Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

Recommended Posts

stiletto_33853

Hi Charles,

Unusual one as it's part of a 4 page service record. I have a few RB men going to either RGA or RFA, this one is the only record with an SD622 in it though.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I've posted a thread here about some of the assessment  during the coursewhich went into a Form SD622, at least in No, 12 OCB,

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
stiletto_33853

Interesting new thread Charles

 

Frewer, E.A., Z/1348, 4th, 9th & 12th RB

Comm. 30/4/18 in 5th RB

WO374/25819

DSC02418.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
stiletto_33853

Charles,

Re. your post 74. Another one of these No. 1 School of Instruction for Infantry Officers at Brocton has popped up. As they are of interest to you, this is R.F.A. L/47668, transferred to 16th Rifle Brigade early 1916, commissioned 27/6/17 to 5th RB, att'd 4th Middlesex, back to RB after wounding.

WO339/93367.

 

Andy

DSC02430 copy.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
stiletto_33853

Fowler, W.

S/4074 13th Rifle Brigade, commissioned M.G.C. 8/10/18

WO374/25319

DSC02519.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/03/2020 at 11:21, stiletto_33853 said:

Re. your post 74. Another one of these No. 1 School of Instruction for Infantry Officers at Brocton has popped up. As they are of interest to you, this is R.F.A. L/47668, transferred to 16th Rifle Brigade early 1916, commissioned 27/6/17 to 5th RB, att'd 4th Middlesex, back to RB after wounding.

WO339/93367.

Andy, many thanks for these three.

Gates is very interesting.  The form says he attended an OCB, and it appears he attended No. 1 School only 6 months after passing out from there.

 

i'm finding some snippets on the No. 2 School of Instruction in the London District Orders so may give an idea of how many men passed through.  I may be able to find some strength data for these two schools and an estimate of when the started in WO114 Weekly strength returns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
stiletto_33853

Fretter, H.

S/2763, 10th RB

Comm. 10/9/18 into 5th KRRC

WO374/25801

DSC02698.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 10 months later...

Just stumbled across this interesting thread. What I find especially fascinating from the samples provided is the relatively large number of cadets with previous service overseas, quite a few of whom had already suffered some form of wounding, that not only stipulated a future preference for the same arm of service as previous but often in the same regiment. Esprit de corps? A desire to return to some vague kind of familiarity when sent overseas again? A determination not to let former comrades down? Or, perhaps, some form of unofficial pressure from above directing cadets back to the fold of the infantry, the main fighting force?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Petroc said:

Just stumbled across this interesting thread. What I find especially fascinating from the samples provided is the relatively large number of cadets with previous service overseas, quite a few of whom had already suffered some form of wounding, that not only stipulated a future preference for the same arm of service as previous but often in the same regiment. Esprit de corps? A desire to return to some vague kind of familiarity when sent overseas again? A determination not to let former comrades down? Or, perhaps, some form of unofficial pressure from above directing cadets back to the fold of the infantry, the main fighting force?

By later in the War, previous experience at the Front was generally expected. Essentially, the demand, with the high turnover, was for infantry officers. Moreover candidates for the artillery would be expected to have specialist experience or ability to offer. So, if you wanted a commission, you generally needed to express willingness to serve in the infantry.

 Some regiments seem to have been happy to see ex O.Rs. back as officers in their former battalions, others not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I would disagree slightly that  officer cadets needed to have frontline experience. Yes, this was true for most of the war- Of course, a good few got commissions in 1914-1915 without any active service experience or without having served overseas.  The wastage of junior officers  meant, broadly, a policy of needs must when the devil drives- a large number of the socially elite junior officers of the Regular Army were dead by the middle of 1915.  The twin ends of slowly having careers for career soldiers-the colonels and generals of tomorrow came up against the brutality that junior officers were always needed as they were wasted more than any other ranks. Captain was the most dangerous rank to hold in the British Army in the Great War, if casualties are measured against rank as a percentage- and that comes on top of being in the front line before that as 2 LT and LT.

   Thus, in 1916-1917, it clearly made sense to have experienced NCOs- many of whom came from educated and middle class backgrounds anyway. But in early 1918 there seems to be a change- I have several casualties of the last months of the war who were officer cadets straight from entry- all of them on conscription. 

   

Link to post
Share on other sites
Charles Fair

Thanks for comments and observations.  At the moment my research is indicating that up to 20% (and probably no more than 10%) of those being commissioned in late 1918 were going straight to OCB from an OTC. I have described a very small sample in this thread: 

I am doing bigger studies on sample companies from Nos. 2 and 4 OCBs which should help me to develop a better estimate.

 

Men who wanted to avoid the stigma of conscription could still volunteer for a commission. There were essentially three routes:

1) schools with a Junior Division OTC (whether or not a public school) were favoured by the War Office. Their boys could stay at school until 18 1/2 years before being summoned to an OCB.  They would have had several years of OTC training for 10+ hours a week by that point and had a syllabus which prepared them for an OCB. Schools did value their reputations with the War Office, and did not recommend boys they did not think were up to the job. There is a chapter on this in Tim Halstead's forthcoming book coming out from Helion later this year.

2) whilst still under age they could join a Senior Division OTC if going up to University.  The senior OTCs also took extra-mural cadets.

3) join the Inns of Court OTC or Artists Rifles OTC

 

Routes 2 and 3 were clearly an option for boys from schools that did not have an OTC.

 

I have a chapter on the OCBs in '1917 - The Darkest Hour' ed Spencer Jones which will be published by Helion in Q4 2021.

 

Analysis of the form SD622s will be in my thesis and its likely to be a couple of years before I have built a big enough sample and crunched the numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given English tendencies to invert things, should one take "very fair" to be better or worse than 'fair"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wexflyer said:

Given English tendencies to invert things, should one take "very fair" to be better or worse than 'fair"?

 

       Our Royal Navy colleagues should be able to describe the various grades of wording used on ratings records.  "Satisfactory" was,I think,the lowest comment-tantamount to a career-stopper.

     The classic comment on this is the apocryphal school reports across 3 terms of the school year- Term 1 "Trying"   Term 2 "Still trying"  Term 3 "Still very trying"

Link to post
Share on other sites
adk46canada

In the Canadian Corps, battalions absolutely expected their cadets would return to them. As a result, they would take care in selecting good candidates. I have seen several sharp letters from battalion commanders angered that their cadets were not returning to them.

 

Regards

Bill Stewart

Link to post
Share on other sites
Charles Fair

 

22 hours ago, Wexflyer said:

Given English tendencies to invert things, should one take "very fair" to be better or worse than 'fair"?

 

That's possible.  I haven't looked at enough of these/done the analysis to see how these 'grades' align with the comments in the bottom box. I'll do some sentiment analysis on the text when I have enough data.  I also haven't seen any form of guide used by instructors - if one existed. I suspect there was some form of guidance on assessment emanating from SD3 in the War Office to help ensure some degree of consistency across OCBs, and calibration between companies and platoons within an OCB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...