Nieuport Sector July/August 1917 - Casualty Evacuation Chain

[TEW]

Russ,

I went through the DMS diary for the whole year and some months have no evacuations and once into September there are perhaps one or two mentioned per month. By comparison July was quite busy. It didn't seem to stack up that they were recording every evacuation by train or barge. Would they not have numerous evacuations in November 1917?

 

The numbers given for discharge from 1st Can. CCS Adinkerke (Oosthoek) that run into hundreds per day may not be by AT and may not be evacuations in the same sense as for the 22nd July but the diary records them all in the same way.

 

Lines of Communication medical diaries are more likely to hold info on evacuations to a port. Not sure if such a diary exists but there was an ADMS for the ATs. 

TEW

[RussT]

11 minutes ago, petwes said:

Russ

Many thanks for the offer. 

He was gassed (mustard) on the 26th July, admitted to 91 Field Ambulance and then transferred to 1 CCCS.

If he was on 15 AT it would have left around about the last couple of days of July or 1st August. The diary for DDMS indicates the train arrived at 06:05 a.m on the 2nd at Boulogne. The St David had been loaded with 194 cot cases the previous evening and at 08:00 a.m. on the 2nd was filled up with sitting cases ( a further 33 Officers and 307 Other Ranks) before sailing at 09:30 a.m. for Folkestone.

 

Peter

 

Peter,

 

The 4th Army DMS diary has this from 26th July onwards:

 

26th July: 52 Officers and 501 ORs to Boulogne on AT 23

27th July: No mention of any evacuations

28th July: Explicitly states there were no evacuations

29th July: 28 Officers and 503 ORs to Le Treport on AT 23

30th July: 13 Officers and 469 ORs to Thorne on AT 10 (the mysterious Thorne!)

31st July: 10 Officers and 457 ORs to Boulogne on AT 2.

 

I don't have the diary for August I'm afraid.

 

I've looked at the AT 15 diary and I can confirm it was neither going to/from Oosthoek on the above dates (in agreement with the above 4th Army DMS diary) nor throughout the whole of August.

 

If he was gassed on the 26th July, then I would suggest he would have been evacuated on 26th July (I've seen quite a few service records already which show men getting away on the same day). If so, you need AT 23. The other possibility (to Boulogne) is on 31st July on AT 2.

 

I don't have the dairies for AT 23 or AT 2, so can't help with that bit.

 

Regards

 

Russ

 

 

 

[johnboy]

Could it be that a major battle was coming up and the evacuated men had been treated and were well enough to travel and therefore leave space at the CCS for an expected influx of wounded?

[TEW]

Peter,

DMS 4th Army diary for August has;

1/8/17 Noon. Gassed cases in last 24 Hours - 4 officers 199 ORs

Evacuated 60 ORs, Oosthoek to St Omer by Amb. Flotilla No. 5

Evacuated 25 Officers and 524 ORs, Oosthoek to Boulogne  by AT 10

4/8/17 6.56 am. Evacuated 15 Officers and 337 ORs, Oosthoek to Boulogne  by AT 18. (could include men from 24CCS as well as 1CCCS)

6/8/17 Noon. Evacuated 120 ORs Oosthoek, to St Omer by Amb. Flotilla No. 5

 

There is also a note regarding the gas casualties that mentions 3500 casualties by the 25th rising to 5000 by 31st. I thought as Russ said he would have been evacuated on the 26th July.

 

However.

 

Despite the fact that I've said several times that 1/CCCS was the only one open (which I could confirm from DMS orders) the DDMS 15 Corps diary (not Boulogne) states that 24 & 39 CCSs were also receiving gas gases from the 23rd July and sending only the severe cases to 1/CCCS.

 

So it appears 24 & 39 CCSs and the Corps Rest Station were holding slight gas cases, 550 per CCS and 1000 at the CRS. Those that didn't improve were sent to 1/CCCS. As this is an un-official arrangement I doubt any of the men would show in an admin/discharge book for anything other than for 1/CCCS.

 

There is a possibility he was held back in Oosthoek for days and then became a more severe case.

TEW

[petwes]

Russ and TEW

Thank you both for your information. 

I'll let you all get back to looking for Thorne now!

 

Peter

[MaureenE]

This article about Ambulance Trains,   Somme 2016: Ambulance trains of World War 1 meant the difference between life and death https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/history-of-war/somme-2016-the-ambulance-trains-of-world-war-1-meant-the-difference-between-life-and-death/ mentions the Archivist at the National Railway Museum, York. Perhaps she may know  the location of Thorne.

 

Cheers

Maureen

[TEW]

Have just noticed in Diary for 39 CCS Oosthoek which was not officially open that 386 were evacuated by AT 23 on the 24th. These must be part of the 439 mentioned in the DMS diary for the 24th. 1/CCCS say they discharged 575. Does this mean they evacuated only 53 (medical) and 522 back to duty?

 

Given the forward position of Oosthoek how exactly do they discharge men back to duty or base. Is there an APM that gathers the men up, orders another type of train or barge and sends them back?

 

39CCS also mentions walking gassed cases arriving on the 23rd, perhaps there were large numbers discharged to duty and sent on their way.

 

23CCS only discharged one man back to duty with unit on the 25th out of 502 admitted on the 23rd, 61 of those were moved to 1/CCCS and the bulk evacuated on the 25th. Table of Admitted, Discharged and Evacuated from 23CCCs if needed.

 

Bit of a tease I know but DMS 4th Army has lists like this for July - Dec 1916, some months are complete IE a daily list.

TEW

 

 

 

 

[RussT]

3 hours ago, TEW said:

Have just noticed in Diary for 39 CCS Oosthoek which was not officially open that 386 were evacuated by AT 23 on the 24th. These must be part of the 439 mentioned in the DMS diary for the 24th. 1/CCCS say they discharged 575. Does this mean they evacuated only 53 (medical) and 522 back to duty?

 

 

The way I am interpreting things is that when a CCS uses the term discharged (e.g. by the 1/CCCS diary) it means nothing more than that they physically left the CCS - some might have gone back to duty, some might have gone to the Corps Rest Station and others might have been evacuated to Base Hospitals (by whatever means).

 

If we just for now consider the evacuations by ATs (or by a flotilla), then the only thing that one might need to see for a self-consistent picture to emerge is that the evacuation numbers must be equal to or less than those numbers mentioned as being discharged.

 

Take the 24th July as example.

 

1) We know that 1/CCCS states that 575 were discharged

2) It seems all 386 cases at 39/CCS were evacuated on AT 23

 

So the maximum number that might have been evacuated is 575+386 = 961 cases

The total number of evacuations on the 24th July is as per your image above i.e. 180+439+355 = 974

 

So this is not quite self-consistent - how can the total number of evacuations (974) be higher than the total being discharged (or evacuated) as mentioned in both CCS diaries (961).

 

But I think these two numbers (974 and 961) are so close, I would regard them as being a result of small errors in the numbers recorded in either or all of the 3 sources (the 4th Army DMS diary, the 1/CCCS diary and the 39/CCS diary). I have already spotted a few small differences between the numbers mentioned in the 4th Army DMS diary for a given AT on a given day and that recorded in the actual AT diary for that day.

 

The implication of the two numbers (974 and 961) being so close together makes it seem clear that, for the 24th July at least, everyone was actually evacuated on one of the three transports shown in your image above.

 

What do you think?

 

Russ

Edited 17 March , 2017 by RussT

[ss002d6252]

I'd agree with Russ on the aspects of the discharge - I'd read to mean they simply passed them on to the next stage in the process, whether it was back to the battalions or off to the camp to recuperate for a bit.

 

The figures look close enough that they may well be the same figure, just adjusted for little discrepancies as with most casualty related figures. (or perhaps a few men were brought in from elsewhere and loaded direct on to the train).

Craig

[RussT]

13 hours ago, Maureene said:

This article about Ambulance Trains,   Somme 2016: Ambulance trains of World War 1 meant the difference between life and death https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/history-of-war/somme-2016-the-ambulance-trains-of-world-war-1-meant-the-difference-between-life-and-death/ mentions the Archivist at the National Railway Museum, York. Perhaps she may know  the location of Thorne.

 

Cheers

Maureen

 

Maureen

 

Thanks for posting - I would have liked to have gone to that exhibition - and it's a fine article describing ATs.

 

As I've mentioned somewhere previously, it has amazed me how the system all joined up in the face of all the horrors unfolding at the battlefront.

 

On the 10th July 1917 the Germans opened up a complete surprise attack on the Nieuport sector (Operation Strandfest). Yet that very day (10:30 pm) , 4th Army DMS phoned up "Traffic" for 3 ATs to proceed at once to Oosthoek to begin evacuating casualties. AT 22 arrived at 15:40hrs on the 11th July and evacuated 462 casualties, arriving Boulogne 05:10 hrs on the 12th July.

 

The difference between Life and Death - I would say so.

 

Regards

 

Russ

 

Edited 17 March , 2017 by RussT

[seaJane]

Did I read somewhere that the York ambulance trains exhibition is now permanent?

[RussT]

Up-date on the mysterious place called Thorne mentioned in the 4th Army DMS diary as a destination from Oosthoek for 3 different ATs during July 1917.

 

As suspected by TEW in post #6, I also now conclude there is no such place - why the 4th Army DMS diary wrote Thorne as a destination in the first place seems to be the only mystery.

 

Thorne is mentioned 3 times as a destination in the diary for July (TEW has already checked that it gets no mention in August)

 

1) 22nd July as the destination for AT 22

2) 29th July as the destination for AT 23 (but Thorne is crossed out and replaced by Le Treport - see post #6)

3) 30th July as the destination for AT 10

 

I now have the dairy for AT 22, which shows it went to Le Treport (image attached).

 

So we have Le Treport being the actual destination for 2 out of the 3 entries where Thorne is written. I had first suspected (based on some evidence) that the correction on the 29th July was a late change in an actual destination - but it now looks convincingly to be a correction of an error. Why Thorne was written to begin with, and why the other two entries were not likewise corrected, remains a mystery.

 

Of course, getting the diary for AT 10 would be the clincher but I think I have enough here to resolve this apparent mystery.

 

I also have the AT diaries for AT 15 and AT 25, and all 3 AT diaries I now have don't mention Thorne at all throughout the whole of 1917 - and there are plenty of places mentioned.

 

Despite this, the thread has nevertheless provided other interesting points for discussion along the way - so thanks to all contributors - feel free to carry on with those discussions as I'm still researching the general medical evacuation chain arrangements from the Nieuport Sector throughout July 1917, and I'm glad of the help in the interpretations of the various unit diaries. I hope to post more.

 

Regards

 

Russ

 

 

 

[johnboy]

There must have been prior communication between the CCS and the AT operators. The AT Operator must have had info letting them now that a Hospital ship would be available at the port and its capacity. Again, when when the Hospital Ship left port for the UK arrangements would have to have been made for another AT for onward transport.

Communications would have been important to get the timings right .  

[TEW]

Interesting result and as you say other interesting aspects came about from the topic as well. Will reply in full tomorrow when free of iPad. From trawling various diaries I got the picture that there were upwards of 1000 men spread between 23 & 39 CCS, the CMDS and the CRS 21st - 28th July who were not expected to have recovered within 10 days and were therefore evacuated possibly after being transferred to 1/CCCS first, or a portion of them. 23 CCS is quite clear that only one man was discharged to duty in the same period. That's 1 out of 520.

 

Alhough we can see and track large numbers of men being moved from a CCS area while still suffering from gas back to a port they can't have sent 100% of them back to the UK? So were discharged to duty and those gassed mixed up and separated in Le Tréport etc?

 

I get the discrepancies, with walking wounded and more MACs arriving at the CCS area, by the time the DMS received a 'total so far' it would be out of date. There could also be some that deteoriated and couldn't be moved.

TEW

[RussT]

Johnboy

 

The ambulance trains are going to base hospitals in France from CCSs - to Boulogne, Le Treport, Abbeville etc etc etc, as mentioned throughout this thread - not to ports to catch hospital ships. That many of the base hospitals were in locations that were ports makes perfect sense because many men would need eventually to be evacuated to the UK.

 

It has nothing to do with hospital ships. Weather any of these men were eventually evacuated to the UK by ship (and many indeed were) would be subject to arrangements between the base hospitals and hospital shipping - it's not a concern of the CCS. Indeed it's not a concern of the CCS as to the availability of ATs or the exact destination of the trains to the base hospitals - those arrangements are the responsibility of the Army DMS to arrange as evidenced by the 4th Army DMS diary quoted at length throughout this thread.

 

ATs were not being arranged from the UK.

 

The arrangements between base hospitals and hospital ships is, I suspect, the responsibly of, for example, the DDMS Boulogne and one would need to look at that unit's diary to understand how those arrangements worked.

 

It's obvious that communication is paramount throughout the whole chain. The CCSs need to communicate upwards, and the Army DMS staff would need to communicate back downwards warning that an AT was on its way so the CCS could prepare for evacuations

Edited 17 March , 2017 by RussT

[johnboy]

Do you know the capacities of the hospitals near the ports?

[RussT]

Here is an example to illustrate the point.

 

Record of 267477 John Thomas Everley, 1/8th Bn West Yorkshire Regiment

 

He is gassed on the 22nd July 1917

He is at the 1/CCCS on the 23rd July (probably being transported there by a Field Ambulance - but if so that is not mentioned in this record). 

He is evacuated from 1/CCCS to Boulogne on AT 10 on 25th July (no doubt after he has stabilised sufficiently to make the journey - this AT 10 to Boulogne on 25th agrees with the 4th Army DMS diary)

He is at the base general hospital No 83 in Boulogne from that date (no doubt being cared for carefully)

He is then eventually evacuated to the UK on the ship St Patrick on 12th August (no doubt after he was assessed as being well enough to travel further)

 

 

 

Edited 18 March , 2017 by RussT

[RussT]

16 minutes ago, johnboy said:

Do you know the capacities of the hospitals near the ports?

 

 I would suggest it's far more rewarding researching for answers than just asking questions - why don't you have a go?

 

 

[johnboy]

Sorry for asking. it seemed you have much info on the process. I'll withdraw from the discussion that you yourself said should continue.

[RussT]

2 hours ago, seaJane said:

Did I read somewhere that the York ambulance trains exhibition is now permanent?

 

Looking at the NRM link provided does indicate it's "permanent" - must get over there when I can to have a look.

 

 

[TEW]

Nice example of how things connect with Everley. He must have been one of the more severe cases. He missed out on at least 4 previous evacuations between his arrival at 1/CCCS and when he did leave. They had admitted 2041 from 23rd to 25th.

 

As far as the precision of the communication of arrangements, I would hope they were rare occurrences but there are quite a few mentions in other diaries of trains being several hours late leaving wounded at the siding for far too long. Trains that arrived with the 'wrong sort of carriage' or not enough carriages. And one train that left the siding before being loaded!

For some reason it proved difficult to provide updates to some CCSs as to when a delayed train would eventually arrive. Wounded were not to be left at sidings while waiting for delayed trains but COs pointed out that managing the carry and loading once a train arrived would severely prolong the evacuation.

 

AT 23 that left Oosthoek on the 24th July (5pm according to 39CCS) was 'smooth but will always be slow & laborious owing to the long carry across the road and [going] around the train to get to the platform'.

 

TEW

[RussT]

Thanks TEW for those insights - I can imagine trains being subject to all sorts of delays prior to arrival - making preparations at the CCSs frustrating to say the least.

 

The journey itself must have been hellish - according to the AT war diaries, journey times were anywhere between circa 6 and 12 hours. And uncertainties on arrival times at the base hospitals would likewise make the preparations at the base hospitals also frustrating.

 

Spotted what must be another error in the 4th Army DMS diary - it has AT 10 making two trips on the same day of 25th July (as well as AT 2 also departing that day). The AT 10 diary shows only one trip for that day - and I don't think it would actually be possible for the same AT to make two trips in a single day. So I assume the 4th Army diary entry on 25th July was either completely in error for that third AT trip or it was a different AT and three ATs did indeed depart that day. The total discharges from the 1/CCCS versus the total evacuations by ATs (and flotillas) also get a bit out of kilter on and around that day - I think that has something to do with 39/CCS starting to get into the act.

 

I hope to post some summary tables of these movements shortly.

 

Regards

 

Russ

[TEW]

If you want page extracts from 23 & 39 CCSs and/or 15 Corps DDMS diary let me know, the latter brings the CMDS and the CRS into the equation of holding slightly gassed men.

TEW

[RussT]

Many thanks for the offer but I have those now - unfortunately not had much time to read them very much yet - so far I've only been looking at the raw numbers in trying to get them all to tally between the various unit diaries.

 

Russ

[petwes]

Russ

I'm not sure if you have this already but just to fill in AT10's destination for the 30th, the diary for No.3 General Hospital at Le Treport records the following:

 

 

Peter

Edited 19 March , 2017 by petwes