Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Postcards


trenchtrotter

Recommended Posts

It is indeed the 7th BW taken in 1918 in France. Excellent photo, please can I use it my book on the TF badges 1914-1918 which is nearly complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, poona guard said:

It is indeed the 7th BW taken in 1918 in France. Excellent photo, please can I use it my book on the TF badges 1914-1918 which is nearly complete.

Yes I think that they’re in France too, probably near Boulogne not long after arrival and becoming part of 153rd Brigade of 51st (Highland) Infantry Division, given that they look rather spick & span and unblooded.  I say this because the Officers’ Mess building that they are seated in front of appears to be an ‘Adrian Hut’.  The Adrian was a large design of hut used in France during the First World War and patented in the United States in April 1918 (image from IWM Q5395).  As well as the central window just below the apex of the roof is the distinctive flare to the huts sidewall providing a wider base for storage and extra structural integrity.

IMG_5846.jpeg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ronmarsden said:

7th (Fife) Bn Black Watch (Royal Highlanders) (TF)

Too neat and tidy to be taken in France.

Thanks.

The "Carte Postale" back suggests they were neat and tidy in France. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, poona guard said:

It is indeed the 7th BW taken in 1918 in France. Excellent photo, please can I use it my book on the TF badges 1914-1918 which is nearly complete.

Thanks.

Please feel free to use a copy for your book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello again

An excellant photo, showing some fine details and the battalion badge of the 1/7th BW, 2 blue horizonal bars, although one officer, left seated wearing breeches seems to wear a different patch, 3 bars of a different shade.

Also the officer seated in front, centre, could he be a chaplin, going by the dark shoulder straps and "english" pattern tunic ?

William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CO has four years of stripes so photo is 1918. In the back row is an American officer. Three bars would be 1st/6th A&SH (he is wearing BW collars). The dark shoulder boards are for a Chaplain - he is wearing a Chaplain's collar badges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
22 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

An older, anxious looking man, doing his bit.  I wonder if his brother in the infantry survived.  I have an ominous feeling. 

No sign of either of the two brothers on 'CWGC' FROGSMILE,

Ancestry confirms this.

I believe from my basic searches they both made it through.

Wishing you a relaxed evening.

Regards,

Bob. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello poona guard

Thanks for the info, I hadn't even noticed the US officer standing in the back or the chaplins collars!

William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Bob Davies said:

No sign of either of the two brothers on 'CWGC' FROGSMILE,

Ancestry confirms this.

I believe from my basic searches they both made it through.

Wishing you a relaxed evening.

Regards,

Bob. 

Thanks Bob, that is very uplifting to learn and I appreciate your looking into it 👍

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, poona guard said:

The CO has four years of stripes so photo is 1918. I

Well spotted Dave.  They were most certainly “blooded” then!

The American would almost certainly be the battalion’s RMO.  There was a shortage of medically qualified officers and an agreement was reached with the American government to meet shortfalls with their medical officers. 

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Came across this while hunting for a picture of an officer to post in another thread

DefendingourCoastLinePage239TheTatlerAugust26th1914..png.0b5845205d503c99d0778b26d4367e52.png

Caption reads "Ready for any Emergency - Defending our Coast Line
The picture shows English artillerymen manning the heavy guns in one of our coast batteries."

Courtesy Page 239 The Tatler August 26th 1914.
https://archive.org/details/the-tatler-1901-1929/1910-1919/1914/The Tatler %230687v053 (1914-08-26) (BNA)/page/n5/mode/2up?q="Edward+Satterthwaite"&view=theater

Doesn't look like heavy guns to me and I'm wondering if it's a training range rather a coastal battery.

Cheers,
Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PRC said:

Came across this while hunting for a picture of an officer to post in another thread

DefendingourCoastLinePage239TheTatlerAugust26th1914..png.0b5845205d503c99d0778b26d4367e52.png

Caption reads "Ready for any Emergency - Defending our Coast Line
The picture shows English artillerymen manning the heavy guns in one of our coast batteries."

Courtesy Page 239 The Tatler August 26th 1914.
https://archive.org/details/the-tatler-1901-1929/1910-1919/1914/The Tatler %230687v053 (1914-08-26) (BNA)/page/n5/mode/2up?q="Edward+Satterthwaite"&view=theater

Doesn't look like heavy guns to me and I'm wondering if it's a training range rather a coastal battery.

Cheers,
Peter

They look like 4.7” coastal guns to me Peter.  That was the British Empire’s workaday, go-to calibre gun for most coastal defence purposes since Queen Victoria’s reign.  It was a sort of Ford Cortina of guns and they were deployed everywhere.  The next size up was 6”, which was also fairly common but lesser so than the 4.7.  The gun was developed over many years and there were a number of marks.

IMG_5873.jpeg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flimsy wall does suggest range rather than defence though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stereoview Paul said:

The flimsy wall does suggest range rather than defence though

You would think so wouldn’t you, but looking around coastal artillery positions where I live in the South West, bigger guns were in bunkers and the smaller calibre guns seem to have relied on steel shields as shown in the photo.  They were far from ideal though and often left legs exposed.  These guns do look rather close together though, I agree.

There were quite a range of smaller calibre guns of both 3” and 4” below the 4.7”.**

There’s good information at these two websites:

1. https://ordnancesociety.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/wwi-british-artillery.pdf

2. https://pinkroutes.org/research/artillery/

** apparently only limited numbers of 4.7”guns were taken off RN ships once they became an obsolete armament and redeployed as coastal artillery before WW1, so it doesn’t seem to chime that so many would be placed in a row as in the photo.  Looking at images of 3” and 4” guns though, none of them seem to have the type of gun shield shown.  Perhaps @ianjonesncl might recognise them.  The gunners are RGA wearing the typical white canvas fatigue suits that were favoured by that corps when drilling on oily guns.

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admittedly poor scan from some rather tattered old postcard; group picture of lads from east Devon (Ottery St Mary), Royal 1st Devon Yeomanry

 

20240816_205040.jpg

Edited by Petroc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting pair of Canadians

Forforumsmall.jpg.8b0351244d0f45a20b1a6722205a70bc.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stereoview Paul said:

An interesting pair of Canadians

Forforumsmall.jpg.8b0351244d0f45a20b1a6722205a70bc.jpg

Yes the officer cadet VC on the right looks like he’s also got the MM.  He’s dressed for arms drill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/08/2024 at 09:04, FROGSMILE said:

You would think so wouldn’t you, but looking around coastal artillery positions where I live in the South West, bigger guns were in bunkers and the smaller calibre guns seem to have relied on steel shields as shown in the photo.  They were far from ideal though and often left legs exposed.  These guns do look rather close together though, I agree.

There were quite a range of smaller calibre guns of both 3” and 4” below the 4.7”.**

There’s good information at these two websites:

1. https://ordnancesociety.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/wwi-british-artillery.pdf

2. https://pinkroutes.org/research/artillery/

** apparently only limited numbers of 4.7”guns were taken off RN ships once they became an obsolete armament and redeployed as coastal artillery before WW1, so it doesn’t seem to chime that so many would be placed in a row as in the photo.  Looking at images of 3” and 4” guns though, none of them seem to have the type of gun shield shown.  Perhaps @ianjonesncl might recognise them.  The gunners are RGA wearing the typical white canvas fatigue suits that were favoured by that corps when drilling on oily guns.

No 4.7" guns survive in batteries at Bermuda, though they had been mounted at West Whale Bay battery (https://www.google.com/maps/place/32°15'23.6"N+64°52'23.2"W/@32.2565461,-64.8737671,149m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d32.256545!4d-64.873122?entry=ttu), at Bermuda's West End, guarding against torpedo boats sneaking along a minor channel that let to the Royal Naval Dockyard and its Grassy Bay anchorage, and at the dockyard itself, mixed with 6" guns that were more common at other batteries at the East End (St. David's Battery, Fort Cunningham, Alexandra Battery) where the main shipping channel is located (9.2" guns are also located there). There are only the masonry elements of the 4.7" gun positions that remain, and I have never seen a photograph of them with guns mounted. I can say that the 6" guns mounted before the First World War originally had no armour shields, but these were retrofitted to them at the start of the Second World War.)

 

Edited by aodhdubh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, aodhdubh said:

No 4.7" guns survive in batteries at Bermuda, though they had been mounted at West Whale Bay battery (https://www.google.com/maps/place/32°15'23.6"N+64°52'23.2"W/@32.2565461,-64.8737671,149m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d32.256545!4d-64.873122?entry=ttu), at Bermuda's West End, guarding against torpedo boats sneaking along a minor channel that let to the Royal Naval Dockyard and its Grassy Bay anchorage, and at the dockyard itself, mixed with 6" guns that were more common at other batteries at the East End (St. David's Battery, Fort Cunningham, Alexandra Battery) where the main shipping channel is located (9.2" guns are also located there). There are only the masonry elements of the 4.7" gun positions that remain, and I have never seen a photograph of them with guns mounted. I can say that the 6" guns mounted before the First World War originally had no armour shields, but these were retrofitted to them at the start of the Second World War.)

 

Thank you for contributing that interesting perspective.  I think that Ian (@ianjonesncl) must be away, as he has not responded.

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FROGSMILE said:

Thank you for contributing that interesting perspective.  I think that Ian (@ianjonesncl) must be away, as he has not responded.

Thanks very much. I should have added...repeating what others have said about the elevated, clearly non-defensive structure, and the closely grouped gun positions, that are not arrayed to effectively provide a defensive arc of fire...that this is clearly a training battery. Garrison artillery gunners were generally trained on the guns they normally manned in defence works, obviously, so such a battery could only have been in a centralised school of gunnery, ergo I can only presume this photograph is at the Coast Artillery Gunnery School in Shoeburyness?....also, I think these are too small to be 4.7" (I have photographs of 4.7" on mobile mounts at Bermuda and they are definitely larger). More likely a smaller QF gun....12 Pounder, I suspect.....Adding further...initial web search for QF 12-pounder 12 cwt guns kept bringing up photographs minus shields, but with a little digging a few contemporary and present day ones are easy enough to find. The first is on Wikipedia, with a caption from the IWM that it is a 4" gun at Chatham (on a very similar structure) in November, 1939, though a comment has already been added that it is not a 4"....Other photographs are at Singapore and Australia.

https://pinkroutes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/12-pdrs-mounting.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Siloso12pounder.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fort_Siloso_-_Sentosa_Island,_Singapore_(4374802169).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fort_Siloso_QF_12_pounder_12_cwt_gun_Flickr_4375555166_eec49b5f78_o.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fort_Siloso_QF_12_pounder_12_cwt_gun_breech_view_Flickr_4375552548_5e6133b25f_o.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:QF12pdr12cwtSouthMoleFremantle1943.jpg

1939-11 RA 3-in coastal defence gun practice at Chatham .jpg

Edited by aodhdubh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, aodhdubh said:

ergo I can only presume this photograph is at the Coast Artillery Gunnery School in Shoeburyness

Yes I think that seems very probable.

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, poona guard said:

Anyone recognise the badge below the Rangers title and square?

1mg9.jpg

Carriage drivers prize badge.  Competed for by infantry transport sections amongst others.  Originally an artillery focus I think.

IMG_1591.jpeg

IMG_5277.jpeg

Edited by FROGSMILE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...