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

Remembered Today:

Field Artillery guns?


skr123

Recommended Posts

I would be grateful for any ID on the photo attached. I am researching a relative who I know served from 1900 to 1908 with the RGA but I'm now wondering if he re-enlisted for the war. This photo was with his 1908 discharge parchment and other family documents/photos. If it is indeed 1914-18 then it confirms my thoughts. Any info on the possible unit would be most welcome.

many thanks

Spike

IMG_0003c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No shield on the gun so not a 13 pdr, 18 pdr or 4.5" howitzer as used by the Royal Field Artillery.

The horses are heavy draft so RGA would be my best guess - as to what gun it is I'll leeave that for an expert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure angle is a bit deceiving but could be a 60lb; which the RGA served as opposed to the 13lb & 18lb which the RHA and RFA served respecfully

Picture has four pairs of horses (and big ones at that) which the 60lb also had could be a clue?

If the person you are talking ablout served 1900 -1908 then they would have been eligible for re-call to service as a reservist in 1914.

Bom T

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think wartime Heavy Battery RGA ..one of the Howitzers.??. like this? https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2329/2353791432_1b8727f648.jpg

I would think very likely to have served again if serving to 1908 - almost certainly on a 12 year enlistment prewar [fulltime + reserve to make 12yrs] .. if within age range would almost certainly have been called up in 1916 if not previously volunteered

tiled roof to farm looks like France to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is definitively a wartime photo dating no earlier than 1916 and more likely no earlier than 1917.

The Driver on the lead pair appears to wear the Soft SD cap introduced in 1916.

The boots he is wearing if Issue boots (as opposed to private purchase), which is likely, than photo is no earlier than 1917. The type he is wearing were introduced in that year.

Joe Sweeney

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fairly sure that it is howitzer - either a 6 inch or an 8 inch: the barrel shape looks to me more like the latter. What do others think?

William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd agree with BomT The wheels look like those on the 60 pounder Mk II carriage and limber piece

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for the information - you confirm what has been puzzling me since properly looking at these photos. Yes, he was on the reserve for the remainder of his 12 years - It looks likely that he re-enlisted and having been RGA I would expect he would initially have gone back to them. The dating of the photo seems to helpfully rule out any overlap with the end of his first period of engagement and it doesn't look much like Malta and Gibraltar where he had been posted. This post is for John Arthur Bell b1882. Service number 2844 from 1900 - 1908. I have looked at his service record for that period and he was also previously a volunteer with 4th Oxford Light Infantry so he has a much more interesting service record than the family have given him credit for - I'm trying to rectify that!

I have another group photo showing what I am pretty sure is him but with a RASC cap badge which had until now baffled me - how likely would that transfer be? Would the fact that he was a bit older have had any influence on that? I can put that photo up here if its the right place or another thread if more appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have another group photo showing what I am pretty sure is him but with a RASC cap badge which had until now baffled me - how likely would that transfer be? Would the fact that he was a bit older have had any influence on that? I can put that photo up here if its the right place or another thread if more appropriate.

During the war the Army Service Corps numbered amongst its many tasks moving guns (like the 60 pounder) up to the front The Royal Army Service Corps would have also transported guns after the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The perspective makes identifying the gun difficult. The barrel seems too long for 6-in How, and the barrel doesn't seem to be far enough towards the horse to be 60-pr. I don't think heavies like 8-in How or 6-in Gun were ever towed by horses, they always seem to have had 'traction engines' wheels. That leaves one possibility, 4.7-in Gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with nigelfe that it is a 4.7 QF Field Gun on a Carriage Travelling Converted MK 1. (Converted from RML 40 Pdr). The wheels are 1st Class B No 6 weighing 588 lbs each. I come conclusion to this by the wheel brake assembly.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of interest were there a significant number of 4.7 QFs still in service in France in 1917?

Peter

No they were replaced by the 60 pounder and transferred to Salonika and Italy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These 4.7in guns were used on the vcWestern Front but they were eventually superseded by the more powerful and heavyer 6 inh guns, they redeployed to other fronts, numbersw were sent to Italy and Serbia. They were declared obosolete shortly after the war ended.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think that is a 60pdr Gun MKI on a MKII carriage and not the 4.7".

The recoil mechanism rear look more like the 60pdr which appear larger than the 4.7".

Joe Sweeney

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These 4.7in guns were used on the vcWestern Front but they were eventually superseded by the more powerful and heavyer 6 inh guns, they redeployed to other fronts, numbersw were sent to Italy and Serbia. They were declared obosolete shortly after the war ended.

John

1922 to be precise. I have doubts that many were sent to Serbia - a confusion I think with Macedonia (Salonika) (post 14)

I actually think that is a 60pdr Gun MKI on a MKII carriage and not the 4.7".

The recoil mechanism rear look more like the 60pdr which appear larger than the 4.7".

Joe Sweeney

I agree as I said in Post 8. The 4.7 was used on two basic carriages - only one used wheels anything like those in the photo - this was in fact the 40 pounder BL carriage the rest of which did not look like the carriage in the photo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The origin of the 4.7 was Parliament. The army was developing the 60-pr but a media campaign led to 4.7 being mandated for the TF. Eventually the 60-pr replaced them.

The key question is whether the upmost tube is the barrel or the buffer-recuperator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its definitely not 4.7 or 6in. Therefore the visible top 'tube' is part of a 60pr Buffer Recuperator and the barrel is obscured mainly by the wheel. The shape of the saddle and trail is consistent with 60pr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

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...