Talk:Stalag Luft III

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lambrec?[edit]

Who were the Lambrecs? I haven't seen them mentioned anywhere else in connection with The Great Escape? The only web pages they seem to appear on are copies of Wikipedia. Removing these from the equation would then allow the total to be said to be 76, which is I believe the usual number, instead of the current 78 stated here. 91.111.62.178 (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the changes made by anon user 68.42.26.175, which were to increase the number of escapees by two and claim that two Dutch resistance members escaped back to the Netherlands [1]. It is uncited, I cannot find any evidence for it (or even the existence of these men) and these are the only edits that this user has made, and as you point out it conflicts with other accounts of the escape. Jll (talk) 13:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resources[edit]

It would be both interesting and desirable to elaborate on where the diggers got their resources. The sheer amount of tools needed and sand moved require more explanation, because it all seems highly unlikely. Even when it's all true, as I gather from the number of references... Divad 20:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that you think it's all a pack of lies? Rsduhamel (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No he isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.22.131.44 (talk) 14:22, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How many escapes?[edit]

The article's opening paragraph speaks of two escapes, one in 1943 and one in '44 but the body of the article appears to imply there was only one escape, the preparations for which took place across these two years.--Lairor 04:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The article currently reads thus: "The site was selected because it would be difficult to escape by tunnelling. However, the camp is best known for three famous prisoner escapes that took place there by tunnelling, which were depicted in the films The Great Escape (1963) and The Wooden Horse (1950), and the books by former prisoners Paul Brickhill and Eric Williams from which these films were adapted." To me, this is confusing because first 3 escapes are mentioned, "...which were depicted in..." 2 movies and 2 books which detail only 2 of the 3 escapes to my knowledge. Should it be changed to read "...two of which were depicted in..." ? Rodney420 (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Speaking of escapes, can we remove the reference that claims that Paul Brickhill wrote of the two most famous escapes - the Great Escape and Douglas Bader's? Paul Brickhill wrote a biography of Bader and his time in Stalag Luft III only comprised a small portion of the book so that comment is misldeaing. And, far more importantly, Bader never escaped from Stalag Luft III (although he had tried to escape from the hospital in which he was held immediately after being shot down). He constantly baited the guards and for this he was removed to Colditz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.203.98 (talk) 02:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations Needed[edit]

To whoever added all the "citations needed" tags: I think all the things you flagged up are in Brickhill's book, perhaps some in Williams. I'm not sure how to reference them... maybe do it as in a book, with (Brickhill 1951), then (ibid)...? Trious 12:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Gp Cpt Massey cite needed. Added link to History in Film which references both he repaitriation and his testimony before HM Government on the executions.--Lepeu1999 20:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My New Project[edit]

I'm going to get this up to Featured status. I'm going to try anyway. I'm interested in this subject, am surprised that there is no Escape Wikiproject, will try and get one, and probably annoy the hell out of everyone. Anyone want to help? microchip08 20:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added {{Fact}} tags to places that need them, as, although they are annoying, need to be addressed to get this article up to B-Class status. I will do them as I can, as I need to get the books from up in the attic. To cite a book, write:

.<ref>{{cite book | last = Carroll | first = Tim | title = The Great Escapers | publisher = Mainstream Publishers | date = 2004 | id = ISBN 1-84018-904-5 }}</ref>

for example. For more information about citing, please click on any fact tag. Thanks for your anticipated co-operation, microchip08 12:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
I may have started with all good intentions, but I have only just rediscovered this article. Let's try again, for GA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by microchip08 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Timestamp restored (but bolded, to give notice of its unusual history), by me. --Jerzy•t 10:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]
   This diff shows that the contrib was properly dated ("12:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)") and signed. (It's hard to imagine how it could have appeared otherwise, other than because of further editing, and -- altho further investigation would IMO have even less significance than this pro forma clarification -- there almost certainly is a findable record of an editor (or several) removing the original sig, as well as removing the time stamp that i have restored and bolded.)
--Jerzy•t 10:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stalag II-D note[edit]

I fixed the note on Stalag II-D, as it was originally written as "11" and not linked. I'm unfamiliar with the details of the escape listed here; 1500 prisoners seems so enormous that I wonder if it was a mass escape or a total number of escapes during the Canadians' imprisonment there? The Stalag II-D article didn't note a mass-escape.

On a related note; should the non-Stalag Luft III section perhaps be moved into a "Mass POW escapes of WWII" article? It certainly seems noteworthy, but a bit tangential to the topic of Stalag Luft III, which should presumably just have details of the escape from that installation and perhaps a link to these other similar escapes. Just my .02. 142.167.169.78 18:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Goering or Himmler[edit]

on this page it says goering persuaded hitler not to execute all the escapees but on jens mullers page it says himmler, who was it? or both? Webbmyster 21:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I second this, it's an inconsistency which is repeated on many pages. Should be sorted out by someone who actually knows. - Jon F. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.252.146 (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of escapes[edit]

Remove? Not very encyclopaedic? Split into sapurate article? microchip08 08:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever they are, they don't belong here. The article deteriorates to a real mess by its conclusion.

Nebe[edit]

Apparently selecting the men to be shot was a 'traumatic experience for him'. I don't have access to the source cited, can anyone clarify what it does say please? Brickhill's "The Great Escape" (page 211) states while selecting the men to be shot he was 'grimly excited and behaved "uncountrollably"', which is something rather different entirely. One Night In Hackney303 20:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spies vs POWs[edit]

Not to sound like an apologist, but were not the escapees wearing civilian clothes? Doesn’t that mean that escapees would be treated as spies and not POWs. Hence the executions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.212.2.218 (talk) 19:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was discussing this issue with someone recently and we had the same confusion. Additionally, I realize that movies are not a reliable source, but in the film "The Great Escape", a prisoner who tries to escape is shot by a machine gun placed in a tower. Why was it seemingly "okay" to shoot a prisoner in such a manner? Is there really a distinguishable difference here? GCD1 (talk) 21:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IANAL, but as I recall Brickhill's book, they were wearing their uniforms, albeit somewhat recut, recolored, and generally made to look like civilian clothes. And they didn't act as spies or saboteurs. It does seem like a gray area, but note that they weren't all shot, nor accused of spying.
But shooting someone "while trying to escape" is okay, since he's made the decision to put himself back in play. That assumes that a prisoner really is trying to escape, and when called on to surrender, doesn't. And that the rules about the deadline were clear and known to the prisoner. If I'm remembering correctly, that incident was equivalent to suicide by cop.
—WWoods (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
when captured after the great escape, some were accused in interrigation of being spies and wearing civilian clothing, but according to the great escape book, a tailor was brought in who reviewed the clothes and vouched that they were definetly recut uniforms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.173.203 (talk) 11:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Prisoners could be legally shot in the camps for any major rule they broke but the Germans were strict in regards to justification. Several guards in Luft III were disciplined for shooting prisoners without sufficient cause. Stepping over the wire as McQueen did in the movie was justification although in practice they were given the chance to stop when called apon, if they had reached the fence before being seen then they were shot regardless. POWs who escaped dressed in civilian clothes or German uniforms were exempt from being classed as spies as long as they could prove at the point of capture that they were POWs. For this reason all POWs would carry their insignia and PoW identity dogtags when escaping because under the GC POWs carrying these were considered "wearing their uniform" regardless of their visable clothing. Wayne (talk) 12:48, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have just been reading the Geneva Convention (no particular reason). Article 89 onwards deals with disciplinary sanctions and limits the nature of such sanctions significantly. It is obvious nonsense to say that prisoners could be "legally" shot for any major rule breaking as suggested above by "Wayne".

In particular: the max punishment for an escape is 30 days "confinement" (reading articles 89 and 90 together: article 89 lists available punishments; article 90 stipulates maximum duration of said punishments; you also need to read article 92 which makes clear that an escapee is liable to disciplinary sanctions only not judicial proceedings which would presumably also allow eg the death penalty and all other punishments).

If you think about what happens in war films generally this rule is in fact applied: eg The One That Got Away. The British commandant refers to a max punishment of 30 days' solitary for an escape but in fact gives the prisoner 21 days. In The Great Escape Mr McQueen gets days in the cooler each time he escapes. Obviously in common with most wiki editors my main source of knowledge is what happens in films, family guy etc and I won't pretend otherwise. In fairness many of these films were based upon the experiences of the people involved in real events so they are authorities of a sort.

There is nothing in the Geneva Convention preventing escaping PoW's wearing uniform etc and on the face of it any such requirement would be utterly absurd. The Convention acknowledges that prisoners may attempt to escape and (severely) limits the punishment that can be imposed should such attempt fail. It does not stipulate what they can wear for making an escape (any more than it says who they should salute as they leave the camp): the clear implication of an escape attempt is that the PoW will be dressed in clothes appropriate for escaping.

In any event article 93 then makes clear beyond all argument that various minor offences (including wearing civy clothing, or knocking off bed struts etc) if for the purposes of escaping and if not involving violence are also disciplinary offences only and therefore by implication subject to the limitations mentioned in articles 89 and 90, ie can only be punished by 30 days confinement.

In conclusion: this is not a remotely grey area. The killing of re-captured prisoners was plainly unlawful and contrary to the Convention irrespective of dress or disguise. (NB: the references above are to some post war edition of the Convention but we can assume that the same or equivalent provisions applied during WW2).

The grey area if there is one is what one is allowed to do in order to frustrate an escape that is actually in progress, as opposed to punishing a re-captured PoW. All films in this genre (Colditz, Stalag 17, The Great Escape, Hart's War etc) show German guards firing upon escaping prisoners as a matter of routine. The guards (of all countries) were obviously armed and presumably not just for self-protection. So arguably there is a grey area in terms of what steps can legitimately be taken in the course of the escape itself eg if a prisoner fails to stop when instructed to do so; obviously if an escaping prisoner appears to pose a threat of violence then that is no doubt a different matter and fairly straightforward.

Finally I would like to point out that if a PoW escaped back to his own side but was then re-captured, ie if the escape was successful, a party to the Convention is not allowed to punish the PoW for the earlier escape (article 91). Surely that is hilarious. 62.232.34.3 (talk) 16:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, it is legal to shoot a prisoner if he disobeys a legal order from the camp staff or if he refuses to stop if ordered to while attempting to escape. So it wasn't legal to shoot an escaping prisoner just because he was escaping - the only legitimate reason was if he disobeyed an order to stop/halt and shooting was the only way of stopping him, e.g., it would not be legal to shoot someone if he could just be apprehended. If the escaper was not discovered, such as escape by tunnel, etc., then as long as he avoided contact with the police or anyone else with 'legitimate' authority who might order him to do something, then he was reasonably safe. The point being that if one avoided any situation where one might be given an order to stop or surrender, then one was more or less free to travel as one wanted.
Once a combatant has surrendered (i.e., as POWs are deemed to have done) then he/she agrees to abide by the legal orders of the holding power, e.g., the enemy, and so as long as a POW does as he/she is ordered then he/she is deemed to be entitled to the protection of the holding power. Once however a POW escapes or disobeys a legitimate order from the captor then he/she is deemed to have forfeited their surrender and hence become an enemy once more, and so may be dealt with in the same manner as one would an enemy, i.e., shot at unless they surrender. Usually of course they just surrendered if caught again.
The legal area isn't really a grey one, it was based on common sense but it did rely on a bit of give-and-take on both sides, generally it was acknowledged by both sides that it was the duty of an officer/man to escape, just as it was the duty of the opposing forces to re-capture him. It was also generally agreed by both sides that it was unreasonable to shoot at an unarmed prisoner, unless absolutely necessary to stop him. Problems only arose when bad feeling arose, such as with Hitler and Himmler when they started to take escapes personally. The murder of escapees in WW II only occurred because of the extreme unpleasantness of the Nazi and Japanese regimes. Generally it was fairly easy for the German authorities to find out if someone arrested in civil clothing was an escaped POW and it was fairly obvious if so, that they were unlikely to be actually spies, however the reaction of the capturing authorities depended on the people concerned, and so in some relatively rare cases escapees were actually shot. Usually however, they were just handed back to the camp.
BTW, in cases were escaped POWs joined up with the various Resistance organisations and actually fought alongside them in civilian clothing then the situation would be pretty unpleasant if subsequently re-captured, as IIRC the Geneva Convention then did not apply. The Geneva Convention did also not apply to personnel from SOE if captured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 18:43 &:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
RAF escaped POW's who returned to the UK were not allowed to resume their previous operational roles, as if subsequently shot down again there was the possibility that they might be tortured and reveal names of civilians who had helped them escape previously. Usually returned RAF aircrew went to roles where they were not required to fly over enemy territory, or in some cases were sent to new postings overseas, e.g., the Middle East or Far East.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.99 (talk) 19:12, 14 April 2015

Part of the status of POW is a non-combatant, with some significant differences, from an airman who has been shot done and is one the run is an "evader". An escaped POW wearing civilian clothes may have been accused of being out of uniform, and threatened with being shot as a spy, but usually this was a bluff, and POWs kept their POW ID disc as proof. An evader who wore civilian clothes was at greater risk if caught. Also a POW who killed an enemy combatant as apart of his escape could be charged with murder. In Eric William's book, the Wooden House he added an incident where he killed a German guard in Denmark. Later he admitted this was fiction, added for drama, because while he was in the care of the Danish resistance he had become a passenger. I am not sure of how it was defined that an escaped POW who joined up with partizans or a resistant group behind the lines could be deemed to have returned to his side and become a combatant again. There is an interesting story of an American colonel, captured during the Ardennes Campaign in late 1944, who was abandoned by his SS guards in April 1945, and took charge of a town in eastern Germany, with about 70 former POWs plus 1 SS guard who took and American uniform and identity, also joined by a unit French labourers. The local mayor surrendered with about 30 Volksturm (Home Guard) and the Americans were armed when the town was captured by the Russians. Noel Ellis 10:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)~

1942 or 1943?[edit]

Did the first successful escape happen in October 1942 or October 1943? Both dates are given.Cbalducc (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The third papragraph is wrong. The 'Wooden Horse' escape was 29th October 1943 - cf Oliver Philpot 'Stolen Journey' p 297 'We decided to break on Friday 29th October 1943' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.37.41 (talk) 17:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Escape[edit]

This section appears to have been (poorly) merged in from another article. It contains quite a large discussion of mass escapes in general, as well as questioning the P.O.W's strategy etc etc. Either this needs to be removed, or the Great Escape section needs to be re-split from this page. Metao (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, these sections were not cited, and given their inappropriateness for this article, I have removed them (despite admiring the very meticulous wikilinkification). Metao (talk) 14:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the "escape" section should be split off to a separate article. There are a large number of good sources available, some of which I have, including Brickhill's book. Stetsonharry (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, The great escape section should be split off. It's too large to be just a section in this wiki and it is by far the most notable aspect of Stalag Luft III because of the movie. May I suggest calling the new wiki The great escape from Stalag Luft III? --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to agree, and express surprise that it hasn't happened already. It's well over half the content of the page as is, so I'd say a relatively brief mention should stay here, and all the details split off onto another page. Jedikaiti (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

von Lindeiner's fate[edit]

I placed a "fact" tag after the note that von Lindeiner died in a Polish coal mine explosion. I believe that Brickhill said he ended up in London after the war. Rsduhamel (talk) 06:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that it has been corrected. Rsduhamel (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request transfered from main page[edit]

Please see Lt. Delbert Creed Brimhall referenced at the WWII memorial, Washington, DC. Shot down over Munich 16 November 1944 in a B24J, the "Blue L," 783rd of the 465th, 15th AAF, Capt. Stringham, AC, KIA. He was interned approximately 6 months post "Great Escape" when American Pilots were allowed the privilege. Information of post "Escape" POW's is requested. Jim Brimhall, son.

(Was located at bottom of main page, transferred here as more fitting.) -- Marcsin | Talk 17:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   The content that Marcsin "transferred here" was that of a contrib made by User:Jglennb at 09:14, 26 December 2008
Jerzy•t 05:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed split off of The Great Escape section into its own wiki[edit]

(This is a continuation of the discussion from The Great Escape section above.)

The great escape section should be split off. It's too large to be just a section in this wiki and it is by far the most notable aspect of Stalag Luft III because of the movie. May I suggest calling the new wiki The great escape from Stalag Luft III ? --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Gruntler (talk) 03:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also agreed, but I assume you mean a new article and not a whole new wiki????? Stetsonharry (talk) 18:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
   Presumably any of several models of a GE wiki could be created at Wikia, and could use copied WP content under WMF licenses. IMO it's unrealistic to hope that WMF would support a separate wiki with its resources.
   Splitting the article into two articles -- one covering just the escape (and repeating parts of the camp's article sufficient to help users whose interest is highly focused, in saving the effort of picking out their "choice pieces" of the accompanying camp article) -- is also plausible (& mutually consistent with having a GE wiki on Wikia, tho one may draw effort away from another).
--Jerzy•t 09:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caloric requirements[edit]

The article states, in an uncited sentence, that 3,000 calories per day are needed for healthy men. This is a lot more than the US government's assumptions, and we know how obese Americans can be... At the very least, a cite (and explanation) would be needed.--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If "we" know that Americans are obese, then we can also know that the Yukon is North America's rectum and you are it's no.1 turd. Al Cook USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.39.126 (talk) 12:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stalag_Luft_III#Tunnel_construction[edit]

The last para in thia section was a bit 'mucked up' and not making sense. I deleted 4 words and added a full stop. It now makes sense. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now it makes sense, but on the other hand, the tunnel dimension was given as 2 square feet. This is clearly impossible. A human being could barely wriggle through an aperture of only 2 square feet (about 17 inches by 17 inches) if at all. It should read "2 feet square", which is 2 feet by 2 feet and thus 4 square feet. My assertion is supported by the research on this website: http://www.b24.net/pow/greatescape.htm , which is highly authoritative by all appearances. I have changed the text accordingly. Rodney420 (talk) 14:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of nationalities[edit]

It does not include The Netherlands. But further on Bram van der Stok is mentioned as one of only three homerunners. 62.12.14.25 (talk) 09:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Soil[edit]

The sand was bright yellow... Literally? Canary yellow? Seems doubtful. Perhaps what's meant is light and yellowish colored? Sca (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nuremberg War Trials[edit]

This material was moved to here from the article The Great Escape (film) so that parts of it can be considered for inclusion in the Stalag Luft III section The "Great Escape".

Col Telford Taylor was the U.S. prosecutor in the High Command case. The indictment called for the General Staff of the Army and the High Command of the German Armed Forces to be considered criminal organizations; the witnesses were several of the surviving German Field Marshals and their staff officers.[1] One of the crimes charged in the Nuremberg Trials was of the murder of the 50.[2]
Luftwaffe Col Bernd von Brauchitsch, who was on the staff of Reich Marshal Hermann Göring, was interrogated by Capt Horace Hahn about the murders.[3]

--Bob K31416 (talk) 23:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk footnotes for "Nuremberg War Trials"[edit]

  1. ^ Guilt, responsibility and the Third Reich, Heffer 1970; 20 pages; ISBN 0-85270-044-X
  2. ^ Indictment "Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Vol. 1, Indictment: Count Three C.2". Avalon Project. Yale University. Retrieved 2009-06-28. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  3. ^ [http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/03-12-46.asp Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Vol. 9 seventy-ninth day: Tuesday, 12 March 1946: Morning Session], Avalon Project, Yale University, Retrieved 1 March 2010

Clarify[edit]

As British government policy was to deduct camp pay from the prisoners military pay, the communal pool avoided the practice in other camps whereby American officers contributed to British canteen purchases.

What does this sentence mean? I'm really not sure what is trying to be said here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.171.55 (talk) 02:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Order[edit]

It would make more sense if the liberation paragraph was moved to after the part about the tunnels and escape attempts. Herogamer (talk) 14:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Penguins[edit]

Penguins do not live in Germany. Someone may like to tidy this article up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.55.157 (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The term is explained three or four paragraphs up from what you must have read. 92.15.30.71 (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

what was shown...[edit]

they showed a picture of supposedly normandy and it was dieppe...I have seen the pictures and it was dieppe that was attacked... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.54.139.58 (talk) 03:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How many escapes (again)[edit]

The article says "Tom" was the 98th tunnel to be discovered (in Sept 1943); just how many escape attempts were there? And how many were successful? The article says a bit about the Wooden Horse, and a lot about the Great Escape, but nothing much of anything else. Does anybody know? Xyl 54 (talk) 02:00, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lager Belaria or Bavaria[edit]

As an complete aside, my father in law was a airmen while on his 25 mission on August 1944 was shot down over Berlin and sent to Stalag Luft III. I thought he told me the British Compound, where he was despite being an American, was called Lager Belaria or Bevaria. Since he is deceased and I no longer have his records (Most POW records were then and I believe still are classified anyway) received ours from NPRC and National Archives Military Branch in Suitland Maryland. I can only rely on my memory. His name was Walter Collins and his nickname The farmer as he deposed of sand accumulated by more tunnels being dug even then and feigned a garden structure in which to do it. He also worked on the Monument for the prisoners who escaped and were murdered. Was forced marched to Nueumberg and finally Mooseburg where he was liberated by Patton's army. He was also interviewed by Arthur Durand (former AF Colonel) who wrote a book and did his thesis on Stalag Luft III. Can anyone shed some information on this? Thank you.

Also have seen many AF Mission Reports. Do not remember any crew member lower than a 2nd Lt., perhaps a 1st Lt. Mugginsx (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While interesting, your story above -- as well as your memory of who was and wasn't in the Luft camps -- would be considered original research. I have reverted your latest edit in the article based on WP:OR and the following link [2] Lhb1239 (talk) 16:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Admittedly no hard evidence. The story is however all true. Will try to contact Dr. Durand and see if he remembers me or Walter. If anything, he may give us permission to add more information to this article. Mugginsx (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wally Floody and the Canadian contribution[edit]

Canadian Wally Floody, the "Tunnel King", designed and supervised the construction of all the tunnels. He was one of 150 Canadians, members of both the RCAF and the RAF, who were involved in X, 25% of the total manpower. <http://wwii.ca/content-91/canadians-and-the-great-escape/> <http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/story.html?id=afc753d5-bb92-4c7f-87c1-103a4e1b1611> <http://www.history.ca/content/ContentDetail.aspx?ContentId=39> <http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=013cff64-5c6a-4339-9a96-c516d558ff94> <http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=013cff64-5c6a-4339-9a96-c516d558ff94> 209.213.242.221 (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An earlier escape?[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Allied_airmen_from_the_Great_Escape Also, there was at least one other successful escape from Stalag Luft 3 (The "Wooden Horse" escape in 1943), during which all 3 participants made home runs. So, one cannot, therefore, title the list of the 76 as all of the escapers from Stalag Luft 3. Mhstevens 21:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC) So there was an earlier successful escape??? --RThompson82 (talk) 23:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bunkroom size[edit]

The text states "Each 10-by-12-foot (3.0 m × 3.7 m) bunkroom" housed 15 men in 5 3-tier bunks. The metric/imperial conversion (which appea to have been given by some automatic conversion tool) does not seem right: 3m is approx. 12' and 3.7m is around 14'. And anyway, assuming these bunks were 2'6" by 6', I can't see how it would be logistically possible to fit 5 of them in a room 10' by 12'. Men would have had to climb through each others' bunks to reach their own. In which case, the Jerries may just have well constructed three 10' wide shelves for them to sleep on 5 to each, and called it day. Plutonium27 (talk) 10:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tunnel location?[edit]

A documentary shown last year (2012) on Channel 4 had archaeologists digging up the end of "Harry". However all the programme proved was that where the official Polish memorials were, are in fact in the wrong place because they found no trace of the tunnels. Little progress could be made to find the tunnels due to the instability in the sandy soils.

Thus making the legends used for images in this article factually incorrect. The only thing the diggers found was a cache of tools and an actual digging cart which were found in an excavated area under the foundations of the camp's former concert hut.86.157.49.73 (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Info on a previously unknown fourth tunnel, 'George', constructed after the Great Escape, here: [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Class B?[edit]

I just read this whole article and I think it is better than class B. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 06:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stalag Luft III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stalag Luft III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Map in infobox beside introduction[edit]

When you hover over the map of Germany underneath the model camp it says 'Stalag Luft 111 is in Germany'. Since Sagan is now in Poland this should say 'was in Germany'. I don't see a way to edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goingagin (talk • contribs) 12:15, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stalag Luft III. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 23:19, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Group Captain Harry "Wings" Day[edit]

In the article at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Day

it is claimed that Harry Day was a co-organiser of the Great Escape, but his name is missing in this article. Can this be confirmed, and if so should his name not be alongside Roger Bushell? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.167.135 (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3 or 98?[edit]

If three tunnels were built, how could 98 tunnels have been discovered? Can this be clarified in the article? 173.88.241.33 (talk) 05:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have added something to the article explaining that there had been lots of previous attempts to tunnel out of the camp, almost all discovered during the digging. This is why the preparations for the 'great escape' were so thorough, with three simultaneous digs and elaborate security, waste disposal etc. But I checked out the citations given after the sentence containing the "98th to be discovered" claim, and couldn't find it in either. Maybe it comes from one of the hard copy books cited in the article? This statistic does need referencing as to its source, and I have added a citation tag to the article accordingly. MapReader (talk) 07:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Stalag Luft III. 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) 14:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Franz [sic] Braune[edit]

As of 6 December 2017, the main article includes the following:

Cordes was replaced soon afterwards by Oberst Franz Braune. Braune was appalled that so many escapees had been killed, and allowed the prisoners who remained there to build a memorial, to which he also contributed. (The memorial still stands at its original site.)

No source is given, but I assume it is From Commandant to Captive: The Memoirs of Stalag Luft III Commandant Col. Friedrich Wilhelm Von Lindeiner Genannt Von Wildau With Postwar Interviews, Letters, and Testimony (2015), by Marilyn Walton and Michael Eberhardt, since a search of GoogleBooks gives that name for Cordes' replacement.

The Oberst in question is not Franz, but Werner Braune. Luftwaffe Oberst Werner Braune, born on 9 December 1897 in Schweidnitz, was named acting commandant of Stalag Luft III ("mit Wahrnehmung der Geschäfte des Kommandanten des Kriegsgefangenlagers der Luftwaffe Nr. 3 beauftragt") on 27 April 1944. Oberst Braune was transferred from the Luftwaffe to the German Army on 2 February 1945 with effect from 16 October 1944. which makes me wonder if the camp itself was also transferred to the jurisdiction of the Army, or if Braune was simply transferred elsewhere (his personnel file does not say). My source is Braune's personnel file, which was among the German Army records seized by the US Army in 1945 and is on microfilm in the US National Archives. I will change the name in the main article, but I expect someone will revert it at some point and cite the Walton/Eberhardt book as a source. Hopefully, placing this information here on the talk page will prevent this.

I cannot speak to the rest of the quote, as Braune's attitude toward the escape and whether he allowed a memorial to be built are not the sort of matters adressed in his personnel file. Again, I assume the Walton/Eberhardt book is the source for this, but since I do not know for certain, I cannot place a citation on the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.216.227.115 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Stalag Luft III. 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) 10:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


the number of escapees[edit]

Re the number who escaped in the Great Escape, I recall from Brickal's book, that 80 prisoners got out of the tunnel, but 4 were captured outside the wire, so that it was 76 "at large". I think that because the German's were disturbed by the size of the escape, they did not want to promote a higher figure, so that it was recorded as 76. Noel Ellis 10:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)~~

correct units of calories[edit]

"Food was an ongoing matter of concern for the POWs. The recommended dietary intake for a normal healthy inactive adult male is 2,150 kilocalories (9,000 kilojoules)." This should read only 2150 calories , not kilocalories, which would = 2.150 million calories. Likewise, remove the "kilo" from joules to read 9000 joules.

"According to the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the recommended calorie intake for adult men ranges from 2,200 to 3,200 calories per day.Dec 30, 2021"

<CommsO> CommsO (talk) 05:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added sections on a transmitter in the POW Camp, and a program to send escape aides to POWs.[edit]

Added two sourced sections, which may or may not be related to each other, but both mention Stalag Luft III by name. One book source says prisoner Cundall built a transmitter. Second section relates a secret program to send escape aides to the POWs, including transmitters and crystal receivers. Perhaps this second section was the source of Cundall's transmitter, rather than (tubes, or valves) being dangerously sourced by bribery and built from scratch. Crystal radio receivers are mainly used for receiving (very) high powered medium wave or short wave broadcasters. They are far from ideal for a receiver for a two-way radio exchange, even in CW (Morse Code), which by comparison are typically low power transmitters. Even so, transmitting "answers" to POWs (e.g., train schedules!) would give up that game!


<CommsO> CommsO (talk) 06:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are problems with [this section](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalag_Luft_III#Stalag_Luft_III_radio_transmitter):
1) it is not written with WP:NPOV in mind. Specifically, the use of first person plural pronouns indicate that Wikipedia (we) is to be interpreted as the allies. Much as Nazis' evilness is a settled theme (I hope), the text would be better match wikipedia's voice with more neutral language. Another option is to make this a quote of the source.
2) the section begins with a popular culture reference and works back to the facts. There is a popular culture reference section elsewhere in the article, so perhaps that belongs there. Alternatively, a brief mention of the cultural reference at the end could also work. fmobus (talk) 18:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moosburg[edit]

The prisoners were not marched all the way to Moosburg, Stalag 7A. They were marched to Spremburg where they were loaded onto cattle cars for the train trip to Moosburg. 76.149.62.74 (talk) 18:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation? MapReader (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stalag_Luft_III&oldid=1215882998"