Chris Boonzaier Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 Is this a bad M.W.K. ? It looks like U.M.K.
Bernhard H.Holst Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 Is this a bad M.W.K. ? It looks like U.M.K.Hi Chris.I believe "N.M.K." stands for "Nachrichten Mittel Kompanie" which one would call Signals Company in English these days. Bernhard H. Holst
Chris Boonzaier Posted September 2, 2007 Author Posted September 2, 2007 Hi,but that was not a signals unit designation used in WW1, and definately not at Regt level. At Div level they had Abt, at regt level the signal/telephone men were intergrated into regular units with no independant signal company.BestChris
Guest Rick Research Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 I'd take the M.K. to be Munitions Kolonne, but can't get anything out of the first initial.
Chris Boonzaier Posted September 2, 2007 Author Posted September 2, 2007 I'd take the M.K. to be Munitions Kolonne, but can't get anything out of the first initial.Hi,Munitions Kolonne are also not part of the Regiments order of battle. All at this stage were centrally numbered (with nothing to do with the regts) and the awards would have been at Korps level.BestChris
Bernhard H.Holst Posted September 2, 2007 Posted September 2, 2007 Hi:The plot thickens?A quick review of the regimental history of the Fus.Rgt.73 resulted in the apparent existence of the regimental "Nachrichten Mittel Abteilung".Also scrutiny of the British "Handbook of the German Army 1918" showed that regiments formed unauthorized " Nachrichten Mittel Abteilungen" personnel for them were drawn from the regimental components. This approach caused a reduction of fighting strength. ( because of the nature of these unauthorized units it seems plausible to me that in the absence of official terms "...abteilung " and ...kompanie" are used interchangeably) Later on regular "Truppen-Nachrichtenabteilungen" were then formed with a strength of 1 officer and from 130 - 150 men, organized in telephone and lamp signaling sections. These Abteilungen were subordinated to the division in technical matters. However I am receptive to any other explanation of the meaning "N.M.K."Bernhard H. Holst
Chris Boonzaier Posted September 2, 2007 Author Posted September 2, 2007 Hi,Authorised seems to have been the Fernprechtrupp until 1918 when the Regt staffs and battalions formed their signals guys into their own "Truppen-Nachrichtenzug's".Maybe the designation was not yet formalized when the doc was issued?
Bernhard H.Holst Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 Hi:review of the regimental history of the 2.Hannoversches Inf.Rgt. Nr.77 shows the formation of a Nachrichten Mittel Abteilung with date of Dec.1916. The wording seems to indicate that this was done to improve the signals situation by concentrating all signals element within the regiment into the Abteilung under command of the Regt.Nachrichten Offizier.Bernhard H. Holst
Naxos Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 Hi Chris, the first letter of the Abbreviation is definitely not a "u" since a S?tterlin "u" always has a line over: It could either be an "e" or more likley a "n".Signal units were on Regiment levels always in -Abteilungen or -Trupps. Here is the breakdown of Reserve-Infanterie-Regiment-93
Naxos Posted September 3, 2007 Posted September 3, 2007 (edited) The Ersatz-Bataillon RIR93 consisted of ten coys Nachrichten-Abteilungen were numbered 1,2 or 3 and not organized in Kompanien.Interesting is that, on top of the Machine-Gun company in each the three battalions, there was a regimental machine gun company (M.G.-Kompagnie des Rgts.).Could it be a badly written small r, making it r.M.K. regiments Maschinengewehr-Kompagnie or regiments Minenwerfer-Kompagnie? Regards, Hardy Edited September 3, 2007 by Naxos
Chris Boonzaier Posted April 22, 2008 Author Posted April 22, 2008 Just reheating this to see if anyone has any new ideas.... still not clear what Kompagnie sized unit within a regt this could be...I assume we all agree that and Abteilungs would have been quite a bit smaller?ThanksChris
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now