Jump to content

Old Git

Members
  • Content Count

    282
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Old Git last won the day on January 4

Old Git had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

About Old Git

  • Rank
    Staff Sergeant

Personal Information

  • Location
    Oxford
  • Interests
    Research, WWII, Normandy, NWE, Royal Engineers, Bailey Bridges, Modelling, Research
  • Occupation
    Retired
  • Homepage
    http://www.onesixth.co.uk/vb4forum/

Recent Profile Visitors

5,549 profile views
  1. Another couple of still, this time from © IWM A70 119-3 . Can't tell if this shows the bomb Thrower attached alongside the mounting for the 30 cal or as a replacement. Last pics shows a couple of Machete attached to rear bustle bin.
  2. Found a pic of the standard AA mount, sans armament, and trying to compare the two setups...
  3. It does indeed look like the 2" mortar cum smoke discharger which one normally sees fitted inside the turret, especially in Cromwells, Churchills and Firefly's etc. I have a feeling that they may have also fitted something similar to UC's but will need to check. I've zoomed the detail shot below from the film still which shows it a bit better. Would still like to know what the thing that protrudes below is and also have a better understanding of how the gubbins works.It look likes it might be the standard mounting so just off now to see if I can find an online manual for the M5A1 and see if I can't work it out for myself.
  4. Thanks for that Adrian, I guess if it was that shallow then it was probably just a lot easier to remove it and replace with the battery carrier. Might be an idea to find out what the actual dims of the box are. Will ask on the FB group.
  5. Another quick question, or request for opinions. In the drawing shown right above the stowage box between drive and passenger seats appears to have been removed and replaced by the standard battery carrier. Just wondering if anyone knows if they did indeed just remove the stowage box completely or if they only removed the lid and inserted the battery carrier inside. I know the drawing shows it as completely gone but I find myself wondering if this was just to show the setup rather than 100% accurate to how it was done. Surely the existing storage box would have offered a good receptacle for the batteries if they'd simply removed the lid. Just wondering how they kept rain of the battery boxes? I do know the boxes were made of wood but it seems to be that they at least needed a canvas cover or some sort of protection and the pre-existing stowage box would seem to offer that. Perhaps the difference in dims between stowage box and battery carrier did not allow for it? Anyone got any ideas?
  6. Here's another shot of the same setup, taken about the same time, on what I believe is a different Stuart. This photo is a still from a piece of film footage, covering the same events, which can be found on the IWM website ( (© IWM (A70 107-5)). Interesting to see the skirts still on this vehicle
  7. Another question on Stuarts in British service. Attached below is a well known pic of an Irish Guards Stuart south of Caumont during the Normandy campaign (© IWM (B 8275) ). Those of you who know your Stuarts will know that there is a cover on the side of the turret in which a 30. cal was normally mounted, at least in US service. This Stuart, and others shown in the same series of pics, seem to have a smoke discharger fitted in the same place with something else underneath. Does anyone know exactly how this setup worked and does anyone have any clearer pics or drawings of this?
  8. Old Git

    Welcome back!

    Well done guys, you've passed that crossed-fingers moment when you run it all back-up and..... yes it worked! I know only too well how that goes. Only too Well!
  9. I'm guessing you didn't look at page one of this thread before you posted these, otherwise you'd have seen that these have already been posted. In fact I'd hazard a guess that you got them from this thread originally, as the last image is not part of the Airborne configs, but comes from a wartime pamp on standard WS 19 installs, ..... and you uploaded them in the same order you apparently saved them in. 😉
  10. That would make sense Richard, I thought it must be some sort of jib because I thought I could see an A Frame type deal behind it...zooming it on IWM gives a different perspective.
  11. Anyone know the proper nomenclature fot the wee Jib/Crane, on the right, holding the old Engine in this IWM photo? Any info on it at all, manuals, drawings etc. REME fitters prepare to install a new engine into a Sherman tank at 8th Armoured Brigade workshops, 9 August 1944. © IWM (B 8892)
  12. Superb looking WSC, I especially like the Aerial mount brackets!
  13. Hi Adrian, thanks for the feedback, we've got the RA insignia on the Passenger side but Packhow and I of differing opinions on the Divisional markings on the Drivers side. It's an oblique angle so difficult to see, Packhow thinks in 43rd Wessex but I'm more inclined to think Canadian 4th Armoured Division. Care to Hazard a guess?
  14. The more I look at this the more convinced I am that this is 4th Canadian Armoured Division mate.\ it might be worth checking in Canadian archives to see if they have a doc on Cannuck mods to the WSC.
  15. Thanks again Adrian, that's brilliant info, nice to know that it comes with the later versions of the M5A1 as well. Just need to find some drawings for it now.
×
×
  • Create New...