|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 5, 2010 12:06:08 GMT -8
Well, here we are once again, but in a sparkling New Year! New and more dedicated recruiting efforts, more light hearted ways of poking fun at the 'HUN'... and 'Larry', and newer ideas for developing our fast growing trench system. The RMLI will be especially pleased with the latest developements. Also, by continueing this thread, we can learn together [as well as having a little fun] about the Do's and Don't, Pitfalls and Slides of our chosen period impression. I would hope that a few more of the erm..... Feldgrue.. will try their hand this session, and join our resident 'Froggy' : Sgt-Chef, and that rather friendly chap on the other side, known as 'Larry!' OK then, lets kick off with a 'Safety' question, and finish the third set of five which we started before the previous festivities. A reminder!.... read the question type, and that will point you in the direction to what is required!  'Q'-13.  There are two Safety violations here... what are they? One is clearly stated in the GWHS Bylaws. Seph ;D |
|
|
|
Post by rmli on Jan 5, 2010 12:07:45 GMT -8
Amazing!!! It just reappeared, like magic!
By the by-laws, It is the bayonet attached to the rifle during a tactical event.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 5, 2010 12:18:31 GMT -8
OK, where did the picture just disappear too?  ? Well... it is.. 'Q'-13. |
|
|
|
Post by oskar2ndchev on Jan 5, 2010 14:16:44 GMT -8
OK, for safety violation No. 2, it appears that the chap in the background is resting his hands on top of the rifle muzzle. If there's a blank in there and should there be a discharge, our chappie is going to be one very unhappy camper. Can you say "stumpy"?   Even if the safety is set, do you really want to take the chance? In any event, it's unsafe and is not to be done. |
|
1886lebel
GWHS 
151?me R?giment d'Infanterie de Ligne
Posts: 732
|
Post by 1886lebel on Jan 5, 2010 14:54:21 GMT -8
Amazing!!! It just reappeared, like magic! By the by-laws, It is the bayonet attached to the rifle during a tactical event. I know a few of you have seen the following picture I have posted below and are going to say this was against the GWHS by-laws and you would be correct. This was taken back in the Summer of 2002 at one of the GWA events and this was a STAGED reenactment for the public, one and only one done at the GWA site. Yes, we did fix bayonets and rushed out the trench with them but as soon as we all got to the road that divides the Allied and Central Powers sectors we either had to die, get wounded or stay behind the road with them and the CP guys stayed inside their trench shooting at us. This scenario only lasted about 5 minutes after that we unfixed bayonets. Patrick  And to the Sgt. Major I APOLIGIZE for you if I over-stepped your post with a picture of Frenchmen  |
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 5, 2010 16:23:21 GMT -8
Well Done Adam and the RMLI.... Phil, you get the apple! ;D  As we can see above, this should never happen at any GWHS trench event. The fixing of bayonets can only happen if it has been previously sanctioned for a well reherced scenario. I happen to know that this photograph was taken during filming for a documentary. As for the covering of the rifle muzzle.... DON'T EVER LET IT HAPPEN. We all have a slight laps in concentration at times, and its at this oint that we all should look after each other. A quick word or nudge is good enough as a reminder of the stupidity of this action. Soley to illustrate how widespread the problem is getting... below is a pic from a Napoleonic event, and the players are one of the TOP UNITS!  Also, thank you to Sgt-Chef for illustrating the bayonet issue. Now onward.... and back to our three 'Plum Chum Erberts!'  Whenever one is appointed with a higher rank than ones contemparies, then one has an obligation to: Lead By Example. I can't actually fathom out what the three individuals above are doing! Auditioning for a re-make of 'Blackadder Goes Forth' or 'Monty Phython?'. Whatever the occasion is, they have never read a Drill Manual, and being honest, I'd be rolling on the floor with laughter at the sight of their performance. Give one of them credit though, for he's trying to look the part he is supposed to be portraying... I think. 'Q'-14. 1) Which of the three has been watching too many Hollywood impressions of Officers antics? 2) Which of the three portrays a modicomb of authenticity? Seph ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by oskar2ndchev on Jan 5, 2010 16:31:15 GMT -8
I'd be inclined to say that the gent on the right is the best of the bunch, the gent on the left looks pretty hopeless. Not sure about proper swagger stick positioning but the one on the right seems to be the best. But then again, I don't claim any level of Commonwealth expertise so I could be totally wrong. :-)
You know, if you're going to have a group of two or more, it really would be a good idea for everyone to be uniform, even if it's wrong. As we used to say in the Army, if you're going to screw up, screw up as a group! :-)
As for fixed bayonets, there's only one time that we've done it for a GWHS battle and that was pre-arranged. Basically we charged the Allied wire with fixed bayonets and then everyone died on the wire as the MG opened up. Nobody was meant to actually make contact and it worked out very well.
|
|
|
|
Post by aefstraggler on Jan 5, 2010 16:32:27 GMT -8
I would go with the closest as displaying a modicum of authenticity.
As for the one who has seen too may Hollywood movies - I would go with the
one in the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldeagle1939 on Jan 5, 2010 19:30:38 GMT -8
Yeah the dude in the middle lookslike he is trying to hard to be "British" for lack of a better term.
The Guy on the right looks passable I suppose.
I'm not even going to guess, what the fellow on the left is doing, I only have to say what drugs is he taking and what do I have to tell my doctor to put me on the same!
|
|
Radford
New Member
My Grandfather's Dog Tag.
Posts: 29
|
Post by Radford on Jan 15, 2010 11:47:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 15, 2010 13:22:57 GMT -8
You must have been burning the midnight oil to find the only period pic with a Gor-blimey having a chinstrap.. and your point is?
Come on now Radford.. dont be shy!
Seph ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by rmli on Jan 15, 2010 18:20:22 GMT -8
I believe that the point he is making, is that you can almost always find an exception to any rule. It is not the "norm", but sh*t does happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 15, 2010 19:16:20 GMT -8
Aw.. now you've gone and spoilt it! How on earth is Radford going to explain his pictures now? Seph |
|
Radford
New Member
My Grandfather's Dog Tag.
Posts: 29
|
Post by Radford on Jan 16, 2010 16:56:30 GMT -8
Dear Seph, Phil, and List- There's really nothing to explain. The point of the photographs is self evident. A morning's browsing through my "'Hollywood' information files" yielded a photograph of a soldier wearing a Gorblimey with a leather chinstrap. It is an actual, documented, historic fact. It is a shame that it conflicts with Seph's pre-conceived notion that the only true history is that which is validated by inclusion in officially published documents. Even Seph is not naïve enough to believe that this is the only available period photo of a Gorblimey with a leather chin strap, but he didn't even bother to check. He took a photo off of a reenacting web site and proceeded to declare that the Sergeant's headdress was incorrect. He did not identify what unit the Sergeant was representing. How does he know that the chinstrap is incorrect for that man's impression? I am afraid Seph has fallen into the re-enactors trap of believing only what he reads in official MOD sources. The manuals are an excellent starting point, but he needs to take his head out of his Government manuals and take a look at some of what really happened. The BEF had millions of men in it, sorted into hundreds of different organizational bodies, each seeking how to distinguish itself in some small way. It puzzled me that the Sergeant would go to the effort and expense of fitting a leather chinstrap to his cap. Why would he bother unless he could back it up? I went for a browse and found a period image of a Gorblimey with a leather chin strap. With actual historical precedent, I looked further and found the series of photos where Seph got that image. The Sergeant is a member of the "Salient Remembrance Detachment"; a Belgian WW1 living history organization. Their web site is: www.srd1914-1918.tk/He is representing a Sergeant of the 1st Bn. Lancashire Fusiliers, 29th Division, BEF. The clip that Seph posted is part of image number 14 of the "herdenkingsweekend" photo set (taken in 2009). One interesting thing is that that Serjeant can be seen in earlier photos from 2008 and 2007 wearing the later style trench cap. Another interesting thing is that private soldiers of the 1st. Bn. LF at that same "herdenkingsweekend" event do not have a leather chinstrap on their Gorblimeys. Therefore, it was not a simple oversight! Does that Sergeant have access to information indicating that LF NCO's wore a leather chinstrap on their Gorblimeys? Wouldn't it be worth finding out if that was the case? In any case, Seph needs to be careful making absolute, declarative statements when he actually doesn't have all the facts. |
|
|
|
Post by rsm2ndbtnlf on Jan 16, 2010 17:46:31 GMT -8
"The BEF had millions of men in it, sorted into hundreds of different organizational bodies, each seeking how to distinguish itself in some small way. " You know... I never knew that!! Isn't he a love? But then again, if Radford had actually opened his eyes and READ the opening introduction to this thread, AND the explanation of the chinstrap for the Gor-Blimey...  Radford... what part of the following statement do you not understand? THE GOR-BLIMEY WAS DESIGNED TO BE WORN WITHOUT A CHINSTRAP!Come on now... this is easy! Seph  |
|
