Adam Elsdon

Thats the one, they pack away alot smaller than a 9x9 as you dont have all of the poles, extra ground sheet pole joints etc, so if you are strapping them to the exterior of your vehicle, this would be the better bet. The 9x9 and 12x12 are considerably bigger though.

Roger that, will PM

If somebody would like to give me the details on size, weight, width tech spec etc of a Stalwart, i will ask VOSA what the present definition is and how do i get such a vehicle registered for use on the road. I will then post response here, and then we have the "Fact" from VOSA and how you can apply that fact to the present consultation parameters. Unless one of the many Alvis Stalwart owners with a vested interest is prepared to do this, preferably before the consultation period is over and done with!! I like Stalwarts and i think it would be a shame not to find out how to keep these on the road.

Mike, i think this is a well planned out and relevant response that is within the parameters of the consultation requirement. My only concern and you have pointed out the ommissions, that people may not be laying down their "Constructive opinion" for there own respective vehicles in the "Proposed MOT Regulation Vehicles List" Thread: http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?16901-Proposed-MOT-regulations-VEHICLE-LIST

I think he is considering selling it, he has a couple of other restorations underway !

You could go for a CVRT crew tent or "Crew Shelter Scorpion Fox" as is stencilled on my tent. They are a lean to type design, and well big enough for two people, i think they sleep 3 they are designed to tie onto a vehicle to support them, but you can tie them to trees, a fenceline or a version i seen, somebody had made a couple of poles so they were freestanding, which worked well. They have a built in ground sheet and the doors open at each end. I find mine to be a very good tent, and they resist wind well, compared to other tent types. They would also look period correct for a Ferret, and they pack down small compared to a 9x9 and wouldnt look out of placed strapped to the rear deck. You can generally pick them up between £25 and £150. I will see if i can find a picture of one!

I'm with you on that one! Actually thinking about it, one of the shows i attend has on the entry form a requirement to provide proof of insurance (Name of Insurer/Policy No.) or show a copy on registering on the day, which totally gets around the problem of people trying to get in with illegal vehicles. Good idea, should maybe advise other organisers to add it into show registration.

Bad driving occurs in or on any type of vehicle regardless of how the transmission puts the drive onto the road. I drive a "Chelsea Tractor" a big long wheel base, heavy on the juice 3.2 Turbo Diesel 2001 Mitsubishi Shogun, however it doesnt go anywhere near Chelsea, it does pull very large and heavy trailers with ease, in and out of fields and on the road, in the recent adverse weather conditions it has driven through deep flood water and some of the worst snow conditions for years, and that is "Scottish" rural snow conditions, not the dusting seen in news reports from down south. The difference is it wears some proper All Terrain tyres, instead of massive bling alloys with Pirelli elastic bands. My Chelsea tractor carries all of our animal feed the dogs, the kids and other kit wherever we need to go, up here 4x4's are an essential tool. So next time you see a badly driven "Chelsea Tractor" think about the badly driven Taxi, the Scooter and the Cycle courier that previously cut you up, and then think for every "Chelsea" based tractor, there are thousands of other 4x4 drivers who use the vehicles for the purpose they were designed. So any new legislation aimed at 4x4's would be poorly misjudged, especially just to get back at a few idiots in Chelsea, we have enough rules, regulation and laws foisted upon us without requiring more restrictions. Where would they stop? Chelsea tractors? i think not, it will be everything, Land Rovers, Jeeps, Champs, Pinzgauers, Ferrets do i need to go on? Be very careful about which personal liberties you are throwing away. Getting back to the thread, if you cant see to a decent standard, you shouldnt be driving, so testing is the only way to go for properly assessing drivers eyesight.

Can you recommend a supplier for large tins of rubber tyre paint, i have only ever seen tiny pots.

Thats some operation they run, sizeable area turned into a trench warfare complete with shell holes, not enough mud though!

I bunked off school to go see the Vulcan land at Sunderland!, as i remember, the runway was only just long enough to take it, it came in and touched down on the piano keys at the end and was really slamming its anchors on to slow down.

The same poster has split the film int two parts, also by the same, is a film about the Daimler Armoured Car.

Mike i believe this is a massive point that really complicates what we can and cant do and could very easily catch out an owner who thought they were operating their MV within the law. For example a 1953 Humber Pig "Special Purpose" 2 axler rigid bodied vehicle MOT exempt under its age and weight, but i believe if its not MOT'd and because of its taxation class then i cant have any load in it, which is a pain if its for a show, and if i pull a trailer, that may be construed as the same empty or loaded, which again is handy for tents etc. I believe the only way around this is to MOT it, within the current historic taxation class and all the other issues with other "newer" MV's, just you are now catching everything built before 1960 as well, its more of a "what you can use it for" problem than MOT/TAX problem. It would be far easier and less administration complication and cost to Government if the Historic Vehicle owners had a clearer plain speak system for testing/exemption and taxation, than the present system forced to work with taxation changes. I realise that this isnt the purpose of the consultation, but i think the whole thing top to bottom could be audited and made more efficient for purpose.

Dont succumb to the "Change it to 12v" brigade, the 24v system is far superior, and with the shielded electrics it is pretty well waterproof, although the ignition parts can be expensive from dealers keep an eye out for bargains on e-bay and buy them when you see them, i have just bought a stack of plugs for mimimal money. You usually get loads of bits turn up on ebay that have been taken off of 24v landrovers, so keep an eye out, they arent particularly rare. Do you have the Military reg of your landrover? This is my vehicle

Speaking with Croc earlier, thats what we came up with, you really need to look at it a few times to get a handle on it. And welcome Mr Newman, thanks for taking such an interest in our wildly varying bunch of old vehicles!

I cant see S6 Respirators been in use, we had S10 well before that point, i dont recall anybody with S6, we were heavily trained in NBC drills as it was thought Saddam would use Chemical at the first sniff of losing, as he had already used it on his own people.

That has super fast self righting responses, the sensors must be exceptional and the software writing to take in all circumstances must have been enormous, very impressive.

It can be difficult, at times its a love hate relationship, but its a rare old girl, if you cant get a lockup, put a heavy tarp over it and rope it on well, out of sight out of mind and all that.

Just me or does the American scrapyard have alot of useful spares, im surprised they left that much stuff behind.

Hi Jim, that looks like a catchy RAF service number! welcome to the forum (A8288677):-D

I saw the Vulcan fly at the Leuchars show last September, it started off promising as it went near vertical on take off, and then it flew around gently for a while before landing. Not at all like the displays of old, ground shaking as they hauled it around shrieking, engines lit vertical on its wing tip, with the bomb bay doors open. Given that it hasnt any airframe hours left, they could at least send it out with a decent showing before its grounded. There are plenty of other more worthy causes i'd put my money towards.

Interesting thread, i have put a better condition silencer box obtained from Clive onto the Pig, but looking at the old one, i was thinking about using some heavyish plate to make the ends, and some thick steel sheet to roll around them, there are plenty of companies that supply perforated tubing for silencer internals and pre bent tube joints. Nice bit of practical restoration work that can be applied to any vehicle. Nice one CW & Co.

Is there any way that a list/table of vehicle types could be made up here? would be interesting to see just how many vehicles are been affected by the proposals and to make owners aware how it affects them. For example. Pre 1960 Humber Pig over 3500KG 2 axle rigid body heavy car . No change under proposal. Pre 1960 Daimler Ferret over 3500kg 2 axle rigid body motor tractor. No change under proposal Post 1959 Bedford MJ 2 Axle rigid body 4x4 truck. Requires testing under new proposal. Post 1959 Daimler Ferret over 3500kg 2 axle rigid body motor tractor Requires testing under new proposal. Im not suggesting that the info here is even vaguely correct, it is for illustrative purposes, but you get the idea, like the price guide in Classic Military Vehicle.

www.smithandallan.com And i can highly recommend: Protegalac Containergard HS A high solids, single pack, modified alkyd one coat primer/finish. You can order it in any colour and it dries to a very nice Satin finish, can be applied by brush or spray, and the coverage is excellent and its exceptionally hard wearing, i painted my Pig with it, and it still looks like the day i put it on. The paint was very reasonably priced for 5 litres and they post, and they will send you up to six tins for the same postage price.

Reading the proposal, i cant see the STGO exemption been removed, and tracked vehicles are still exempt under what they are proposing. I didnt think that living vans were considered "Laden" i thought they had a seperate definition, i thought that laden would mean for example our purposes, a trailer with another vehicle on the back going to a show. My problem with the consultation is they are presuming everybody with a truck or something heavy or different must be a commercial operator, and are going to be setting testing and testing fees with that solely in mind. As far as i can see it isnt proposing to change the vehicle construction rules. I do worry about the type of person that has no HGV driving training, and see the present MOT exemption classes as a way not to bother properly maintaining a vehicle, and jump into potentially a very big rig with unladen trailer and head out onto the Queens highway, my wife and kids could be sharing the same piece of road.