War Diaries Talk

Query concerning Unit Strength.

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    I've come across a case I haven't seen before. I'm tagging the 1st Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers and the author lists the battalion strength as both trench (or sometimes effective) strength and ration strength. The figures for ration strength are the higher ones. For instance, the page I just finished gave trench strength at 15 officers and 510 O.R. and the ration strength as 23 officers and 734 O.R. Which one should I use?

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    The trench strength here is the number of men who would be involved in any action, while the ration strength is the total number of men they had to feed, including the non-combatant roles, like the Medical Officer, quartermaster, etc. I also haven't come across this in the diaries yet, but I think I would tag the trench strength in this case, as it's that which really determines the effectiveness of the battalion in its current role.

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Okay, I'll tag the trench strength. That seemed to me to be the way to do it. Then I thought about those emergencies where the enemy breaks through and everyone down to the cooks is pressed into front-line service, so I decided to ask.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    I think in such desperate cases, even the ration strength probably wouldn't reflect the true picture. The defenders would be anybody and everybody who was in the area, whether they were officially part of that battalion or not. But as you say, for general front-line operations, the trench strength would be more indicative of the unit's actual presence as a fighting force.

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com

    In the diary of the 9 Battalion Royal Irish Fusiliers The Author quotes figures for Effective Strength, Fighting Strength and Ration. For the Unit Strength I entered the figures given for Effective Strength but now I am wondering if this was correct. There was a comment on Unit strength tagging before but I can't remember it now. Page link: https://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/subjects/AWD0003evr

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Marie, I remembered that earlier discussion because I was the person who had the question! I've merged the previous thread into this one, as I think it answers you're question. Looks like tagging the Effective Strength was the right choice.

    Posted

  • erik.schaubroeckscarlet.be by erik.schaubroeckscarlet.be

    AWD0003fy6 In this diary of the 10 Bn Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers I find at the end of every month the unit strenght on the first day of the month and on the last day of the month. I always tagged them both and the total (not taking into account those who are on leave or in hospital etc. But what do I do with the WO's? Do I count them with the officers?

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    No, count the Warrant Officers with the other ranks.

    Posted

  • erik.schaubroeckscarlet.be by erik.schaubroeckscarlet.be

    What if the author just mentions the overall total strength?

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    That is a bit difficult with the way the unit strength tag is set up. In that situation, I'd put the total strength in the Other Ranks field, but make a note in the comments box to say that figure includes everybody.

    Posted