington, Richard S. J. "The Crossword Panic of 1944." Historic UK. Retrieved: 21 July 2012.
- ^ a b Grove, Eric (August 2017), "Dieppe – The Reason Why", Britain at War Magazine, Key Publishing, p. 66 (Box panel, "The Enigma Factor")
- OCLC 1159041048.
- ^ Gumbel, Andrew (9 May 2021). "Raid on Dieppe masked secret mission to steal Nazis' Enigma machine". The Observer.
- ^ Atkin 1980, p. 265.
- ^ "The 1942 Dieppe Raid". Veterans Affairs Canada. Retrieved 4 March 2020.
- ^ Twice-told Tales of St. Albert's Past, p. 97
- ^ Lawren P. Harris (1942). "Portrait of Private W. A. Haggard". Canadian War Museum. Retrieved 4 January 2019.
- ^ Lowrie, Morgan (1 April 2019). "Dieppe veteran and the Canadian Army's longest-serving officer David Lloyd Hart was 'a friend and mentor to many'". The Globe and Mail. Montreal, ON Canada.
- ^ "WWII vet, Dieppe hero David Hart dies at age 101" (Video). CBC News. Toronto, ON Canada. 1 April 2019.
Works cited
- Atkin, Ronald. Dieppe 1942: The Jubilee Disaster. London: Book Club Associates, 1980. ISBN 978-0-333-19187-3.
- Boog, H.; Rahn, W.; Stumpf, R.; Wegner, B. (2001) [1990]. Der globale Krieg: Die Ausweitung zum Weltkrieg und der Wechsel zur Initiative 1941 bis 1943 [Widening of the Conflict into a World War and the Shift of the Initiative 1941–1943]. Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg (Germany and the Second World War). Vol. VI. Translated by Osers, Ewald; Brownjohn, John; Crampton, Patricia; Willmot, Louise (eng. trans. Cambridge University Press, London ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt for the Militärgeschichtlichen Forschungsamt. pp. 439–442. ISBN 0-19-822888-0.
- Rahn, W. "Chapter III: The Conduct of the War in the Atlantic and the Coastal Area (3.) Mine Warfare and Coastal Operations". In Boog et al. (2001).
- Bowyer, M. J. F. (1979) [1974]. 2 Group RAF: A Complete History 1936–1945 (2nd Faber Paperbacks ed.). London: Faber and Faber. ISBN 0-571-11460-1.
- Buckingham, William. D-Day: The First 72 hours. Stroud, Gloucestershire, UK: Tempus Publishing. 2004. ISBN 0-7524-2842-X.
- Campbell, J. P. Dieppe Revisited: A Documentary Investigation. London: Cass, 1993. ISBN 0-7146-3496-4.
- Christie, N. M. (2000). The Suicide Raid: The Canadians at Dieppe August 19th, 1942. Access to History (No. 5). Ottawa: CEF Books. ISBN 1-896979-36-X.
- Churchill, Sir Winston. The Second World War: The Hinge of Fate. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin, 1950.
- Copp, Terry A Nation at War, 1939–1945. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier Press, 2004. ISBN 978-0-96887-505-6.
- Copp, Terry and Mike Bechthold. The Canadian Battlefields in Northern France: Dieppe and the Channel Ports. Waterloo: WLU Press, 2011. ISBN 1-926804-01-5
- Dumais, Lucien A. Un Canadien français à Dieppe. Paris: Éditions France-Empire, 1968.
- Dunning, James. The Fighting Fourth. Stroud Sutton, 2003. ISBN 0-7509-3095-0.
- Ford, Ken. Dieppe 1942: Prelude to D-Day Campaign 127 Oxford: Osprey, 2004 .
- Fowler, Will. Allies at Dieppe. Oxford: Osprey, 2012. ISBN 978-1-78096-596-3.
- Franks, Norman L. R. (1998). Royal Air Force Losses of the Second World War: Operational Losses: Aircraft and Crews 1942–1943. Vol. II. London: Midland. ISBN 1-85780-075-3.
- Gilbert, Val. A Display of Lights (9): The Lives and Puzzles of the Telegraph's Six Greatest Cryptic Crossword Setters. London: Macmillan (Telegraph Group Limited), 2008. ISBN 978-0-230-71446-5.
- Greenhous, B.; et al. (1994). The Official History of the Royal Canadian Air Force: The Crucible of War, 1939–1945. Vol. III. Toronto: University of Toronto Press and Department of National Defence. ISBN 978-0-8020-0574-8. D2-63/3-1994E.
- Griffins, Richard. Marshal Pétain. London: Constable, 1970. ISBN 0-09-455740-3
- Hamilton, Nigel. Monty: The Making of a General. London: Hamish Hamilton Ltd., 1981.ISBN 0-241-10583-8.
- Henry, Hugh G. Dieppe Through the Lens of the German War photographer. London: After the Battle, 1993. ISBN 0-900913-76-2. A Canadian historian covers the actions of each one of the 29 tanks disembarked on the raid with photos, oral history and primary sources. The author later did his doctoral dissertation on the raid.
- Hughes-Wilson, John. Military Intelligence Blunders and Cover-ups. Bath: Robinson. 2004. ISBN 978-1-84119-871-2.
- ISBN 978-83-206-0852-6.
- Leasor, James. Green Beach. Archived 26 November 2011 at the ISBN 978-1-908291-10-3.
- ISBN 0-304-36651-X.
- Maguire, Eric. "Evaluation." Dieppe, August 19. London: J. Cape, 1963.
- O'Keefe, David. "One Day In August : The Untold Story Behind Canada's Tragedy At Dieppe", Alfred A Knopf Canada, 2013, ISBN 978-0-345-80769-4.
- Poolton, Jack with Jayne Poolton-Turney. Destined to Survive: A Dieppe Veteran's Story. Toronto: Dundurn Press 1998. ISBN 1-55002-311-X.
- Robertson, Terence. Dieppe: The Shame and the Glory. Boston: Little, Brown, 1st U.S. edition, 1962.
- Roskill, S. W. (February 1964). "The Dieppe Raid and the Question of German Foreknowledge: A Study in Historical Responsibility". Royal United Services Institution Journal. 109 (633): 27–31. .
- Shelley, James (2021). "The Germans and Air Power at Dieppe: The Raid and its Lessons from the 'Other Side of the Hill'". War in History. 29: 228–247. S2CID 237012955.
- Shelley, James (2023). The Germans and the Dieppe Raid: How Hitler's Wehrmacht Crushed Operation Jubilee. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Military. ISBN 9781399030601.
- Smith, C. (2010) [2009]. England's Last War against France: Fighting Vichy 1940–1942 (2nd pbk. Phoenix (Orion) ed.). London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-7538-2705-5.
- Stacey, Colonel C.P. "The Lessons of Dieppe." Archived 28 March 2022 at the Wayback Machine Report No. 128: The Lessons of Dieppe and their Influence on the Operation Overlord. Ottawa, Canada: Department of National Defence Canadian Forces, 1944.
- OCLC 1113687432. Retrieved 19 June 2020 – via Government of Canada: Directorate of History and Heritage.
- Taylor, A.J.P. The Second World War: An Illustrated History. London: Penguin Books, 1976. ISBN 0-14-004135-4.
- Thompson, H. L. (1956). "Chapter 16 Day Fighters During 1942". New Zealanders with the Royal Air Force. The Official History of New Zealand in the Second World War 1939–1945. Vol. II (online scan ed.). Wellington, New Zealand: Historical Publications Branch. pp. 333–358. OCLC 846897274. Retrieved 19 June 2020 – via New Zealand Electronic Text Collection.
- Villa, Brian Loring. Unauthorized Action: Mountbatten and the Dieppe Raid. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. ISBN 0-19-540679-6.
- Weal, John. Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Aces of the Western Front. London: Osprey, 1996. ISBN 978-1-85532-595-1.
- Whitaker, Denis and Shelagh. Dieppe: Tragedy to Triumph. Whitby, Ontario: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1993. ISBN 0-07-551641-1
- ISBN 0-11-771593-X– via Hyperwar Foundation
- Ziegler, Philip (1985), Mountbatten: The official biography (Hardcover ed.), London: Collins, ISBN 978-0002165433
Further reading
- Arthy, Andrew (2021). "Dieppe: The Luftwaffe Perspective: Jagdgeschwader 2 Operations: August 19, 1942". The Aviation Historian (35): 106–117. ISSN 2051-1930.
- Patrick Bishop: Operation Jubilee. Dieppe, 1942: The Folly and the Sacrifice. London 2021. ISBN 978-0241985991.
- Bowman, M. W. (2005). The Reich Intruders: RAF Light Bomber Raids in World War II (1st ed.). Barnsley: Pen & Sword Aviation. ISBN 1-84415-333-9.
- "The Dieppe Raid", London Gazette (Supplement), no. 38045, pp. 3823–28, 12 August 1947 Operation Jubilee despatch submitted by Captain John Hughes-Hallett on 30 August 1942
- Roskill, S. W. (1962) [1957]. The War at Sea 1939–1945: Period of Balance. History of the Second World War United Kingdom Military Series. Vol. II (repr. 3rd ed.). London: HMSO. OCLC 929331838.
- Zuehlke, M. (2012). Tragedy at Dieppe: Operation Jubilee, August 19, 1942. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre. ISBN 978-1-55365-836-8.
External links
- Dieppe: a German Learning Experience – Lecture to the Joint Services Command and Staff College, Shrivenham
- WWII: The Dieppe Raid – Canada at War Archived 10 February 2012 at the Wayback Machine
- The Dieppe Raid, BBC History
- The Dieppe Raid – Saving the lives of 85 Canadians by Polish Destroyer, ORP Slazak
- The Dieppe Raid – The Canadian Encyclopedia (via archive.org)
- Raid on Dieppe Militaryhistoryonline.com
- The Contentious Legacy of Dieppe – CBC Digital Archives
- A Look at the Dieppe Raid through Air Photographs – Laurier Centre for Military Strategic and Disarmament Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University
- PDF: David Ian Hall The German view
- Official History of the Canadian Army (Vol 1) at Hyperwar Foundation
- Timeline lahistoriaconmapas.com