What does “NZMGS” stand for?????? - Page 12 - British & Commonwealth Military Badge Forum

pukman · #**166** 10-01-13, 05:25 PM

Here are some recent aquisitions .A No.3 Company NZMGC patch(green star on black backround) and an unknown MG proficiency patch.

atillathenunns · #**167** 10-01-13, 11:16 PM

Puk, I must admit I have been stalling on posting distinguishing cloth insignia worn by the NZMGC, as I wanted to check out Malcolm Thomas's collection first, as I am still missing photos for a couple of patches.
I have had two invites from Malcolm to check out his collection, the last one was at Barry's and Matthew's Wellington book signing, but failed to follow up on it, hopefully I will catch up with Malcolm at the Wellington Military Fair next month.

The New Zealand NZMGC distinguishing patches, were only in use for a short period of time, the NZMG HQ patch itself was only worn for a few months, which suggests to me there would not be much in the way of variations when viewing surviving examples.

I do happen to have high res photos, front and back, of a known original No.3 Company (Green star) NZMGC patch, but as these patches are relatively easy to reproduce, I am only going to show a photo of the front.

In comparrison with Puks new acquisition, I can see that Puk has photgraphed his patch on its side.
Interestingly, the weave of both the star and black square seem to much more coarser on Puks example, which IMO is more common with WW2 NZ cloth patches that I have seen.

Another notable difference is the thread, the one I have pictured, you can see they have used green coloured thread, and when viewed from the back, except for where it is tied off, the green thread is almost not visable, although the outline of the star is very visable.

Interestingly, I decided to compare the stitching on my collection of WW1 NZ 1st Battalion and 2nd Battalion patches, although none of these have green cloth, they all commonly use red thread on red cloth, yellow thread on yellow and gold cloth, and black thread on blue cloth.
But whats even more interesting, the reverse of my patches, match the style of stitching on the green NZMG patch I have posted.

I am not saying that puks badge is not original, anything is possible when you take war shortages into account. Certainly before we can throw it to the fake pile, we need to investigate a lot further and see what other collectors have in their collections, so we can make a much better evaluation from.

What size is your patch puk? Any provenance? Where did you get it from?

pukman · #**168** 11-01-13, 03:08 AM

I can't gaurantee much,but i can gaurantee there is many,many decades of fading on this patch.It certainly has age which may not be evident in a photo but sure is with the naked eye.Before i bought it i compared the stitching to an example owned by a friend.This other patch was bought over a decade ago from one of NZ's true badge guru's.It is also on a slant.My one is approx 35mm square

Tinto · #**169** 11-01-13, 04:15 AM

Hi Brent and Iain,
Here are my two NZMGC patches for comparison.
Cheers, Tinto

Chrisr · #**170** 11-01-13, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atillathenunns

Andy, it does seem small, but I think you can appreciate that when the NZ Machine Gun Sections were first authorised in 1910, they would have seemed a formidable unit of that time.

The formation of Machine Gun Sections into Companies and Squadrons of the New Zealand Machine Gun Corps was a necessary expansion, however they still operated as Machine gun sections up until the end of the war, but instead of one section, there was a lot of sections working together.

I think Andy may be correct.

When the machine gun sections were authorised in 1910, they were part of the infantry battalions and mounted rifles regiments. Each unit had a section of two maxim heavy machine guns (the Anzacs received the Vickers during the Gallipoli campaign), and were an integral part of the battalion or mounted rifles regiment. Unlike the Germans and the Turks they were not a separate branch. During 1915 each unit machine gun section was increased to four guns. British doctrine allowed for the macine gun sections to be brigaded under the brigade machine gun officer depending on the situation, and they were trained to operate in the brigaded or battery formation. At the landing on 25 April 1915 the NZ gun sections were not brigaded but landed with their battalions, the Auckland section helping repel the Turks from crossing the Nek on the evening of 25 April.

In early 1916, when the Lewis gun was introduced as a platoon weapon, the machine sections were withdrawn from the battalions and formed into machine gun companies with one allotted to each brigade.

In late 1917 the machine gun companies were formed into machine gun battalions with one allotted to each division.

The invoice from Gaunt (post #2) shows the date as 31st October 1916. This was well after the machine gun sections were withdrawn from the battalions and formed into machine gun companies, and the heavy/medium machine gunners were regarded as specialists and forming their own distinct units.

On this basis, and the fact there was an NZ Machine Gun Specialist badge I would think Andy is correct and the S in NZMGS means Specialist.

Cheers
Chris

atillathenunns · #**171** 11-01-13, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinto

Hi Brent and Iain,
Here are my two NZMGC patches for comparison.
Cheers, Tinto

What size are yours Tinto?

Tinto · #**172** 11-01-13, 06:02 AM

Hi Brent,
Here's a picture with a grid attached per curtesy of Derrick of this Forum.
Tinto

atillathenunns · #**173** 11-01-13, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrisr

I think Andy may be correct.

When the machine gun sections were authorised in 1910, they were part of the infantry battalions and mounted rifles regiments. Each unit had a section of two maxim heavy machine guns (the Anzacs received the Vickers during the Gallipoli campaign), and were an integral part of the battalion or mounted rifles regiment. Unlike the Germans and the Turks they were not a separate branch. During 1915 each unit machine gun section was increased to four guns. British doctrine allowed for the macine gun sections to be brigaded under the brigade machine gun officer depending on the situation, and they were trained to operate in the brigaded or battery formation. At the landing on 25 April 1915 the NZ gun sections were not brigaded but landed with their battalions, the Auckland section helping repel the Turks from crossing the Nek on the evening of 25 April.

In early 1916, when the Lewis gun was introduced as a platoon weapon, the machine sections were withdrawn from the battalions and formed into machine gun companies with one allotted to each brigade.

In late 1917 the machine gun companies were formed into machine gun battalions with one allotted to each division.

The invoice from Gaunt (post #2) shows the date as 31st October 1916. This was well after the machine gun sections were withdrawn from the battalions and formed into machine gun companies, and the heavy/medium machine gunners were regarded as specialists and forming their own distinct units.

On this basis, and the fact there was an NZ Machine Gun Specialist badge I would think Andy is correct and the S in NZMGS means Specialist.

Cheers
Chris

Welcome to the discussion Chris, I'm afraid it has gone way past just thinking when it comes to what does NZMGS stand for?

I am not sure how many period documents I have already posted which support that NZMGS = “New Zealand Machine Gun Section” on this thread, but I am pretty sure I can double that number again.

Chris, can you provide any period documents which support that NZMGS = “New Zealand Machine Gun Specialist”?

atillathenunns · #**174** 11-01-13, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinto

Hi Brent,
Here's a picture with a grid attached per curtesy of Derek of this Forum.
Tinto

Thanks for that Tinto

Puk the regulation size is 2 inches, which is about 5cm, if your patch is 35mm (3.5cm) I would taking it back to the seller, and pointing them to this thread.

pukman · #**175** 11-01-13, 07:40 AM

The one thing i have know Brent is that the NZ army circa WW1 ,that regulations were never strictly adhered too.

Who in there right mind would copy a patch ,make it smaller and on a different angle.Doesn't make sense .I'm sorry if it doesn't tick all your boxes for you, but sometimes you have to look outside the square.

In my opinion,it looks to have been trimmed on the margins at some stage of its life.Perhaps it was regulation size originally.Its certainly no modern copy,

Chrisr · #**176** 11-01-13, 08:43 AM

Brent,

Thank you for your welcome. This is an excellent thread that certainly has gone way beyond the original topic, with many wonderful photos and badges displayed. Congratulations on creating such an interesting and informative thread.

Looking at the document in post #10, I hadn't drawn the view it was definitive in confirming what NZMGS stood for. Nonetheless, I am happy to stand corrected and accept the Kiwi view. Having just seen post #95 showing the NZMG signallers badge with the NZMGS titles either side of it has me puzzled as to why it is linked to the signallers. I noted the NZMGC and NZMG titles are either side of the NZ Machine gun corps badges.

The Kiwis had such a wide range of badges during the Great War, as opposed to us Aussies (The Rising Sun), so much so that I opted for the NZ Expeditionary Corps badge for the cover on my book on the Landing at Anzac even though it was worn later in the war. It is also why I have limited my NZ collection primarily to the infantry and mounted rifles. Hard to get here and when I am in NZ there are not many around in the second hand shops.

Anyway an outstanding thread and congratulations to all who have contributed the photos, badges and commentary to it. It is a classic thread.

Best wishes
Chris

Spr Jock · #**177** 11-01-13, 09:27 AM

Chrisr

Before you go too far along the track with things writing wise , you had best consult the actual Book . It may help out your research .

During the First World War there were two different Machine Gun units in the New Zealand Machine Gun Corps.

The Machine Gun Companies in Europe and a Machine Gun Squadron in
the Middle East .

My reading of the History did not turn up any mention of 'Specialist' being used as title for either a Unit or a Gunner ,

I may have missed it tho .

cheers ,
Jock

Quote:

With the Machine Gunners in France and Palestine

Preface

In writing this historical record of the New Zealand Machine Gun Corps, I have had the two-fold task of tracing the operations of the Corps in France and in Sinai and Palestine. A General History of the New Zealand Forces in these campaigns has already been written and published. I have endeavoured in this account to follow the chronology of the General Histories, but to supplement them by giving in greater detail the part the Corps took in the many operations of the campaigns. The narrative is divided into two parts; the first deals with the work of the Machine Gun Companies that served the New Zealand Division in France, and the second deals with the work of the Machine Gun Squadron that served the Anzac Mounted Division in Sinai and Palestine

E. W. C. Chaytor,

Major-General, Commanding New Zealand Military Forces

__________________________________________________ ________________

http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/schol...front-d13.html

Title: With the Machine Gunners in France and Palestine

Chrisr · #**178** 11-01-13, 09:36 AM

Hi Jock.

Thank you and noted. I was aware of the Machine Gun Squadrons in the Middle East with the mounted rifles. My focus was on the Machine Companies in Europe, simply for brevity in the post. Nonetheless, your point is most valid.

Best wishes
Chris

atillathenunns · #**179** 13-01-13, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrisr

Brent, Thank you for your welcome. This is an excellent thread that certainly has gone way beyond the original topic, with many wonderful photos and badges displayed. Congratulations on creating such an interesting and informative thread.

Looking at the document in post #10, I hadn't drawn the view it was definitive in confirming what NZMGS stood for. Nonetheless, I am happy to stand corrected and accept the Kiwi view.

Chris, I am glad you are enjoying the thread, I would have replied sooner, but I am sharing a computor with my daughter, who has been hogging it due to it being the school holidays.

In regards to your first post, you mentioned “British doctrine” that was used in 1915!
For the benefit of other forum members who may be unfamiliar with this, British doctrine for machine-gun tactics available in 1915, was published in 1909 by Major R. V. K. Applin, and was primarily based on his observations during the Russo-Japanese war (8 February 1904 – 5 September 1905).

Unfortunately, Major Applin's outlines in regards to the utility of machine guns and their employment in tactical situations, was actully not operationally developed by the British War Office until 1917.

Fortunately for the New Zealanders, Wallingford appreciated Major Applin's book and put his doctrine to good use on Gallipoli.
(Lieutenant-Colonel R. V. K. Applin was the “Army Corps Machine Gun Officer” attached to the 2nd ANZAC Corps)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrisr

Having just seen post #95 showing the NZMG signallers badge with the NZMGS titles either side of it has me puzzled as to why it is linked to the signallers. I noted the NZMGC and NZMG titles are either side of the NZ Machine gun corps badges.

Due to only having collected half of the badges worn by NZ machine gunners, they are currently displayed on a small board, which does not allow for 100% chronological order. When I get more badges, I will put them on a bigger board and display them in their correct order.

The 'New Zealand Machine Gun Section' and the 'New Zealand Signal Section' both wore the same “Specialist Company” cap and collar badges.
NZMGS shoulder badges were worn by the 'New Zealand Machine Gun Section,' and NZSC shoulder badges were worn by the 'New Zealand Signal Section.'

sigcollector · #**180** 13-01-13, 06:55 AM

I have to say pukemans patch looks real to me... it would depend on where they were produced, if they were made made locally in the field, I have seen other original patches infantry and so on that are real but not to the exact dimensions.

Where did yours come from Brent it looks quite new and has never been worn by the looks of it.
I have seen fakes before they are to perfect and better than the real patches.

My view..