Infantry Battalions 1918

[AndyMac]

Hi,

I have searched a number of sources but cannot seem to find any indication of the numbers that would make up an front line service battalion in 1918.

How many men would there be in a typical:

Platoon?

Company?

Battalion?

Can anyone help?

Thanks in advance.

Andy

[PPCLI]

All this information and further details can be found on the mother site at Battalion composition The main alteration from the 1914 establishment was an increase in the size of the machine gun section - see the paragraphs under the 'Changes during the war' subheading. The info provided under the subheading 'Battle reality' would certainly be the case with the majority of battalions in 1918.

All the best,

Stuart

[Old Tom]

Hello,

May I add a little to PPCLI's answer. By 1918 most battalions were well under strength and 5OO might be a typical strength compared with the 1914 establishment of 1,000. Also by 1918 the platoon had become an important sub unit capable of fire and movement in its own right. The Vickers MMG had left the battalions in Feb 1916. The Lewis had been introduced, but in a different role. 16 Lewis guns were considered as company weapons until the end of 1917 when they were devolved to platoons.

SS 143 issued by the BEF in Feb 1917 gave a suitable organisation of a platoon as:

HQ 1 offr and 4 OR

1 Section Bombers 1 NCO and 8

1 Section Lewis Gunners 1 NCO and 8

1 Section Riflemen 1 NCO and 8

1 Section Rifle Bombers 1 NC and 8

a total of 40, but the publication suggests that a platoon could function with strengths of 28 to 44.

Old Tom

[Ian Riley]

Also by 1918 the platoon had become an important sub unit capable of fire and movement in its own right. The Vickers MMG had left the battalions in Feb 1916. The Lewis had been introduced, but in a different role. 16 Lewis guns were considered as company weapons until the end of 1917 when they were devolved to platoons.

SS 143 issued by the BEF in Feb 1917 gave a suitable organisation of a platoon as:

Old Tom,

Do you mean that the Lewis gun were considered as company weapons until the end of 1916 rather than the end of 1917?

My understanding is that SS 135 Training of Divisions for Offensive Operations had been ambiguous about the role of the Lewis gun in December 1916 (when it was published - although actually printed in January 1917) but it did make the platoon the fundamental unit of the assault. SS 143 The Training of Platoons for Offensive Operations (or some very similar title from memory) definitely stated that the Lewis gun section was to be part of the platoon and that the change was to take place immediately. This was dated February 1917 and actually printed in March 1917 (44,000 copies approx) and again in April 1917 (75.000) copies). I gatheris that the final decision on the Lewis gun was to be deployed was made by Haig at the beginning of February 1917. He had originally favoured its employment as a company weapon but was persuaded that it should be based with platoons.

There seems to be plenty of evidence from war diaries and regimental histories that many formations and units had taken this aboard immediately onthe publication of SS 143 (if not before, following the hints of SS 135) although I think that there were probably pockets of resistance to tactical reform. I don't think Dr Dunn was too impressed in the Royal Welch Fusiliers where some platoons were only FOUR men (again that's from memory) strong!

Ian

Edited 17 January , 2008 by Ian Riley

[Ali Hollington]

As an example the 11th Essex, 6th Division had begun re-organisation of its platoons in early Feb 1917, later (about the 23rd) in the month it received the "new" formation as per SS 143 and adopted it. In contrast the 10th Essex, 18th Div didn't adopt the new formation till it had a chance to train in the new style and therefore did not change till May 1917.

The above is drawn from the respective war diaries held at kew.

Regards

Ali

[Old Tom]

Hello,

My statement on the Lewis and companies was based on my reading. My note indicates from 'Fire Power, Weapons and Theories of War ' byBidwell & Graham. I bow to your more specific information.

Old Tom

[Ian Riley]

Old Tom,

That will be the very same Bidwell and Graham who described the sending of General Solly Flood to found the Training Directorate at GHQ at the beginning of 1917 as 'sending a boy to do a boy's work'. I am not quite sure what that means but I don't think it was meant as a compliment. Strong evidence has emerged (through the prodigous efforts of someone else) that Solly Flood was in fact responsible for the pamphlet SS 143 February 1917 that promulgated the change in the platoon organisation, a masterpiece of clarity and readability, presumably in between games of marbles (a boy's work) at GHQ.

As Ali says the actual timing of the changes will have varied depending on when they had time to train. I don't know how the logistics of provisioning battalions with sufficient Lewis guns worked through out 1916 but there do not seem to be complaints of 'no guns'. It was not something that was attempted overnight - training classes for section and platoon commanders. The training of soldiers took time and attempts to ensure that there was multi-skilling in the platoon, especially in the rifle section which was definitely not supposed to be the minimally skilled but half were expected to be skilled with rifle-grenades and half with the Lewis gun as well as to be able to scout and act as company marksmen. In one division (possibly the 55th) every officer and NCO was expected to be trained on the Lewis gun. (I am working a little bit from memory here as I have just put the relevant material away). I have been breathing this for the past four weeks in pursuit of an essay and am very grateful for the opportunity to use it before it fades from view!

The French probably thought of the principle first (September 1916) but they had automatic rifles rather than something like the Lewis in their equivalenyt of platoons.

By mid 1918, there were 36 Lewis guns on the establishment of each battalion, two to a platoon plus four spare (I don't actually know how they were deployed. SS 143 The Training and Employment of Platoons November 1918 might have the answer.

Ali, I will be interested to further the discussion at the weekend!

Ian

[Chris Henschke]

Ian,

the four 'spare' Lewis guns came before the doubling of Lewis Guns in the companies. So, for about the first half of 1918, there were 20 Lewis Guns on establishment to a Battalion. Four extra for AA work.

These additional guns were allotted to Infantry Battalions on the scale of one per Company because the guns then on charge were platoon weapons and could not, therefore, be reserved exclusively for anti-aircraft work without decreasing the firepower of the platoon to an undesirable extent.

The existing establishment was not increased and detachments required to man the additional guns were to be found from within the existing establishment. As these guns were not required to be as mobile to the same extent as platoon guns, the detachments were not required to be as large, and a detachment of I N.C.O. and 3 men was sufficient.

In Infantry Battalions the additional guns formed part of Company Headquarters and the detachments were found by withdrawing one man from each Lewis Gun Section of the four platoons of the Company and attaching them to Company Headquarters. The authority for this was OB/1934, GHQ, 3rd February, 1918.

Chris Henschke

[AndyMac]

Just the kind of info I was looking for Pals- much appreciated!

Not sure how I missed the 'Long Long Trail' article though...(?!)

Thanks to all.

Andy