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

Remembered Today:

Percentages.


Sgt_Hazell_Great_Grandson

Recommended Posts

I am sure this has been asked before but i am a new boy !

Is there any information available on the percentage of each rank of soldier killed in WW1 ?

I would guess the percentage decreases as the rank gets higher ?

Regards, Roland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure this has been asked before but i am a new boy !

Is there any information available on the percentage of each rank of soldier killed in WW1 ?

I would guess the percentage decreases as the rank gets higher ?

I don't know the numbers involved but if you search the archive I amsure that you will come up with an answer.

I do think that your assertion that the percentage of killed decreases with increase in rank is actually way off the mark, in fact, up to a point, I think the exact opposite is correct.

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may be right, Andy - I don`t know the figures. If I were to guess, though, I`d say that losses would rise to a maximum where men were most exposed and that would be among those actually leading attacks - around captain, say. For the rest, the risk would be proportional to time spent at the front - fairly even up to say Lt Col, then falling. The attached graph is presented with no supporting evidence!

Phil B

post-2329-1117184706.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can supply the number of casualties of each rank (over 2000 of them) as recorded in the CWGC database but you would need to know the number serving to work out the percentages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure this has been asked before but i am a new boy !

Is there any information available on the percentage of each rank of soldier killed in WW1 ?

I would guess the percentage decreases as the rank gets higher ?

Regards, Roland.

Hi Roland, :)

It is actually the complete opposite !!

Just loose stats, one in seven Officers died, as to one in eight other ranks.

Cheers

Tim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Tim.

Is it possible to break this stat down some more ? Is Phil on the right tracks with his graph ?

Regards, Roland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Roland, :)

I would think that Phil was well on the right track.

I'll do some more digging !!

Cheers

Tim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry, am I reading that right - 2000 different ranks?

Chris

You ceratainly are.

I am away from my records at the moment and so cannot give the exact figure but there are about 2200 from memory - all forces and both WW1 and WW2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think that Phil was well on the right track.

I also think he is on the right track but I suspect that the dip from captain to general is not so steep, large numbers of Bn commanders were also killed.

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I`ve done some counting of LNL officers who died from the regular and service Bns. I got 5 Lt Cols, 13 Maj, 54 Capt, 48 Lt & 135 2/Lts. I don`t know what a typical distribution of officer ranks would have been throughout the war but the 1LNL went to war with 1 Lt Col, 2 Maj, 6 Capt, 8 Lt & 6 2/Lts. I`d guess that a typical Bn wouldn`t be much different except for having more 2/Lts. The figures do indicate, however, that captain may have been the most vulnerable rank in an infantry Bn. I`d be interested to see figures for other regiments. Phil B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Officer casualties for 1/5th Seaforth (1 May 15 - 11 Nov 18):

Lt Col - 1

Maj - 1

Capt - 5

2/Lt & Lts - 22

Total of 29 out of 189 officers who served in 1/5 Seaforth in this period = 15.3%

Jock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add numbers to Phil's graph above.

The actual number of WW1 names with his ranks in the CWGC database is as follows (not sure if it helps)...

Serjeant 29822 (includes 'Sergeant' for non UK/NZ army)

Second Lieutenant 22981

Major 2692

General 2

Remember that these include all Commonwealth names up to 31.08.21 and from all services using these ranks (eg including RAF).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Terry, so would these figures indicate that percentage wise being a full General was the safest rank or the most risky ? Another added thought...Would the percentage risk of death be about the same for a full General as a Private ?

Roland.

Link to comment
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...