LarryH57

Of course the HAC was a bit different from the 7th Para Royal Horse Artillery, with 25 pdrs instead of the 105mm Light Gun,and I bet they never went off road in the very shiny Lwts.

As members may remember I have a 1980 GS Lwt that was fitted with a Dexion racking to hold a Clansman 351 or 352, connected to a TUAAM on the offside (UK drivers side) and plenty of clips to show the routing of the cabling. The Lwt was used by the 4th Field Regt Royal Artillery and 7th Para RHA, both equipped with the 105mm L118 Light Guns towed by 1 Ton, Land Rover 101s. The units had LWB Series III Land Rovers in support such as FFRs and perhaps a few LWB GS types for REME and Cooks, so who would use a GS Lwt adapted to have a single Clansman 351 or 352? Battery Commanders and Officers didn't like an adapted GS Lwt as it wasnt an FFR and even those didn't have much room for their kit. So who might settle for a 'second best' option, who just needed to be contactable on the Radio Net, but doesn't need a multiple channels? A roving Senior NCO and driver or perhaps the Padre and his driver? Anyone else? By the way I am ignoring the use of it by the Paras as a Lwt Recce Vehicle as I have no evidence of such use in the Para RHA.

Yes, its a piece of recovery gear and used in the UK too

My fear for MV owners is that our freedom will be curtailed and the next thing we know is that the Police will require a square hatch of armour being cut in the drivers side of any preserved AFV. Or MVs will be banned as dangerous whatever they are

MV owners are very law abiding and I am pleased that by and large we are alloed to drive what ever we own, but this guy whoever he is, isn't doing us any favours!

Another Commer Q2 4x2 and flatbed trailer, with a ?50 marking on the cab door that might suggest another variation of numbering the stock of vehicles at an MU. The vehicles has an RAF Registration, and briging plate and has a camo paints scheme, which gives an indication of the year but no RAF roundel yet Also it looks like the chalk marks are still visible between te camo as a guide to where each colour should be painted.

I guess Ted you are on to something. Firstly that MUs involved in aircraft recovery in WW2, were never short of work! With sections of each aircraft recovery MU being despatched to various locations, it would be logical and quick & easy to number your vehicles, for the job, rather than recite their standard RAF registration numbers and RAF Group Number in Maintenance (M/??) in any local orders. I guess also that an MU might have an official base but only despatch, what was needed to the locations as required for the job. It could also be that the entire MU fleet was numbered for a potential move. However logic says in war the CO's Tilly or staff car would not be Vehicle No.1. Consequently, the Officer in charge of despatch would just see what was available by random vehicle number (rather than RAF registration) and list them in his orders by their single of double digit number and the RAF drivers would go to their 'MT yard', prepare the correct vehicles and off they would go. Also is there a Maintenance Command list of all the subsections in each Group; Are these available in an AMO, somewhere, plus details of the patch they covered, especially for aircraft revovery? Their work surely needed a patch to cover, wheras the Aircraft Storage MUs would have different requirements, related to aircraft type etc and be as far away from the Luftwaffe aa possibl..

I am beside myself with excitement ( Perhaps I dont get out enough!)

Adrian, thanks for your considered opinion. Please do post this query of the RE BD site. You are probably right that a lightly armoured vehicle would not be of use for GP 250 kg bombs for example, but the explosive element of a fire bomb would hardly blow up the armoured car. So, Adrian you might be on to something as fitting something intricate to an armoured car for a job so menial as clearing leaves, for example would be odd However, I do think the a/c set up shown here was an experimental set up and that the caption to the photo above was a post war guess. It may be like Bryan suggests; what to do with a little used vehicle, that proved to be no use that none were ever copied for service!

But the use of an armoured vehicle is not explained, as I have a photo somewhere of Austin K3 with a plough.

My point exactly, Citroman! Also a secondary shield suggests a blast protection set up. An old friend of mine (since deceased) who was in the Fleet Air Arm in WW2, on a UK land base,was 'voluteered' with his mates, by his CO, to act as Crash Crew and used to have to deal with bombs that fell off the wing mounts of USAAF P-47D Fighter Bombers (on take-off) and they were literally dragged off the runway and dealt with later. A plough and some blast protection would have been better than what he had; ie his bare hands and a tow truck! Also why Armour a vehicle for a simple cleaning job?

And yet with the plough on small wheels, it's not going to clean much as push larger objects out of the way. I dont think airfields were covered with logs and large branches or brick rubble?

This weeks mystery photo is from 1944 and shows a strange RAF Beaverette with a plough, but for what purpose? It doesn't really fit the visual description of a snow plough. As some of these armoured cars were used for crash rescue, allbeit in cut down form (as seen painted yellow in the 1944 Bomber Command film with Lancasters) so could this be used to push wreckage out the way or live bombs still onboard? And what is mounted in the turret, some kind of water canon / Co2 / foam dispenser? I guess it was a one of its kind. Your thoughts.

Thanks all for your thoughts on this matter.

Yes Ferg, my point exactly. My great grandfather died at the age of 62 in 1923 of old age and he looked like a very very old man in photos but I guess he had a hard life. Now a 70 year old is considered not so old as then, so the DVLA need to be told if they are intent on changing the law should start looking at the over 90s age group, some of which I know, who still drive but only locally, and relatively slowly.

For the non HGV drivers, I think the current system is perfectly OK. There is no evidence that the over 70s drivers are not being open and honest with themselves, let alone the DVLA, if they have a condition that stops them driving. I'm not yet 70, but even so, I did not drive last year after breaking my arm, until it was fixed. The trouble is like so many things, change is seen to be doing something when it isn't needed. Remember all the fuss there was over Homeowner Reports that sellers had to give to the buyer - ultimately the idea was dumped. I think 'fiddling with the law' is the start of a descreat campaign by the government to get us off the road. Its OK to work till you drop age 67, 68 or older before you get a state pension, but in the interim we will make life difficult for you if you live in a 'one bus a day' rural area

This one is for RAFM / Bryan. A photo I mentioned on another post - a Commer Q2 4x2 2 Ton Tractor (and Taskers Queen Mary trailer) said to be from 9 MU(?) Why 49 over 41 ? Not a standard marking. Below the 41 appears to be a bridging plate of 9 / 5 and if so is the circular marking on the drivers mudguard in use or blank? Also there is a split in colour or between matt and gloss

The DVLA Link is now fixed so have a go in English or Welsh!

Dear Members, As you may be aware at age 70 in the UK you have to renew your Drivers License with the DVLA The Secretary of State for Transport is looking to change the law, and reading between the lines it may be a synical way of getting older drivers off the road with a medical and tests etc, instead of relying on self declaration. In my IMHO people aged 70 (and possibly still working) are a different ball game to a driver aged 90 years or even 100 years old. The insurance industry is of the opinion that new drivers aged under 25 years are the highest risk and not older drivers who typically drive locally, especially in rural areas rather than on motorways. Of course I want drivers to be safe and capable but I dont think a change in the law is needed so I have said so in this survey. Its worth doing as I believe it could seriously disrupt the lives of people who dont live in Islington! Is it a way to achieve Net Zero Carbon? Interestingly the survey asks about what is done in other coutries, so for any EU based members, please post details of what they do where you are located. DVLA Survey below ends in October 2023 https://online1.snapsurveys.com/s3dxzw (new link added in place of the original) Kind regards Larry

Apparently about 1,000 were made for the RAF but I guess like the Austin K2, had only a 2 ton capacity were not so good in civi life.

I guess adding water, to my petrol tank is going to be too risky for a guy like me, wondering if thats all the water coming out or is it still watery petrol, and suddenly I have drained the tank? I know there was a video on here from YouTube showing how to remove the ethanol from petrol using a large clear plastic container, circa 5 gallons but trying to do the same in a non see through LR fuel tank is risky. I seem to remember the water could be coloured/died, so that once all the colour has gone, its just petrol?

And what stabalizer do you recommend for the E5 petrol it uses?

The Dennis AM30/40 cwt was built for the RAF and used in the UK during WW2. Despite it supposidely being common, I have only ever seen one clear photo of one, shown below. Do any others exist?

Guys, thanks for all the info on laying up a vehicle. To be honest it seems quite involved, and so I have made a concious effort to 'escape all other commitments' and use the Lwt more often. Amazingly it fired up first time and I drove it on the road again, since February. Luckily it is classed as Historic, so is ULEZ exempt and has lasted longer than ALL the cars, I have ever owned.

Peter and Bryan, Thanks again for your comments. I appreciate you take on the colours as to be honest they are strange. However as the title suggests people might ignore orders for the the following reasons, typically total ignorance of what was expected, next confusion with previous orders (we always do it that way), "lack of the right paint Sir", well do your best with what you have! And finally experimental reasons but rare at unit level.