Looking Down the Corridors

by Kevin Wright

  In addition to airborne ‘hazards’, Chipmunk flights sometimes provoked hostile reactions from Soviet and East German ground troops too. Again it is difficult to determine if these acts were the result of official orders or over-zealous reaction by individual sentries, who always carried weapons loaded with live ammunition. In image 29 of the picture section, a Soviet soldier (circled) is pointing an AK-47 semi-automatic rifle and firing at the aircraft. Whether he was reacting this way because he didn’t want to appear on camera, or the crew were not photographing his best side, remains undetermined. This incident placed British authorities in a quandary. On one hand, here was prima facie evidence to support a formal complaint to the Soviets of an overtly hostile act against an RAF aircraft going about its ‘innocent’ lawful occasions in airspace it was entitled to use. On the other hand, producing the photograph as evidence to support any complaint would have compromised the operation and given the Soviets unequivocal confirmation of Allied clandestine photographic reconnaissance. There were other occasions when the Chipmunk returned to Gatow with bullet holes in the airframe. Flares fired at the aircraft were also a common form of harassment.27 Peter Jefferies often saw photographs of self-propelled and towed anti-aircraft guns, man-portable, mobile and static SAM systems tracking the aircraft as it passed by. This probably provided the operators with practice using a ‘live’ target. Roy Marsden has also described how, soon after take-off, in the local Potsdam area were several ‘target’ installations. That one unit in particular, the 34th Artillery Division, ‘had the disturbing habit of training their guns on the aircraft as we flew round the installation’.28 The Chipmunk crew had no way of knowing if the guns and missiles being pointed at them were loaded with live rounds, or what the operator’s rules of engagement were – which must have been a very discomforting thought, if they had the time to dwell on it.

  Protest and Compromise

  The Soviets were never happy about the Allied flights as evidenced by the ‘safety of flight not guaranteed’ endorsement on the BASC flight cards. The flights only came about because of the Allies’ assertion of their access rights to BCZ airspace from airfields in West Berlin. The Soviet representative in the BASC regularly protested about Chipmunk flights in particular, usually citing ‘interference’ with civilian air traffic at Berlin-Schönfeld (now Berlin-Brandenburg) international airport, regardless of where the Chipmunk actually was at the time of the alleged offence.29 This was probably a means for the Soviets to protest about the flights, but without drawing the Allies’ attention to the actual area of the alleged incursion, which they may have considered ‘sensitive’ for some reason at the time.

  The intensity of air activity along the Corridors and inside the BCZ saw opportunities for ground and air-based efforts to sometimes overlap. These could be complementary, but equally, on occasions, they could undermine each other. One BRIXMIS officer has recounted the targeting of the high-priority objective at Werneuchen airfield. He described how the Soviets appeared to be aware when Allied overflights were likely to take place. When they suspected one was about to happen, they would often cover up, or move, items of sensitive equipment that they did not want the overflights to see. This could undermine the BRIXMIS ‘Tourers’ efforts, who had spent a long time creeping undetected to an observation point close to the airfield, which was within a PRA, to view those sensitive items rapidly being concealed from overhead flights.30

  Despite the British suspecting that the Russians and East Germans knew what the Chipmunk was doing, knowledge of the operation and its products was strictly ‘need to know’ and security was taken very seriously. However, inadvertent compromise of the operation could happen, as recalled by Major General Peter Williams, a former BRIXMIS member. He was escorting some senior RAF visitors, including RAF Gatow’s Station Commander, on an official visit to Potsdam. The party had the inevitable Stasi minders in tow. The party was standing on the Sansouci Palace terrace when the Chipmunk appeared overhead. The Station Commander’s wife was heard to say: ‘Look darling, it’s a small plane – Goodness me! Isn’t that your Chipmunk?’ The Station Commander hissed at his wife out of the corner of his mouth: ‘Listen to me. You can’t see anything.’31 Drawing attention to the flight in this way would certainly have interested the Stasi representatives, who would have passed the infomation up the chain of command.

  Bob Hamilton was involved in one of those ‘oops’ moments. In mid 1990 Nikon developed a 500mm autofocus lens and Bob was selected to try it out. The lens was larger, heavier and more cumbersome than the 1,000mm lenses then in use. After getting airborne Bob prepared to do a few test shots before crossing into the GDR when they hit air turbulence. The lens rose about 6in and then rapidly came down to hit the canopy rail. The result was a very bent lens, costing some £2,000, that had to be written off.

  A totally unofficial piece of intelligence-gathering carried out from the air over East Berlin brought considerable personal benefit to David Cockburn. A restaurant in East Berlin, frequented by BRIXMIS personnel, was a rather dilapidated establishment, not really the place to take a family, but the chef produced excellent meals in the poor facilities. Suddenly it closed but an Army officer was told by the chef that he intended to open his own restaurant in another part of the city. During the next few weeks they discovered that the chef had moved to a building near an S-Bahn (overground) station in one of the villages outside the city itself but within the city boundary. It was also on the Berlin Railway Ring that was regularly overflown by the Chipmunk in the hope of spotting ‘kit’ loaded on trains. Although the station was regularly overflown, it was not an important target but it now assumed greater significance.

  On the next flight a building, near the station, was visibly being refurbished – an almost unknown occurrence for a private establishment in the GDR because of near-permanent material shortages. Over the next few months the building was kept under air observation and photographs were taken to confirm that the place looked like a restaurant. When signs of occupation appeared, a ground reconnaissance was called for. They found that the restaurant had the same name as the previous one and was open for business. The food was even better than before, the surroundings were very pleasant, and the staff friendly. This started a very enjoyable series of meals out, with food and service which would not have been out of place in a 5-star establishment in London. Sadly, the proprietor’s success meant that he fell foul of the local SED Party elite. His restaurant was classified as a 2-star establishment, and so his prices were set to reflect this, but it was insufficient to make his business viable, so it eventually closed.32

  Other British Light Aviation Activity

  Before 1954 the RAF’s Air Observation Post (AOP) Squadron and AOP Flights based in the BOZ provided light aircraft support to Berlin by deploying one or two Austers there as required. These aircraft were owned and maintained by the RAF but aircrew were usually from the Army (mostly Royal Artillery). They flew visual observation flights in response to such events as the 1951 East German workers’ uprising. There is no evidence that any officially tasked photographic reconnaissance was undertaken, although there may have been enthusiastic amateur photographers in the crews who made personal photographic records.

  In April and May 1956 there is some evidence of a number of flights by a Percival Prentice lasting about one to two hours, flying throughout the whole BCZ and carrying passengers, possibly BRIXMIS personnel and Berlin-based intelligence officers.33 Whether these flights were photographic or visual reconnaissance is not recorded. The Cabinet approved Chipmunk photographic flights in 1956, although the Chipmunk had been at Gatow since 1954, so the Prentice flights may have been a precursor to this. However, the Prentice could carry up to four passengers, so they may have been familiarisation flights for observers.

  In 1970 the Army Air Corps (AAC) formed ‘7 Aviation Flight’ AAC (7 Avn Flt AAC), later renamed ‘7 Flight’ AAC (7 Flt AAC), at RAF Gatow. The flight initially had four Westland Sioux AH-1s that were replaced b
y three Aerospatiale Gazelle AH-1s in 1975. The flight belonged to the British BIB and flew visual reconnaissance patrols along the inner city border (The Wall) and the border between the city and the GDR (The Wire), liaison flights and photographic reconnaissance missions. HQ BIB tasked the latter via 3 Intelligence and Security Company (3 Int & Sy Coy). Their main targets were the Grenzkommando Mitte installations adjacent to The Wall and The Wire. The results of these missions were mainly used by HQ BIB but were sometimes sent to HQ BAOR.

  United States Light Aviation Activity in Berlin

  In 1967 the USA authorised Project Lark Spur to photograph Soviet and East German installations in the BCZ using fixed-wing aircraft of the US Berlin Brigade Aviation Detachment. 34 The programme’s original aim was to add to the large volume of photographs of Berlin produced by the US Corridor missions, but the Americans soon found that the Lark Spur photography did far more than just complement their other imagery collection programmes. It was particularly useful in supporting technical intelligence reports. The operation started in 1968 using a single Cessna O-1 Bird Dog (L-19) aircraft, which was replaced early in the programme by the more capable De Havilland Canada U-6/L-20 (DHC-2 Beaver) that arrived in Berlin during 1958 and stayed until 1979. It, in turn, was replaced by two Pilatus UV-20A Chiricahua (Turbo Porter) that were used until the Detachment’s disbandment in 1991. Lark Spur flights were conducted in a similar fashion to the BRIXMIS Chipmunk missions with the observers drawn from the USMLM, at least from the 1970s. ‘Lark Spur’ photography was exchanged with the French and British under the Tri-Mission agreement.

  The Berlin Brigade Aviation Detachment started in 1951 when three Hiller OH-23 Raven helicopters began operations at Tempelhof as part of US 6 Infantry Regiment. Their primary task was mounting air patrols over Western Sectors of the city. They also supported British and French forces who, at that time, had no Berlin-based aviation assets. Although they could have legally flown throughout the BCZ, they confined themselves to the Western Sectors of the city. By 1958 Bell OH-13 Sioux and Sikorski H-19 Chickasaw’s had arrived, replacing the OH-23s which eventually left in 1962. In the same year a single U-6/L-20 (DHC-2 Beaver) arrived, staying until retirement in 1979 and subsequently it was donated to the Berlin Transportation Museum in 1982.

  The unit was renamed the ‘US Berlin Brigade Aviation Detachment’ in 1962 and remained so until its disbandment in 1994 when Allied forces left Berlin. It continued to support US Berlin Brigade and United States Command Berlin (USCOB) activities with helicopter patrols along the inner city border (‘The Wall’) and GDR border (‘The Wire’). Between 1962 and 1964 the rotary-winged component had a short-lived acquaintance with the H-34 (Choctaw) until they were replaced by the ubiquitous Bell UH-1 (Huey) that served in various versions. The detachment’s fixed-wing element included a Cessna O-1 (L-19) Bird Dog until 1975 when it was replaced by a Cessna O-2 that itself left in 1979. The twin-engined Beechcraft U-8 Seminole of the 1960s was succeeded by a Beech U-21, and superseded by a Beech C-12 from 1986 to 1991. Two Pilatus UV-20 Chiricahua (Turbo-Porters) were also flown from 1980 until 1991 when Project Lark Spur ceased.

  In the summer of 1962, at the time of the second Berlin crisis, there were numerous complaints by the Soviets about US helicopter flights. One protest from the Chief Soviet Controller read:

  Today July 19, 1962 an American helicopter No. 640 which took off from Tempelhof airport at 0824Z, irrespective of the fact that the region of its flight was limited to West Berlin, flew over democratic Berlin and from the open door of the helicopter pictures of different objects of the GDR were taken.35

  The American response reasserted the Western ‘freedom of movement’ and the intent to continue exercising it, but ignored the photography issue. By the end of the month the exchanges became much more heated after the Soviet Controller twice demanded that a US helicopter flight leave the area over Berlin-Karlshorst on 30 July. The record says that the Soviet Controller stated to the US Controller, ‘If the American helicopter does not leave the area over the Soviet objectives [sic] in Karlhorst, he will be shot down.’ The Chief American Controller’s reply, ‘Was that statement a protest or a threat?’ to which the Soviet response was ‘I will tell you later’.36

  The following day more information became available from USCOB who reported that the flight over Berlin-Karlshorst had been undertaken ‘at an altitude of 100ft in order to obtain the required photographs’. The British representative at ‘Live Oak’ expressed his personal opinion to US General Wheeler ‘that the manner in which the flight was conducted was highly provocative and unnecessarily rude’.37 A few weeks later USCINCEUR issued new instructions covering Berlin that set 1,000ft as the minimum altitude for helicopter flights, with altitudes down to 500ft permitted when overflying East Berlin in poor visibility or to keep them clear of airfield traffic patterns in the BCZ.38

  The Stars and Stripes of August 1968 reflected on life in the Aviation Detachment and stated that although flights had been conducted on a ‘regular basis since the late 1940s, they gained greater significance when The Wall was erected in 1961’.

  In 1968 the detachment was flying six UH-1Bs, one Cessna O-1 Bird Dog and one Beech U-8D Seminole ‘command plane’ from the USAF’s Tempelhof AB. The unit comprised eight officers and fourteen enlisted men who flew around 1,200 flying hours a year. Unless weather conditions prevented it, the detachment flew at least once per day, and once or twice a week it flew a longer flight covering the city’s western sector borders in detail. A patrol crew consisted of a pilot, co-pilot and crew chief. For reconnaissance flights an observer from Brigade G2 (Intelligence) would be picked up at Andrews Barracks. Sometimes specific objectives would be briefed ‘but generally we just keep our eyes open, trying to observe any changes to the border fortifications’.

  Besides the patrols, the detachment would undertake troop lifts to support exercises and give border orientation flights to visitors, including French and British officials who, at the time, didn’t have Berlin-based helicopters. Another important task was to resupply the US Army Military Police who guarded the Steinstücken enclave. The helicopters had to land on a tiny plot completely surrounded by East German territory and this led to occasional exchanges of ‘repartee’ with the Vopos (East German Police). CWO Eugene Kollar recalls that ‘the Commies are so close they practically breathe down our necks’. ‘One day he called “Good morning” to them and a Vopo replied in perfect English: “It isn’t a very good morning in Vietnam.”’39

  A newly arrived pilot’s priority was to become mission qualified on the UH-1, which usually took six to nine months. As well as being expected to operate effectively in the busy and heavily restricted Berlin airspace using ‘Freedom City’ call signs, pilots had to learn a detailed brief on Berlin and its history for the benefit of VIP passengers during ‘historical overflights’ of the city.

  Later the unit’s three fixed-wing aircraft were a Beech C-12 for inter-European transport and two remarkable, Swiss-built, Pilatus UV-20 Turbo-Porters, known as ‘Chiricahua’ in US military service. They arrived in 1980 and were subject to special modification including replacement of the two windows on the right side sliding door by a single, large, optically flat rectangular window to facilitate photography, although the aircraft probably frequently flew with the door open. In addition the right side exhaust nozzle of the Pratt & Whitney PT6A turboprop was extended downwards to deflect the hot exhaust gases, that could otherwise have blurred pictures taken through, it clear of the windows.

  New crews followed the unit’s own qualification course and because there was no Chiricahua simulator, pilots had to go to the Pilatus factory in Switzerland for currency training, where much of the deeper servicing work was also carried out. The UV-20 was popular with the ground crews because of its simplicity and robustness. The type was very adept at Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) manoeuvres, needing less than 1,000ft to take off; its ‘party piece’ was to land at very low speeds on the taxiway between Temp
elhof ’s two main runways if strong crosswinds affected them.40

  USCOB ran the Lark Spur collection programme, providing both the aircraft and staff. However, in 1974 Colonel Peter Thorsen, recently assigned as Chief, USMLM, managed to convince his commanders that USMLM officers should participate as observers in Lark Spur. Researcher Hugo Mambour gained a detailed insight on some of the Lark Spur operations interviewing former USMLM participants Nicholas Troyan and Thomas Spencer.

  Troyan was involved from the very start of USMLM member involvement with Lark Spur, one of the initial pair of officers assigned to those duties. He said he was ‘thrilled at having the opportunity to be an observer for Lark Spur’. He explained the extent of tri-national co-operation in BCZ flights:

  In 1975–76 there was little coordination with aerial missions flown by the British and the French – this was probably a consequence of Lark Spur programme being managed by USCOB instead of the USMLM. If one of their aircraft was seen over an area or a target, it was not appropriate to invade their airspace for security reasons, nor was it wise to unnecessarily disturb the Soviets or East Germans. However, everyone consulted each other when a target had a particular interest, the co-operation among the military liaison missions continuing into the air.

  Lark Spur coverage of the BCZ was scheduled for every third day, weather permitting. Troyan explained that he flew with Sergeant First Class (SFC) St John, from the Berlin Brigade who was regarded as a ‘true expert’ having flown missions for a long time. Captain Troyan described flights in the Beaver:

  I do recall that the briefing that I received from SFC St John on the programme was that the aircraft could fly a 40-mile (64km) circle around Berlin, and had to maintain a 1,000-foot above ground level (AGL) ceiling. Sitting in the co-pilot seat of the aircraft, I noticed that it was very difficult to observe, let alone achieve a clear photo, through the front triangular window of the aircraft. SFC St John sat in the rear, and had a larger window; however, it also limited his ability to take very clear shots. In my ‘youthful exuberance,’ I asked the pilot to remove the right door from the aircraft. After finding out that the ‘Sovs’ did not have, or did not use, height-finding radar against our programme, I had the pilot fly lower than the 1,000ft AGL required. This, plus the opening with the door removed, allowed both the person in the co-pilot seat and rear-seat occupant to get much clearer shots of activities on the ground. On one of our flights, as we approached the Dallgow-Döberitz barracks area, we saw what appeared to be the entire tank regiment that had apparently just returned from manoeuvres lined up in front of the vehicle wash ramps. SFC St John and I also noticed what appeared to be a new version of a BMP armoured personnel carrier. At that moment, I asked the pilot to let me take the ‘control yoke.’