Overlord Code Name - Random?
who me?
have been
some other name starting with N or P?, assuming operations were named
alphabetically. Did the Allies ever choose a certain name for an
operation like is done today?
Craig
Bill Shatzer
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, who me? wrote:
> Was the name Overlord the next one on the list to use or could D-Day
> have been some other name starting with N or P?, assuming operations
> were named alphabetically.
Operational code names were not assigned alphabetically. Rather, the
list of code names was generated, screened for homophones, confusingly
similar words, and undesireable connotations and then parcelled out to the
various theatre commands.
The ETO would have had a list of several hundred or thousand operational
codenames to choose from and was free to select any name which appeared
on its list.
> Did the Allies ever choose a certain name for an
> operation like is done today?
Well, you'd not get descriptive code names like "Operation Iraqi
Freedom" as one purpose of WW2 code names was to disguise
the actual nature of the operation rather than to create a descriptive
and "uplifting" name for propaganda/publicity purposes. Still, the
individual operational code names were 'choosen' off the list of
code names available and less than "uplifting" names were unlikely
to be selected, at least for major operations.
But they couldn't just create an operational codename not on their
list. For one thing, that ran the risk of duplicating a codename
already assigned to and selected by another command or selecting
a name confusingly similar with the possibility of creating
confusion between the two operations.
Cheers and all.
David Thornley
who me? <soc.history.war.world-war-ii> wrote:
>Was the name Overlord the next one on the list to use or could D-Day
>have been
>some other name starting with N or P?, assuming operations were named
>alphabetically.
Not that I know of. The idea was to select an operation name that
had nothing to do with the operation.
IIRC, Churchill wrote a memo about choosing operation names that
was reproduced in his history/memoirs. I don't remember everything,
but one of the guidelines was to avoid silly names ("I regret to
inform you that your son was killed in Operation Bunnyhug") and
another to avoid overconfident names (like the US "Operation
Roundup" for a landing in France in 1943).
Did the Allies ever choose a certain name for an
>operation like is done today?
>
Now and then, but then they often changed it. Anvil was the landing
in southern France, but it gave too good an idea of what it was about,
so it got changed to Dragoon (Churchill said he'd been dragooned into
it). Modern US operation names seem intended for propaganda rather
than communications security, it being presumably less important to
conceal what we're going to do.
--
David H. Thornley | If you want my opinion, ask.
da...@thornley.net | If you don't, flee.
http://www.thornley.net/~thornley/david/ | O-
Rich Rostrom
>Was the name Overlord the next one on the list to use or could D-Day
>have been some other name starting with N or P? assuming operations
>were named alphabetically. Did the Allies ever choose a certain name
>for an operation like is done today?
Some operations definitely had 'chosen' names.
TORCH was so named because it was supposed to set fire to the tail
of the 'Desert Fox', Rommel.
BODYGUARD was taken from Churchill's remark to Stalin that "In
wartime, truth is so precious that it should always be escorted
by a bodyguard of lies."
NEPTUNE for the seaborne operations of D-Day has an obvious
significance.
So does DOWNFALL for the planned invasion and conquest of Japan
(it included OLYMPIC and CORONET).
Also STARVATION, the 1945 plan to surround Japan with mines and
thus cut off all imports.
The first RAF 'thousand-bomber' raid was MILLENIUM, and I'm
sure that was chosen.
But the vast majority were just random words, with a preference
for those that sounded good and were easily remembered:
DIADEM, DYNAMO, GRENADE, CARTWHEEL, BAYTOWN, VARSITY, HUSKY,
BATTLEAXE, GALVANIC, COBRA, LUSTRE, WATCHTOWER - to name a few.
--
Were there eight kings of the name of Henry in England, or were there eighty?
Never mind; someday it will be recorded that there was only one, and the
attributes of all of them will be combined into his compressed and consensus
story. --- R. A. Lafferty, _And Read the Flesh Between the Lines_
--
W. Lydecker
"Don't we have something better than this?" So, another name was
chosen.
--
Michael Emrys
thor...@visi.com wrote on 2/7/04 2:14 AM:
> Modern US operation names seem intended for propaganda rather than
> communications security...
I wonder if something similar cannot also be said for TORCH, AVALANCHE, and
OVERLORD, which for all I know may have been chosen entirely at random but
which, serendipitously or not, definitely have evocative powers to my ear.
TORCH suggests carrying the torch of liberation to the occupied and
oppressed countries under the Axis yoke, something the Allies were certainly
at pains to convey at this point in the war, hopefully to obviate French
resistance to the landings.
AVALANCHE implies a sudden crushing blow. In the event, this proved
optimistic, but you can't blame a guy for trying.
OVERLORD would speak to the supreme priority of this operation in the Allied
strategy.
Now of course these names would not have been publicized prior to the
operations themselves being launched, so it might be argued that their
propaganda value is little or nil, but I am also thinking of the
psychological effect on the planners and executors of the plans. Giving an
operation an apposite name strikes me as a cheap way to enhance the focus
and elan of those "in the know".
Of course, maybe I just suffer from an overactive imagination. :-)
Michael
--
Martin Clements
news:<4025b9f...@news.pacific.net.au>...
.
>
> IIRC, Churchill wrote a memo about choosing operation names that
> was reproduced in his history/memoirs. I don't remember everything,
> but one of the guidelines was to avoid silly names ("I regret to
> inform you that your son was killed in Operation Bunnyhug") and
> another to avoid overconfident names (like the US "Operation
> Roundup" for a landing in France in 1943).
>
As far as I know, the Canadian beach on D-day had it's name changed
for precisely this reason.
Apparently. the person tasked with naming the beaches (amongst many
other planning duties) was a keen fissherman. He decided to give the
beaches names which could have the word "fish" added to them. He
named them Gold (fish), Sword (fish) and Jelly (fish). A more senior
officer said he would not have any man die on Jelly Beach and ordered
the name to be changed. Presumably because the rest of the planning
referred to a naval Force "J" for this beach, the new name had to
start with a "J". Whether Juno was plucked from the air, or from a
list of allowable code names I don't know.
I am assuming this was done under COSSAC, when a 3-Division assault
was all the planners were allowed to prepare from. My information or
this comes from an obituary in the Times about 18 months - 2 years
ago. My Dad told me about it, and I didn't see the article myself, or
know the name of the officer involved. You're welcome to shoot this
down in flames if it's wrong - but only if you can tell me the real
derivation of the beach names! This is the only account of the naming
process used for the beaches that I've ever heard.
Cheers,
Martin Clements
Scott M. Kozel
>
> OVERLORD would speak to the supreme priority of this operation in
> the Allied strategy.
My take on the selection of Operation Overlord for the Normandy
Invasion, was "overlord" in the sense of "lord it over", that the Allies
intended to "lord it over" the German occupiers in continental Europe,
with the Normandy Invasion being the starting point for the land
invasion.
--
Merlin Dorfman
...
: But the vast majority were just random words, with a preference
: for those that sounded good and were easily remembered:
: DIADEM, DYNAMO, GRENADE, CARTWHEEL, BAYTOWN, VARSITY, HUSKY,
: BATTLEAXE, GALVANIC, COBRA, LUSTRE, WATCHTOWER - to name a few.
I have wondered about some of the names that might easily
be confused with terms used in a military/naval message. The
first one that comes to mind in that category is the code name
for the invasion of Iwo Jima: DETACHMENT. Wouldn't "detachment"
be likely to appear in the normal course of traffic?
Scott M. Kozel
>
> OVERLORD would speak to the supreme priority of this operation in
> the Allied strategy.
My take on the selection of Operation Overlord for the Normandy