Talk:Station HYPO

record speed for a rename requirement
The name of the operation was a code name and in the US military these are usually written with the cAPS LOCK on. For no particualr reason I have ever known. Fingers led to automatic camel case, unfortunately. Title of the article should be Station HYPO. ww 15:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

cAPS LOCK on
Just a few lines from an old cryptologist to explain the use of CAPS in military communications. Modern computers use 8-bit technology which allows for UPPER and lower case characters. Prior to the modern computer era, all there was were the Teletype Corporation (and Kleinschmidt and a few others) which used 7-bit ASCII. In 7-bit ASCII you have only CAPS and the three rows of letters commonly seen on a computer keyboard. All punctuation and numbers were the upper case of the three rows, (1st) QWERTYUIOP in "uppers" would be 1234567890, (2nd) ASDFGHJKL;, and (3rd row) ZXCVBNM,. There was a character which would be similar to CAPS LOCK today to shift up, and another which would UNLOCK the "uppers". The funny thing about this is that even today, 8-bit has to be converted to 7-bit for its journey across "the Internet" only to be converted back to 8-bit at your computer. For an example of how CAPS were used in teletype days, in the 1970s, I served some duty at NAVSECGRUDET PEARL (Naval Security Group Detachment, Pearl Harbor). W4crypto (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2009 (UTC)W4crypto

This link needs fixing
Under the paragraph for "PURPLE diplomatic traffic", there is a link for something called MAGIC, in reference to the cryptography. However the MAGIC is currently linked to a radiio telescope which I'm sure isnt where its supposed to go. Not sure if there is currently a wiki page for the correction MAGIC, but someone should take a quick loot at it and fix it. Coradon 22:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

A convenient truth
I did some minor rewriting, including the drydock ref, as well as changing, "and so HYPO became less important in any case." HYPO wasn't "less important", more a smaller proportion of the total effort, as Holmes explains. Trekphiler 04:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fleet Radio Unit Melbourne
It is strange to see the statement that Hypo "after agreement with the British and Dutch to share the effort, worked with Hong Kong and Batavia", since both cities and bases fell to the Japanese in early 1942 (as did the USN station at Corregidor). Especially since there is no recognition here of the US-Australian Fleet Radio Unit Melbourne (FRUMEL). See for example
 * By the middle of March 1942, two viable naval radio intelligence centers existed in the Pacific: one in Melbourne, Australia, and one, HYPO, in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. In response to the deteriorating situation on Corregidor, a possible threat against Hawaii, and the demand for information from everyone in official Washington, another center (NEGAT) was formed in Washington in February 1942 by the Communications Directorate using elements of OP-20-G. The center on Corregidor (CAST) was no longer affiliated with a fleet command, and its collection and processing capabilities were rapidly disintegrating as a result of evacuations of personnel to Australia and destruction of its facilities by bombing and gunfire. Prior to March, however, its contributions to the rapid advances being made in naval cryptanalysis by the United States Navy were substantial. (Parker, Frederick D. A Priceless Advantage: U.S. Navy Communications Intelligence and the Battles of Coral Sea, Midway, and the Aleutians. Fort Meade MD: Center for Cryptologic History, National Security Agency, 1993.)

I will do my best to fix this now. Grant |  Talk  05:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There's now been some back and forth on this and so this note here. CAST was evacuated to Australia by submarine not long before the Rock fell. In Australia, its personnel contributed (IIRC) to both the Central Bureau under MacArthur (US Army, nominally, but it being MacArthur, Arlington Hall in Washington had only nominal control of it) and FRUMEL. Together with the refugees from Hong Kong (now in Ceylon, see Smith's book Emperor's Codes is the title, I think) and the US agencies, OP-20-G and Arlington Hall, and HYPO or what was left of it after Rochefort lost the infighting, all worked on Japanese traffic. So there were not two major centers as this refernce claims, but rather more. Rupert Neve, an Australian cryptographer, went back and forth between Australia and Hong Kong, and IIRC, ended up at FRUMEL. He may even have gotten to ceylon, but my memory fails on that ground. All this is why I revised the earlier edits. ww 05:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC) I
 * Sorry, but I have provided a reference from a highly credible source which says that Hypo and FRUMEL were the "big two" Allied sigint stations in the Pacific. I'm reverting until you specify in the text which other stations were as significant as those, with a reference. Regards, Grant  |  Talk  06:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And regrets as well as regards. Note that Parker even specifies "Naval" here. Th Central Bureau under MacArthur was nominally US Army, though as I note above, it being under MacArthur raised certain issues of who was really in charge. Arlington Hall sent out a senior crypto guy (Col Clarke) to investigate, improve security and cooperation/sharing, and Macarthur wounldn't even let him enter the MacArthur area of control!? The take from the discovery of the buried crypto material trunk discovered at Sio, New Guinea, went to Centaal Bureau, for instance. The references I would suggest to you in this connection are three, none of which do I have at hand and so cannot give chapter and verse. S Budiansky, Battle of Wits, J Prados, Combined Fleet Decoded, and M Snith, The Emperor's Codes, (the first two are more rewarding, and I think more to be relied upon). The books Harry Hinsley wrote/edited are the official British story and likely include something relevant, though I can't remember from my hurried reading some time ago.
 * I'd also note that the field is, more than most, littered with special pleading, partial information, speculation claimed to be fact, deliberate disinformation of one sort or another, combined with legends / conpiracy theories / and the lot. One must beware over reliance on a source (even Parker in this case) lest one discover one has one's foot mired in the muck. Winterbotham's The Ultra Secret is treacherous in this way. Peter Calvocoressi's book covers much the same materail (he was also at Bletchley Park, though in analysis, not distribution) but is a much more reliable book. Much of Ladislas Farrago's (spelling is from memory) books are quite shaky. Even Gordon Welchman got some things bad wrong in his book, and he worked directly with Alan Turing at BP. The most honored writer, in the field, David Kahn (in the Codebreakers), has a good bit of misemphasis, and missing info (writien before quite a bit of the declassification after he published) plagues him.
 * In this case, special pleading for FRUMEL's importance over that of the Brits in Hong Kong/Ceylon, the Dutch (at least before they were run out of town), and US Army efforts is not well.
 * I trust all this might satisfy at least some of your concerns? I do suggest we agree what to write before going back to editing over each other in these two articles. ww 09:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "Special pleading"? I have added a referenced statement to the intro. It is up to you to provide a reference which specifically says that stations other than FRUPAC (a.k.a. Hypo) and FRUMEL were just as significant. Grant  |  Talk  10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Contradiction: Military value of PURPLE
To attempt clarification: MAGIC referred to cryptologic efforts against Japanese ciphers and codes. PURPLE referred specifically to an electro-mechanical cipher machine used by the Japanese foreign ministry and diplomatic missions. I have seen documents at the National Cryptologic Museum, outside Fort Meade, Maryland, which were original intercepts. They have a classification on them stamped TOP SECRET and stamped MAGIC. I have seen documents marked TOP SECRET ULTRA. ULTRA was a codeword assigned to information which had been obtained from German or Italian intercepts. I have seen one document (an intercept and the partial cryptologic solution) which had been encrypted in JN-25 the Japanese admiral's cipher, and it was marked TOP SECRET ULTRA.

It was obvious to allied senior persons both military and civilian, that the decrypted intercepts had to be given very special handling when delivered to senior commanders. An RAF officer, a lieutenant (later Group Captain) F. W. Winterbotham created a system which lasts even to this day -- the Special Security Officer (SSO System) which guarded the distribution of end product from ULTRA and MAGIC so that it was delivered to seniors by an SSO who was cleared and indoctrinated for the handling of such material. See his book "The Ultra Secret", which was published in 1974 for and explanation of the SSO system. All that the "codeword" (ULTRA, MAGIC, etc.) did was to designate the channels to be used to limit distribution.

Back to PURPLE, if I may: There had been a RED machine previous to 1941. At the National Cryptologic Museum, there is in their collection the only known surviving single piece of a Japanese PURPLE machine (The Museum has in its collection three-, four-, and five- rotor versions of the "Enigma" electro-mechanical cipher machine used by Germany, and its allies.). The U.S. constructed a PURPLE machine solely by theory and logic -- "from scratch", so to speak. The Enigma was given to GCHQ (Government Communications Head Quarters) at Bletchley Park by several Polish Army officers just prior to September 1939. The Allies had the machine but had to "solve for" the daily changing rotor settings.

I've not tried to edit the two questions. I am just giving you background for navigation through the maze. I was in the Naval Security Group (outgrowth of HYPO, CAST, etc.) for 29 years, and also worked extensively in SSO work. I retired as a Chief Cryptologic Technician, WO4. If you have any new issues/questions posted here, please give me a wake up call at w4crypto@mindspring.com W4crypto (talk) 22:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)W4crypto


 * Okay, this was posted here TWELVE YEARS AGO and the tag is *still* in the article. If we can't confirm or deny this, then that section needs to go. Also, to @W4crypto, original research isn't allowed here, so if the only reason you placed that tag was because of personal knowledge and not because it contradicts another article or source, then it needs to be removed. I'll try and remember to come check on this in a bit. If it's still not resolved, I'm going snip the whole paragraph/section.  M r A urelius R   Talk! 22:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Bumping this comment as this flag is still on the page 2 years later, total of 12 years.
 * Any conclusion? Armeym (talk) 05:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

All CAPS keyboard illustrated
Here is an example of a "communication keyboard", found on both teleprinter (Teletype, Smith Corona, Klenschmidt, etc.) and on "communication typrewriters" (aka a "mill", by Radiomen, and intercept operators). It was located right here on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Baudotkeyboard.png The author of the link offers the description of the picture as "Keyboard of Teletype Model 15, Communications character set, 1944" W4crypto (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)W4crypto

Why small caps?
Why is it that HYPO is put in small caps (" HYPO ") throughout this article, and in several linked articles, like Battle of Midway? I think it should just be "HYPO" in regular capital letters unless there is some great reason that, unlike any other acronym on Wikipedia, we need to be using the small caps. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

"Later on"
"Later on, a new building was constructed for the station, though it had been reorganized and renamed by then."

This sentence is too weak and ambiguous to be in the Lede. "Later on" could mean anything. A month later, a year later, 20 years later, etc... creates an obstacle and interferes with the Reader's interest, and gives nothing in exchange for that negative. Plus if you think about it, it's annoying. "later on" it was "reorganized" and "renamed" well so what. Was it also painted a different color? Were the AC units changed to "something different" "later on". What about the bathrooms? Were they different in some way? I could go on, if anyone fails to get the point here.68.206.248.178 (talk) 01:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)