INW Posted 7 August , 2017 Share Posted 7 August , 2017 A single page in a small note book archived in the Imperial War Museum lists the members of the crew of this tank. The battle history sheets for the tank are also available and these describe the events of those two days in great detail. I am very keen to find out all I can about the tank crew. My grandfather L/C George Harwood Wells was one of the crew. Through Ancestry.co.uk I have recently got in contact with a relative of the Tank Commander 2nd Lt Christopher Fell Watherston and another Ancestry member who has Arthur Edward Buttle in their family tree. I believe all the men survived war. Three members of the crew have service records which are available on Ancestry. C F Watherston is mentioned several times on Google Landships. I will collate those references as soon as I can. His service record is at the National Archive. This research is inspired by Stephen Pope’s achievements with ‘First Tank Crews’. I thank all members of this forum who have helped me with this research so far. I ask anyone who has further information about these men to help ‘fill the gaps’ in the initial draft of my spreadsheet which is attached. INW Tank Crew 9189 rev 1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tanks3 Posted 8 August , 2017 Share Posted 8 August , 2017 (edited) INW I compliment you on your efforts. Well done. I think Stephen would be proud!! Do keep us and the spreadsheet up to date with your findings Tanks3 Edited 8 August , 2017 by tanks3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INW Posted 2 September , 2017 Author Share Posted 2 September , 2017 I have recently received as copy of photograph of my grandfather which I have not seen before. I have a vague memory of seeing the backdrop used in a photograph before. Does any one else recognise the curtain with classical column, steps and aspidistra stand? I would be interested in locating the photographers studio? He trained at Bisley and went to France in Mid 1915 with the Motor Machine Gun Corps. The cap badge is Machine Gun Corps. That might be a fabric tank badge on his arm. He moved to the tanks in November 1916. He would have taken his leave in Birmingham. INW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david murdoch Posted 3 September , 2017 Share Posted 3 September , 2017 I have him on my list as Gunner 686 MMGS. 9th Battery MMGS disbanded November 1916, and the majority of the personnel transferred to tanks (Heavy Section). I'd say this photo was taken on active service (or training) rather than on leave - given his dirty boots and wearing shorts, so possibly spring/ early summer 1917 while still in Heavy Branch MGC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 3 September , 2017 Share Posted 3 September , 2017 (edited) Most photos of this type were taken in the summer of 1917 in the rear areas behind Ypres. Clues are the tank arm badge which reached F&F at that time, the drill shorts and that he was still wearing the MGC cap badge which was not replaced until late Autumn Edited 3 September , 2017 by delta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INW Posted 3 September , 2017 Author Share Posted 3 September , 2017 Thanks David and Stephen Stephen In relation to the tank badge can you clarify the 'reached F&F'. My guess is reached France and Flanders..... Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 3 September , 2017 Share Posted 3 September , 2017 Yes Ian - correct - sorry I should have not abbreviated it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johntaylor Posted 3 September , 2017 Share Posted 3 September , 2017 Hi, this is amazing - Stephen, you posted a photo last year taken in exactly the same place! I've seen the background in another photo showing a tank officer - almost certainly in Poperinghe, as you say taken in the summer of 1917. I don't know the source of the photo you posted, but surely it must have been taken at the same time as Ian's photo? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INW Posted 3 September , 2017 Author Share Posted 3 September , 2017 John and Stephen I think I will have to use the word amazing again.... I did think I had seen that background before and you have proved I was not kidding myself. The left side leg of the aspidistra stand (probably more precisely called a jardiniere) has a little blackboard with a number chalked on it in both photos. This must be the number the soldier had to ask for when he went to collect the print. My photo might read 235 Stephen's photo might read 265. They could have been taken on the same day! If so I think the photographer has mopped the mud off the floor in between time. Sorry this is getting to much like a Conan Doyle or an Agatha Christie! The original photo is with relatives in Chicago. I think I will try and get a good quality scan done so that we can read the number. Alternatively I could fly over with my 20x mag jewellers eye glass..... I have cut and pasted Stephen's photo here for easy comparison. INW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 3 September , 2017 Share Posted 3 September , 2017 Ah, the unidentified warrant officer Sad to say we never did trace him but may be this will aide us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david murdoch Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 2 hours ago, delta said: Ah, the unidentified warrant officer Sad to say we never did trace him but may be this will aide us. Stephen. What leads you to say this chap was a warrant officer? You can see his tank badge more clearly than in George Harwood Wells photo. As I mentioned a fair number of 9th MMG battery ended up in Heavy Section and quite a few have pretty well consecutive Tank Corps numbers - so transferred en masse,having 2007## service numbers, and some probably continued serving together. Amongst these is Acting Bombardier 242 James Gully who became 200709 Tank Corps Acting WO II and BQMS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 If you look at his waist belt buckle, you can see it to be of Sam Browne pattern. It is subtly different to that worn by other ranks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 Ian I know this is a very broad range for dating the new photo but D Bn deployed to Flanders from 8 July and withdrew to Wailly by 31 Oct (dates from War History and War Diary) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johntaylor Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 You can see a photographer's number on the floor, leaning against the table leg - presumably this was so he could identify and order negatives. However I can't really make out the number in either photograph. This was obviously the studio of choice for tank crews based at La Lovie in summer 1917. Wouldn't it be amazing to find his back catalogue! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob McGlynn Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 The number is 263. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjwmacro Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 11 hours ago, INW said: John and Stephen I think I will have to use the word amazing again.... I did think I had seen that background before and you have proved I was not kidding myself. The left side leg of the aspidistra stand (probably more precisely called a jardiniere) has a little blackboard with a number chalked on it in both photos. This must be the number the soldier had to ask for when he went to collect the print. My photo might read 235 Stephen's photo might read 265. They could have been taken on the same day! If so I think the photographer has mopped the mud off the floor in between time. Sorry this is getting to much like a Conan Doyle or an Agatha Christie! The original photo is with relatives in Chicago. I think I will try and get a good quality scan done so that we can read the number. Alternatively I could fly over with my 20x mag jewellers eye glass..... I have cut and pasted Stephen's photo here for easy comparison. INW Ian I think the number in Stephen's photo is 263 (or possibly 243). It`s much harder to read in your photo - but possibly 253? Or perhaps 252? Incidentally - has anyone else noticed the discrepancy in crew size? A MkV had the same official crew size as a MkIV - 8. The 2 secondary gearsman no longer required became gunners, so a Mk V was Commander, driver and 6 gunners. While I know in practice a crew could do with fewer, were 4th Bn that short of crewmen by Amiens that they were going into action with only 7 onboard - or is the list missing a name? Regards, Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johntaylor Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 (edited) Hi Paul, I originally supplied the crew list to Ian, and must admit I hadn't spotted the discrepancy in numbers until you raised it I've gone back to the full records and was surprised to see they were virtually all seven-man crews (i.e. officer, or occasionally senior NCO, in command plus six ORs). The only exceptions seem to have been six-man crews. This is new to me - I'd assumed crews were always eight men, even in the the Mark V, and it seems we will have to adjust our thinking, at least for 4th Bn in August 1918. I wonder if shortage of manpower was the reason, or just the fact that it was better to have more space inside (e.g. for ammunition) than an extra crewman who wasn't strictly necessary. Regarding the photographer's number in the photos - sorry I came to that point rather late. The numbers do seem to be quite close, and it would be great to see a higher quality scan of Ian's photo so we can be sure. All the best, John Edited 4 September , 2017 by johntaylor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 4 hours ago, pjwmacro said: Ian I think the number in Stephen's photo is 263 (or possibly 243). It`s much harder to read in your photo - but possibly 253? Or perhaps 252? Incidentally - has anyone else noticed the discrepancy in crew size? A MkV had the same official crew size as a MkIV - 8. The 2 secondary gearsman no longer required became gunners, so a Mk V was Commander, driver and 6 gunners. While I know in practice a crew could do with fewer, were 4th Bn that short of crewmen by Amiens that they were going into action with only 7 onboard - or is the list missing a name? Regards, Paul GVH should know the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johntaylor Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 Good point - unfortunately he doesn't seem to hang out much on GWF. Obviously got better things to do than us! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 I am sure @pjwmacro will email him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tanks3 Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 14 hours ago, david murdoch said: Amongst these is Acting Bombardier 242 James Gully who became 200709 Tank Corps Acting WO II and BQMS. David I have researched 242 James Gully. He became part of the crew of the Tank Bank in Leeds when it visited in late 1917 Tanks3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjwmacro Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 37 minutes ago, Gareth Davies said: I am sure @pjwmacro will email him. Will do so tonight. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INW Posted 4 September , 2017 Author Share Posted 4 September , 2017 MY THANKS ARE DUE John Taylor was kind enough to supply not only the Crew List for the tank but the Battle History Sheets as well. I am planning a visit to the Imperial War Museum to see them for my self in November. Thanks to all those contributing. CREW NUMBERS On the battle history sheet for the 8th August the Tank's officer states that the crew of six needs to be supplemented with an extra man. 'The extra man to assist in ammunition supply and change barrels on the Hotchkiss and keep a look out for our infantry'. J GULLY MM I remember Tank 3's topic on James Gully. It is a pity it didn't bring up a photo of him. It is well worth reading the topic again. A BETTER SCAN I will put the wheels in motion to get a better image from Chicago. LIVING RELATIVES OF THE CREW I am now in email contact with the great nephew of the Officer C F Watherston and grandson of crew member A E Buttle. I will update in due course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johntaylor Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 Hi, I saw the thread on Jim Gully, and in fact contributed to it, but didn't you realise you were after a photograph of him. I've attached one, though unfortunately it isn't a wartime one. It appeared in The Tank when he retired in 1947, along with a quite detailed biography which I can post if you're interested. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjwmacro Posted 4 September , 2017 Share Posted 4 September , 2017 6 hours ago, pjwmacro said: Will do so tonight. Paul Done - cc toGareth. 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