Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: The Reason For Singular Entries in the London Gazette

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,610
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts

    Default The Reason For Singular Entries in the London Gazette

    Hello All,

    On Thursday 1 Apr 1943 some 871 civilian forecasters in the Meteorological Office of Air Ministry were Commissioned (mostly at Plt Off to Flt Lt rank) into the RAFVR (Met Branch). These Commissionings are recorded in the London Gazette.

    The subsequent Uniformed careers (Promotions, Awards, Relinquishment/Resignation, etc) of a majority (751, or 86%) of these Officers can also be followed in the LG. Should they rise to senior positions then they may also have appeared in AFLs and/or contemporary documents/reports.

    So far, so good.

    However, there is a minority (120, or 14%) where the recording, in the LG, of their Commissioning is their only entry nothing else! Further, there were during WW2 some 51 other Met Branch Commissionings (at various ranks) for which that, again, is the only entry in the LG.

    I have two questions:-
    1 Has anybody found anything similar in any other Branches?, and
    2 What is the likely cause?
    As I understand it you are Commissioned when the LG says so. And you stay Commissioned until the LG says you are not!! I can understand the occasional administrative oversight but 14% of oversights does seem rather large? There must be a reason?

    TIA

    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    2,508
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    It won't make a great deal of difference to your percentage, Peter, but have you taken into account those who died in service?

    Brian

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,610
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts

    Default

    Brian,
    I have been ploughing my way through that very idea. None, so far, that I can readily identify as being the same bloke in the LG, and who might have died 'in harness'. I have only investigated those with the more unusual fore/surnames. The more common ditto makes positive 'death in harness' identification almost impossible.
    I agree that 'dying in harness' might account for one, or two. But the numbers of singular entries are too great for that to account for all of them. There has to be a simple reason? Perhaps, for example, all those Commissioned on 1 Apr 43 and who had not been Promoted, Awarded, or anything else, were Relinquished in one 'cover-all' LG announcement? If so, I have failed to find it - thus this thread!!
    Hopefully, the "Experts" may be able to shed some light on this?
    Rgds
    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Bewdley, UK
    Posts
    2,700
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Hi Peter,

    Give us a couple of "for instance" names to work on.

    My post war Air Force List collection has quite a few gaps but it may give spot checks of "present/absent" to narrow down when they were removed from the active list.

    Armed with that a return to the LG may show the entry as possibly OCR scan error.

    Regards
    Ross
    The Intellectual Property contained in this message has been assigned specifically to this web site.
    Copyright Ross McNeill 2015/2018 - All rights reserved.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,610
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts

    Default

    Ross (et al),
    The process was/is as follows (I’ve gone into some detail as what I did, and why, as it may have some bearing on any mistakes I might have made!).
    During work on the Met Office Roll of Honour – mostly by Lyffe (on this Forum) – we found a lot more uniformed meteorologists in WW2 than we had originally thought. When the Met Office HQ moved from Victory House, London, to Bracknell it was decided, apparently, that the WW2 PERS files of uniformed met staff could be dispensed with.
    My spreadsheet is a small effort to recover some of that lost data – a ‘by-product’ if you like.
    The LG was interrogated. The texts of every WW2 (and years after!) ‘Meteorological Branch’ entry were manually transcribed into MS Excel. Every dated occurrence has a Row for the appropriate name (the Columns are the usual sort of thing – Name, Number, Action, From. To, Rank, Date, etc, etc.). Thus Snooks, Algernon, may have a Commissioning date, a Re/Graded date, Promotion date(s), Award date(s), Branch Transfer date(s), and a Relinquish/Resignation date, etc, etc. So, if properly transcribed(!), and sorted, his uniformed career should appear as a series of Rows in date order. Mostly it does!
    However, when manipulating the s/sht it was noticed that some persons only had one entry in the LG (this is 99.9% a Commissioning notice – but there are others!) These were checked.
    The checking process consisted of (a) re-interrogating the LG by Service Number, (b) interrogating the LG by Name/Initials (in double quotes, and with correct periods/spacing), and (c) Full Name (in double quotes). [NB This latter sometimes finds details of their civilian careers - a bonus!]
    The four gents below (taken at random from my ‘Singles’ page) stubbornly refuse to come up, from the LG, with anything other than their Commissioning dates. Don’t compute?

    GILBERT, George Henry 132276 Cmd RAFVR Flt Lt 01-Nov-42
    TREWHELLA, Ian William Martin 132269 Cmd RAFVR Flt Lt 01-Nov-42 (Died 1983)
    BENWELL, George Richard Raymond 140100 Cmd RAFVR Flt Lt 01-Apr-43 (Died 1992)*
    BARROW, Cyril David 140321 Cmd RAFVR Fg Off 01-Apr-43

    Now it is quite likely that I may have made an unknown/unintentional serious error (or errors!) in interrogating the LG. If so, I would be pleased to receive a tutorial (presume your fees will be paid in guineas?).
    I do not wish to make a cause celebre of this - just to find out WHY.
    TIA
    Peter Davies

    * I worked with "Benny" in the Central Forecasting Office in the mid-60's. He would NEVER stop talking on a night-shift!!
    Last edited by Resmoroh; 30th September 2016 at 13:18. Reason: Clarification
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    2,508
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Default

    Doesn't really help you, Peter, but Benwell was demobilised in April 1946.

    Brian

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,610
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts

    Default

    Brian,
    Tks. Well, it does help! What is the Ref of your source? I have a stratagem on the s/sht whereby my dates are normally dd-mmm-yy (yy actually input as yyyy). But if I only know the month then the format is 15-mmm-yy, but, as you see, in italics. The Date column has this as a 'Comment' at the top, but even if you don't know/read that, you are not going to be more than 14 days out (either way!) in any calculations.
    Peter Davies
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Bewdley, UK
    Posts
    2,700
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Hi Peter

    Gilbert is the only one to appear in my first post war AFL Jan 49 under the Met Branch with the whole Branch annotation "Not on Active List & not released under AP 3039".

    He remains listed until my list of Oct 56 and does not appear in my next one of Autumn 64.

    The first post war AFL I have to hand also contains a Retired List and only one Met man is listed for the Branch

    Harries J L born 4/7/05. First Commissioned 25/11/44 F.O. 25/11/44 ret 20/1/46

    So possible to use AFLs to narrow some of the names down and any entry on the retired list is paydirt for your purposes.

    A few places including Kew have a full set of AFL on the library shelf.

    Ross
    The Intellectual Property contained in this message has been assigned specifically to this web site.
    Copyright Ross McNeill 2015/2018 - All rights reserved.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Bewdley, UK
    Posts
    2,700
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    The Branch annotation set me off at a tangent.

    Wonder if all your disappeared Met Men were wiped out in a blanket admin swipe when the RAFVR that they were commissioned into became the reconstituted RAFVR in 1947.

    That way they would not be an individual entry in the LG but all removed in a blanket admin statement of not required on voyage.

    Only a few escaped the cull hence the AP 3039 annotation. This would also explain the lack of entries in the 1949 retired list as all removed from reserve obligation in 1946/47.

    Ross
    The Intellectual Property contained in this message has been assigned specifically to this web site.
    Copyright Ross McNeill 2015/2018 - All rights reserved.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,610
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts

    Default

    Ross,
    Mni tks yr response. Much appreciated.
    It would appear, therefore (he said very guardedly) that whilst some AFL 'Retired List' contents could provide additional info, the problem of non-appearance, in the LG, of any info subsequent to a Commissioning notice - for some individuals - still remains unknown.
    I shall, possibly, sleep easier tonight knowing that I had, in my surmises, not made a catastrophic cobblers of it all!
    I have:-
    357948 W/O Jack Leslie Harries Cmd Fg Off(p) (186983) 25 Nov 44
    Retired 29 Jan 46
    But - to be pedantic - is 'Retired' the same as 'Resigned' and/or 'Relinquished'. I thought Officers only Retired (at this stage) on the anniversary of their 55th birthdays? 1946 minus 1905 does not equal 55?
    Tks yr help!
    Peter
    Meteorology is a science; good meteorology is an art!
    We might not know - but we might know who does!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •