The Crew of Mk V Tank 9189 at Battle of Amiens: 8th & 9th August 1918

[INW]

J GULLY MM

9th Battery MMGC

D Battalion Heavy Branch MGC 

 

Please do post the biography in Tanks 3's topic. Hopefully his heroics at Bullecourt 3rd May 1917 are referenced.

 

INW

Edited 5 September , 2017 by INW

[Gareth Davies]

On 04/09/2017 at 20:37, 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

 

On 05/09/2017 at 01:06, johntaylor said:

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

 

 

 

 

These shots are taken from "The Distribution & Details of Training of Tank Crews". 

 

 

 

[johntaylor]

Thanks - this is very interesting, and confirms that eight was the standard crew size.  I can only think that in this case they dispensed with a signaller/observer, perhaps because of the scale of the action and the resulting strain on manpower.  There may be a reference to this in the reports but I haven't come across it so far.

 

All the best, John

[tanks3]

16 hours ago, johntaylor said:

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

 

 

John

 

I would be extremely interested in seeing Grundy's biography and as good a scan of the photo as you have.  I will PM you if that is acceptable?

 

Tanks3

[pjwmacro]

4 hours ago, Gareth Davies said:

 

 

These shots are taken from "The Distribution & Details of Training of Tank Crews". 

 

 

This would certainly suggest that the official answer was the MkV crew was 8 - although clearly 4th Bn were running on 6 or 7 - my assumption would be manpower shortage.  I note the 2nd 2 pictures are not categorical about the 3rd driver / observer/signaller.

 

I have heard back from GVH - who supports this view that the official number was 8, although he is away at present and cannot access a paper he has:

 

"Mark V did not need the two secondary gearsmen although they could act a loaders for the six pounder. ....... I have seen a paper discussing the Mark V manning which I will try and find again. 2nd drivers appear to have existed (1st Drivers were normally not included in Lewis Gun Battalions) It is very rare to get any idea of crew size or crew names / lists."

 

and:

 

"I do not have any references in front of me (I am in France) A Mark V did not require the two secondary gearsmen (the driver could change gears without help) and therefore in theory a Mark V could operate with a crew of six (commander, driver and four gunners) however I strongly suspect that the establishment was kept at eight with a second driver for example."

 

Regards, Paul

Edited 5 September , 2017 by pjwmacro

[johntaylor]

17 hours ago, tanks3 said:

John

 

I would be extremely interested in seeing Grundy's biography and as good a scan of the photo as you have.  I will PM you if that is acceptable?

 

Tanks3

Hi - I'm not sure about Grundy, I thought he got a long service and bad conduct medal for service in the Archers.  On a more serious point, I've sent you everything I have on Jim Gully!

 

All the best, John

[tanks3]

John

 

Not sure where Grundy came from!!!

 

Tanks3

[INW]

Please see attached the latest version of the crew information sheet for tank 9189; 8th August 1918.

I am now in contact with the relatives of three of the crew. I attach a PDF which should be sharper than the displayed JPG.

The three other men are proving more difficult to research; any suggestions would be welcome!

One crewman had a field ambulance background, I wonder whether there was a policy to include a 'medic' in each tank crew?

INW

59be81f06e89b_TankCrew9189rev3.pdf

 

[INW]

Is this the same mahogany aspidistra plant stand ? 

I was in Waterstone's Newcastle branch today and whilst browsing came across Lost Tommies by Ross Coulthart. I could not help looking at every photograph in this a brilliant book.

I noticed one or two photos included a plant stand. This jogged a memory..... Is it the same stand that was used in the photo of my grandfather ?

It is a different back drop to that used by Louis and Antoinette Thuillier in the village of Vignacourt. 

The Lost Tommies photos appear in the BBC one show facebook pages. This is an example: Thuiller portrait

Please compare with photos at post #3 and post #9 on page 1 of this topic. .

I have just looked at this google map. Vignacourt is just north west of Amiens. My grandfather was in the 4th Battalion of the Tank Corps. They were in that location 100 years ago this week. They took part in the Battle of Amiens on the 8th August 1918.

 

INW

 

Edited 4 August , 2018 by INW

[INW]

CREW OF TANK 9189  

At the Battle of Amiens 8th August 1918

William George Hancock: 92877 Tank Corps

Having joined the WFA about a year ago I have only just got around to searching their pension records.

I was able to find the details of one of the members of the crew. William Hancock lived his life in the beautiful village of West Looe in Cornwall.

He joined the Devons and transferred to the Tanks. This is my summary of the information from the pension record and some newspaper obituary references. The articles refer to him as a butcher. Prospect House in the village appears to have been his shop and now is an Air BnB. 

There are many codes on the pension records forms. If any experts can decipher them, please let me know what they mean.

Does anyone local to West Looe have further information?

INW

 

Edited 22 January by INW
Accidentally posted before I had completed the post.

[Darian Zam]

So, I thought you would be interested in this photo regardless, but I could do with some help. This is extracted from a glass plate, sorry it's not great quality but it's the best I have.
I'm researching a cache of negatives found in the West Coast area of New Zealand. Many of them seem to be of one family, but an anomaly (but probably an important clue) is that there are 3 images of tanks with crew; 9189 (posted here), 9119 and 9?25. It makes sense the man who appears in many of the photos served and was probably on this crew. There are so few hints, except some areas like Greymouth, Buller, Brunner and possibly Waiuta and Te Kingi. It was a logging and gold dredging area. He's married and seems to have 4 children, 3 girls and a boy. Photos are post WWI so late 1910s through late 1920s, into the 1930s. He appears to be a bushman (logger) and sawmiller. The main hint is the photos belonged to or were taken by J. Digas (I assume this is a misspelling and means Diggs). Other than that I don't have a lot to go on.

[INW]

Darian

This is like finding the holy grail....I cannot thank you enough for finding this.

On first glance, I don't think my grandfather is in the picture. I don't suppose there is a date on the glass plate. I am meeting up with some of my cousins, that is many of the grandchildren of my father's father next weekend. They will all be very interested. I am in contact with some of the descendants of other members of the crew of 9189 on the 8th August 1918.

I may have copies of the battle sheets for 9119 and 9125, I will check this evening. they are archived in the Imperial War Museum.

Interesting features:

• 9189 is a male tank. (I always get asked if it was male or female).
• The top hatch is not painted with red and white rectangles which it probably would have been (for aerial recognition) on the 8th August 1918.

I will inform John Taylor as he found the notebook reference connecting this tank to my grandfather.

 

regards and many thanks.

IAN WELLS 

Edited 18 March by INW
joke removed

[Darian Zam]

31 minutes ago, INW said:

Darian

This is like finding the holy grail....I cannot thank you enough for finding this.

On first glance, I don't think my grandfather is in the picture. I don't suppose there is a date on the glass plate. I am meeting up with some of my cousins, that is many of the grandchildren of my father's father next weekend. They will all be very interested. I am in contact with some of the descendants of other members of the crew of 9189 on the 8th August 1918.

I may have copies of the battle sheets for 9119 and 9125, I will check this evening. they are archived in the Imperial War Museum.

Interesting features:

• 9189 is a male tank. (I always get asked if it was male or female).
• The top hatch is not painted with red and white rectangles which it probably would have been (for aerial recognition) on the 8th August 1918.

I will inform John Taylor as he found the notebook reference connecting this tank to my grandfather.

You don't live anywhere near Peter Jackson do you? He has got some pretty good photographic equipment, and probably would be interested!

regards and many thanks.

IAN WELLS 

Hi Ian,

No I am in Australia. I don't have a date for the image. The only thing that I didn't notice before is that there is a number scratched discreetly  on the reverse corner '166' but I think this  is a reference the photographer made and only meant something in relation to a personal system.
This item is currently for sale in a lot on a NZ website. 

https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/antiques-collectables/militaria/other/listing/4615284132?bof=dYaf6NvU

The other two images have some of the same people in them, but also others, I think. I suspect the man who is in most of the other family photos from the collecion is one of the men, he's maybe in two of them, that's why I am interested in a relevant crew list so I can cross reference names with the electoral roll for that area and solve the question of who the family actually is. Descendants may be able to get the photos back.

[INW]

I think these photos must have been taken at a training area or a workshop.  The ballast or hardcore ground surfaces and the proper buildings in the background suggest this.

Landships states:  

9189: 21 Jun 18 - male tank - 4th Battalion - Taken on Strength from Central Stores.

Will this be Erin?

The 4th battalion was posted just down the road from Erin at that time. So they could easily have come to collect it. My Grandad was a tank driver, and a driver would be needed.

9125: ditto

9225: does not appear to have been allocated.

9325: was in action on the 8th August, 1918. 2nd Battalion.

9119: was in action on the 8th August,1918. 14th Battalion.

Perhaps when a crew came to collect a tank from the stores they were photographed with it. I guess it would not be a full crew that was needed just for transport.

Perhaps the chaps who had prepared the tank at the workshop also joined in the photo.

INW

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 18 March by INW
typo corrected

[Darian Zam]

7 hours ago, INW said:

I think these photos must have been taken at a training area or a workshop.  The ballast or hardcore ground surfaces and the proper buildings in the background suggest this.

Landships states:  

9189: 21 Jun 18 - male tank - 4th Battalion - Taken on Strength from Central Stores.

Will this be Erin?

The 4th battalion was posted just down the road from Erin at that time. So they could easily have come to collect it. My Grandad was a tank driver, and a driver would be needed.

9125: ditto

9225: does not appear to have been allocated.

9325: was in action on the 8th August, 1918. 2nd Battalion.

9119: was in action on the 8th August,1918. 14th Battalion.

Perhaps when a crew came to collect a tank from the stores they were photographed with it. I guess it would not be a full crew that was needed just for transport.

Perhaps the chaps who had prepared the tank at the workshop also joined in the photo.

INW

 

 

 

 

 

My experience from many years of social history research is that the same person will look very, very different from one photo to the next. Angles and especially lighting can really alter appearances, especially harsh outdoor lighting like these set ups. It often doesn't even appear to be the same person.

Yeah I was gonna ask, once I noticed buildings and other tanks in the background. There's something about it that seems neutral and casual

[INW]

Darian

I will contact the Museum at Erin. I met somebody from this Museum at the 100th Anniversary Event of the Battle of Cambrai. I will find his contact info and ask what he recognizes.

So far have not got my head around the issues you would like help with. I am currently thinking the glass plate negatives would rarely get handed over to the person in the photograph. I wonder whether someone who worked at Erin took the photos of the crews coming to collect the tanks. A glass plate camera would have been a big object and would have to be 'official'.

After the first few months of the war soldiers were banned from carrying and using personal pocket cameras. The 'powers that be' were worried the images would fall into the hands of the enemy and or the UK press.

Lots of people worked at the Central Stores. They were usually selected because they had good mechanical engineering experience. I recall one garage mechanic missing out on any training as a soldier, he was just given a uniform and sent straight to a workshop.

INW

[Darian Zam]

6 minutes ago, INW said:

Darian

I will contact the Museum at Erin. I met somebody from this Museum at the 100th Anniversary Event of the Battle of Cambrai. I will find his contact info and ask what he recognizes.

So far have not got my head around the issues you would like help with. I am currently thinking the glass plate negatives would rarely get handed over to the person in the photograph. I wonder whether someone who worked at Erin took the photos of the crews coming to collect the tanks. A glass plate camera would have been a big object and would have to be 'official'.

After the first few months of the war soldiers were banned from carrying and using personal pocket cameras. The 'powers that be' were worried the images would fall into the hands of the enemy and or the UK press.

Lots of people worked at the Central Stores. They were usually selected because they had good mechanical engineering experience. I recall one garage mechanic missing out on any training as a soldier, he was just given a uniform and sent straight to a workshop.

INW

So far not a lot about it is making sense to me. Since the dealer is in Reefton it means the collection stayed in the local area for over a century. The collection seems to have belonged to J. Digas, which I have determined is misspelled, and was Joseph Diggs. He was living in Te Kinga on the edge of Lake Brunner. He was there for sure in the 1910s and 1920s as evidenced by some classified newspaper adverts and the era the photos were taken.
The name quoted is pretty much the only significant clue. Because the collection was held by him came from his estate or the family belongings, or was found somewhere in a trunk or an attic doesn't mean Joseph Diggs was the actual photographer necessarily, just because his name is quoted.

I have considered the point on the negatives. I know this poses some questions/clues/direction. Since the same family are in most photos, I assumed the photographer was a family member. The father seems to have been a logger professionally. The man seems to appear in a mill staff photo and a cricket team photo taken in the 1910s and 1920s respectively I have found at a relative site online.
There are a number of more formal landscape shots, a large wedding party and members of a local lodge of some type . This indicates that the photographer was a professional or a skilled amateur trying to become professional (he seems relatively accomplished). I think what has survived was a fraction of the collection but the majority is this one seemingly local family. Did they know Joseph Diggs, was he a family fiend and that's why they mostly kept the negatives of themselves?
I am making an educated guess from past research experience that the photographer was a professional who had another occupation and took photography work when he could. The father and the mother appear in no more than a couple of shots together. They could have been sharing the task, taking pictures of each other. They were also keen motorcyclists and had their own machines, probably unusual for a woman in the 1920s so generally  they seemed quite daring for people of that time.
Diggs is surprisingly to me not a common name. It is hard to determine Joseph Diggs' earlier years if he was a Kiwi. I am finding very little on him. There are no enlistment/military records I can find (just because they're not online doesn't mean he didn't serve). After the 1920s he effectively disappears. There doesn't seem to be a birth record or a death record in NZ that matches. It's all very weird that nothing adds up. The photographer was in the UK at some point to take these photos and as you point out probably an official capacity. I was aware of the ban, soldiers were smuggling cameras and film in and out, but not a big one like this. This is perhaps indicating to me he was not a Kiwi. Was he British? Quite possible. A lot of men came to the west Coast of NZ in the 1910s-1930s from elsewhere either for the gold dredging, or milling, or the government water scheme. They came from all over the country, America, the UK. When those industries started to peter out just pre-WWII period they left again.
There were very few people who even had the Diggs name, I assumed it would be more common. That's an advantage to sorting this out.  I have ruled out all the other J. Diggs living in  NZ at the time.  There was a Joseph Diggs who enlisted in Australia and served. His record describes him as fair haired and blue eyed with a facial scar so he is ruled out from being the man, the father, in most of the collection's photos who is dark-haired.
I'm a pretty seasoned researcher and pretty good at cracking cases. usually some dots join by now, in this case it's not. But gut feeling plays into leading you in the right direction as well. I feel like he was not a New Zealander, he lived there for some time, he knew the family well, he was friendly with them, in the town where he lived, and he took lots of pictures for him, and they kept them.

[Darian Zam]

Jos Divis seems to be the photographer of the collection. A quite well-known one in a number of public collections who has had a doco made about his life and career, so I am not sure how the seller who sells a lot of local history stuff and should be well-versed turned 'Jos Divis' into 'Joseph Digas.' A bit annoying that it wasted a day and a half of my time.  He was known for using a timer and photographing himself or, joining in the scene. However he doesn't appear to have placed himself in these shots.  The seller says that these and 'the motorcycle photos' were unattributed. Well, the motorcycle photos are definitely his work so non-attribution does not cast doubt on the tank shots. Anyway now we have the author the question is what was he doing in the UK and how. According to his biography he went back to Europe in 1913 and then again from 1926-1930. How does that work with the date these tanks existed and we in use/maintained?

[Darian Zam]

I've now identified a couple of people in some of the photos, one of them was Edward John (Ted) French, his headstone specifies him as Sgt in Duke of Cornwalls Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry 240680.

[INW]

Wekan and Darian

I do not appear to be able to use 'trade me' from the UK.

Please could you contact me using a personal message.

INW

Edited 21 March by INW

[INW]

should have been a personal message

 

 

Edited 21 March by INW
should have been a personal message

[INW]

should have been a personal message

Edited 21 March by INW
should have been a personal message

[Darian Zam]

The National Library  have a large collection of Jos Divis work they acquired from Derek French who knew Divis from Waiuta; and there is a lot of buzz around Divis at the moment as a 'rediscovered' early Kiwi photographer of note. I am starting to put together that these are the remainders of Derek French's collection (he died 2017). I still don't have an answer for the reason why he came into a lot of stuff from Divis' estate. The connection is that Divis knew the French family and that is why there are many photos of them in these lots. Maybe Divis just left them to French in his estate.

There's a distinct possibility that the tank images are not Divis but in this case that's irrelevant. The reason why I note Derek French's father's service is, the possibility of how these negatives ended up in the possession of the French family, although it is curious they are original glass negs as was the rest of Divis's images offered.

 

[Darian Zam]

So I'm wondering if anyone can further help me with information on Ted French's service.
In particular I am interested in NOK, residential address etc.
He apparently served in WWI as Edward John French
Duke of Cornwall Light Infantry, Service No 240680
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/173454373/edward-john-french

Not sure where he was born but he gave his birth date as 1894, however I suspect this was not accurate and was more likely 1896-1897. Also while not out of the question there was allegedly a nearly 10 year age gap between him and his wife which is very unusual and almost as a rule couples were the same age or the male 1 year older, so could be legit but unlikely especially as wife also gave a different age than she actually was.
He was in Pewsey, west of London when he married in 1923 and the couple also had a daughter there. At some point around 1925-1927 the permanently migrated to New Zealand.
I'm still trying to figure out if he actually took the tank photos or was in some way associated with the Port Erin Workshop...or the front the tanks participated in. it is obvious he had some connection to have the images but also, he was a panel-beater and painter by trade so his service spent there would kind of make sense.

Edited 1 April by Darian Zam

[Darian Zam]

Found a 1921 census where Ted French is living in the Pewsey area and ascribes his profession as 'outdoor photographer' at that time. So all but confirmed, he is the author of the tank photos. It was Occam's Razor really, but now confirmed.