The Hedgehogs of Birnbeck Pier (1941-45)

Of the one hundred and twenty five projects undertaken by the Department of Miscellaneous Weapons Development (DMWD) during the course of the Second World War, one in five were adopted by the Admiralty. Three of the twenty five were developed at Birnbeck Pier in Weston-super-Mare, a site which had been requisitioned by the Royal Navy from 1941-45. Of these the most significant was the 'Hedgehog' anti-submarine system. 

The problem that needed to be solved, was that convoy escort ships needed to intercept German U-boats quickly so as to attack them before they could dive to a safer depth. 35% of U-boats were visible at the time of the intercept and a further 15% had disappeared no more than thirty seconds before. So, the question arose as to how could intercepting U-boats be made more effective? Royal Navy ships lost precious seconds as they had to get beyond the target to discharge traditional depth-charges from the stern. They also lost sonar contact when the ship was directly above the U-boat.

The Hedgehog, DMWD project (No. 20) was developed and trialled at HMS Birnbeck (as the pier was designated during the Second World War), was a multi-spigot mortar which threw contact fused projectiles in a circular pattern 250 yards ahead of the attacking vessel. Two would be mounted onboard - one on each side of the bow. 

Hedgehog style mortars - USS Charette, Thessaloniki

As an aside, Hedgehog style weapons were used for many years after the Second World War. The above photo taken during a trip to the First World War Salonika battlefields shows one of a pair of Hedgehogs onboard what was the USS Charette, an American destroyer which served in thw WW2 Pacific Campaign. The Hedgehogs were still deployed when the ship was decommissioned in 1992, having served with the Hellenic Navy.

Of the 41 Kreigsmarine U-boats sunk in May 1943, fourteen were sunk by convoy escorts using Hedgehog. Such losses contributed to a temporary withdrawal of German U-boats to what Admiral Doenitz described as 'less hazardous areas'.  

The effectiveness of the Hedgehog can be seen by comparing the 'kill rate' of this new weapon, with the effect of traditional depth charges. During the second half of 1944, 35 Hedgehog salvos were fired, of which 10 resulted in the destruction of a U-boat. A 28% success rate compared with a 5% success rate for traditional depth charging. 

So to what extent were the Wheezers and Dodgers of the DMWD responsible for the development of this highly effective weapon and why was Birnbeck Pier such a big part of the story? The latter question is straightforward, in that the massive tidal reach on the North Somerset coast was ideal for weapons testing. A projectile could be fired from the deck of Birnbeck Pier and, once the tide had receded, the discharged ordnance could be picked up from the muddy foreshore.

Rails for ordnance retrieval at Birnbeck

A female Scientific Officer recalled, in an unpublished memoir, how early methods of retrieval worked.

I visited Birnbeck Pier many times and carried out or helped others to carry out tests of such things as the Hedgehog, firing the spigot mortar fixed on one side of the pier. On account of my sex I was excused the cold, wet, and muddy job of getting the Hedgehogs out of the mud at low tide. I remember being told by Jim Close of an occasion when he was grovelling in the mud and the admiral in charge arrived on an unexpected visit. Close was eventually called out of the mud to greet his official commanding officer. He told me later that he was slightly embarrassed at standing to attention and saluting when dressed in nothing but mud – apart from an entirely invisible loin cloth which was the normal dress for mudlarking!

Later, as can be seen in the photograph above, a trolly and rail system was used. Later still, the testing was carried out on St Thomas's Head where landing craft were used for retrieval. Judging by entires in the diary of civilian contractor, M.J.Smith of Crowe and Green - held in Weston-super-Mare Library - the tests were a major activity from 1942 onwards.

Hedgehog Pattern  St Thomas's Head - National Archive

The first part of the question I posed above demands a fuller response. Happily, the answer can be found in the records of a lively debate which was conducted in the early 1960s following the publication of 'The Prof in Two Worlds' a biography of Professor F. A. Lindemann (Lord Cherwell). In his work, the author, Lord Birkenhead', stated that 'The Prof' had to fight hard for the Hedgehog against the Admiralty, who eventually made it into a successful anti-submarine weapon with at least thirty-two kills to its credit.

This bold 'accusation' attracted the attention of the official Royal Navy historian, Captain Stephen Roskill, who decided to investigate the claim so that the historical record could be corrected. Early in 1962 Roskill wrote a letter (on Cabinet Office paper) to Sir Charles Goodeve expressing surprise at Lord Birkenhead's assertion that the DMWD had been laggards in developing the Hedgehog (Goodeve, who set up and commanded the DMWD, led the development of Hedgehog).

Goodeve's fulsome response, along with a detailed history of Hedgehog's history, was sent to the Cabinet Office on 21 Feb 1962. The claim that the weapon was developed in the face of resistance from the Admiralty was completely untrue. The Admiralty accepted the scheme from very beginning, and with no hesitation. Furthermore the DMWD remained in charge of the weapon until it was finally handed over for operational deployment.

Birth of an idea - the first Hedgehog meeting - Churchill Archive

In his letter to Roskill, Goodeve said that if anyone could claim ownership of the initial idea, it was Millis Jefferis of the Military Intelligence Research branch. Whilsy many others contributed ideas it was Jefferis, working as DMWD Chief Designer, who was most invested. 

In corroboration of this, there is a definitive record of 'the birth' of Hedgehog amongst Goodeve's papers at the Churchill Archive in Cambridge. The description of a spigot mortar with the hand drawn diagram is the work of Jefferis. It was appended to a memo from the Director of Anti-Submarine Warfare to Commander Goodeve of the DMWD. The memo, dated 22 Dec 1940, references a meeting to discuss the use of 'spigot-guns' for anti-submarine purposes. It is interesting to see that Goodeve (or his Secretary) scribbled the name 'Norway' on the memo. It was to be Neville Shute Norway (yes, the well known author) who would take the project forward for the DMWD.

In a talk which I occasionally deliver on behalf of North Somerset Council's Birnbeck Pier Regeneration Project, I use the rather tongue in cheek title 'Wheezers and Dodgers: How the Boffins at Birnbeck Pier helped to Defeat Hitler (1941-45)'. With the phenomonal success of the Hedgehog anti-submarine weapon, I rest my case!

To come - the story of Birnbeck Pier's Squids. 

The Shinagawa Batteries, Tokyo Bay (1853-1868)

 On holiday in Japan earlier this year, I found myself gazing out of an upper floor window of one of the new international hotels built on the island of Daiba, a suburb of the great metropolis of Tokyo. Whilst the view of the city across on the other side of Tokyo Bay is spectacular, my mind turned to matters of the past. Would I be able to see, I wondered, the spot where the USS Missouri (the Mighty Mo) was anchored when the Japanese surrender was accepted on the ship's quarterdeck on the 2nd September 1945? 

Unfortunately I couldn't as the ceremony took place away from my line of sight - off the coast of Yokosuka and south of Yokohama. What I did see, however, was what appeared to be a fortified island with what looked like gun emplacements dotted around its coastine. So, with my ever obliging wife in tow, off I went to investigate.

Shinagawa Battery No. 3, behind the Statue of Liberty

Daiba is a vibrant waterfront resort area complete with bars, restaurants, shopping centres, galleries and, rather incongruously, a replica of New York's Statue of Liberty. At one seventh of the size of the original it dominates the beachfront and acts as a magnet for those seeking an Instagram ready selfie. The modern elevated railway that links Daiba to central Tokyo is a means of double-quick transit around the neighbourhood and we used it to get as close to the battery as we could. The Odaiba-Haihinkoen stop is an interesting twenty minute walk from the fortifications.

Shinagawa Battery No.3

Walking along an artificial beach and through a recreational area it became apparent that the battery could be reached by a causeway. Helpfully, on the causeway, the authorities have installed an information panel. From this we learnt that the battery 'island' we had seen was one of six built in the 1850s, of which two survive - Battery No.3. now open to walkers and Battery No. 6 which has been designated a wildlife sanctuary. Traversing the causeway we found that we could walk around the parapet which encircles what was an island. In the enclosed space within the perimeter we found a number of concrete bunkers and the foundations of a barracks building. The parapet was interrupted at regular intervals with what had obviously been gun positions.

Battery No.6 - Wildlife Sanctuary

Interestingly there is a connection between the construction of the batteries and the surrender ceremony on the 'Mighty Mo' ninety or so years later. Constructed during the final years of the Tokugawa Shogunate, the batteries were built in direct response to the arrival of an an American fleet under the command of Commodore Matthew Perry in 1853. Perry's 'Black Ships' entered what was the called Edo Bay and demanded that Japan open its ports to foreign trade. An example of gunboat diplomacy more often associated with British attempts to open up China. Anyway, the display of overwhelming naval power exposed the vulnerability of Japan's coastal defences and shocked the shogunate into action. 

Surrender information panel, USS Missouri, Pearl Harbor

So what is the specific connection? Well, the Missouri was deliberately anchored on the spot where Commander Perry had rested his ships in 1853. To drive the point home, Perry's 1853 flag - which had been flown when US forces first entered Japan, was displayed at the surrender ceremony, alongside the flag that had flown over the Capitol building in Washington on the 7th December 1941 - the day of the Pearl Harbor attack.

To complete the story of the six completed Shinagawa batteries, they were controlled by the Japanese Navy until 1915, when they were sold to the City of Tokyo. In 1924 the two batteries which still exist today, were designated as historical sites. The other four were removed or incorporated into reclaimed land.

To read more about the USS Missouri, now a museum ship berthed on Battleship Row in Pearl Harbor, click here.

Since writing this story, I have been contacted by Robin Dutt who went to great lengths to identify the exact location of the 1945 surrender ceremony. His picture, and an explanation, are shown below.

The site of the 1945 surrender

Robin recalls "I researched the exact location of where the USS Missouri had received the Japanese delegation. The spot is two-thirds of the way between where I was standing (western side of Tokyo Bay) and one of the towers on the far bank (ie eastern side of Tokyo Bay). Mount Fuji was behind me, though I couldn’t see it. 

I wanted to view the location from the eastern bank but it would have been very difficult to do so by public transport. I stayed in Ikebukoru (just north of central Tokyo) and it took me two hours to get to where I took the photo!".