16 Company, F Battalion, tanks on 31 July 17.

[IRC Kevin]

Need some guidance from experts on the tanks here. I'm working through after-action reports from 164 Inf. Bde and came across mention of two tanks, but I'm not happy that the report has got the correct tank numbers.

The first is described as F19. The platoon are forward of the Black Line, but probably only a couple of hundred yards at the most and tasked with clearing Somme. I'm wondering if actually this should be F13?

"A tank (F19) came up to help us, but was immediately destroyed by an anti-tank gun."

The second is described as F16.

"We were held up by an M.G. and rifle fire from dugouts at approximately C.18.d.80.60. A tank, F16 came up and gave us very valuable assistance. This task was directed by the officer in charge who walked in front although he was under heavy M.G."

I also have big reservations about the map reference above, as this is so far from where they had been prior to this and a long way from where they should have been. Pretty sure that the clerk who typed up the statements from 2 Lt Newbold and Sgt Mayson for Brigade/Division use has misread the reference C13.d.80.60. on their handwritten reports.

[delta]

I agree that the numbers seem "out"

Have a look at Rob Martin's superb site at

https://sites.google...mpany31july1917

Stephen

[Colin W Taylor]

Kevin

Please see below for the war diary entry for F13 which soulds like the most comprehensively knocked out of the tanks in action. F10 could be the other tank. I can email the summaries for each tank if you haven't got them. I'm not an expert but have the battalion history from the war diary.

Kind regards

Colin

[IRC Kevin]

Thanks for that, Colin. I think F13 fits the bill for the 'F19' in the report. The platoon in question were tasked with mopping up Somme and the position marked for F13 on the 'Landships' website fits very well with this. I think the second engagement took place within an hour or so after the first (probably around Noon) and I now realise that the reference in the report is correct at C18 and not D13 as I originally thought, as another report confirms that the fire was coming from the direction of Pond Farm. This engagement was considerably short of the Green Line and apart from the report on F13, I could find no mention of any infantry support in this locality. I was wondering if the tank commander may have been awarded a medal for his bravery in guiding his tank, which could have helped identification.

Kevin

[IRC Kevin]

I agree that the numbers seem "out"

Have a look at Rob Martin's superb site at

https://sites.google...mpany31july1917

Stephen

Thanks, Stephen, its a great site and the first I turned to when I wanted to check these sources, hence my belief they were flawed. I've found that a lot of the Battalion's documents that were typed up from someone's penciled notes, whether at the time or in later years, contain many errors in the names of people and places, numbers and map references, so I always try to check and double check against as many other sources as I can, especially as the original mistakes have been passed on down in generations of writing.

Kevin

[delta]

According to the preliminary orders, issued by CO F Bn, ,164 Inf Bde were to be supported by 16 Coy commanded by Maj Arthur Inglis.

[IRC Kevin]

Now I'm really struggling! I can't find the 2Lt D Seymour, OIC for F10 in CWWG or 'Soldiers Died' and having searched all deaths for F Bn on 31/07/17-4/8/17 the most senior rank I can find is a L/Cpl. The only officer death for the 31st that isn't allocated to a Battalion is Lieutenant Neville Ernest Baker Royal Engineers, attached Tank Corps and I can't find him on 'Landships'.

[delta]

Try 2Lt Bertram Seymour

Although Rob has the initial as D, the original history records it as "B".

,

[IRC Kevin]

That's a great help, Stephen- found him now- down as Machine Gun Corps (Infantry) in CWWG. What do you think about the second tank being F39, as the map reference given in the report is for the extreme end of Capricorn Trench?

Edited to add:- I can now put this action somewhere between 1015 and 1100hrs.

[delta]

I didn;t think F39 was allocated to 16 Coy - but I could be wrong

[IRC Kevin]

I didn;t think F39 was allocated to 16 Coy - but I could be wrong

'Landships' has F39 in 17 Coy, however, the narrative for it says "Dispersed snipers and knocked out MG in Capricorn Trench, also cleared 20 Germans from a communication trench leading to Capricorn Keep."

2Lt Newbold's reports says "We were held up by M.G.and rifle fire from dugouts at approx. C18d.80.60." The tank intervenes and then "After a while we made a charge on these dugouts and captured 18 Germans."

The reference is only 100 yards from the spur on the end of Capricorn Keep and right on the edge of the Newbold's tactical bound (which he then crossed to clear Pond Farm) and there are some similarities between F39's recorded action and Newbold's. However, Colin's suggestion of F10 also fits, especially as it would be an easy typo to make between F10 and F16.

Kevin

[IRC Kevin]

Unfortunately, I've thrown another 'spanner of confusion' into my works! Another after-action report I've just read, from a platoon detailed to attack Iberian says of their progress just past the Black Line,

"A machine gun that was holding up at this point was successfully dealt with by a tank, No. A 10."

Now it can't be A 10, as this tank wasn't in action on the 31st and A Battalion was miles away. Therefore it seems reasonable to assume that it must have been F10, especially as F10's final resting place was to the south-east of Hill 35, not too far from the position this action took place in. I'm now thinking that the second tank from the post above probably wasn't F10 as it's unlikely be in these two locations at a similar time, as the positions are about 1000 yards apart, lending more weight to the theory that it was F39 on the edge of it's tactical bound.