Bletchley Park spat 'halts work on rare German cipher machine' An engineer has claimed the war between the Bletchley Park Trust and the National Museum of Computing has prevented him from repairing one of the few WWII German cipher machines that remain in working order. On GreenKeys, a mailing list dedicated to the discussion of older radio teletype (RTTY) gear, engineer Craig Sawyers …
I visited once and found the split between exhibits a bit confusing. It seemed like the fee for "Bletchley Park" consisted of being able to walk around the grounds, and see some stables and codebreaking huts, but all of the interesting machines (including the restored encryption/decryption machines) were in the NMC instead. Pretty odd, given 99% of the people going will want to see the machines, not the grounds...
>Pretty odd, given 99% of the people going will want to see the machines, not the grounds...
Not really, UK tourism PLC is in the business of preserving buildings and gardens not the falling down huts with a bunch of geek stuff in it.
I bet the people working in them don't even have any official qualifications in tourism interactivity studies.
But one of the board members runs an amusement park! (?!?!?) Surely he knows EVERYTHING about taking money from the public...
http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/content/about/BPTrust/DuncanPhillips.rhtm
And the rest are either bankers or lawyers - trustworthy and well trained to look after public assets.
Yes my experience too. Bletchly Park itself has a few Enigma bits and bobs, but all the interesting stuff is at the NMC, including of course Colossus and the working Harwell WITCH computer. Bletchley Park is mainly a bunch of static displays and things in cases - nothing much actually working - you could get as much information/benefit from Wikipedia. The nice thing about the NMC is that things work (and it's a lot cheaper to visit)
Precisely.
I live in NZ and have never been to Blighty. If I go, then going to Bletchley is an absolute must on my itinery.
However, like most, the only motivation to go to Bletchley would be to see the computers. I can see stables, swans and gift shops with marmalade anywhere - even in NZ.
It would be sad though if the NMC was to move since the setting is part of the story. Still, if it was a choice between seeing the NMC or seeing the estate, the computers would win.
What is it about the Human relationship with computers ?
They are by design, meant to enhance our lives and make things quicker and somehow less beurocratic ..
and yet, at every stage all they manage to do is cause grief and frustration ....
plot twist : or is it human error that foils the robots perfect planning ?
you be the judge
"given 99% of the people going will want to see the machines"
This should be a wake-up call for Bletchley Park - if they carry on like this, and fence-off their potential visitors, they will find they are left with the 1% who prefer to look round their bolted stable doors rather than historic computing and crypto devices. Idiots.
What makes you think they want people to visit? They have just been given a load of cash from the lottery fund so why should they care about gate recipts. All they need is to do is accept their inflated salaries while it lasts and hope for some bogus awards for their 'world class attraction' to enhance their individual CV's before they move on.
Was this the same spokeswoman who said, after a volunteer was sacked,
"This will create a world class museum and heritage site which is a fitting memorial to the heroic Codebreakers of Bletchley Park making the site much more sustainable and accessible to growing numbers of visitors".
If so, my heart sinks. As soon are someone says "world class", you know you are dealing with idiots who will never listen. They will remake BP according to their own wants and you won't have any say.
@Magnus_Pym - Quite. Their ideological compadres are currently busy trying to screw the South Bank skate park to install another lovely glassy restaurant, quelle surprise, while others are successfully ensuring that diners at the Science Museum aren't burdened by any especially challenging science, but the plethora of eateries are world-class and overpriced.
Lamentably, until we do the B-Ark thing for real they'll exist in every age in some form, from kissing the Tyrant's arse to ensuring 'free' is eradicated from human experience. I think Xavier Bardem's character in "Goya's ghosts" about summed them up.
"given 99% of the people going will want to see the machines"
(sadly) I suspect that the majority of people visiting will be happy with a some static displays etc so long as there's a good cafe and gift shop. Things have been going this way for years .... remember when the V&A had an advertising campaign along the lines of "Come to the great restaurant and there's a museum as well if you want"
Didn't the Milton Keynes Amateur Radio lot used to meet there as well? - And there was a Winston Churchill exhibition - though they both seem to be absent now.
Bletchley Park confused me as well - they want people there (and they do/did/probably still have have some good stuff there to go look at) - but it all kind of feels like it has to be on their terms, which don't always seem to be on the same wavelength as the visitors...
I saw the Churchill Exhibition a couple of years ago. It was in a separate building, minded by an older chap in a tweed jacket who showed everybody around then left them to browse. He was passionate about it and his interest was infectious. He was also charming. Had it not been for him, we would not have stayed so long. I spoke to him on the way out, when he happened to mention that as well as minding the displays, he actually owned every item in the place.
Can't we set up a kickstarter or something then for TNMOC?
If each El Reg reader gives them a fiver, it might help them out a bit?
Or if they completely blow past the target amount and end up with millions, maybe they can afford to set up their own gate, a bit in front of the Bletchley Park gate, with a tunnel (a la Steve McQueen) bypassing the Trust's entrance and so charge their own admission directly themselves?
This post has been deleted by its author
We already have ways in which people can support us so I urge people to do so to enable us to continue to fight for BPs future. We want both to succeed but ultimately if BP goes under we want to remain financially stable to carry on the story as best we can.
http://www.tnmoc.org/support/make-donation
And with our £1 million match funding pledge, all donations count double.
Sounds to me like you are dyed in the wool bloody sheep staying there @ £75,000 per year rent plus utilities amounting to a total of more than £100,000 per year..
What you should do is use one year's rent to buy 100 acres of farmland adjacent a motorway junction/theme park; get the theme park to cough up the cost of moving you and invite hoards of RPG fans to come and help you rebuild.
I'm sure tea and buns along with the chance of playing Enigma 2 weeks a year would get you a full calendar of paying guests eager to build you a right home from home.
I'm pretty sure we could win this war if you pulled your fingers out.
We almost won the last one.
Just don't let any fat drunken midgets give half of Europe to the Russians this time.
***
"Personally, I'd rather suck shit through an oily rag than give that bunch of tossers a penny"
It isn't the bunch that are tossers, just an evil cadre. What you might do rather than suck shit is hold a beltacnutinnagobweek bus party and go somewhere useful to stage the games.
I get the impression some of the "bunch" might join in.
There is no need to pay BP anything to just visit the Computer Museum and this is something that has always been possible, however with BPs continuing efforts to eliminate any mention of TNMOC from its website, guidebook and exhibitions it is no wonder that people are confused.
There are also unconfirmed reports that visitors to BP are being refused access to block H from within the BP 'heritage' area via the new gates (which are open) even though Standon has stated this is not happening. Pretty much as expected given recent events.
Full details on visiting Colossus and Tunny and the many other working and hands-on exhibits we have on our website: www.tnmoc.org/visit
From:
http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/greenkeys/2014-January/029032.html
"Basically the relationship used to be pretty positive - the NMOC paid a rent, the ticket price was split between the Trust and the NMOC and everything worked. "
We have NEVER received a penny from BP in all the time we have been in Block H. Before we started charging we allowed FREE access to any BP paying visitor. We have paid BP in excess of £500,000 + utilities for the privilege of showing BP visitors around our museum!
"The Trust now claim that the NMOC owe them £200k in historic debt;"
Payment has now been negotiated and agreed. The figure is much less that £200,00 due to BP having no records of use and also a faulty meter..
"They claim part ownership of Colossus;"
They tried too but even Scarlett has stated BP have no ownership of Colossus. Maybe someone should tell Standon that!
"they refuse to collect money on the gate for NMOC so you have to pay extra to see Colossus, and the whole of the NMOC is out of bounds to tour guides - I believe they are even instructed not to mention its existence."
All true, and confirmed by BP guides we have spoken to, regardless of what Standon claims.
" But the location of the [Lorenz] machine is at NMOC."
We do not have the LZ42. It was at TNMOC for a few weeks when the Tunny gallery was opened a few years ago, but it went back to BP where it resides now. So any dispute with working on the machine is between Sawyer and BP not TNMOC.
This post has been deleted by its author
Well, the quotes were communicated from a fellow list member on the Greenkeys teleprinter forum. In fact it was a private communication, and was sent to The Register without my knowlege or agreement. When The Register contacted me for comment, I said that because everything I knew came from private communications from BP and TNMOC staff - and I view privately communicated information as precisely that - private.
I also absolutely did not say the the Lorenz machine was at TNMOC. That is the nub of the problem - it is NOT at TNMOC, but ought to be.
That BPT assert "It also denied it was neglecting the upkeep of the German cipher machine:
The Bletchley Park Trust now employs a Curator; the custodian of the Trust’s collection, responsible for its protection, preservation and conservation, in line with the standards you would expect for its value to the nation." is ridiculous - perhaps they can point to where the mains transformer should be?
And look - I have no intention of having any truck with BPT. Standen has had my business card for well over a year, knows my role in the SZ42 restoration, knows perfectly well that it has a fault, and that I want to repair it. If he wants me to re-fix the machine I restored to full functionality a decade ago he only has to pick up the phone.
And we thank you, Hollerith 1, and the considerable number of new members (and those who have renewed) that have signed up and supported us over the past couple of weeks. It is always good to know our efforts in keeping our heritage alive, and available to the public is appreciated by so many.
Oh gods no not the National Trust! I know a fair number of stories about them (some experienced first hand) which basically show them as money grabbing and completely insensitive to the very things they should be preserving e.g. bulldozing a 400 year old hedge to replace it with something "neater", or asking 3rd and 4th generation tenants to pay holiday let type rates for their homes.
Unfortunately, the two NT sites you mention are the exceptions. At Styal Mill, my understanding is that the working exhibits are in the hands of some sort of separate trust or organisation that runs and maintains them. And they were in place before the NT arrived on the scene.
At Cragside, I didn't see much actual historic technology working when I visited. I did see reproductions of the original light bulbs which was interesting and enlightening. Nothing else though - including the much trumpeted hydropower.
I've been trying to get working exhibits of WWII electronics into a NT site which was similar to Bletchley Park for its contribution to the war effort (but is barely known outside a few specialists like myself). I''ve been working towards this for the last few years, but have recently been told "we don't want anything working in our museum". You will get the same attitude in other museums - the Royal Signals Museum at Blandford for instance, which I have first hand knowledge of.
The truth is that the general run of people who run "heritage" have no understanding of, and no interest in, technology and its history. There interests are in the people who did the technology and how they lived their lives - not in the actual artefacts they invented or used.
And to be fair, the "geeksquad" who do understand it and know about it (and I am full card-carrying member), have failed to make it interesting to the ordinary person in the street. The exceptions are those small groups (for instance) who fire up old steam engines once in a while and show them to the public. It sounds like NMOC may well be an exception too but I have yet to visit it.
...is hoping that the TNMOC goes under and then the wonderful equipment in there has to go somewhere obviously. Hmmm how about next door to Bletchley Park Trust!!
Well wouldn't that be convenient! Everything under one happy roof! No more need for fences and gates eh.
Donate! Donate now!
Having seen and had personal experience with the way museum trusts work on past occasions, I'm inclined to believe engineer Craig Sawyers' account of events at Bletchley Park. Museum and gallery trusts don't often have technical people or experts on them, rather they've lawyers and accountants who've little or any expertise of the subject matter/collections. Thus, these people often have a tangential view of the collections and it's invariably based on money—not on the history of collections or the way visitors interact with them.
We're now seeing new problems emerging with museums everywhere. Here's just one example of many: museums and galleries have historical photographs whose copyright ran out say a hundred years ago, yet these institutions have deliberately set out to renew copyright by scanning the photographs WHILST simultaneously stopping others from having access to copy them on the grounds that they might be damaged. Thus, the ONLY access to the photographs is via these new scans, which of course are copyrighted, and the museums charge like wounded bulls for access to them (that's if there's a scan available—often there's not).
Moreover, this has the effect of taking the images out of the public domain and placing them back in copyright (as available images (if they exist outside the museums) are usually old, faded, low-resolution copies in books etc. and thus unacceptable by modern standards. (By necessity you'll often seen such low quality images on Wiki, as the authors do not have access to the high resolution ones held by the museums/galleries—or that the high resolution ones cannot be posted as they're subject to copyright and the museums have withheld copyright permission to publish on Wiki).
Essentially, this quirk of copyright acts/Berne convention is allowed but it's an abuse--nothing but a scam which keeps the nation's treasures and cultural heritage under a form of perpetual copyright (and thus always under curators' control). Museums etc. also engage in similar forms of control over physical access to collections, thus the average citizen has no idea of what's held in repositories as the museums are not obliged to publish what they have or even provide access to them.
This is highly unsatisfactory in the modern internet age and the laws must be changed to allow everyone better access. Clearly, objects have to be properly protected from damage etc., but the excuse that museums have to charge for access to public-owned assets is also totally unsatisfactory.
Remember, state-owned museums and galleries almost universally used to be free on the grounds of education and the universal betterment of everyone—an Enlightenment concept—but now that idea has changed. As I see it, the State STILL has that responsibility as passed down from the Enlightenment, and we citizens need to demand our legislators STILL honour it.
——
BTW, I consider this a particularly irksome practice when war museums partake of it—the Imperial War Museum and the Australian War Memorial being two very blatant perpetrators. After all, their whole raison d'être is to ensure we—especially the younger generation—remember the fallen and the horrors of war, yet they're past masters at making access to their collections difficult and or expensive. If you don't believe me, then do an internet search and see if you can find any on-line high resolution images from these institutions and I'll bet you'll find absolutely nothing! Now compare this with the enlightened attitude of LOC's (Library of Congress), for example check its Civil War photographs (http://www.loc.gov/pictures/) and you'll find that (a) they're freely accessible and (b) the resolution of the scans has been taken to ultimate heights—almost to the Nyquist limit—most of these 150-year old images are available in TIF format with 7500px resolution and file sizes between 50/200MB. That's how it should be!
HAving just read what you have to say about the BIWM has made me change my mind. My father took many photos in the Western Desert during the war while in the RAF, I had been thinking of donating them to the Imperial War Museum but now I think I will publish them myself first to establish my own copyright.
The photos are of aircraft, tanks and other items some actually during combat including a photo taken by my father of a Messerscmidt 323 "Giant" being shot down by his CO over the Med'.
The thought of such things being restricted by a museum is not something I can contemplate considering that all they have and show is owned by the public and originally created by most of us.
Right. Similarly, I have some postcards and photos from my great uncle who sent them from Gallipoli and the Western Front. They also include a photo of him and a group of mates in hospital after being injured on the Western Front along with a letter to his sister (my grandmother) explaining what happened to him.
I have no intention of giving the photos etc. to these museums until there's a resolution of this nonsense. Both the Imperial War Museum and the Australian War Memorial should be interested as he originally enlisted in the Australian Army and then, somewhat unusually, transferred to the British Army during the move from Gallipoli to the Western Front (upon which he was also promoted).
These type of WWI records are especially important for the British Army, as the major repository of personal records from WWI was bombed during WWII and thus lost.
Having seen museums fail to resolve these issues over quite some years, my next intention is to scan the documents at a very low resolution but with small sections in high resolution and then send them copies. The high resolution sections will provide authenticity (indicate what they are) but the majority of the image will be blurred and unintelligible. Essentially, I will be doing in reverse what the IWM and AWM are now doing to us the public!
If everyone—or even just a reasonable number of people—did the same then I'd reckon things would change pretty quickly.
When asked, these war museums keep coming up with the same old mantra that many documents are still in copyright even 100 years after the War and they don't know who to contact for approval to publish (as all participants are now dead—the orphan works copyright problem surfaces yet again!!). Perhaps so, but this is essentially legal bullshit.
First, the 'works' of the many soldiers who were killed during WWI—even with the outrageously long copyright laws—are now out of copyright. Second, many photos taken during WWI were done so officially by the military, thus were subject of Crown Copyright in the UK and Australia (but not US) and have thus expired long ago. Third, photos taken by organizations such as newspapers etc. are also out of copyright (even given the new 70-year rule). Forth, the vast majority of soldiers, next of kin, relatives etc. donated these documents so they would be put in the public record for all to see. Fifth, even if there's some special exceptions (and it's hard to think of any), this doesn't preclude the vast majority of photographs and documents being available to public in the highest resolution possible, both at the museums as well as being made available on-line.
If these photographs and documents are to reach the greatest number of people, then it is imperative that they be made available at the highest possible resolution (i.e.: at least equivalent to the native resolution of the original images, and if necessary they should be corrected, sharpened and or otherwise enhanced). Today, with high resolution colour imaging commonplace, it is very difficult to capture the imagination of many people (especially the young) with poor grainy, low-resolution B&W images that are full of horrible JPG artifacts.
If these museum public servants are so scared of their shadows and must have every 'I' dotted and 'T' crossed before making documents available on-line, then a simple amendment of the Copyright Act would suffice. After all, even the most ardent copyright zealot would have a hard time criticizing such a non-controversial issue, especially one that was so clearly in the public interest.
Of course, the real issue lies elsewhere. If published on the Web, then most documents of this kind would be no longer under the control of the IWM/AWM etc., thus the curators' jobs etc. would come under scrutiny. Whilst there's some truth to this, there's still the need for expert war researchers and such at the IWM/AWM to put documents, images, maps and such into context/perspective. Again, the reasons for not doing so are essentially money-making, bloody-mindedness and that curators do not want to relinquish even a single iota of control over them. Even if funding were an issue (and there's some reason to believe that in the short term there is), it should not stop many of the iconic images (such as those of that great photographer Frank Hurley) from being placed on the Web:
http://www.greatwar.nl/hurley/hurley1.html
(The original negative plates of these images are of much higher resolution than shown here but they're not available as the museums won't release them.
Moreover, the best presentations of these photos on the Web ought to come from the IWM, AWM etc.—government museum sites that are officially charged with the responsibility—but they do not, not by a long shot! Even more surprising is that some of the best sites come from counties other than the UK, NZ, Canada, Australia etc.—countries where the museums are located. For instance, the link above points to Dutchman Rob Ruggenberg's truly wonderful site! One really has to question what goes on in these government museums when we see their paltry efforts compared to the excellent work of just one individual. Clearly, these museums are in desperate need of reform)
If I were you, I'd begin asking very awkward policy questions of the IWM etc. such as what would be the public availability of my images, and I'd be asking for a guarantee not to charge the public for access to them etc. I'd then publish my images on the Web and advise the IWM of the Web link together with the fact that I hold the copyright and that for now the IWM cannot use or even store the images as a direct consequence of their unacceptable access policies. Essentially, these bastards have to be put under pressure and the more people that do so the better.
Ultimately however, what we really want is for the problem to be fixed properly so that everyone can have access. But first it has to become a significant issue with us the public, thence with the pollies, for if these public service gnomes are told to solve the problem, they will.
Whether it's Bletchley Park's spat over the German cipher machine/Enigma or the IWM's hold on war photographs etc., the underlying problems ultimately stem from the same fundamental cause—inadequate legislation guaranteeing citizens reasonable access to their county's heritage.
Resolution begins with complains, hopefully, we're started here.
A long time ago, I was writing a book on the (then rather rudimentary) art of web design. I asked a well-known New York museum for permission to include a one-page montage composed of screenshots from their (for the time) quite impressive website. They said yes, provided they got the full commercial reprint rate for each of the objects displayed (and there were quite a few on the index page in small 72dpi thumbnails). This would have exceeded by an order of magnitude the likely return from the book. I did later visit the museum and, noting that in very small print the prominently-displayed entrance fee was in fact only a suggested voluntary donation, I gave them a dollar. I hope they spent it wisely.
Excellent comment.
The truth about museums is that they "say" they are in business to collect, preserve and interpret artefacts. But the bottom line is that the people who run them are in business to preserve their jobs. And generally, the unpaid trustees (most museums are charities of one sort or another) don't have the gumption or knowledge to challenge the paid staff ("the professionals").
Even in the good times (definitely not now!) museums have to fight for funds, and so they will adopt any dodgy and underhand practices they can get away with if it brings in the money. A good example would be the National Archive at Kew. Their charges for copies of documents sent in the post are eye-watering. Of course, you can go there in person, get in free, and photo the documents youself. Trouble is that they put every possible hurdle in the way of obtaining good quality copies - poor lighting, no flash allowed, no scanners allowed, documents bundled so they cannot be laid flat (and woe betide anyone who undoes his bundle!).....
Poor english of course.
But the point behind the bad english is that no-one who holds a very rare item likes to make statements such as "this is the only one surviving". It is of course unwise to make such claims, because proving a negative - in this case, that no other examples exist - is a practical impossibility.
Because technology is generally regarded as a "throw away" item, very few people outside those directly interested place any value on bits of our technological history. Some of it changes hands for small sums on Ebay. Much of gets skipped when its owner passes away by relatives keen to clear the house of "all the junk".
The response of the average person in the street to the claim that "this is the only one surviving" - is to say "well, the rest were clearly junk, why are you hanging on to that one?"
I'm afraid it's the British way of doing things. National institutions aren't really seen as a way to benefit the nation, and we don't like supporting them with our taxes.
Instead they are used to reward the Great and the Good with a neat sinecure and a pathway to that knighthood. But the actual funding has to come from a crass money making enterprise that is in competition with any other "tourist attraction". Exit by way of the Gifte Shoppe.
Several points here...
1) Block H is an iconic building and the start of the British computing revolution. While Block F (now demolished) was where the first Colossus was built, block H was built specifically to house the Colossus machines and thus is the first purpose built computer centre. We have also invested a considerable amount of money and resources in setting up TNMOC, restoring the building (returning it to as near as possible war time layout) as well as collecting 10,000s of artifacts. The amount of money and resources necessary to move elsewhere would be prohibitive.
2) Block H is also the end of the Bletchley Park story and the beginning of the computer story so is a fitting location for a computer Museum. It also shows the importance of Bletchley Park in the Computing story.
3) We want Bletchley Park to succeed and have been investing a considerable amount of money in terms of rent into it in order to help it survive, well before any HLF money arrived.
4) We believe we are an added attraction to the Bletchley Park experience which should be available for all to see in a transparent way. We are very concerned that the history of the Park and its heritage will be irreversibly damaged by the actions of Standen et al having no understanding of the importance of this place. They just want to turn it into a cattle market getting as many people in and out the park as quickly as possible, forgoing any thought to how the heritage of the place is shown.
Yes, we would like to expand and we have lots more to show, and investment in the Museum is always welcome, but moving to a different place is the last resort. We will stay as long we possible and keep fighting for the heritage of the Park.
I am simply astonished given the relatively small sums of money involved, one of those who have now acquired such massive personal wealth from the computing industry don't simply stump up the cash and offer a long term commitment to fund the museum and its work; lest we forget eh. We all owe an inestimable debt in any number of ways to the people who made such great advances in computing while effectively 'flying blind', but those IT billionaires who now stand on the shoulders of giants owe a profound debt of honour to the history of their industry.
I'm grateful that my own trade, photography, does a much better (if still far from perfect) job of preserving it's heritage, with a particular tip of the hat to (as mentioned in a previous post) the US Library of Congress, whose collection, scope and ease of access set the benchmark.
I'm sure he has the 'full support' of the board
watch this space.. .while he must be keeping more than a watching brief of the help wanted ads.
I had a moan about what a tit standen was on the trusts website, and to be fair I got a more or less personalised (lots of Ctrl[C] Ctrl[V]) response.
The usual corporate bullshit
It's becoming clear that this little hitler has been outflanked by taking the fight public. There is no way the trust will take the day. it's just a matter of how much damage they are prepared to take to their reputation before ditching the oaf. Because ditch him they inevitably will.
Before repatriating to NZ from the UK late last year, I made the trip to MK to visit both BP and TNMOC. I was well aware that they were separate organisations before I set out, so there were no surprises on that score.
For a geek like me, TNMOC was awesome. Hands on, all the classic computing hardware from my youth, and cool flashing lights (I loved the Decatron). I saw Colossus and Tunny. I had a happy morning wandering, playing and chatting to the volunteers (and even got to help boot a classic Unix CAD system). It was really cool, and worth the trip on it's own. However, for all the love and technical skill on display, it was obvious to me that TNMOC needs more investment and space.
Then I headed to Bletchley Park - more expensive, but more going on. I knew many of the details, so I decided to forgo a tour, and just wandered round by myself. There was lots to see, but the displays were a bit busy, and the information panels were small and a bit wordy. It was less interactive, and I ended up considering it pleasant for a visit but not enthralling. It also needs investment, but it also needs better management and organisation. Sadly, from the recent commentary, it may not get either.
However, I do suggest doing both. The Bletchley Park ticket did allow a return visit, and I am sure the guided tours add more value. And the grounds are nice if the weather is good, and a picnic/walk would be a great use of time. The current management may be prats, but there is a story being told at the park that should be experienced. But TNMOC is just great.
I cant help but notice that the twixes in the ad you mention are.... mahoosive and one on it's own would in all probability be an elegant sufficiency.
either that or the actors in the ad were all exceptionally small...
or maybe the actors were normal size, but _much further away_ that the twixes??
"I see, in my minds eye, Chris Barrie in the TV show "Brittas Empire".
Anyone else?"
Yes, but not in the same manner: I think Chris Barrie would probably make a great public face for the NMOC, as he strikes me as just the kind of person who would be fascinated by it and see the importance.
Thinking of Colditz, Dunkirk, St. Nazaire et al, are there not enough of us left with a soul
to undertake the removal of the required exhibits to the Museum ?
Ian Standen could be blindfolded and shot every day as a traitor to the original reason
for Bletchley being reinstated as a working exhibition of what made Britain Great.
(Should improve foot traffic no end )
Storm the paper battlements and lay siege to the real conservation of the site not the
preservation of an overpaid ponce with no feelings for the place.
Perhaps I am holding back a little ?
He sounds like a self important little twit in a job paid for by those of us who pay our stupidity tax. He is clearly looking over the fence at the one bit that people REALLY associate Bletchley Park with, the bit that he ain't got. Result, try to force them out with made up demands for money and by isolating them from the viewing public.
Come on El Reg, you are the sort of folks to organise a Twitter campaign to #SackStanden
Ive spent quite a bit of time in Signals Intelligence, and BP is like our Mecca, especially since the US' only equivalent is the NSA/CSS National Museum of Cryptology located on Fort Meade itsself and is not open to the public since some of the exhibits have a requirement for a TS clearance with a COMINT, SI, or ORCON caveat. Its sad to see that such an important part of my career's history, and the only public exhibition of it is subject to a petty turf war between two non-profit organizations which in reality should have the same goal.
The world owes a debt of gratitude to the staff at Bletchley Park and the groundbreaking Polish cryptanalysts who preceeded them.
The BP GPCC intel decrypts were declassified in 1997 / 98 and are held in the National Archives (PRO) at Kew for all to examine.
The GPCC mesages relate to the daily decodes of Concentration Camp inmate populations, as intercepted & decoded in 1942 / 43.
These primary source intel decrypts, known as German Police Concentration Camp, (GPCC) decodes, were first alluded to by Sir Frank Hinsley in 1981 in the official history, British Intelligence in the Second World War.
Hinsley described these as the "Vital statistics" of the Concentration Camps thus:
“From the spring of 1942 until February 1943, when it ceased to be sent by W/T, GC and CS decrypted in another cypher a daily return of prisoners at Dachau, Buchenwald, Auschwitz and seven other concentration camps – not all of them, but a good cross section.*
The daily return consisted of a series of unheaded, unexplained columns of figures which GC and CS worked out to mean:
(a) number of inmates at the start of the previous day,
(b) new arrivals,
(c) departures by any means, and
(d) number at the end of the previous day.
It also specified the various categories of prisoner, such as Politicals, Jews, Poles, other Europeans and Russians.
GC and CS interpreted column (c) – ‘departures by any means” – as being accounted for primarily by deaths. The returns from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassing."
This can be seen on Bletchley Park's website:
1940'S BOUTIQUE
15 MAR 2014 FROM 9:30 TO 17:00
Join us for a day of 1940's glamour and learn how to style your own hair and make-up to achieve that iconic 1940's look.
Hairdresser and make-up artist XXXXXXX will show you how to recreate some iconic styles including the famous victory rolls as well as make-up to match. The day will include refreshments and lunch as well as admission to Bletchley Park exhibitions and facilities.
09.30 Arrival with tea, coffee & mini muffins
10.00 Demonstration of 1940's look, hair & make-up
11.30 Practical make-up session, eyes, lips and brows.
13.00 Lunch - tea, coffee & sandwich selection
13.30 Free time to enjoy Bletchley Park exhibitions and facilities
14.30 Victory roll demonstration
15.00 Practical hair session, victory rolls, creating curls, 1940's accessories (snoods, hats etc).
Participants will need to bring:
Free-standing mirror
Hair brush and comb
Their own make-up bag containing
brow pencil
eyeliner
lip liner and lipstick, preferably red
Tickets £65 each available here.
TICKETS £65 EACH!!!!! And this "Boutique" day is scheduled to run for several days throughout the year. Yet another crazy idea for making money from the Bletchley Park Trust/Park Management that has nothing to do with what happened at the Park during WWII. What next?? Workshops in how to stop ladders running in nylons; cookery courses in 1001 things to do with Spam; how to cook potatoes in 57 thoroughly boring wartime ways???
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
