Talk:Gee (navigation)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconMilitary history C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Additional information:
Associated task forces (general topics):
Taskforce icon
Military science, technology, and theory task force
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
Taskforce icon
British military history task force
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
Taskforce icon
World War II task force (1939–1945)

GEE vs Gee[edit]

The name is given as "GEE", not "Gee", in Price Instruments of Darkness which is the definitive printed reference work I know of on this field, so I'm going to go with that name. Noel (talk) 19:11, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I also had this confirmed via an e-mail from the chairman of the Duxford Radio Society. — PMcM 23:57, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

GEE didn't stand for anything. It was a randomly allocated code name as were all code names used by the British. Code name allocated in this way couldn't reveal anything about the equipment that they protected. Contrast this with German code names which always betrayed some characteristic of the equipment. I B Wright 15:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to "Radar: A Wartime Mirace"
"Gee was the first of several successful radionavigational systems based on a grid (hence the name 'Gee')....."
Also in Avionics by Bill Gunston
"Called Gee (G from grid)"
Theoretically all military codenames should be randomly generated but it is quite common for there to be reason behind a choice of a codename. --jmb 16:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A reproduction copy of the Radar Bulletin Victory Souvenir Number 1945 originally published by RAF 60 Group, has an article on Gee and Oboe. This used the spelling "Gee" throughout. I would not call "Instruments of Darkness" as the definitive book, just another book on the subject. R V Jones used "Gee" in Most Secret War but his one reference in Reflections on Intelligence uses "GEE". Michael Bragg uses "GEE" in RDF1. Louis Brown uses "Gee". E G Bowen seems to use "GEE" though can only find in the index. Colin Latham uses "Gee" and I think the key to map of sites is a copy of an original RAF one. I get the impression that both spellings were used and both should be given in the main article as the evidence is that both were use during WWII. --jmb 16:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This site is written by someone worked on GEE/Gee and uses both spellings --jmb 18:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The term 'Gee' was Word War I signalese for the letter 'G' (in the same fashion that it is 'Golf' today) so 'Grid' is likely to be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
BTW, Gee was the most widely installed piece of Allied radar equipment after IFF - it was also widely used by the USAAF and also played a key role in D-Day. Robert Dippy's IEEE award with information on Gee by Dippy himself and Robert Watson-Watt here: [1]

Other chains[edit]

Were there Southern and Western chains? The map of RAF radar and navaid stations at the end of WWII that appears in various books shows these GEE sites --jmb 00:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Kilkenneth (Tiree)
  • Saligo (Islay)
  • Downhill (Northern Ireland)
  • Folly (Pembrokeshire)
  • Trerew (Cornwall)
  • Pennen (Cornwall)
  • Sharpitor (Devon?)
  • Bulbarrow Hill (Hampshire?)
  • Truleigh Hill (Sussex?)
  • Canewdon (Essex?)
  • Nettleton (Lincolnshire?)
  • High Wittle (Northumberland?)
  • Richmond (Yorkshire)
  • Clee Hill (Shropshire?)
  • Barkway (Hertfordshire?)
  • Gibbet Hill (Surrey)

This site shows four chains in 1948 South Western, Eastern, Scottish and Southern. This suggests there might have been at least five chains during WWII unless each had moree slaves. --jmb 22:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gibbet Hill has been put as part of the Eastern Chain - is this certain? Barkway is much nearer to Daventry, could Gibbet Hill be in a Southern Chain as several of the GEE sites listed above are in the South East of England (including Gibbet Hill). --jmb 16:49, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the 1956-159 period I was stationed with 550 SU at Fort Spijkerboor, Holland, then 889 SU near Eckenforde, Germany, and then 330 SU outside Ingolstadt in Bavaria. We never seemed to be operational. Just closing down and moving all the time. Were we just a ruse or deception...we never were told. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

crashed Wellington[edit]

"During the development phase, a trial Gee set was on board a Vickers Wellington flying over occupied Europe. The aircraft crashed, and although the equipment was not fitted with demolition charges, the British couldn't be sure that the set wouldn't be studied by the Germans. It subsequently appeared that the Germans completely missed it."
I'm reading Target America: Hitler's plan to attack the United States, (James P. Duffy, Lyons Press 2004, ISBN 1-59228-934-7) which states: "Following the... bombing of... Lubeck on March 8, 1942, [Dietrich] Schwenke searched the wreckage of a [RAF] Wellington bomber and made a vital discovery. He found a navigation aid the British code-named Gee... The discovery quickly lead to the German development of technology to successfully jam the Gee signals." It cites Louis L. Snyder, Louis L. Snyder's Historical Guide to World War II (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982),265. I'm assuming this is the wreck the article refers to - if the source is accurate, the Germans didn't completely miss it. JW 09:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

=Gee H[edit]

What was special about Gee H? Used to be in Hastings aircraft and presumably others up to 1960. (talk) 15:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confusingly, GEE H wasn't based on GEE, but on Oboe. It was much more accurate than GEE and, like Oboe, was used primarily for target finding/bombing rather than navigation. I assume it would have been installed in Hastings' so as to allow accurate parachute drops. Ian Dunster (talk) 14:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GEE H was used in early versions of the Canberra bomber, but not in the Suez campaign since the network did not extend that far Soarhead77 (talk) 22:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Naming, GEE vs. Gee[edit]

The original patent and IEEE reports on Gee from 1946 both use "Gee". The upper case form appears primarily in military sources. In the days before word processing and WYSIWYG, this was a common replacement for bold text. We use bold text on the Wiki to draw attention to the names of the main objects of interest in the article, and in the past that would have been upper case instead. I think in this case I'm going to go with the inventor's own use pattern, and suggest this be moved to "Gee". Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a question of house style. Gee was originally a WWII codeword. It was British officialdom's house style to capitalize codewords in typewritten memoranda etc. WP doesn't have to follow that. I don't know if WP has a style policy for codewords. I think it would look better as Gee.--Harumphy (talk) 16:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I had a look in RAF Signals 1939-1945 (the official history). They use mainly "Gee" with just the odd use of "GEE", mainly in tables. I prefer to see if capitalised but won't lose any sleep over the use of "Gee".
There is a lot of information there on other chains, site numbers and chain codenames etc. Perhaps add a bit to the page one day. jmb (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TR 1335[edit]

On 10 November last year the lead read "GEE was the code name given to T.R. 1335" It was supported by two inline citations. The next edit on the 13 November removed those inline citations. "T.R. 1334" was removed from the lead when the lead was changed to "Gee was the code name given to a radio navigation system". Why was T.R. 1335 removed? -- PBS (talk) 09:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After a conversation with some guys that have one of these that's actually operational, it was clear this was the name of a particular piece of equipment used in Gee, not Gee itself. As such I didn't want to get into listitis in the LEAD, so I moved all of this into the BODY. I'm still trying to find out what the original receiver was called (NOT 1335, apparently) but no one seems to have one any more. Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The designation denotes that it is a Transmitter/Receiver unit, although these were sometimes misleading for radar and similar RAF equipment for security reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Correct designation for GEE and GEE-H airborne receiver was 'R1335'.
Ground station GEE transmitter equipment was designated 'AMES Type 7000'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gee (navigation). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]