Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Why might a new recruit join the ASC in october 1916?


hamishmck

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

I was wondering why my GU was sent to the ASC MT when he enlisted in oct 1918 aged 18.

I dont think he could drive (he was a clerk in a mill) and i dont think he was mechanically minded but he was grammar school educated..

Did he have a choice or was it the luck of the draw where you went?

Was the ASC MT seen as a sexy role or was it seen as relatively safer option than some others?

Incidentally, he had lost 3 cousins at gallipoli in 1915 and his brother had been sent back from france twice already with trench fever.

This might have had a bearing on his thinking.

cheers and thanks for all the help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may have asked him if he had a preference but in general the choice was the military's and he would be sent where they wanted him to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Hamishmick

A grammar-school lad working as a clerk might have been a good choice for some storekeeping role, given the variety of technical stores which MT units would have needed for repairs to vehicles.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morning and thanks chaps for the respnses.

I think then that perhaps it suited both parties.

They got a potentially competent person for the ASC and he got a marginally safer posting?

Am i being too cynical?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I think you are. Your great uncle was a conscripted soldier. It is improbable that he had any choice of the arm of the services or regiment into which he was placed (he could have elected to go into the navy, but that was about it). Many young men who had no driving experience were sent to the ASC MT to train as such, and many more went to the ASC as packers, loaders, clerks, etc. His civil employment may have had some bearing on his selection, but only may. What was his number, including the letter prefix?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ASC drivers did not necessarily have a less dangerous time than other soldiers. Vehicles often operated within German artillery range.

Old Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks Chris and Old Tom,

I do appreciate your opinions and honesty.

I am trying to get to the truth and understanding of his service and so feel i can only do so by being

pertinent and asking awkward questions.

Genuinely much valued answers guys, thanks.

Chirs, his service number. taken from his short service form b2512 dated 21.6.1916

I have 265076 with a line through it, above that is 47844 with a line through it and then 107903 written above

The prefix and it is difficult to make out but looks like 172 or M2

many thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamishmck,

You haven't given him a name.

The prefix if he was ASCMT is most likely M2.

How much of his service record do you have? Do you know what regiment etc the other numbers come from? One looks like a Territorial number (265076).

Do you know what medical grade he was?

The ASC was, I believe, compulsorily relieved of a lot of A1 fit men, who were replaced with lower medically graded men. Subsequently new batches of recruits were also disproportionately drawn from the lower grades. Certainly a lot of the men who passed through Grove Park MT Depot as clerks etc were such.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry Steptoe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morning Phil,

His name is Gilbert Fielding Sames (sometimes turns up as James)

After the asc, he went to 3rd btn tr northants, then machine gun corps, then tank corps.

I have all of his service records.

His condition is described as 'fair' at his medical at grove park 25.10.1916 when he was mobilized after attesting on 21.6.1916.

His occupation before attesting was a clerk but when he transferred to the northants he is listed as a mechanic. He compulsory transferred in may 1917.

From what i have read, the norm seems to have been 12 weeks at grove park not GFS' 6 months although he did have a spell of flu and went to Fort Pitt Drill Hall military hospital but only for a week.?

hope this helps to solve the mystery.cheers again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In which case, reverse my earlier post. He was probably compulsorily transferred because he was fit for front line service. I see he was also commissioned into the Tank Corps, coming up via the MGC. Not an unusual route and the mechanics training would have been ideal. Commanding a tank was a physically demanding job.

You may find this link useful, particularly the Narratives section.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Phil, thanks for this.

I know this site and if you look up GFS tank 9172 number he is listed as 2nd lt James as i warned you he sometimes is.

All very interesting though.

Can you explain his 6 months at grove park when the norm seems to be just 12 weeks?

Can i state then that he went to ASC by chance. not because he pushed for it, not because he was a clerk, just because thats where the army sent him?

and he was compulsorily transferred to the 3rd tr btn northants because they at that time needed fit and able bodied men?

cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Chris said earlier, he was a conscript, therefore it was the army's choice.

There is no way of telling why he remained at Grove Park for 6 months. As you say, the standard course was about 12 weeks, but possibly they found a job for him. I recently researched a man who started there in November 1915. He was A1 medically, but remained there until September 1917 when he went to Mespot, as a CSM, with a newly formed MT Company.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right with everybody's help i think i can finally put this chapter of GFS army career to bed now.

it wont be long i am sure before i am back on the forum asking about the commision into the GMC when i get around to it.

Incidentally, i have a picture of his tank and interestingly the tank that rolled off the production line before his, 9171 is 'devil' which proudly sits in the IWM.

Thanks again for sheding light on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gilbert Fielding Sames was one of 49 men transferred from the Army Service Corps Motor Transport section in May 1917 (No. 47818 Joseph Locke Anderson to 47866 Charles Young). The group seem to have been transferred under Paragraph 2 of Army Council Instruction 2084 of 1916. I don't know the detail of that A.C.I. (I have copies of some either side but not that one!).

However, one webpage online here,

http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/j-m-james-myles-hogge/war-pensions-and-allowances-hci/page-25-war-pensions-and-allowances-hci.shtml

does reference the A.C.I.:

A.C.I. 2084 has reference to men whose cases are not covered by the foregoing instruction, and provides that soldiers compulsorily transferred from one corps to another owing to exigencies of service, or on grounds of medical unfitness contracted in and by Military service, will retain the rates of pay and allowances of which they are in receipt at the time of transfer, if more advantageous than those of their new corps, under the conditions of A.O.'s 210 of 1916 and 211 of 1915, as amplified by A.C.I. 704 of 1916.

Soldiers transferred at their own request and those compulsorily transferred as unfitted for the duties of their corps through inefficiency (whether culpable or not), misconduct, or on account of medical unfitness not contracted in or by their Military service, will receive the pay and allowances of the corps to which they are transferred from the date of transfer.

The service records I have found of this group suggest that the men retained their (higher) A.S.C. rate of pay, so the transfers were either due to medical reasons or for "exigencies of service". The medical reason seems unlikely since they were moving up to a section of the army where men would need to be more medically robust.

It certainly seems to rule out transfers due to being unsuitable for the A.S.C. or transfer at own request since they did not switch to Infantry rates of pay.

Steve.

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...