utt61

It looks to me as though, in the photo above, the whiffle tree is chained to the chassis legs just behind the bumper and not to the lifting points. I wonder why this is, is it preferred for some reason, or is someone being lazy or lacking suitable shackles?

Thank you for posting that link, it makes fascinating reading. My goodness, it brings back memories, some good, some not so good.

Using Firefox I cannot see any evidence of the photos in the original post, I can see the link in post #4 but when I follow it I get an "invalid attachment" error. Using Google Chrome I can see icons for two attachments in the original post, however I cannot see the actual attachments. Post #4 is the same as with Firefox. So, I think that it is probably a browser issue! The reason I ask which type is because I have the coupling off a hydraulic-damped 3/4 ton Sankey which has a failed damper which I need to replace. As far as I can determine, the damper is internal to the coupling and to change it you need to remove the lunette from the housing, and unscrew the end cap. Inside is, I think, a fairly standard hydraulic trailer coupling damper. I have two problems, one is that the end cap on mine is exceptionally reluctant to come off (although I am optimistic that the application of much heat may help), the other is that when I contacted Bradley to ask about replacement dampers I was confronted with complete bewilderment - they denied making the thing in the first place, despite a plate on the coupling stating that they did, its NSN, and all the other data. It seems that Bradley has recently been taken over (by, I think, Alko) and all the people who knew about Bradely stuff have left. I was intrigued by your question about topping up the oil, because I don't this this this is possible. I think that there is an internal, self-contained, damper unit. Unless of course we're talking about completely different couplings (which I can't tell because i can't see the photos)!

Unless I am in a worse condition than I thought after Christmas, there are no pictures! Which type of Sankey is it?

Thank you.

When you read the description it really doesn't sound as though there's much of the "genuine wartime vehicle, manufactured in 1942" left. At what point does it become a replica with some original parts, I wonder?

Brilliant idea, I hadn't thought of that for chains!

In that scenario you'd be better off with "Historic Vehicle", but you are right in that it couldn't be "Agricultural Vehicle".

Just realised that it's been getting on for three years since the last post in this very interesting thread. Cosrec, do you stil have and operate the Foden? It'd be really interesting to hear an update to the story.

I wondered if the plank was hinged along its bottom edge so could be dropped to a horizontal position to act as an external sun visor, perhaps. Close study of the photo does reveal four dark blobs that could be hinges.

Well, things have moved on a bit since I asked the question above. Firstly there seem to be two different types of Bradley MH35 coupling, one has the manaul reversing lock-out and is used on the widetrack Sankey and similar trailers, and the other - later - version has no reversing lock-out and is used on the later Penman type trailers with auto-reverse brakes. My coupling is definitely defective, the unit should provide a hydraulic damped effect, so there should be controlled resistance to the movement of the lunette shaft, so the unfortunate buyer is returning it to me and I will make a full refund. Bradley (now of course Al-Ko Bradley) has been less than useless though polite, and seems to have no knowledge that the former Bradley part of the business ever made such a coupling, have no idea how it works, and are adamant that they certainly cannot suppley spares etc. In fact the impression I get is not so much that Bradley's business has been absorbed into Al-Ko, it is more that Bradley has been extirpated completely! I have no idea who, if anyone, supports and provides spares for the in-service trailers. I have also been unable to find any information onlin about the maintenance etc of this type of hitch. Although there are Sankey trailer manuals online, the only ones I can find only seem to cover the older spring overrun coupling of the type used on narrow-track trailers. It is most frustrating. If anyone knows of a source of a manual for a wide-track trailer with hydraulic damped overrun coupling I would be delighted to hear of it. Many thanks.

Can any of the many knowledgeable and helpful people here tell me if it is normal and correct to be able to move the lunette in and out freely by hand on an MH35 coupling (the kind used on wide-track Sankey trailers etc), or if there is supposed to be a spring or friction damper built into it? I have just sold one I have had kicking around for a while which I believe to be in excellent condition and full working order, but the buyer (not a member of this forum)has pointed out that it is defective because the shaft moves freely and that "the internal spring is broken". I don't think that there is an internal spring, however. Better yet does anyone have a exploded diagram or parts list they could post? If there is a problem with it I will of course refund the payment. Many thanks.

In the early days of trailers it was inherently easier to make the lunette on the trailer rotate, since it is on a sliding shaft anyway. Early Sankey trailers therefore followed convention. The problem with this arrangement when applied to trailers with military-style lunettes is that when the trailer and towing vehicle are at a significant angle to each other - approaching a jack-knife angle - the lunette rotates and assumes a vertical orientation on the pintle. This can be prevented if there is a lug on the pintle, but such a lug is unsatisfactory since it greatly restricts articulation in normal driving. NATO lunettes therefore have nothing to limit this movement. Once the lunette has rotated thus, when the vehicle pulls forward and the trailer straightens up there is no restoring force to return the lunette to an horizontal orientation and consequently something is going to bend: either the shaft of the lunette (common in the case of early Landrovers with strong rear crossmembers) or the rear crossmember (common in the case of more recent landrovers which have rear crossmembers manufactured from processed cheese - on these it is essential that the additional reinforcing plate is fitted between the crossmember and the pintle). The above is a very common occurrence when a trailer has been reversed, attained a sharp angle, and then driven forwards again. Later trailers have a lunette which cannot rotate on the shaft axis, so that the lunette cannot drop on the pintle as described above. Since some degree of relative rotational movement is needed in normal driving, especially off-road, with these the pintle must rotate instead. The two golden rules are (1) that either the lunette or the pintle but not both must rotate, and (2) if towing with a rotating lunette and if you have got into a situation where the trailer is at a sharp angle to the towing vehicle, stop and check that the lunette has not rotated before straightening out.

I don't think any precedents have been set with this prosecution, this law has been on the statute books for years. The last case I recall hearing about was a caravanner who, again, allowed a huge queue to build up behind him and made no attempt to allow the traffic to pass, and was many years ago. There is no offence of driving too slowly on a normal road, and there are very few places in the UK where minimum speed limits apply (the law does allow this though). The offence was not 'driving too slowly', it was, to paraphrase, being a completely inconsiderate plonk and causing unnecessary inconvenience to other road users. Provided that, if you are driving a slow vehicle, you take reasonable steps to be considerate to other road users, you will not be prosecuted.

Although I cannot immediately trace the source legislation, I am fairly sure that the law now requires all persons carried/riding in a vehicle to be seated in proper seats designed for the purpose, irrespective of whether seat belts are required or not. It is, for example, no longer legal for people to ride in the rear of a 'bare' Land-Rover sitting directly on the rear wheel-boxes. This is irrespective of the age of the vehicle. I imagine that travelling in a place in which the RTAs apply (i.e., a place to which the public has access) standing with your upper body out of the hatch is therefore technically illegal, however I would think that, unless you were being demonstrably stupid or dangerous, you are unlikely to be stopped. If you are seen with a child - someone for whom you as an adult have a duty of care - doing this, I imagine that you very probably will be stopped, however.

It is unlikely that there will be any significant change to the status quo inside 2 years, although legally the process could be completed quicker (it involves much negotiating with the EU, and that isn't a quick process). The two-year period people are talking about is the time after which the negotiating period must be extended by agreement or the UK automatically ceases to be a member of the EU. The two-year period starts when the UK officially notifies the EU that it is invoking Article 50, and there is no legal time constraint how long the notification can be delayed (under the EU treaties, we could delay notification for 2, 5 10 years or whatever). It is possible for the UK to begin preliminary negotiations with other member states before formally notifying the European Parliament of our intention to invoke Article 50. The process potentially could be drawn out for decades. So don't count your chickens yet! The next question of interest of course it what happens to all the UK domestic EU-derived law when we leave, and that again is something no-body really knows. Any EU directive which has been implemented by domestic law is almost certain to remain unchanged, EU law applicable by virtue of our membership will become non-applicable unless the exit agreement states otherwise. One of the problems, of course, is that no country has done this before and to the EU it is unthinkable that any country would want to, so nobody really knows how to go about it. If anyone in interested, there is a briefing paper to be found here.... http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/577971/EPRS_BRI%282016%29577971_EN.pdf ... which is actually quite informative.

The most I've paid for a Series 1 is £1500, the least £50. I wonder if this will make the £20k estimate, it is a fairly nondescript 86" after all, albeit quite original. Prices have gone a bit loopy of late though! The £1500 one was an 86", approx 2750 vehicles earlier than the one in the auction. I may have to revise the value for the insurance!

Nice Land-Rover, but a shame that they couldn't be bothered (or were to stupid to know how) to fasten the rear curtain properly for the photos. It's probably OCD but it really irks me when the side flaps aren't put through the pockets!

My father was serving on HMS Perseus in 1950 when the ship was involved in steam catapult trials. During the course of these a number of unmanned Seafires were fired off the ship. Apparently the first off had full wings and flew rather too well, circling round and approaching the ship in a menacing way. Subsequent launches involved aircraft with the wings truncated to reduce the chance of this. My dad's memory of how many aircraft were ditched in this was is flakey, but it was quite a few.

Just watched the documentary mentioned above, what a heartwarming 'good news' story for a change! Until recently I had no idea that a WW1 light cruiser (and genuine Jutland survivor) still existed, and it is even more remarkable that she still has her original Parsons steam turbines in situ. This is definitely going on the "things to visit" list.

Still green for me. Horrible, and strangely unsettling!

I'm looking forward to that already!

Could you fit a sleeve to the bolt?

Remember that it is important to keep the load as near the ground as possible so that if it does get too hairy you can put it down very quickly! Also it is - of course - a good idea to have at the very least a couple of helpers with tag lines to keep the load under control. With my Iron Fairy 6, if I have to travel any distance, I jib-in until the load is resting against the front of the crane and secure it with a ratchet strap or similar so that it can't swing.

From what I remember of the programme when it aired, the casualty in this incident was a mobile crane which had put its offside wheels onto the verge and sunk, tilting to a spectacular angle. The Foden was positioned in the field adjacent to the stuck crane, and lifted the casualty to unload the bogged wheels. A second recovery vehicle (a large vehicle of American origin) was positioned further along the road to winch the casualty back onto the tarmac. So the Foden was lifting rather than winching, IIRC. The tractor was used to winch the Foden back out of the field, since the Foden was slipping 'all wheels' due to the saturated ground. I can't get the linked version to run either, since I think it requires a presence on some form of social media, or a "My5" account (whatever that may be). I have neither.