Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It could be a 1/2ton Lightweight No.2 trailer going by the body. It has mudguards and rear lights as later additions if it is a No.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Richard says the odd thing about this category of trailer is that it has mudguards. Using "flash fill" you can see that the panels are flat & reinforced by vertical channelling. Doesn't match up to anything I can think of.

gettyimages-141559600-2048x2048a.thumb.jpg.cc577d83c4ee595ccebadba00ea0089a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mogmaner said:

Could be German supplied like the Munga towing it.

Could be, as the lights look German style and British did use German made vehicles in Berlin, such as Munga. There are some features that remind me of the Lightweight No2 trailer however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Richard Farrant said:

Could be, as the lights look German style and British did use German made vehicles in Berlin, such as Munga. There are some features that remind me of the Lightweight No2 trailer however.

West German government's contribution to British involvement in Germany was by way of providing vehicles and equipment possibly the trailer is such a piece of equipment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, the car is a DKW MUNGA off-road vehicle type F 91/4, year of const.ruction 1958/59.
Of course the Allies bought material from German production. It was a contribution to the development of the German economy and finally the costs of the Allies were paid by the German state.
The rear lights of the trailer correspond to German system.
It is a closed box without flaps. Unfortunately I cannot identify the trailer markings at the rear. One does not recognize also the coupling system, ball, Rockinger, Nato? I also never saw further photos with the MUNGA of the RAF in Berlin and trailers.  It is very strange that rifles and ammunition were transported this way.  Maybe someone else has an idea??

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the-blue-cloud said:

 Unfortunately I cannot identify the trailer markings at the rear. One does not recognize also the coupling system, ball, Rockinger, Nato? I also never saw further photos with the MUNGA of the RAF in Berlin and trailers.  It is very strange that rifles and ammunition were transported this way.  Maybe someone else has an idea??

Thanks.

I'm not sure why you think it belongs to the RAF as the trailer markings show it to belong to one of the three (a 7, an 8 and a 9 on a red square arm of service sign) infantry battalions of the Berlin Infantry Brigade.  I don't think the weapons are being transported - it is more likely that they have simply been left in the trailer while the associated soldiers are doing something without them.  One soldier has been left to guard them (wearing a 1960-pattern plain green combat jacket with a regimental lanyard on the left shoulder).  The fact that the rifles have magazines still attached suggest that they are certainly not loaded - as they haven't been "cleared" prior to being put down. 

At the same time the soldiers' early pattern kidney pouches, (with the white label and no additional straps for holding them close to the yoke) and "bum rolls" have been taken off and also dumped in the trailer, leaving the troops, presumably, in "skeleton order" of ammo pouches, yoke and water bottle.  Of interest are the helmets which don't look British - they appear to be deeper and more rounded - more like French ones and the rivet close to the front edge of the brim and the high gloss finish also suggest foreign.

 

10 68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, thanks.

It is definitely a picture from Berlin and the car is a Munga type F 91/4. Maybe one met at the transition of the British and French sector with soldiers of the FFA Berlin and made a joint break and the weapons and part of the equipment were placed in the trailer of the British. So much is conceivable.
I was mainly interested in the trailer type (British?) and the use, because I don't know any photos from Berlin on which a trailer was used. The MUNGA 4 were not equipped with a trailer coupling at the factory. This can then only have been a needs-based retrofit in Berlin.

 

Edited by the-blue-cloud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, the-blue-cloud said:

Okay, thanks.

It is definitely a picture from Berlin and the car is a Munga type F 91/4. Maybe one met at the transition of the British and French sector with soldiers of the FFA Berlin and made a joint break and the weapons and part of the equipment were placed in the trailer of the British. So much is conceivable.
I was mainly interested in the trailer type (British?) and the use, because I don't know any photos from Berlin on which a trailer was used. The MUNGA 4 were not equipped with a trailer coupling at the factory. This can then only have been a needs-based retrofit in Berlin.

 

I had several Ex-Dutch Munga's all were fitted from new with towing pintles - from memory there are two types of pintal cast and pressed steel  suitable for towing Jeep/Landrover trailer types

07140011.jpg

Munga-NL-MP.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the manufacturing documents of the manufacturer and can check the factory equipment in detail.  The MUNGA 4 of the RAF in Berlin were delivered without trailer coupling. Some of the 6 series had a trailer hitch.

The NL Army chose a different equipment! So you can usually find the factory mounted trailer hitch here. If you send me your chassis numbers as a private message, I will gladly look for the individual equipment.
love greeting

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, the-blue-cloud said:

I have the manufacturing documents of the manufacturer and can check the factory equipment in detail.  The MUNGA 4 of the RAF in Berlin were delivered without trailer coupling. Some of the 6 series had a trailer hitch.

As 10FM68 said earlier, this isn't an RAF trailer, and thus the towing vehicle isn't likely to be RAF either. I assume the Army had different specifications for their equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fault should have explained ,unit markings may lead to a MT inventory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me as though, at the time the second picture was taken, the number 9 on a red square, arm-of-service sign indicated the King's Regiment.  They were in Wavell Barracks, Berlin, 1962 - 64 which seems to fit.  The transfer on the Munga is their regimental badge - the Lance Corporal with the SMG and binoculars is wearing the Lancastrian Brigade badge, which would also be correct for that period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...