johann morris

Ok so if mucked up, lets try again. :red:

Jon

I haven't got the whole report but it is mentioned in several books. Attached is, apparently, a 1943 picture of a display of Airborne equipment. In the centre, slightly obstructed by the fold in the page, is another sleeping bag.

Personally as they were produced in Denison material it would follow that they were used by Airborne troops.

Jon

From a ww2 report on the effectiveness of sleeping bags, these sleeping bags are referred to, in the report, as Airborne sleeping bags.

Jon

Isn't this one, strapped to the front of a jeep, Arnham 1944 and there's another pic that I can't find at the moment, of a para carrying one, again in Arnham.

Jon

Well lets face it, it can't get much worse. My heart sinks when I see articles on buying jeeps or land rovers, I love both but how many buyers guides do we need published. The tank museum pages are just infill in the worst sense, I like to hear what's going on but keep it brief.

Grumpy Jon.

Sounds very much like he intends to try and pass it off as original when he makes the comment "apart from the engine its all 100% war time".

http://www.oldtimergarage.eu/catalog/images/store_logo.png Sometimes a bit slow but they have never let me down or ebay.de.

jon

Beautiful and a replica, without destroying another piece of history. The Marder will probably look fantastic when it is finished but no matter how many original parts you put on to that Swedish chassis, it is still a replica. So why not make all new parts as they have with the Luchs. There's nothing wrong with replicas, most of the flying ww2 aircraft are, after all, just that.

Jon

So if you are building a replica, why spend the extra money and use original parts. Its always only going to be a replica and it would be far, far, cheaper to make the components yourself. Unless of course in the fullness of time things get forgotten and its sold for big money as an original.

Jon

I suppose that some of it is ignorance and lack of interest but a lot of it is the way that we are educated and the fact that as Sweden didn't participate in hostilities in WW1 or WW2, we don't see Swedish tanks on news reels, films etc. In fact most, including myself, are totally unaware of what was happening in Sweden during both Wars. Personally I have no recollection of Sweden ever being mentioned in any history lesson at school. As everything that I read is ww1/ww2 based, I now have a basic knowledge of Sweden's activities during WW2 but what military equipment they had, have, bought or designed I have no idea. As for the Renault, well, that is part of the early development of the Tank and some I beleive were still being used by France in early ww2 but in Britain most don't even know of their existence.

Jon

The more I think about it the more I agree. This Vehicle was an important historical vehicle in its own right that has now been destroyed.

Jon

Stefan,

Than you very much for that very interesting and informative production summary and now I am off to tell the wife I was right for once, well sort of.

Jon

I read somewhere and sods law say's that I cant now find the article, that the chassis for these personnel carriers was produced post war and that they are longer than the war time version. Its something to do with the gap between the road wheels. Apparently there was a museum that was auctioning a similar restoration and someone spotted that the chassis was the post war version. However as I am not an expert on the matter I couldn't tell the difference.

Jon

Onwards, forwards and backwards.

I don't know if this will help but these are photos I found on the web when looking for pictures to camo my CMP. I think from these and others, the brown canvas was just painted over with black. I assume that as the assembly of CMP's destined for Europe was completed in Britain, these pictures were taken in Slough.

Jon

Stop talking and start ringing. The answer might be no and then you have wasted your time, if its yes, then go get it as quickly and quietly as possible, then tell everyone.

Jon

Any pictures? I have 2 DKW's an 1944 NZ350-1 and a 1938 SB200, Oldtimer Garage have some spares and there is a DKW web site but they don't give much info away. Ebay.de has some spares but you have to keep on looking. As for general information, just spend hours searching the web, most of it will be in German or Polish. Sorry I can't be much more help but keep us updated please.

Jonathan

This weekends little project.

Progress

Project depending how bad it is or one to go I don't really mind

Jonathan

Hi,

Anyone out there in the UK got a Bedford 6 cylinder engine for a QL for sale?

Thanks,

Jonathan

Maybe a silly question but where is the brake master cylinder positioned on a QLD vehicle?

Jonathan

Richard,

The more I look at it, the more I think that you are correct but someone has gone to a lot of trouble on the main drum mechanism and attachment to the chassis, then done a real bodge on some of the other items, strange really. I wonder what it will end up as, time will tell.

To answer Peter75 question yes there is a hip ring but it has been blanked off and the cab is a two piece design top and bottom.

Jonathan

So I assume from your comments that QLB did not have vacuum brakes, interesting. Did QLC have a winch then? I thought it was only the QLB and W that had them. The tanker theory makes sense because of the extra spring leaves.

I am glad that I am not going to start the restoration for some time, it will give me time to decide what to do with it.

Jonathan

Its never simple.

Richard, that makes sense, so what ever it is was made in 1944. I cant find a chassis number on the chassis but a lot of brackets have been added post war so it could be under those I suppose. I had a good look at it with a fist full of photos of other QL's and its not a QLB OR W as it longer, (see pictures) and looking at the spring packs on the rear it was built to carry a lot of weight. However the main winch drum and the cross member carrying it doesn't look like it has been added later on.

The last chassis cross member also appears to be the reverse of a QLD cross member. So all in all I don't know what it was other than a QL.

Oh well back to the sanity of the CMP.:nut:

Jonathan