Northern Soul Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 Does the gun above the stripes have any particular significance? (close-up of a photo of a Sergeant in the R.F.A.) Cheers. Andy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggers Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 It indicates that he was a sergeant in the Royal Artillery! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Soul Posted 15 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 15 January , 2009 It indicates that he was a sergeant in the Royal Artillery! Thank you for being so patient with my request. His shoulder badges also indicate that he was in the R.F.A. Why would you need an extra badge to emphasise it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 Doesn't it make him a Quartermaster Sgt? Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggers Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 Pride in the regiment's symbols of its 'colours'? The sergeants of the Royal Engineers wore/wear a grenade badge above the chevrons. I cannot say why, or when the practice began, but others may be more learned. Daggers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KONDOA Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 Doesn't it make him a Quartermaster Sgt? No, he would have a crown if that were the case. Roop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 If he were a BQMS he would have a crown above the gun above the chevrons. Apart from RHA, RFA, RGA gun above chevrons and RE grenade above chevrons, Serjeants of some of the cavalry regiments wore a badge above the chevrons also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjjobson Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 Gun above stripes = Full Sergeant (Detachment Commander) No Gun = Lance Sergeant. Regards Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KONDOA Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 (Detachment Commander) Do you mean section sergeant? Sounds a bit modern otherwise. Roop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 I think the reference to "detachment" is Gun Detachment - those manning a gun. Gun section was two guns with ammunition limbers, GS wagon, drivers etc', two gun detachments and the whole commanded by a Lieutenant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockdoc Posted 15 January , 2009 Share Posted 15 January , 2009 I have a photo that shows the men and two guns of 25 Battery RFA with a chalked notice in the centre that says "F Sub-Section" but how widespread that was I haven't a clue. Mind you, Squirrel, you've just made a penny drop. I had wondered why the anti-aircraft units were called Sections rather than Batteries but they only had two guns so what else would the Army call them? Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 Apology - I should have said Gun Sub Section as it is correct - checked the source last night. Letter from King's Troop RHA sent to me in response to a query about 25 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT-Guards Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 Hello there, Put me right please- I thought crown above stripes would be Colour or Staff Sergeant (Staff for the Artillery) Quartermaster Sgt insignia would therefore be different - (crown gun & stripes). Apologies in advance! Confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggers Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 See recent thread headed B.Q.M.S etc, last entry 13 Jan!!!! D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT-Guards Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 D, Cheers for that. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Foster Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 I don't know if this helps or hinders things caption reads R.G.A Sergeant copying down instructions for sos lines . Monchy le Preux 18th march 1918 Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggers Posted 16 January , 2009 Share Posted 16 January , 2009 Yes, indeed, Sergeant, Royal Artillery, with interesting technical detail on the board. D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjjobson Posted 17 January , 2009 Share Posted 17 January , 2009 Apologies for not being clear in my earlier post. Yes, Detchament Commander is the NCO in charge of a Gun Detachment, as Squirrel quite rightly says. Each individual gun is indeed a Sub-Section, with two guns being referred to as a Section. F Sub-Section referred to above would have been referred to in gunner terms as F-Sub. Incidentally, terrific photo of the RGA Sergeant. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockdoc Posted 17 January , 2009 Share Posted 17 January , 2009 Here's the photograph I mentioned, taken at Lahore in 1913. There are 27 men shown, which seems an awful lot (to ignorant me!) for even two guns, let alone one. What would the complement be for two guns and what would the jobs be within that? (Edit)If it helps, I've gone over the original with a magnifying glass and think I can see the following: Sergeant-Major - seated centre front (has extra badge above the gun just under the shoulder seam) Sergeant to his left (as they are sitting) Corporal to his right Six Bombardiers (three each side, seated) Bombardier Farrier (leaning on gun. legs crossed - pliers above his stripe) Seventeen Gunners Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjjobson Posted 17 January , 2009 Share Posted 17 January , 2009 Grovelling apology for my earlier post!!! I was incorrect with the rank of Lance Sergeant at this time. Up until 1920 the ranks would have been, Gunner, Bombardier (one Stripe), Corporal (two Stripes) and Sergeant (Three Stripes with gun above). On 1st May 1920, the rank of Corporal was abolished in the Royal Artillery. All existing Corporals became Lance Sergeants and wore three stripes without the gun. From 1st May 1920 until 1946 (when Lance Sergeants themselves were abolished) the ranks were: Gunner, Lance Bombardier (one Stripe), Bombardier (Two Stripes), Lance Sergeant (Three Stripes) and Sergeant (Three Stripes with gun above). Incidentally, I would be inclined to think that the soldier referred to in Rockdoc's last post isn't a Sergeant-Major, but rather a Staff Sergeant (Three Stripes, Gun and Crown above). Off the top of my head, I can't recall the full establishment for a Sub-Section, but it is possible (and this is only my opinion, and therefore most likely incorrect) that the photograph includes drivers, gunners, NCO's and of course those gunners and NCO's from the sections ammunition wagons. However, I stand to be corrected on that last point. Hope that makes things a little clearer. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockdoc Posted 17 January , 2009 Share Posted 17 January , 2009 Incidentally, I would be inclined to think that the soldier referred to in Rockdoc's last post isn't a Sergeant-Major, but rather a Staff Sergeant (Three Stripes, Gun and Crown above). Just me showing my not-inconsiderable levels of ignorance, I'm afraid. <slaps wrist!> You can't see the badge itself, just a roundish bulge on the sleeve. Off the top of my head, I can't recall the full establishment for a Sub-Section, but it is possible (and this is only my opinion, and therefore most likely incorrect) that the photograph includes drivers, gunners, NCO's and of course those gunners and NCO's from the sections ammunition wagons. However, I stand to be corrected on that last point. Hope that makes things a little clearer. Yes, Phil, it does. When I saw the farrier I wondered whether all the supporting troops were present, as it semed far too many to be the men working the guns themselves. As the three batteries od XLVI Brigade were back from India in January 1914 I wonder whether this was one of their last chances to have a photograph taken before they started the move to the port. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 27 June , 2011 Share Posted 27 June , 2011 QUOTE (Op-Ack @ Jan 17 2009, 07:58 PM) Incidentally, I would be inclined to think that the soldier referred to in Rockdoc's last post isn't a Sergeant-Major, but rather a Staff Sergeant (Three Stripes, Gun and Crown above). Just me showing my not-inconsiderable levels of ignorance, I'm afraid. <slaps wrist!> You can't see the badge itself, just a roundish bulge on the sleeve. QUOTE Off the top of my head, I can't recall the full establishment for a Sub-Section, but it is possible (and this is only my opinion, and therefore most likely incorrect) that the photograph includes drivers, gunners, NCO's and of course those gunners and NCO's from the sections ammunition wagons. However, I stand to be corrected on that last point. Hope that makes things a little clearer. Yes, Phil, it does. When I saw the farrier I wondered whether all the supporting troops were present, as it semed far too many to be the men working the guns themselves. As the three batteries od XLVI Brigade were back from India in January 1914 I wonder whether this was one of their last chances to have a photograph taken before they started the move to the port. Keith Keith, I am led to believe that until 1915 BSMs and BQMS both wore 3 stripes, gun and crown above, although I am unclear how they were differentiated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockdoc Posted 28 June , 2011 Share Posted 28 June , 2011 Thanks for this. I haven't yet looked into the organisation of a RFA Battery and which ranks and how many of each were associated with a Subsection. Every little helps! Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianjonesncl Posted 28 June , 2011 Share Posted 28 June , 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianjonesncl Posted 28 June , 2011 Share Posted 28 June , 2011 Here's the photograph I mentioned, taken at Lahore in 1913. There are 27 men shown, which seems an awful lot (to ignorant me!) for even two guns, let alone one. What would the complement be for two guns and what would the jobs be within that? (Keith Keith Can you see what is written on the board ? Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now