Tank Corps badges.
 

For any Tank Corps collectors on the forum there is an interesting thread on the Great War Forum, in the section on uniforms and badges, that might be of interest to you. A real eye-opener perhaps.

Not for me.

Firstly the picture is of an officer’s bronze OSD badge. Secondly could I swear those definitely are ‘spanners’, no.

The ‘spanners’ 1970s fake is attached below you can clearly see from the shape of the crown it’s base, voids, berries, tank outline etc these are two very different dies.

Whoever Ypres1915 is he appears to have shown the fake BM cast copy Gaunt badge as a ‘genuine’ example when it is not.

Nice to see there’s some lighthearted mocking of our mods too. I also look forward to seeing Toby Purcell’s new evidence relating to school of musketry.

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/...k-corps-badge/

Just to add.

It may well have been Andy’s helpful thread which coined ‘ring spanners’ https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...corps+spanners

This has over time inevitably I suspect shortened in writings to just ‘spanners’.

What needs to be remembered is this is a colloquial term being used here to identify a prominent feature of badges from the Martin Marsh catalogue fake die, no. 131. Certainly when I use it my meaning is badges originating from this die.

And the die a badge is from is often paramount, as we know some TC fakes don’t have spanners, like this looped badge so just applying the beware of spanners is no silver bullet.

Conversely the badge on the red background does have spanners but they’re not the ‘dreaded’ sort or quite so ‘ring’ like or hollowed out. It’s clearly from a different die altogether and vastly differs from the Martin Marsh fake. I would be happy with this seldom seen badge in my collection.

Somehow beware is the ‘dreaded 99% of spanners with a hollow ring centre and crown with asymmetrical jewels and no void under the crown’ doesn’t have the same ring to it.

Similarly the Mr Punch faced Britannia on Norfolk Regiment fakes can sometimes be misconstrued and wrongly applied to the genuine Lambourne badge because on their version she is a bit of a thugly.

This is why it’s important to study the badge rather than merely repeating a tagline.

I'm still waiting for actual evidence to support his claims regarding spurious gilt and enamel LG and RHG forage cap badges.

I don't mean this comment to be interpreted as a for or against ring spanner badges being genuine or duff - the GWF photo is interesting but to me the quality of the magnified image is too poor to be sure that the apparently large spanner is such rather than a flaw or blemish in the image.

Interesting - I shall continue to sit on the sidelines (fence?) and follow the threads on these badges on both forums whilst hoping that they stay on theme and don't degenerate in to a shagfest.

100% Original
 

Does anyone have 100% original TC badge they can post. I have seen so many variants especially ones with three holes above corps scroll and others with two.

Sliders depending on manufacturer could be on tank scroll or crown from what I can workout at the minute.

Also below crown hole or no hole.

I’m trying to get 100% original to add to my research on my great grandad.

One last thing as well please. My gg transferred from Notts SRY to TC where he remained however two months after joining TC he is listed as MGC although still in TC, can anyone enlighten me on this please

Hi Dave,

All these badges belonged to Pte Ben Clark TC.

Regards

Mark

Members of the Heavy Section of the Machine Gun Corps formed the Tank Corps, when did your gg join the TC?
Original TC cap badges are very common, you should not have any problem in obtaining an example.

MH331

Many thanks that has cleared a few things up, seen ones similar but slider on crown so assuming still original.

Frank

My GG joined Notts SRY in July 1915

Transferred to TC in Feb 17

March 17 MGC although still TC according to records. There is a word before MGC on his records that I cannot make out looks like loaned but not sure. Either way he was TC from Feb 17 until 1920 when he was wounded in France

I would have thought that a statement of service in WO363 or WO364 would be clear on both units and dates, he was wounded in France in 1920? very strange, what is his name?

W S Ward 201877

First Name:
Wilfred S
Surname:
Ward
Regiments served with:
Unit Rank Service Number
Sherwood Rangers Private 2830
Tank Corps Private 201877
Archive Reference:
WO 372/21/6502


First Name:
W S
Surname:
Ward
Incident Details:
War Office Daily List No.5571
Report Date:
21/05/1918
More Information:
Entitled to wear a "Wound Stripe" as authorised under Army Order 204 of the 6th July 1916. The terms of this award being named on this list.
Rank:
Private
Service Number:
201877
Casualty Listed As:
Wounded
Next Of Kin Address:
Doncaster
Service:
British Army
Primary Unit:
Royal Tank Corps
Archive Reference:
NLS 1918_WList43
Collection:
British Army daily reports - missing, dead, wounded & POWs - WWI

Leigh

Many thanks for this have this already.

I’m trying to get to bottom of some s dates that do not make sense.

He joined Notts SRY 19/7/15

Transferred to TC 9/2/17 all makes sense up to now wounded 1918 discharged 1920 from TC.

Spanner in works now 21/3/17 was part of Machine Gun Corps but still in TC with TC number. But as you have seen no mention of MGC above. I’m trying to work out word before MGC on his records as faded.

WO364 states that he "Trans d to Mac Gun Corps 21/3/17 new number 47785"
So he transferred from the 4th Reserve Cavalry Regiment and Tank Corps into the Machine Gun Corps upon the 21st of March 1917.
Sadly, there is no Statement of Service, but, the Pensioners Record Card, from 1920 does show his unit as the 2nd Battalion of the Tank Corps.
As far as cap badges are concerned, I would simply go with the three, Sherwood Rangers, MGC and Tank Corps, all three are very common and you should have absolutely no problems whatsoever in obtaining them.

The Tank Corps didn't exist on 9/2/1917. It was formed on 28th July 1917 from the Heavy Branch, Machine Gun Corps.