59Prototype Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 07 RN 49 was a Mini Moke prototype built at Longbridge by Austin in 1959. Here's photo of it probably taken that same year. The photo was taken at Westlands, Yeovil. It was trialled by the Royal Marines at the Army Air Corps Centre, Middle Wallop where they tried various ways of lifting it by helicopter. Other photos show the same Moke at Fort Cumberland, Eastney, Portsmouth. It obviously passed through FVRDE, Cherstey as it has their establishment number of 6008 on the bonnet. After c. 1960 the trail on it goes cold. I just don't know what happened to it. Today I've heard back from the Royal Navy Museum to say that they have no record card for 07 RN 49. I'm now inclined to think that it was de-registered as a navy vehicle very early in its life and re-registered to another service, and most probably the army however I have no proof of that. Incidentally I have tried the Royal Marines Museum too and they have nothing on it either. Can anyone help with any information? Does anyone have any photos of it in their collection? Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 GRAHAM Do you not think that as you say there is no record of 07 RN 49 after 1960 that it is possible that it was chassis SPL 433 A as it was the only one returned to AUSTIN in 1960 as the 419 B card been with the royal navy museum or the royal marine museum does not surprise me when l collected the RN vehicle 419 B CARDS they did not want them As to the MOKE you can check the detail on the sheet l e mailed to you REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 GRAHAM I have just rechecked all the MOKE FILES moke 07 RN 49 was returned to CHERTSEY 6008 WAS CHASSIS number SPL 453 AM we also know that in 1963 it was transfered to the MT SCHOOL AT BORDON so we already know after its trials with the royal navy it came back to CHERTSEY what we do not know is when and may never know l also know that in 1963 the RASC COLLECTION OF HISTORIC VEHICLES were housed there at bordon REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59Prototype Posted August 31, 2013 Author Share Posted August 31, 2013 Wally If I read what you are saying correctly I think you now confirm what I had suspected for a while and that is after the trials with the Royal Marines finished it was de-registered as 07 RN 49 and re-registered as 20 BT 30? We have already established that although 20 BT 30, which as we know still exists and is in safe hands, was built in 1959 but that the 20 BT 30 number wasn't issued until around 1961. We also know that the chassis plate fixed to the bulkhead of 20 BT 30 shows SPL 453. Add in the fact that there is plenty of photographic evidence of 07 RN 49 being about in 1959/60 but none whatsoever of 20 BT 30 is further proof that the Moke with the chassis number of SPL 453 started out as 07 RN 49 but finished up as 20 BT 30. In other words the Royal Marines had it for a couple of years before it was handed over to the Army. Would you agree with this synopsis or is there still some doubt in your mind that this might not be the case? Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 GRAHAM this is what l know all nine prototypes of MOKE were delivered direct to CHERTSEY from the AUSTIN factory here they recieved there establishment numbers in this case 6008 then after a short period of time it was sent to the royal navy/ marines who the applied there own number in this case 07 RN 49 after they had done there own user trials it would be returned to CHERTSEY WHERE it would be renumbered as 20 BT 30 the reason for the change of numbers is l have been told that each branch of the services had there own budgets for this type of work and it was easy to allocate a number from that branch of service for accounting purposes rather than CHERTSEY covering any cost involved SO the MOKE IN QUESTION went straight to chertsey estabilishment number applied then sent to RN/RM not the other way round REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 The US military had a couple of Mokes on trials and evaluation, one was the twin-engine example. Would they have been supplied straight from Austin or be one of those that went to Chertsey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 RICHARD The Americans trialed the twini and the moke in 1964 after the British military declined to adopted it by 1962 three of the nine had been returned to AUSTIN FIVE we know where still at CHERTSEY and one was struck off charge no date given AS the military where not interested in the MOKE project and l cannot find any reference to trails on the twini l would think that the twini and moke where sent from AUSTIN straight to the american military REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59Prototype Posted August 31, 2013 Author Share Posted August 31, 2013 Wally I think that we might be at slight cross purposes here over the registration numbers. I wasn't talking of where the Moke might have gone first but simply of its registration number, in that the first one issued was 07 RN 49 to be followed a couple of years later by a change to 20 BT 30. Richard Yes, you're right at least two did go the USA for evaluation. The Twini (one engine at the front, the other at the rear) had 12 inch wheels as opposed to the 10 inch standard Mini size of the time. I think that that was done in an attempt to improve the ground clearance and of course the 12 inch wheel idea was carried over to the Austin Ant. As for whether the two vehicles went direct from Austin to the States or whether they passed through FVRDE first is a good question and one that I've not thought of before. Certainly a LHD Moke was on display at Cherstey in 1962 when the different manufacturers were trying to find foreign buyers for their vehicles. Just because a vehicle was on display I don't suppose that it necessarily went through the FVRDE system. In other words I still don't know the answer to your question! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 GRAHAM I am not disputing that 07 BT 49 was the first recognizable military number instead of a CHERTSEY trials one and the reason for it l mentioned in my post all l was pointing out was that the MOKE was not sent direct from the factory straight to the RN/RMs REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59Prototype Posted August 31, 2013 Author Share Posted August 31, 2013 Wally Yes, I think that I'm now with you. It looks as though all the 1959 prototypes went initially to Chertsey and having been given their FVRDE establishment number then went on to different destinations, mostly Army although we know one went to the Navy (Royal Marines - 07 RN 49) and another to the RAF (27 AE 03). Am I now on the right track? Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoseman Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 Just a quick on on this. I was trawling e bay last night and came across someone selling a Moke advertised as a prototype! I don't recall where or what section it was in. Wasn't a good pic but defiantly not civilian in looks! Hope this is some help to someone here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 HI JUST found it on e bay what a joke over the years several times it has been claimed that a prototype moke has been found but thanks for the information Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 GRAHAM Now just seen your post number 10 and l think we now agree have YOU come across mention of a CHERTSEY report number FT/B 658 on the very first concept / prototype MOKE as one of my friends has come back on the subject saying that a mutual contact who is very elderly was involved l will try to speak to him in the next few days REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59Prototype Posted September 1, 2013 Author Share Posted September 1, 2013 Hoseman and Wally With regards Ebay and that prototype Moke you both speak of, I can't find it!!! I must be losing my researching touch! What's it listed as or can you post the direct link to it on Ebay? Wally Now that's exciting news! Yes, I do have a copy of that report. I obtained it from the National Archives about 3 years ago. A photo is included of a rather ugly looking Moke that has 5950 painted on the bonnet. Thanks to your previous information I now know that 5950 was SPL 433 which I now believe was the very first Moke prototype made very early in 1959. It differs in quite a few ways from the other prototypes built just a few months later. 07 RN 49 which you have a photo of on this thread is a good example. However there is one thing that has baffled me about SPL 433. It was supposed to be the donor Moke from which they built the very first Twini Moke (engines fore and aft) and demonstrated to the press on the snowy lawns of Longbridge in January 1963. Ok I accept the fact that they would have to have re-jigged the rear end of the Moke to get the second engine to fit but when you compare the photos of the Twini with those of SPL 433 they are so different in all sorts of ways. Did they really go to all the trouble of hacking SPL 433 around to get it to look like the later prototypes? I just don't think they did. As someone said to me recently 'They did some daft things at Longbridge but nothing as daft as that!' All in all that leaves me thinking that SPL 433 was NOT the donor vehicle for the Twini but if it wasn't which one was? Hopefully your contact might give us an answer. Fingers crossed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 GRAHAM l found the [prototype mini moke ] on carandclassic.co.uk Spoke to son of the man who worked on the early MOKES says his dad is in fine spirits and would like to help if he can so l and a friend are going to see him on wednesday REGARDS WALLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59Prototype Posted September 1, 2013 Author Share Posted September 1, 2013 Wally Oh dear, buyer beware! I've found the ad on Car and Classic. What a monstrosity! If that's a Moke prototype I'll eat my hat! In fact if it's a Moke I'll eat my hat! How do these people get away with advertising things that are clearly not what they say they are? I'm pleased to learn that you have made contact with someone who worked on the early Mokes and that you are going to see him on Wednesday. Hopefully he will be able to clear up a few things that have been puzzling us. Hoseman Is this the same Moke that you say you saw last night on Ebay? I think it probably is. Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 However there is one thing that has baffled me about SPL 433. It was supposed to be the donor Moke from which they built the very first Twini Moke (engines fore and aft) and demonstrated to the press on the snowy lawns of Longbridge in January 1963. Ok I accept the fact that they would have to have re-jigged the rear end of the Moke to get the second engine to fit but when you compare the photos of the Twini with those of SPL 433 they are so different in all sorts of ways. Did they really go to all the trouble of hacking SPL 433 around to get it to look like the later prototypes? I just don't think they did. As someone said to me recently 'They did some daft things at Longbridge but nothing as daft as that!' All in all that leaves me thinking that SPL 433 was NOT the donor vehicle for the Twini but if it wasn't which one was? Hopefully your contact might give us an answer. Fingers crossed!! Graham, Have you seen this website; http://www.austinmemories.com/page74/page74.html scroll down to the part on the Twin Moke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoseman Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 Wally Oh dear, buyer beware! I've found the ad on Car and Classic. What a monstrosity! If that's a Moke prototype I'll eat my hat! In fact if it's a Moke I'll eat my hat! How do these people get away with advertising things that are clearly not what they say they are? I'm pleased to learn that you have made contact with someone who worked on the early Mokes and that you are going to see him on Wednesday. Hopefully he will be able to clear up a few things that have been puzzling us. Hoseman Is this the same Moke that you say you saw last night on Ebay? I think it probably is. Graham I dont know as actually cant remember where on e bay I saw it. I was trawling for Universal Carrier parts so dont know how I got there mate! Maybe in tracked vehicles or barn finds??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.